Laura Novak
  • Welcome
  • About
  • NYTs
  • Scribd
  • Murder
  • Clarity
  • Contact

The Veteran Reporter - Inside Insight Into Palin and the Media

7/27/2011

27 Comments

 
Picture
Favorite commenter and contributor, Viola-Alex, is back in action, following her boots-in-Walmart report from Texas. This time, she has been busy chatting up and nailing down a long-time member of the dreaded MSM to get his take on Rupie and Mrs. Todd P., among other things. H/T to V-A for taking the time to toss back a few and get as close as we can to having a veteran reporter explain the unexplainable. He and I also communicated and, yes, this reporter is who V-A says he is. Take it away, Viola-Alex:

                                                    * * * * * * * * 

For insight into modern media, I often turn to my old friend, The Reporter. The Reporter  worked  for twenty years in New York,  writing and editing for a variety of magazines and newspapers, including a ten year career on staff     
of The New York Times.  This dialogue is reconstructed, with his permission, from several cocktail-hour chats within the last few weeks.

V-A:  Why does the press let Palin get away with so much?

Reporter:  I can’t speak for Management.  Who knows why they do what they do, except that they’re in the business of making money.  But for a reporter, Palin poses a few problems.

V-A:  Like what?

Reporter:  Her stupidity, for one. The woman can’t speak credibly about anything.  If a reporter puts her on the spot, it can backfire.  The reporter comes off as mean-spirited, and the public sides with Palin, the poor idiot who was made to look bad. 

VA:  Like in the Katie Couric interview.

Reporter:  There’s no telling what will come out of Palin’s mouth, and even just reporting what she’s said or done can leave a reporter with a story that doesn’t make sense. 

V-A:  Have you seen the interview with Oprah, where Sarah comes on the screen with curly hair?  Oprah asks Palin about her unexpected hair-do, and Palin says, “You like it?  I tried to look like you!”   It’s a totally nutjob comment.  Is she serious?  Is it a joke?  Palin almost hijacks the interview, and Oprah is visibly speechless. 

Reporter:   Oprah speechless?  That I’d like to see.   Another Palin problem is unpredictability.  If you print her nonsense, you look like the idiot, not Palin.

V-A:  What about Tina Brown’s  Newsweek boob cover? 

Reporter:  Tina is Management now.  She’ll do anything to sell a few copies.

V-A:  But clearly  Palin’s sex appeal influences reporters, too.

Reporter:  Of course it does.  I remember when it was going around the [New York] Times newsroom that Frank Bruni’s BOOK  on George Bush may have helped him get re-elected.   It seemed to us that Bruni had a mighty big crush on Bush.  Some people later blamed Bruni because his portrait --  all boots and awshucks cowboy--  made Bush seem harmless.

V-A:  So Palin’s appearance becomes the story.

Reporter:  It definitely  loops the coverage.

V-A:  What do you mean?

TVR:  The news feeds get their fill. 

V-A:  Because it’s safer to follow her appearance than anything she does or says.

Reporter:   I put everything at the feet of reporters.  Few writers know how to report a story. They take what they’re given, no questions asked. That’s the climate now.  Not because of Management, but because of individual integrity. 

There's a Times reporter who it appears has got the hots for all the tumblers and stunts in the musical Spider-Man.  He keeps writing awe-struck articles in its support, and the producers keep pouring millions into it, even though it’s a massive failure twith five serious injuries.  
    
V-A:  One reporter can be that powerful?

Reporter:  A show that should have closed months ago, in my opinion, is still up because of constant coverage. The reporter made it “news.” 

V-A:  What about the News Corp. reporters in the Murdoch scandal?

Reporter:  They were just doing their jobs. 

V-A:  Bribing politicians and police? Hacking phones and emails?

Reporter:  If they’d done that on Sarah Palin’s  pregnancy,  you’d be handing them the Pulitzer Prize.  It’s not that their methods are questionable, necessarily, because good reporters stop at nothing to get their stories.   It’s the silliness of the stories.

V-A:  I’m afraid to say you’re right.

Reporter:  Of course I’m right. What interests me more about Murdoch was his purchase of the Wall Street Journal. His advisors were against it. He lost money on the transaction. In the midst of his billions, he suddenly had a weakness for quality.   I find that curious.

V-A:  Since Murdoch, Wall Street Journal readership is up—what?--   over 20 percent.

TVR:  While the Times is hemorrhaging readers.  Murdoch wanted to out-Times the Times, and he has.

V-A:  What’s the WSJ’s  coverage of Palin like?

Reporter:  Couldn’t say.  I don’t read stories about her.

            (I pull out my laptop and google “wall street journal” +  “sarah palin.”)

V-A:   Listen to this. (Reading from google links.)  Back in November 2010-- “Palin Lashes Out at WSJ Reporter.”  WSJ’s Sudeep Reddy charges Palin with “inflation hyperbole” then Palin attacks him personally on Facebook.  Reddy has the last word by citing the facts Palin clearly misread.  Almost 500 comments!  Even HuffPo picked up the story.  This proves your point.  Here’s one good reporter!

Reporter:  Or the WSJ is trying  to shove Palin off the stage to make way for a real candidate. 

V-A:  Oh.


27 Comments
FrostyAK
7/27/2011 11:34:19 am

The premise that a free and honest press is the foundation of a Democracy is right on.

As we no longer HAVE a free and honest MSM press, does that mean we no longer have a Democracy (or Democratic Republic)? Maybe it is up to the peoples' press, the bloggers, to do what supposedly PROFESSIONAL journalists refuse to do.

Stenography is not journalism.

Reply
Up
7/27/2011 12:17:46 pm

thank you VA and Reporter. A fascinating look into the media coverage of Palin.

Reply
Lisabeth
7/27/2011 12:20:07 pm

What a fascinating interview. Thanks so much. Politics these days seems to be all a big game, and so is making money in media.... It is frightening to me because truth and the people of this country aren't even important. We are only important in terms of who we will vote for or what we will buy. What we need or think is meaningless to congress and the media. I know I sound negative but I really am feeling quite fed up.

Reply
V ictoria link
7/27/2011 02:46:17 pm

Thank you, Viola-Alex and The Reporter, and also Laura for posting their dialogue!

I admit I'd been wondering some of the same things, because I've been wishing that someone from "our side" could break in and get Palin's medical records. I personally neither have the skill to do it myself nor the dough to pay someone to do it for me - and I'm not *really* recommending that anyone do this! But it seems to me that shady methods have always been used to uncover the truth. So the hacking and tapping are not surprising.

One question for now: has the media really gotten worse? Because it seems to me that every generation has to fight to get out the truth. You can never take it for granted.

Reply
Allie
7/27/2011 07:09:12 pm

Great job, V-A! Your adventure sounds like fun and thanks for sharing it with us. Did your friend really say that bribery and hacking were acceptable? They are both crimes. Wow. What is cool is that he probably wouldn't have been so frank with you if you weren't already friends. Now we know.

Reply
mistah charley, ph.d.
7/27/2011 09:23:28 pm

Disillusionment is good because it means you are in better touch with reality.

Reply
jeff
7/27/2011 10:23:49 pm


Thanks, V-A.

Nicely Done!

And thank God for the alternative media!

If the MSM is reporting on something that I really care about, especially if the story has significance internationally, I always try to get other international sources through AlJazeera U.S., Russia Today, BBC or CBC (Canadian Broad News). Democracy Now is also a straight shooter.

As far as individual reporters, there are too few brave souls like Jeremy Scahill and Matt Tiabbi who seem to be fearless. I could name more but my point is there are not nearly enough who are in a position to be able to report the truth. A perfect example of what these guys have to fight to get the story out is Scahill's reporting on the CIA prisons in Somalia. To counter the facts of his reporting, the Pentagon sends a press release to a CNN reporter and another print reporter who "report" the "hot off the press news" as though they researched it themselves, with their own spin from unnamed "senior staffers" at the Pentagon. I understand national security issues, but these are usually hiding policy issues that are in conflict with our administration's stated policies. We had so much of that type of shit with W, Cheney, Rummie and the neocons. Now, it continues and it really sucks because I expected better. Our only choice is that of the lesser evil. We just have to figure out which liars lie the least. That's disgusting but unfortunately, it's reality. So it goes.

