media watchdog

Media Watchdog: Obama & the Press

Monday, December 22nd, 2008

For the White House, the “permanent campaign” is fighting to win every news cycle, and protecting information with a tight inner circle of in-the-know people. The Bush administration mastered the art of the permanent campaign—is Barack Obama following suit?

In a New York Times Magazine feature posted online Wednesday about future White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, Barack Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, lamented the end of the campaign. ”It’s never going to be the same,” he said. “I think everyone is wistful.”

Ah, the days when you could completely control the message. Obama was allegedly furious that details about his courtship of Hillary Clinton for secretary of state leaked out. He said he was hopeful, yet realistic, about what it would be like once his team was installed in the White House. “This is Washington,” he told the Times. “Or it will be Washington. So I’m sure it will not be perfect.”

A White House with no leaks? Impossible. And we’ve presumably learned there are drawbacks to a administration that is always in campaign mentality. Scott McClellan, Bush’s press secretary between 2003 and 2006, received praise from Bush for staying so consistently on-message. As related in the Times feature, Bush thanked McClellan for his work during the campaign. “I want to thank Scotty for saying—nothing,” the President said.

And yet McClellan eviscerated Bush in his tell-all book What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception, writing that running a permanent campaign with the goal of getting re-elected was especially bad. “And that meant operating continually in campaign mode: never explaining, never apologizing, never retreating. Unfortunately, that strategy also had less justifiable repercussions: never reflecting, never reconsidering, never compromising.”

There’s no question we’re getting ahead of ourselves—Obama hasn’t even been president for one day yet. And while Obama and his team might be wishing the campaign were still going on, they also aren’t the Bush administration. According to the Times article, Robert Gibbs will have walk-in privileges to Obama’s office, which will be right down the hall from his own. David Axelrod, one of Obama’s closest advisers, says the the atmosphere will be “collegial” and “not excessively hierarchical.”

President Bush attempted to keep the press at bay during his first term in office, holding the fewest number of press conferences (17) for any president in the television age. Obama had beaten the record for most post-election, pre-inauguration press conferences back in November.  At least in superficial access, Obama gets the nod.

Obama is also experimenting with how he communicates with his constituents—directly, and not through the press. He is posting his weekly addresses on YouTube, and there is a place on the Change.gov Web site for feedback from voters. Like any new media experiment, it’s not clear how well this one is working yet. The first Obama address received almost one million hits, but since then, the numbers have steadily decreased. Only 161,000 people want to watch the President-elect talk about his choice for Secretary of Housing last week.

When Obama selected conservative pastor and gay marriage opponent Rick Warren to participate in the inauguration, people turned to transition Web site, voicing their opposition on the one place they could—the discussion page about Obama’s plan for service. Thousands said Warren was a bad choice. Obama hasn’t changed his mind about Warren yet (he said at his press conference Thursday, “We’re not going to agree on every single issue, but what we have to do is to be able to create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable …) but the transition team did add a new discussion page Friday for “general issues.” Here’s one sample post:

I’m done. While I wouldn’t vote for a Republican, I will actively promote people to not vote for Obama in the future, unless an apology is released.

An explanation that all he is doing is bringing different opinions together is not OK. you don’t get it, you don’t have to fight for your right to see your partner in the hospital everyday.

Shame on you Obama. Shame on your people. We had such big hopes and look at what you did to us.

In 2012 we will not come out in support of you, not after what you have done.

At the very least, this experiment in direct communication with constituents will be a learning experience for Obama. If Obama thought the press could be bad, he doesn’t know the American people.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Media Watchdog: Is Meet the Press For Mature Audiences Only?

Friday, December 12th, 2008

David Gregory, superstar of NBC News and former White House correspondent, will host his first episode of “Meet the Press,” the interview news program, this Sunday. While the media had been speculating for weeks about who the new host would be, Americans have mostly survived the wait. At least I have.

“Meet the Press” is the longest-running television show in broadcast history, and NBC staffers regard it with a great degree of reverence. This same fawning is paid to Tim Russert, the long-time host of MPT who died earlier this year. Tom Brokaw, who took over as temporary host after Russert died, was in full reverence mode when he introduced Gregory as the new host on last week’s show. “Tim always liked to say that ‘Meet the Press was a national treasure, the rest of us were all temporary custodians of all that,” Brokaw said.

Apparently, within the NBC studios Brokaw is also a national treasure. At least that’s how Gregory treated him during their conversation last week. “I feel so grateful to you for everything you’ve brought to the program in such a difficult time after Tim died, and it’s really meant a lot,” Gregory said. “It’s meant a lot to the country, it’s meant a lot to us to see your example.”

Really? It’s meant a lot to the country? Russert’s untimely death may have been a surprise, but I’m sorry to say most people have pretty much moved on by now. (Slate’s Jack Shafer documented the media’s obsessive and saccharine Russert coverage.) With the newly canonized Russert tied so closely to “Meet the Press,” it’s understandable (in a way) that the press hyperventilated about his replacement (as again covered by Shafer.)

In his sign-off last week, Brokaw noted how “Meet the Press” was valued by viewers outside of New York City and Washington, D.C. “Across the country,” he said, “I have been very struck by how important this broadcast is to people as a regular appointment for them.”

But “Meet the Press” was relevant only once during the presidential campaign, when Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama. And this relevance was due solely to Powell’s praise for Obama.

There has to be a generational gap, because I have watched “Meet the Press” exactly once: for the Colin Powell segment. And that was by streaming video.

Brokaw encouraged Gregory to “reach to your generation and get some fresh new voices that are out there because it’s a very impressive crowd of young journalists who are coming of age.” I’m flattered, Tom, I am. But notice he didn’t say “young viewers.” Maybe that’s because no young person in her right mind would wake up at 8 a.m. Sunday morning to listen to politicians go over their talking points.

If “Meet the Press” is the institution I keep hearing it is, then it will still be around in 39 years, for its 100th birthday. By then I’ll be 65, and old enough to appreciate the wonder that is “Meet the Press.” Will David Gregory still be hosting?

Tags: , , , , ,
No Comments »

Tribune Co. Bankrupt in the Bank—and in the Soul

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

The Tribune Company filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday, in a move to begin restructuring its debt. The Tribune Co., owner of the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and various television stations, has $7.6 billion in assets and owes $12.79 billion.

The publisher of the Tribune, Tony Hunter, wrote a letter to the paper’s readers, pledging continued service in the face of adversity. In the letter, he worked to convince readers that the debt restructuring would serve them best.

This restructuring is in Tribune’s best long-term interest. It will reduce pressure on our operating businesses, enabling us to pursue our vision of creating a sustainable, cutting-edge media company valued by our readers, viewers, and advertisers, and that plays a vital role in the communities we serve. In turn, this will help ensure our newspaper and online products continue to deliver the news, information and entertainment you can’t get anywhere else. It’s what you expect and what we’ll continue to deliver.

At the Times, publisher Eddy H. Hartenstein also wrote to assure readers everything would be OK at the Tribune Co.

This restructuring is in Tribune’s best long-term interest. It will reduce pressure on our operating businesses, enabling us to pursue our vision of creating a sustainable, cutting-edge media company that is valued by our readers, viewers and advertisers, and that plays a vital role in the communities we serve. That, in turn, will help keep this website showing up on your computer every day, offering you news, information and entertainment you can’t get anywhere else. It’s what you expect and what we’ll continue to deliver.

That’s right, Hunter and Hartenstein’s letters are essentially the same. I wonder what poor schlub in the Tribune Co.’s legal department had to write it?

Let’s take a moment to remember that the publishers of these papers certainly do not have the interests of their readers at heart. Hunter became publisher of the Tribune in late September; Hartenstein, a month before. The Times publisher’s prior job was with DirecTV.

Sam Zell, the CEO of Tribune, in a letter to staff members, said he was proud of the work everyone at the company had done. “We’ve reduced costs, gained market share, and laid the groundwork for creating a new business model out of traditional media,” he wrote.

There’s no question newspaper companies have to figure out what the “new business model out of tradition media” is. But as Zell writes about Tribune’s “great brands,” he must remember that a brand that is only a shadow of its former self, and is primarily surviving on its name, is hardly a great brand anymore.

Will the Times and Tribune have to cut staff even more in the coming months? Maybe the papers’ publishers need new assistants. After all, those letters to subscribers don’t write themselves. Actually, just one assistant will do.

Tags: , , , , ,
No Comments »

Media Watchdog: Rangel vs. the NYTimes

Thursday, December 4th, 2008

The New York Times has had Rep. Charles Rangel in its sights since July, when the paper reported on the New York congressman’s four rent-stabilized apartments. Last week, the Times raised the stakes, reporting on Nov. 25 that Rangel kept open a tax loophole for a corporation whose chief executive had made a large donation to Rangel’s charity.

Rangel responded to the story’s allegations the next day by letter. Instead of running a shortened version of the 700-word letter in the hard-copy version of the paper, the Times posted the entire letter online Wednesday afternoon, with a 1,500-word point-by-point rebuttal of Rangel’s complaints and clarifications by the original story’s author, David Kocieniewski.

News outlets reporting on the Times and Rangel back and forth have called it a “war of words.” And the verdict is in: After a “beatdown,” “the Times is winning the battle.”

The strangest description of the fight comes from the Congressional newspaper Roll Call, which said the Times‘ response was a “bizarre new twist.” The response is hardly bizarre—after the paper asked Rangel multiple times for an interview, only his lawyers spoke with the reporter. Immediately after the story ran, Rangel offered a lengthy explanation, but one that still raised questions. The Times used the expanded space of the its Web site to put Rangel’s response in context.

Charles Rangel’s actions deserve to be scrutinized; he wields a lot of power as chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. And that scrutiny has turned up plenty of questionable behavior (all documented here). But the Times‘ extraordinary response to Rangel’s letter shows just how much power the paper wields, too. There’s no question more people read Rangel’s letter and the Times‘ response because it was posted in full on the paper’s home page.

What kind of precedent does the paper’s devastating rebuttal set? The Times‘ reporting was rock-solid in this instance, so it had no problem with doing a point-by-point takedown of Rangel’s letter. What happens when the reporting isn’t so solid? Will the protesting letter get relegated to the paper’s letters page?

The interaction between the Times and Rangel has been fascinating to watch. Will Rangel respond again to the paper’s reporting? And if it doesn’t run his next letter on the Web site, Rangel can always call a press conference to dispute the Times‘ claims.

There is no point in wringing our hands about the slippery slope of posting letters and responses to the Web—more dialogue between papers, sources, reporters and the reading public is a good thing. But it’s important to remember that the Times took the step of running Rangel’s letter because it knew it had the goods to dispute him. Every story should be as well-reported as the work David Kocieniewski has done on Rangel. If it isn’t, let’s hope the Times is still willing to publish a takedown, even if it takes down itself.

Tags: , , , , ,
No Comments »

Media Watchdog: Sad Brokers Provide Plenty of Material

Saturday, November 22nd, 2008

The stock market might be hard to predict during these unsteady times, but there’s one thing that’s certain: You’ll see plenty of photos of unnamed stock brokers on the floors of exchanges around the world looking pretty upset as the market collapses around them.

The style and composition of these photos rarely changes. The traders are usually shot from above, and the more of them in the photo, the better. Getting a ticker sign in the background, preferably with red numbers or down arrows, is good too.

