From: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Subject: IF: Media: Counter-Spin on the Democrats
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 08:23:41 GMT

/** nfd.ifeatures: 31.7 **/
** Written  8:55 am  Jul 25, 1992 by ihandler in cdp:nfd.ifeatures **
     If any IF articles are downloaded for use in the print
media, please call us. Our rates are cheap or, in many cases,
there is no cost at all.  There is no fee for downloads to other
BBS or for your private reading, but please send us your comments
anyway.  Call VOICE 312/384-8827 or leave E-MAIL with PEACENET's
NFD.GEN Conference or for Insight Features at NY ON-LINE.

News Analysis / 980 Words

Media `Counter-Spin'
on the Democratic
Convention

By Jim Naureckas and Jeff Cohen
Insight Features /FAIR
 
   MANAGED DEMOCRACY: One got the impression from the coverage of
the Democratic Convention that democracy is something that many in
the national press corps are uncomfortable with.  CBS's Richard
Threlkeld (7/13) put it this way: "Americans are going to be
watching to see how Bill Clinton manages this convention to see how
he can manage the country."  

   Again and again, Clinton won praise for "managing" to stifle any
substantive discussion of issues, which raises the question of how
the press would respond to similar "management" of the country.
"Are you annoyed that you have to deal with people like Jerry Brown
and Jesse Jackson?" Jim Lehrer asked Clinton (7/15). "Should Brown
be allowed to speak if he hasn't endorsed the ticket?" John Cochran
asked a Brown delegate (7/13). Maybe the idea is to eliminate the
last few traces of news from the conventions so that journalists
can spend their leap-year summers doing something else.

   MONEY MAZE: The chief failing of convention coverage was
reporters' failure to "follow the money."  Media consumers learned
next to nothing about the corporate dollars behind Clinton and the
Democratic Leadership Council.  It's not that journalists don't
understand that there's a connection between money and politics -
- here's a David Broder column on Jackson (7/14): "Clinton played
hardball politics with Jackson, especially after Ross Perot's
comments about homosexuality made it clear that the gay community,
whose financial support is critical to Jackson's operations, would
find no alternative to Clinton in November."  

   Broder can analyze this kind of political triple-bank shot --
when he's writing about marginalized sectors of the party.  But has
anyone in the mainstream press connected, for instance, Clinton's
vague, timid position on health care with the support he gets from
the medical industry (as Thomas Ferguson did in The Nation, 4/13)?

   Robert Hager on NBC Nightly News (7/14) did do a piece about how
corporate donors schmoozed democratic office-holders at the
convention.  Though it only skimmed the surface, and to some extent
played for laughs, it was refreshing to see something that at least
mentioned corporate influence.

   FROM RIGHT TO RIGHT: Looking for a spectrum of opinion on the
Democratic platform?  You can turn on Capital Gang (7/11), and hear
it denounced as "anti-capitalist" by Robert Novak and "mildly
socialist" by Mona Charen.  Then, for an opposing view, you can
read "Column Left" on the L.A. Times op-ed page (7/9), where Elaine
Kamarck praises the Democratic platform for avoiding Republican
attacks by adopting Republican rhetoric and positions on everything
from crime to welfare to corporations.  A left perspective that
holds that it's a bad idea for a Democratic platform to adopt
Republican positions is apparently too far-out for much of the
mainstream media.

   OPPRESSED WHITE MALES: An NBC correspondent (7/14) asked a
delegate if the party was "too sensitive to black issues, to
minority issues, to women's issues. Don't you think the Democratic
Party has to reach out more to the white males?"  Meanwhile, on
ABC, Cokie Roberts was similarly concerned about the Democrats'
male appeal: "When you have so many women in the party, you're
going to turn off men."  After all, only a half dozen of Clinton's
top six choices for vice president were white men. 

   SHABBY TREATMENT?: Jerry Brown was treated with the usual
disdain by the press.  Tom Brokaw (7/15) called his speech "a
telephone book of complaints"; a Wall Street Journal editorialist
(7/15) referred to his delegates as "the largest kindergarten class
ever assembled."  One surprise was Mark Shields' defense of Brown
(7/15), who he said has been treated "shabbily" by the press.

   A BOX OF THEIR OWN: A New York Times contingent seemed to be in
a press box of its own during Jesse Jackson's convention speech. In
the Times the next day (7/15), David Rosenbaum reported, "He drew
cheers from many delegations, but others responded tepidly, and
still others watched in seeming indifference." "Though the speech
touched the old chords, the passion of the speaker was in a
slightly muted key, the response of the audience a shade
desultory," according to Maureen Dowd and Times drama critic Frank
Rich, who was perhaps more familiar with the ovations given to Miss
Saigon. B. Drummond Ayres Jr. reported that "the old fire was not
there." (Ayres' "Jackson is over the hill" piece first appeared in
an early edition before Jackson's speech was delivered; when
references to the speech were then added, they coincidentally
supported the theme of the story.)

   Some at the Times observed the same speech the rest of the
country did. Times TV critic Walter Goodman observed that Jackson's
speech, "stronger than anything yet heard from the convention
podium, was rousingly received."  The lead editorial referred to
"Mr. Jackson's electrifying exhortations to stand by the helpless
and to rebuild America." 

   LADIES' MAN: When Ann Richards came up to speak on Monday night,
Tom Brokaw described her as "known for her hairdo."  Brokaw had
introduced Geraldine Ferraro at the 1984 Democratic Convention with
these words: "The first woman to be nominated for vice president -
- Size 6!"

   LOSS OF ROSS: Molly Ivins deserves credit for a scoop -- in a
Washington Post op-ed on Perot (7/15), the day before he dropped
out of the race, she described him as a "quitter": "If he can't
have it all his own way, he takes his ball and goes home."  The
Wall Street Journal's Timothy Noah (7/17) showed signs of a
terminal inside-the-beltway perspective when he explained that the
Perot campaign unraveled "largely because of the clash between the
grassroots eccentrics who launched Mr. Perot's campaign and the
smart political professionals who were attempting to organize it." 
Don't let the people near the democracy; they might get
fingerprints on it.      

                            -- 30 --

   Jim Naureckas is editor and Jeff Cohen is associate editor of
Extra!, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, 130 W 25th
St, New york, NY 10001. 212/633-6700. 
** End of text from cdp:nfd.ifeatures **
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive