Jon Stewart, Terry Gross

Date: October 4, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Jon Stewart, Mainstream Media

From Jon Stewart’s interview with Terry Gross:

I’m less upset with politicians than [with] the media. I feel like politicians — the way I explain it, is when you go to a zoo and a monkey throws feces, it’s a monkey. But when the zookeeper is standing right there and he doesn’t say, ‘Bad monkey’ — somebody’s gotta be the zookeeper. I feel much more strongly about the abdication of responsibility by the media than by political advocates. They’re representing a constituency. Our culture is just a series of checks and balances. The whole idea that we’re in a battle between tyranny and freedom — it’s a series of pendulum swings. And the swings have become less drastic over time. That’s why I feel, not sanguine but at least a little bit less frightful, in that our pendulum swings have become less and less. But what has changed is the media’s sense of their ability to be responsible arbiters. I think they feel fearful. I think there’s this whole idea now that there’s a liberal media conspiracy, and I think they feel if they express any authority or judgment, which is what I imagine is editorial control, they will be vilified."

The Post’s Different Standards in Covering Political Rallies

Date: October 4, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Protests, Washington Post

The disparity between the coverage The Washington Post gave to Saturday’s “One Nation” rally and the Beck rally in August is unmistakable. One need only click on the link of stories of each to see the difference. Click on “Full coverage: Beck, Sharpton rallies” and the results are:

· Sharpton’s ‘Reclaim the Dream’ event brings thousands to honor MLK

· Apocalyptic views hinder constructive political debate

· Glenn Beck ‘Restoring Honor’ rally draws thousands (video)

· Al Sharpton’s ‘Reclaim the Dream’ march (video)

· The battles inside the GOP

· Beck, Palin tell thousands to ‘restore America’ (main story)

· The only thing being restored by Beck is prejudice

· Civil rights’ new ‘owner’: Glenn Beck

· Beck: America is turning ‘back to God’(video)

· Palin: ‘We must restore America’ (video)

· Sharpton: ‘The dream has not been achieved’ (video)

· King’s legacy debated before Beck march

· How to have a rally on the Mall

· Where will Glenn Beck rally money go?

· Today’s rallies (graphic)

· 1 rally, 3 channels and many paths

· Glenn Beck rally in context: Events on the Mall (photos)

· Sharpton: Beck, Palin distorting MLK’s dream (video)

· Preparations for Glenn Beck rally underway (video)

· Tea party guide to D.C.: Racist or overblown?

· Dr. Gridlock: See where the rallies are

· Beck sets religious tone for ‘Restoring Honor’ rally

For the “One Nation” rally:

· Tens of thousands attend progressive ‘One Nation Working Together’ rally in Washington (main story)

· One Nation on the National Mall (photos)

· On the Mall, a counter to conservatives (video)

· Marching for jobs (video)

· Q&A, Transcript: One Nation rally: Liberal groups gather Saturday in Washington

· Dr. Gridlock: Rally road closures

· Share your rally photos (reader provided)

· Share your political signs photos (reader provided)

· DC rally shows support for struggling Democrats (AP story)

The lead-up to the rallies offers a similar difference.

In the week before Beck’s “Restoring Honor” march, The Post published:

· Three op-eds and

· a 2,342-word story on how the march would be a “measure of tea party strength.”

· On the day of the march, you published a 2,722-word story on the “meaning of the march.”

· Plus a 795-word story about TV coverage of the march.

· And a 1,331-word story on how to host a march on the Mall, giving further exposure to Mr. Beck’s march.

The longer two stories were reported on page A4.

In the week before Saturday’s “One Nation” march, The Post published:

· one op-ed in the print edition,

· one 669-word story Thursday and

· a 500-word story on the day of the march (compared to Beck’s 2,722 word story).

Bottom line: more than 7,000 words for the conservative rally (not counting op-eds) and less than 1,200 for the progressive rally.

(Meanwhile, on Saturday, The Post also had a 1,168-word story about how abused Tea Partiers are by their friends and neighbors.)

On the day after the Beck rally, Post coverage was much more expansive, including a main story that included contributions from nine Post reporters. Apparently, three covered the One Nation rally.

This disparity in coverage is ongoing. Back in April, The Post covered two conservative marches in Washington that totaled no more than 2,100 tea-party and gun rights protesters in Washington. Coverage was by no less than four Post staffers, while a New York City march of about 7,500 progressive protesters garnered 300 words by one reporter.

In the Post ombudsman’s response to me at the time, he said the two rallies by conservatives received greater attention because they were local.

I believe the Mall is still in D.C. and that’s still local.

No “meaning” of Saturday’s progressive march story or one on a “measure of progressive strength”?

I can remember the paucity of coverage to a 2002 march on Washington against the Iraq War. Coverage was relegated to the Metro section of The Post.

My research tools are limited to The Post’s web site and Lexis-Nexis, so I may have missed some stories. But there seems without doubt that The Post has a habit of allocating fewer resources and less coverage to marches by the left than it does by those on the right. I would not subscribe the differences to the reporters. Rather, it is editors who seem to have different standards of coverage.

Post Coverage of ‘One Nation’ March

Date: October 2, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Protests, Tea Party, Washington Post

On the day of the Glenn Beck rally August 28, The Post ran a 2700+-word story on its meaning, a nearly 800-word story on the media coverage of it, and another 1300+-word story on how to host a march on the Mall.

Today, that same newspaper has one dead tree story that’s about 500 words, although online that same story is 800 words with the most noticeable edit being mention of a last minute lawsuit by the event staging company that produced the Beck rally to stop this one over claims of misuse of the company’s proprietary information. A judge threw out the suit.

By the way, the online version is the first I’ve seen this week that didn’t include a photo of the Beck rally!

Meanwhile, on the front page of the Style section, there’s a 1,128-word story on how Tea Partiers are abused and misunderstood by friends and neighbors.

Post Coverage of Progressive March Finally Makes the Paper

Date: September 30, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Fox News, Protests, Washington Post

On Monday I wrote to the national desk of The Post wondering where was coverage of the One Nation progressive march scheduled for Saturday. I also had an exchange of emails with staffer Dan Balz. He argued that The Post had coverage in July, but that story was about the One Nation coalition forming, not about any march on Washington.

On Tuesday, a story about Saturday’s plans appeared online, posted about midday. I expected the story to appear in the dead tree edition the next day. It didn’t. Instead, a similar version of that story appeared online again yesterday, with a new time tag. But if you click on my original Monday link to the story, you get the new version, which deleted a paragraph I quoted in my Tuesday post about how this rally may compete with the Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert rally scheduled for the end of October.

(This is not the first time The Post has posted a story and then reposted an edited version. The first version is no longer available.)

So far, this rally has received much less coverage by The Post leading up to it than did the Glenn Beck “restoring Honor” rally on August 28.

In the week before Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” march, The Post published in its dead tree edition:

· Three op-eds

. A 2,342-word story on how the march would be a “measure of tea party strength.”

· On the day of the march, it published a 2,722-word story on the “meaning of the march.”

· Plus a 795-word story about TV coverage of the march.

· And a 1,331-word story on how to host a march on the Mall, giving further exposure to Beck’s march.

So far for the progressive’s rally, we have basically the same 600+ story that has been online for two days but finally makes the paper today and an op-ed by Harold Meyerson.

Meanwhile, E.J. Dionne comments today that the upcoming rally has received much less attention than the Beck rally because Fox News seems to set the mainstream media agenda. Amen.

Obama/Bush Double Standard

Date: September 29, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Mainstream Media

The headline on this The Caucus blog post is similar to others reporting President Obama’s recent backyard chats: In Iowa, a Skeptical Audience Greets Obama. That may be fair enough.

But I’m curious why reporters aren’t making the obvious comparison: George W. Bush would never subject himself to an audience, even when he was giving a public speech, that wasn’t hand-picked and assured to be a GOP partisan one.

You CAN Video a Cop Making an Arrest

Date: September 29, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Law enforcement, Privacy

You may recall the story in June about a motorist who videotaped a police officer writing him a ticket and posted the video on YouTube. He was arrested and charged with violating Maryland’s wiretap law. The prosecutor claimed that police exercising their public duty have an expectation of privacy. The You Tuber was facing 16 years in prison.

Well, some activist judge dismissed the case.

Judge Emory A. Pitt Jr. had to decide whether police performing their duties have an expectation of privacy in public space. Pitt ruled that police can have no such expectation in their public, on-the-job communications.

Pitt wrote: "Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. ‘Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes’ ("Who watches the watchmen?”)."

Graber was also charged with possessing a “device primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of oral communications" — referring to the video camera on his helmet. The judge disagreed with the prosecutor that the helmet cam was illegal, and concluded the state’s argument would render illegal “almost every cell phone, Blackberry, and every similar device, not to mention dictation equipment and other types of recording devices."

Pitt’s decision is the first ruling in Maryland to address the legality of citizens taping police in the course of their duties. Because it is a circuit court ruling, it is not binding on other judges. However, unless it is appealed, said Graber’s attorney, David Rocah of the ACLU of Maryland, "it is likely to be the last word" on the matter and to be regarded as precedent by police.

No word yet on whether the state’s attorney will try to appeal the decision. Graber still faces traffic charges stemming from the incident.

No word on whether he got his four computers, external hard drives, thumb drives and a camera back that police confiscated.