The brokers are rarely identified in these photos, they are simply a visual representation of “Oh crap, the bottom is falling out of the market!” The photos are all the same, and yet each one has its own personality. Thankfully, two people have captured the absurdity of these photos with their blog, Sad Guys on Trading Floors.

Chris Riebschlager and Jess Hemerly launched the site on Oct. 7, a day when the Dow dropped 508 points. The genesis for the site was simple. “I made an off-hand remark on Twitter that it was a bad time for the economy but a banner year for photographers who specialize in sad trader photos,” Riebschlager said in an interview with P+P. “Jess saw this, we started talking about it and decided it’d be funny to start a site based on all these photos. The time between joking about making the site and actually having the site running was a matter of minutes.” (Not quite the same conversation Regis and Kelly had about the market, also on Oct. 7.)

The site has now received over a million hits, and with another extended downturn in the markets possible (though they did respond positively to Barack Obama’s pick of Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary), and plenty more photos of sad traders coming, I asked Riebschlager about the site.

How do you find the pictures you use? They’re a good mix of “traditional” trading floor photos, with kookier ones included, too.

They’re not hard to find at all. Every news story about the economic crisis (and there have been plenty lately) always have an accompanying photo of a sad trader. It’s just a matter of taking a quick stroll through the news sites.

I have come across some odd photos. I have a feeling that the photographers working on the NYSE floor get tired of the typical trader facepalm. When something weird happens, like Gene Simmons shows up or a clown rings the opening bell, they pounce on that.

Newspapers wouldn’t run at least half of the pictures you have on your site—it’s almost like your pictures have too much personality. One of my observations is any story about the stock market dropping has to be illustrated by specific type of photo—group of brokers looking up at board, with a pained look on their faces. Why do you think this is?

A photo of a sad trader is probably the easiest way to illustrate the financial crisis. When the market falls, these people are the first to experience it. The market is such an abstract thing that sometimes the best way to photograph it is to capture the facial expressions of the people right in the middle of it.

The captions are great. What type of commentary do you think you’re making about stock brokers, or about the stock market in general?

I’ve been a huge fan of Mystery Science Theater 3000 since I was a kid, so making jokes out of serious things has become a permanent fixture of my personality.  Jess and I have the same sense of humor so early on we were just trying to crack each other up with the captions. We’re not trying to make some relevant commentary on the crisis and we’re absolutely not attempting to insult the people who appear in the photos.  We’re just trying to crack ourselves up and hopefully make some other people laugh.

Do your captions personalize people who are rarely identified? Do they become something more than just a sad face?

I have a very minimal understanding of how a trading floor works, but it seems ridiculous to me that this kind of business is handled by frazzled men and women shouting at each other in a big room. So all the photos taken on the trading floor automatically have a certain amount of ridiculousness built in. Every caption we write is just trying to get a laugh out of that ridiculousness.

You work for an ad agency in Kansas City in new media/interactive advertising, pretty far from the world of Wall Street. Does this make it easier for you write for your site?

I think that l could do this site no matter where I lived. If you’re watching the news, no matter where you are, you are painfully aware of what’s happening on Wall Street. I would guess that’s a large part of why the site received so much attention, we’re poking fun at a phenomenon that a lot of people were already familiar with.

Other people have commented on the “sad brokers” phenomenon (It’s not clear if they are following Riebschlager and Hemerly’s lead, or noticed the pictures independently.) Hemerly found a dubiously funny sketch comedy duo that wrote a song about the common broker habit of “facepalming” while watching bad news on the trading floor. And a blog similar to Sad Guys on Trading Floors, Brokers with Hands on Their Faces, also launched in October, though it hasn’t been updated in two weeks.

With the way the economy is performing now, it’s unlikely there’ll be a blog called Smiling Brokers Can Sleep Well at Night Again. But as depressed (and depressing) as the markets may be, their performance, and the brokers’ reactions, will give Riebschlager and Hemerly plenty more material.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

« Older Entries