I like Rachel Maddow and I know she's careful and accurate in her reporting, but I know she's limited in what she can freely report bc of the NBC corporate culture. I'd probably be the same way in an effort to avoid being blackballed or under-employed, also, too.

Even local news stories are presented in more detail in the local underground papers as opposed to the corporate-owned city papers. Although these indies operate with very limited resources, they usually have a couple of reporters who are unafraid to have a politician or local advertiser call their editor with a complaint or a request to back off.

News is no longer a loss leader for publishers acting in the public interest. I'm not completely naive---I know that it has always been somewhat censored, even in "the old days", but the bias and misinformation presented as news today is so different than the truth, once you drill down into the sources and details.

Okay, off my soapbox with a big travel cup of coffee-to-go. Traffic be damned.

Thanks, Laura, for letting me "get it all out" by venting before heading to the office. Now, today can be a great day!

I hope it is great for you as well as all of your readers (also, too).

Reply
Laura Novak link
7/28/2011 12:27:08 am

Great assessment, Jeff. I need to explore and bookmark these other resources that you've outlined here.

I don't have enough fingers to count the layers upon layers of pompous asses I've encountered in newsrooms. All the way up the totem pole. But if there was one thing that made them of a type, it was answering to the corporate boss (clean up your desk, he's coming into town and will be in the newsroom on Friday) and protecting HIS pension and HIS position.

If you had five kids on a news director's salary, lived in one of the most expensive markets in the country, commuted an hour each day, and knew that "New York" was never going to beckon to you and you middle management appearance, do you think YOU would rock the boat?

Besides, the news cycle is SO ferocious. The deadlines are killers. If a pretty face spouts a stupid sound bite and you need something in the five o'clock hour to run 1:30 and that bit of fluff can be woven into Novak's piece on XYZ, then have that intern grab the sound bite and hand it to the tape editor and tell Novak it's cut and to insert it for some "balance" or "national perspective."

And if you're lucky, you make "air" and you go home to your husband and cats.

And when you're lucky enough to "enterprise" a story, that is start digging into something, you'd better be prepared to back it up to at least five jerks above you. And THEY don't have the time for that. They've got back-to-back shows to put on that night. And...five kids to put through college some day. And a retirement fund that isn't quite full yet.

Rant over.

Reply
Viola-Alex
7/28/2011 01:29:19 am

I'm glad yall find The Reporter's insight as interesting as I do. He absolutely got me on the Palin pregnancy thing-- damn right I'd condone illegal activity if it outed a story that needs to be told. That's the premise of Wikileaks, but I hadn't thought of that in terms of Murdoch's goons.

Thank you all-- especially Jeff and Laura-- for your added insight.

And Victoria, I've wondered exactly the same thing. Is our media any worse than past news barons? From what I've read, no. It's just that ours has a broader, more powerful reach with tv and internet. Where there is money to be made, there is corruption.

I've known many local, free or underground presses who have uncovered significant stories. However, here in San Diego, intrepid reporters at our extremely compromised daily have also done good work.

Other than that, I don't know what constitutes a Free Press, nor am I sure what one would/could look like. Recently NPR (my major news source) has disgusted me with their double-sided reporting: bending backwards to be fair. Their story on Palin's Paul Revere telling included a professor who argued that technically, she was right.

It seems all we can do is vary our news diet as much as possible. I love the BBC, but my English friends think it a joke. So. . . .

Reply
Laura Novak link
7/28/2011 01:59:58 am

I made a correction to the section on 41. Bruni's book appeared two years into his first term, and as V-A wrote, and I've appended above, the book might have helped him get REelected. I missed the correction in her copy. Apologies to all.

Reply
Laura Novak link
7/28/2011 02:11:09 am

I'm not awake. Despite the fact that I am sitting and writing. Make that 43. Or Shrub, as my husband refers to him because he wasn't grown up enough to be a bush.

Reply
HudsonElizabeth
7/28/2011 02:54:51 am

Thanks for this piece. It does make you think about why the press is letting her get away with so much. I now understand the difficulty she poses. BUT, will the press come forward and do true reporting -- hard as it would be -- if she becomes a candidate for President or VP, especially if she gets on the Republican ticket or runs on a third party line?

Reply
Bobcat Logic
7/28/2011 04:02:10 am

@Jeff

Totally agree with you on reliable sources.

It's a sad day when the best reporting often comes from Rolling Stone or Vanity Fair.

Speaking of which, I hope everyone here goes out and buys the August edition of Vanity Fair. Then read the article "Who Really Bankrolled the 9?11 Hijackers and Who Covered It Up?'

I suspect this article may provide important background for present, and, especially, future, discussions of Palin and her enablers.

Reply
Brad Scharlott
7/28/2011 04:09:06 am

Great post.

One big thing that is different now from the past is the degree that most media have become part of conglomerates. Very few financially independent newspapers today, for example.

So how might that affect coverage of Palin and her birth hoax? As Laura explained, there are all those middle managers - but now the decision makers for something really big are at the corporate HQ, where lots of nervous lawyers will shoot down anything that may involve risk. Plus, those top players at the HQ have to worry about pissing off politicians, national advertisers, etc.

So is Pat Dougherty of Anchorage Daily News spineless, or simply hogtied by those above? I imagine the latter. And how many kids does he have to put through college?

The conditions are not right today for another Watergate. But we are in a transitional time. Things may improve.

Reply
FrostyAK
7/28/2011 05:12:22 am

Too many excuses. All of them going back to the fact that big corporations OWN us. Which, IMO, is wrong, wrong, wrong. It's time for the courageous to try to put a stop to it.

If a reporter gets an important story shot down by corporate, then they need to get it to media people who WILL run with it. Or are there only a few courageous enough to let the truth shine? Those who are courageous enough seem to be relegated to blogs and newsletters.

When Al Jezeera becomes the best source for international news - "Houston, we have a problem".

Reply
Viola-Alex
7/28/2011 05:37:41 am

Thanks, Brad. I wonder too if babygate wasn't covered because AK is so damn far away. Maybe Laura and I just need to get in the car and drive north. All yall are welcome to join us.

From my very limited experience reporting stories locally, I know it takes lots of old-fashioned footwork in the real world-- not online. Appointments, dead ends, conversation, winning trust, and risk-taking.

Bobcat, that's a great article. Here's the link http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/08/9-11-2011-201108

Also, I've recommended it before, but for great summer reading, Family of Secrets by Russ Baker, if you want to know one journalist's research on the Bush family power. It reads like a spy novel!

Reply
lilly lily
7/28/2011 05:58:22 am

While the press appears wimpy, gas bags like Rush Limbaugh actually have a grip on the testicles of congress. He is demanding they don't compramize, that they do what he claims they must do by his lights.

What it seems to me to be is an attempt to humiliate the President, nothing else.

The right wing hate radio hot air bags are calling the shots, and by gum, it is their way or the highway, and damn to the country.

Their over inflated egos nothing more.

Reply
jeff
7/28/2011 06:44:56 am

@Brad,

Both you and Laura nail down the point where middle managers have to go along to get along. Of course, in a mature or stagnant industry like like print media, it is probably a cause for taking a defensive posture and being as averse to risk as possible in order to survive.

[A bit O/T here, but hopefully relevant]

In the corporate finance arena in today's economy, it's much the same. With the pressure to squeeze out just one or two more pennies per share of quarterly income in order to beat or meet analysts' earnings estimates on the street, I've been encouraged to use aggressive accounting to shore up deficiencies here and there. I'm thankful that it was always something that was defensible even if the methodology was not my preference with regard to GAAP Requirements.

Amid all of the accounting scandals with Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, et al which were revealed as the Tech Bubble burst a decade ago, it was evident that financial regulation had become far too lax. It got much better after Sarbanes-Oxley became law in 2002, and CEO's and Board Members could no longer "look the other way" and thereby, abdicate their fiduciary responsibility.