(Cross-posted on News Commonsense)

You CAN Video a Cop Making an Arrest

Date: September 29, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Law enforcement, Privacy

Well, some activist judge dismissed the case.

Judge Emory A. Pitt Jr. had to decide whether police performing their duties have an expectation of privacy in public space. Pitt ruled that police can have no such expectation in their public, on-the-job communications.

Pitt wrote: "Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. ‘Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes’ ("Who watches the watchmen?”)."

Graber was also charged with possessing a “device primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of oral communications" — referring to the video camera on his helmet. The judge disagreed with the prosecutor that the helmet cam was illegal, and concluded the state’s argument would render illegal “almost every cell phone, Blackberry, and every similar device, not to mention dictation equipment and other types of recording devices."

Pitt’s decision is the first ruling in Maryland to address the legality of citizens taping police in the course of their duties. Because it is a circuit court ruling, it is not binding on other judges. However, unless it is appealed, said Graber’s attorney, David Rocah of the ACLU of Maryland, "it is likely to be the last word" on the matter and to be regarded as precedent by police.

No word yet on whether the state’s attorney will try to appeal the decision. Graber still faces traffic charges stemming from the incident.

No word on whether he got his four computers, external hard drives, thumb drives and a camera back that police confiscated.

(Cross-posted on Commonwealth Commonsense)

A Philadelphia Dynasty

Date: September 28, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Phillies

I started rooting for the Phillies as a kid, when they were perennial cellar dwellers. They won a couple of World Series over the years—1980 and then in 2009. But now with four division titles in a row, it’s the first time I feel like my team is becoming a dynasty. I was there last night to see it, too.

Jayson Werth pours champagne on Roy Halladay, who won his 21st game to clinch the East Division title for the Phillies.

Post Covers ‘One Nation’ Plans

Date: September 28, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: Protests, Washington Post

Probably just coincidence, but after my call to The Washington Post yesterday pointing out that the New York Times had written about the progressive rally planned for this weekend, but there was no word about it in the paper of record of the town in which it is being held.

This morning, a story has been posted on The Post’s web site. This ‘graph cracks me up:

Unlike Beck’s rally, in which overt politics took a back seat to religious and patriotic themes [emphasis added], the progressive groups will repeatedly remind attendees at their rally to vote in November’s mid-term elections, said Arlene Holt Baker, executive vice president of AFL-CIO.

Religion and patriotism is politics to those on the right-wing fringe.

This, alas, is true.

It is unclear how many people will make it to Washington for the rally, but organizers’ expectations are high. Last week, the rally’s leaders were still trying to raise money to bring 50,000 students to the event. A plan by Comedy Central television hosts Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert to hold dueling rallies on Oct. 30 could appeal to some potential One Nation participants, creating a less-than-desirable competition for liberal-leaning would-be activists.

But let’s recall, The Post has an unfortunate history over the last decade of giving prominence to conservative rallies and shorting progressive ones. When I wrote about this earlier this year, I also had an exchange of emails with Post ombudsman Andy Alexander, who argued that the reason tiny protests (2,000 on the Mall and 50 gun-activists at Gravelly Point) received such attention in the paper was because they were local and that those groups’ PR people had predicted a large turnout. Four reporters assisted in the coverage. Let’s see what this weekend’s marches get.

Preserving Access

Date: September 27, 2010

Author: Bob Griendling

Categories: "He said, she said", Access, Ethics

Jeff Zucker’s departure from NBC is not a story I would waste much time reading about. But I’m glad I glanced at this short piece in Crain’s New York Business. What caught my eye was the teaser on Romenesko’s website: “Why media didn’t report what they knew about Zucker.”

It seems most reporters knew that Zucker was a dead man walking. That seems obvious given his much publicized failures. But he signed a contract extension after Comcast bought NBC Universal, and he insisted he was staying. Reporters weren’t buying it, but they weren’t reporting their suspicions either. Greg David’s damning conclusion seems spot on:

Reporters knew all this. Some believed they couldn’t write it unless someone told them it would happen. They also knew that if they did write Mr. Zucker was doomed, he might not be accessible to them and he could even shut the NBC Universal door entirely to reporters who angered him.

The end result, of course, is that readers of the NBC stories wonder why the reporters were so wrong about Mr. Zucker’s future.

I visited an undergraduate journalism class at Baruch last week and was asked how much advertising pressures affected editorial coverage in my years as editor of Crain’s. The answer was hardly at all. Rather, I told the students, reporters self-censor themselves not over concern about advertising but because they want access to companies.

The Zucker story showed that once again that is reporters’ interest in access not advertisers who censor the news.

And writing “he said, she said” stories protects reporters from charges that they are making judgments or calling out obvious false statements. All is a day’s work to preserve access.