A bad election for old media

townhall.com ^ | 11/15/04 | Michael Barone

[kattracks]

It was a bad election for Old Media. More than in any other election in the last half-century, Old Media -- The New York Times and CBS News, joined often but not always by The Washington Post, other major newspapers, ABC News and NBC News -- was an active protagonist in this election, working hard to prevent the re-election of George W. Bush and doing what it could for John Kerry. The problem for Old Media is that it no longer has the kind of monopoly control over political news that it enjoyed a quarter-century ago. And its efforts to help John Kerry proved counterproductive.

 Compare the campaign of 2004 with the campaign of 1980. Back then, most voters got their news from the three nightly newscasts of CBS, ABC and NBC. The agenda for those newscasts was set largely by The New York Times, which network producers and anchors picked up on their doorsteps every morning in New York and Washington.

 I had a theory in the 1980s that you could cover the presidential campaign from five rooms -- the two rooms in which the candidates' morning meetings were held and the three rooms, all on the West Side of Manhattan, in which the network producers and anchors decided what would run on the 6:30 newscasts. The interaction between the people in those five rooms pretty much determined what the voters would learn about the candidates and the campaigns.

 Not so today. The ratings of the nightly newscasts have been on a downward trajectory since the 1980 campaign, as voters have been presented with other means of following the news. New Media has emerged: talk radio, Fox News Channel, the proliferation of Internet weblogs, which together make up the blogosphere. The left liberalism that is the political faith of practically all the personnel of Old Media is now being challenged by the various political faiths of New Media. Old Media no longer controls the agenda.

 But it tries. At two crucial points in the campaign, Old Media used leaks from dubious sources to run stories intended to hurt the Bush campaign. The first was Dan Rather's Sept. 8 "60 Minutes" story on Bush's Texas Air National Guard record based on documents supplied by Texas Bush-hater Bill Burkett. CBS, admirably, posted the documents on its websites, and within 14 hours bloggers -- led by frontpage.com, powerlineblog.com and littlegreenfootballs.com -- had demonstrated that these purported 1972 documents had been produced on Microsoft Word. CBS's document experts, it turned out, had refused to authenticate them. Not until Sept. 20 did Rather acknowledge the documents were dubious. The story hurt Rather and CBS, not Bush.

 Then there was the New York Times's front-page headline story Oct. 25 on supposedly missing weapons in Iraq. The story, based on leaks from International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohammed el-Baradei, who was trying to keep his job, turned out to be full of holes. But John Kerry decided to center his campaign for four of the five weekdays of the last full week of the campaign on the story. This, even though polls showed Bush had an advantage on handling Iraq. The Times story ended up hurting Kerry rather than helping him.

 Finally, consider the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth story. Kerry strategists are now saying that Kerry should have responded to the Swifties' charges sooner. But they didn't because they were confident Old Media would bury the story. Which it did, for months, from the formation of the group in April, the publication of its book "Unfit for Command" and the TV ads that started running in the summer. Old Media loved the Kerry narrative (decorated hero returns from Vietnam and opposes the war) and didn't want to disturb it by airing the Swifties' charges.

 But the story got aired on New Media, the Swifties' book zoomed to No. 1 on amazon.com and Kerry responded to the charges on Aug. 19. Then Old Media had to cover the story, and while many stories brushed the Swifties' charges aside as "discredited," more careful examinations, as in The Washington Post, showed the charges had some substance.

 Kerry would have been better served, it turned out, by apologizing early on for his 1971 testimony that besmirched all troops in Vietnam. He could have done so in the spring when questioned by Tim Russert on "Meet the Press," but decided not to. Memo to future Democratic nominees: You can no longer rely on Old Media to hush up stories that hurt your cause. Your friends in Old Media don't have a monopoly any more.

Michael Barone is a senior writer for U.S.News & World Report and principal coauthor of The Almanac of American Politics.

[skaterboy]

Michael Barone is so smart it is freaky

Thank God for Free Republic and all the other blogs because otherwise about now we'd be finding out what all those plans Kerry had were..Dodge a bullet there huh?

[Tall_Texan]

Spot on, Mr. Barone.