But today, with a stagnant economy and tighter profit margins, it's no surprise that Big Business is now wanting less regulation in the financial markets in addition to environmental, labor relations, workplace safety, or any other oversight of commerce.

As you can imagine, it doesn't bode well for those with scruples who think they can ignore the pressure for the company to hit the target numbers. There are just too many dollars on the line in bonuses, options and shareholder equity to pretend anyone is operating in a vacuum.

Now, with the Koch Bros leading the way to strip any and all regulations, I fear the bumpy ride that we're in for on the path we are currently tracking. Unfortunately, it takes a major shock to force institutional change.

My hope is that News Corp is the shock to our media that will lead to more transparency. Beyond that, we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out, I guess.

Reply
Lidia17
7/28/2011 06:55:35 am

@Brad, are you willing to go down the rabbit hole to the extent that you might contemplate a suggestion I came across recently: that Watergate itself was a move by the CIA/GHWB to rid themselves of Nixon? Because with the co-ordinated global omerta' on Palin, I am willing to believe that, at this point. Nixon never was one of the elite, and he may have been right to be paranoid, just as Ernest Hemingway was apparently right to have been paranoid (which state of mind ended up killing him).

Just as we have never known the whole story of JFK, or of Hemingway, I don't think we know the whole story of Watergate.

Notice how the turds involved with these "covert operations"—from Colson to Dean, from Liddy to Oliver North—always seem to end up floating somehow. Things that make me go "hmmmm".


@Viola-Alex, Great Reporting! Thank You!


Reply
jeff
7/28/2011 06:57:07 am

@Bobcat---

Thanks for the heads-up on the VF article. Here's the link:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/08/9-11-2011-201108

Adapted from The Eleventh Day by Anthony Summers and Robynn Swan to be published this month by Ballantine Books; © 2011 by the authors.


Well, I guess I've found the next book I'll be reading once it hits kindle.
Thanks again for the info.

Reply
Freddy el Defibradddor link
7/28/2011 09:44:29 am

On the general phenomenon of employees not pushing too hard against The Powers That Be, I'm reminded of a saying I read in a book by Sufi author Idries Shah, said to be current among the dervishes: "A man who has a wife or a child has given hostages to fate." As Dylan said, "When you ain't got nothin', you got nothin' to lose." And the inverse/reverse/obverse/transverse/contrapositive is also true.

Jeff says, "My hope is that News Corp is the shock to our media that will lead to more transparency. Beyond that, we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out, I guess." Well, maybe. But in general, it doesn't much happen that those with power GIVE things to those without power. Much more often, it comes down to those with less power making themselves powerful enough to TAKE things. In other words, going with the flow is what dead fish do, in the words of Mama Grizzly. If sociopolitical improvement is going to take place, instead of just plain sociopolitical change, some group of people is going to have to decide what they want and go about getting it. To quote another talented tunesmith and rhymster, Bruce Cockburn: "The trouble with normal is that it always gets worse."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kybkiiAKMOY

Reply
jk
7/28/2011 10:34:12 am

One important point about the current MSM is that the field of journalism has been downsized half to death. Fewer journalists covering any beat, veterans shoved out in favor of cheaper younger kids, etc. I talk to journalists fairly frequently in a professional capacity, covering topics for which expertise/experience is invaluable, and have watched so many talented journalists come and go -- in recent years, mostly go. The journalists I talk to aren't lazy, nor disinterested in journalism: they just don't have time to pursue stories in any depth. And then there are the many newspapers & magazines that are struggling to hold on by their fingernails. They fill up pages grabbing stories off the wires and reprinting them verbatim, because it's the cheapest way they can fill pages. (If I talk to a reporter from the NY Times, I'll be quoted in the Times; if I talk to an AP or Reuters reporter my name will be in dozens to hundreds of newspapers.) Dunno what the solution is: one doesn't see things getting any better any time soon.

Reply
jk
7/28/2011 10:38:13 am

PS to FrostyAK: Al Jezeera is great! Thorough, comprehensive, balanced. It was a major revelation for me, being in a part of the world where I had a chance to tune in. Maybe we should work on getting their reporters interested in babygate :)

Reply
Viola-Alex
7/28/2011 11:05:21 am

Freddy - you're right. It only takes one. Or a handful.

JK - I agree completely. The loss of experienced journalists, many of whom are fired so that they can be replaced by cheaper, younger reporters, has affected every paper, everywhere, imo. And everything is moving at a faster pace because there is so much white space to fill. A good story is now one that gets picked up by other venues.

It's interesting that the NYT is trying to create a new model while the WSJ has increased their readership by 20% by being the NYT! What does that mean?

Reply
V ictoria link
7/28/2011 02:17:26 pm

Thanks for sharing the VF article! I have long wondered how anyone could doubt that elements in both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were financing and protecting terrorism - the evidence has been there forever, but who are you going to believe, Saudi-influenced FOX or your lying eyes?

To give credit to the US government, though, we have been in a bit of a hostage situation with respect to both countries. Saudi supplies us with oil and Pakistani has access to nukes. But Saudi apparently bumped off three guilty princes ... were they really guilty? How do you die of thirst?

And poor India! Since the terrorist bases seem to be concentrated now in Pakistan, India is a much more logical target.

Reply
jadez
7/29/2011 07:29:41 am

nothing exciting or new here.

and this person is wrong about the reporters just being lazy or bad.
they clearly are being told to go easy on anything palin just like fox does.
why?

that is the million dollar question.

Reply
Angiemomma
8/9/2011 10:25:39 am

He's correct...whichever MSM publication breaks the Palin pregnancy hoax story is guaranteed the Pulitzer.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Laura Novak

    Reporter, Author, Blogger, and Mother...

    Picture

    RSS Feed


    My novel is now on Amazon Kindle!!
    Picture


    Blogs I Read

    Getty Iris
    Cloisters Garden
    Daily Dish
    AlterNet
    Immoral Minority
    Hullabaloo
    Phantomimic
    Jotting Down a Life
    Lynnrockets
    Oakland Local
    Passive Voice
    LitBrit
    Onward
    Joe McGinniss
    Barbara Alfaro
    Suzanne Rosenwasser


    Categories

    All
    Brushes With Greatness
    Dance Number
    Education
    Friday Feature
    Girls On The Bus
    Good Men Project
    Just Sayin
    My Favorite Movie
    Neonatologist
    Private Parts
    Quick Take Tuesday
    Sarah Palin
    Scharlott Stuff
    Scribd
    Shrink Wrap Supreme
    Tao Te Wednesday
    True Confessions
    Vox Populi
    Writing/Publishing

    Picture
    View my profile on LinkedIn
    Picture

    Archives

    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010

Proudly powered by Weebly
Photos used under Creative Commons from acidpix, sicamp, Clearly Ambiguous, breahn, hoill, William Arthur Fine Stationery, southerntabitha, *Vintage Fairytale*, NeoGaboX, Dana Moos, ButterflyOrb, ruurmo, MCS@flickr, h.koppdelaney, Andrew 94, MarkWallace, fdecomite, Wonderlane, christophercarfi, dreamsjung, the superash, euphro, melloveschallah, Rhett Sutphin, I Don't Know, Maybe., Harold Laudeus, h.koppdelaney, jennaddenda, Harrissa Sunshine, Wesley Fryer, fidalgo_dennis, bark, [cipher], fdecomite, Marcos Kontze, legends2k, optick, pjohnkeane, Kabacchi, Pink Sherbet Photography, h.koppdelaney, alexbrn, Elsie esq., Rafael Acorsi, naitokz, tiffa130, otisarchives4, Sheloya Mystical and Agrimas Gothic, allygirl520, tnarik, Daquella manera, peyri, Patrick Hoesly, Anderson Mancini, Abode of Chaos, joewcampbell, keepitsurreal, Jonas N, David Boyle, Gideon Burton, evmaiden, Mike Willis, ankakay, LadyDragonflyCC -Busy Wedding Week for BF Amy!, Cast a Line, aeneastudio, Lord Jim, hisperati, dbzoomer, Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com, thegardenbuzz, kamshots, AleBonvini, smadden, CarbonNYC