But save that memo. The Democrats keep playing right into our hands when they hush up stuff that's readily available and quite provable on the internet.

[billclintonwillrotinhell]

On Election Night, Michael Barone was simply the most valuable TV personality out there. On Fox News Channel, Brit Hume would toss it to Barone, who would calmly explain county-by-county trends in key states like Florida, Ohio and Iowa. I occasionally would channel-surf, and it became pretty obvious that Mr. Barone was way ahead of the curve, benefitting from his extensive political knowledge.

[america-rules]

He was talking about exit polls in western Flordia which showed conservative dems going for Bush big time. He was speaking about Kerry in the past tense so I knew Bush won early :)

[Wooly]

Barone is a Zell Miller type Democrat who hates, not only what has happened to his party, but also to his profession.

[RetroSexualMale]

"Then Old Media had to cover the story, and while many stories brushed the Swifties' charges aside as "discredited," more careful examinations, as in The Washington Post, showed the charges had some substance."

I must've missed that. All I remember is the WP running frontpage comic-strip explanations which showed how Kerry was telling the gospel truth.

Sorry--the old media are liars. All of them.

[billclintonwillrotinhell]

I didn't put much faith in any exit polls after the early ones I had seen in the afternoon.

What I enjoyed most about Barone is that he would study the actual results being reported from all the different precincts and then compare those numbers to how Bush fared in 2000 against Gore in those same districts. Then he would figure out which areas of a state still had ballots to count.

As a result of Barone's number-crunching (and Jeb Bush's visible confidence in the 48 hours before the election), I was very confident of a Florida victory long before any network called it. And I was somewhat confident of an Ohio victory even when CNN was ridiculously coloring that state a newfound green for "too close to call."

[angry elephant]

Although it is true that the new media debunked the old media's lies, in at least two of these instances Kerry himself - had he been smarter - could have done a better job. Since Gore invented the Internet, and the Dims are smarter than the rest of us, you would think that Kerry would have been smart enough not to rely on the MSM covering his **s. It is pretty obvious that someone who is weak and foolish enough to seek the cover of the MSM could never successfully lead our nation.

[xJones]

Compare the campaign of 2004 with the campaign of 1980. Back then, most voters got their news from the three nightly newscasts of CBS, ABC and NBC. The agenda for those newscasts was set largely by The New York Times, which network producers and anchors picked up on their doorsteps every morning in New York and Washington.

By that logic, though, how did Ronald Reagan win in his 1980 landslide? There were the TV debates with Carter, but there was also the underlying American discontent with Carter, no matter what the MSM said.

[oldbrowser]

At two crucial points in the campaign, Old Media used leaks from dubious sources to run stories intended to hurt the Bush campaign.

They (legacy media) have forever earned the derision and scorn of the American voter.

[tornadochaser]

See here for how the media shot itself in the foot with its attempts to suppress the Swifties.

[Southack]

The NY Times was hilarious; on the one hand claiming that the Swiftvets had been "discredited," but on the other hand never interviewing a single SwiftVet.

The NY Times literally feared printing the other side of the story.

That's what marks the end of the Old Media's penultimate power...their display of fear. They know that their lies are so weak that they can't dare publish both sides to every story that they've spun. They fear the obvious conclusions that their readers would draw if the truth were to ever make it into (prominent) NY Times' newsprint.

...And by their display of that fear, we know that they are aware that their glory days have passed them by.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. This is the last election in which the Democrats can count on the media to carry water for them. In the future they'll have to compete on an even playing field and that means learning how to persuade Americans they have a governing philosophy instead of pitching a tired playbook based on appeals to race baiting and class warfare. In short, the Democrats have to begin to change or face the prospect of extinction as a national party.

[conshack]

It is my hope that their steady decline gets accelerated due to their gross bias coverage of the campaign.
They can stop broadcasting as far as I'm concerned, because I refuse to watch them any more.

[Cobra64]

Pers-kon-ally, from a news and political perspective, I only read the WSJ, watch FOX News, and do research here on FReeRepublic. Otherwise, it's History Channel, Wings, TMC, and other classic brain absorption topics.

[peyton randolph]

Kerry responded to the charges on Aug. 19.

On Bill Clinton's birthday - how appropriate

[Squantos]

Decent hard working Americans are tired of being made fun of because of their race, sex, age , their Christian backgrounds, their traditions and morality by polidiots,presstitutes and hollywood panderers of porn 'n perdition ........

Americans understand that their weapon against such propaganda politics isn't a bullet (yet) ....it's a vote . And they defended their country from a serious domestic enemy this election. They voted for a leader who will take out the enemies of our nation and enemies of all freedom loving humans around the world.

Not a long faced lying loser who will relate a tale about taking out the Viet Cong. And leave the part of the story about taking them out to Maxums restaurant in Paris conveniently out of the story of fabricated heroism.......

[RetroSexualMale]

"That's what marks the end of the Old Media's penultimate power..."

Not only that, but their ultimate power as well! (Or were you punning on "pen.")

In any case people are growing up and won't put up with being lied to by the likes of Dan Rather et al. The MSM will either learn this or die.

I hope (and believe) they will die.

[Route101]

On election eve the old media looked old for sure......

[capt. norm]

I noticed that as well. Barone seemed to be a "walking spreadsheet" with a very impressive mastery of the election's mechanics.

He was way out front in disbelieving the early exit poll numbers...in fact he was the first one I saw that disagreed with them.

[7thson]

He is a Dem! I never could tell. It seems that he is so smart and logical that he was obviously a Republican.

[7thson]

I do not recall the rampant partisan bias against Reagan as there is today against Bush. I do remember they tried to paint him as a warmonger eager to start nuclear war but it seems that whenever the public saw Reagan on the tube they came away with the impression of a strong and forceful leader who truly loved America. Two examples. The primary debates which he put up the money for. When they tried to cut off his mic he turned around and stated he paid for this mic and he will talk as long as he wants. That was great - telling the media smart-arses to shove it! Then the debate with Carter when Jim Boy told the world he took nuclear disarmment advice from his goofy looking teenage daughter. The camera came back to Reagan and he had this look on his face that said "can you belive that s**t." Kerry could have done a dozen things different and won because the Bush people gave him all kind of chances. They never put him away. But try as they might, the MSM could not help Kerry.

[230FMJ]

Bump for later

[7thson]

I think everything depends if Specter gets the chair or not. If he gets the Judiciary Chair, a lot of grass roots conservatives will say ef it.

[LS]

I like Barone, and think he analyzes #s very well, but anyone who listens to Rush would have heard this almost verbatim over the last months.

[Coop]

Kerry could have done a dozen things different and won because the Bush people gave him all kind of chances.

Such as???

[prairiebreeze]

In the end, John Kerry couldn't hide who he is. And neither could the Old Media.

Prairie

[7thson]

One thing is just stick to one line of attack instead of switching all over the place. Another is if he answered the Swift Boats thing when it first hit with a news conference, answered a couple questions and that would be that. Any questions after that could have been answered the Clintonian way - we have already addressed that issue, it is old news, blah blah blah.

[dead]

Kerry would have been better served, it turned out, by apologizing early on for his 1971 testimony that besmirched all troops in Vietnam. He could have done so in the spring when questioned by Tim Russert on "Meet the Press," but decided not to.

Only a perfect storm of stupidity and arrogance could have stopped him from doing this.

Even a half-hearted “I said things I later regretted, that hurt people who were already hurting, blah, blah blah” would have provided him with a total “Get Out Of Jail Free” card with the media.

But the dumbass refused. Good.

[xJones]

Thank you for your link in #12, and kudo for your excellent website. You Vietnam vets still serve your country, and this year was your finest effort of all, IMHO.

[Coop]

One thing is just stick to one line of attack instead of switching all over the place. Another is if he answered the Swift Boats thing when it first hit with a news conference, answered a couple questions and that would be that. Any questions after that could have been answered the Clintonian way - we have already addressed that issue, it is old news, blah blah blah.

All of those have to do with the Kerry campaign - you specifically said the Bush Administration gave him all sorts of opening, or something along those lines.

[KC_Conspirator]

Finally, consider the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth story. Kerry strategists are now saying that Kerry should have responded to the Swifties' charges sooner. But they didn't because they were confident Old Media would bury the story.

That is exactly what happened.