PLANK AUGUST 8, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Over at Slate, Dave Weigel had some nice things to say about my Stuart Stevens profile before raising an objection about how the liberal-industrial-complex has changed campaigns since 2000:
Absolutely, the liberal media is stronger and more influential than it was in 2000. But you can draw a venn diagram between strictly left-wing media and mainstream political reporting, and in the intersection, you will find "explanatory, fact-checking reporting," enabled by the endless archives and space of the Internet. And it's this stuff, not the left-wing character assassination, that has really upended Stevens-ism. In The Big Enchilada, his memoir of the Bush campaign, Stevens remembers -- many times -- how Team Bush was able to throw the press off of ugly stories. Any minor Gore exagerrations would be used to portray Gore as a liar, someone whose attacks on the Bush record must be bunk. "We needed to communicate to voters that the same guy who exaggerates his own record would surely do the same when it came to his opponent's," wrote Stevens. "If we could help voters make that connection, it would go a long way toward 'blowing up the aircraft carrier instead of shooting down the planes,' as it was known in political circles."
As it happens, I don’t disagree with this. I just think Weigel is reading me too narrowly. I’m not suggesting that a handful of crazed left-wing bloggers directly upended the way campaigns had been run. The causality isn't nearly as clean as that. What upended the media landscape for campaigns is the overall backlash against the tactics Bush used in 2000. That backlash gave rise to both the lefty bloggers and (eventually) the mainstream fact-checkers.
But—and this is the point I was making in my piece—the backlash itself was a liberal one. If not for the overwhelmingly liberal critique of the methods Stevens writes about, and which mainstream reporters largely fell for, the media wouldn’t have had the same sense of dropping the ball. Nor would it be as devoted to the whole fact-checking enterprise. (Though I agree that, mechanically at least, the Internet made it possible.) I distinctly recall friends at mainstream outlets in the years between 2001 and 2004 taking up blogging for the first time and just getting annihilated in arguments with liberal bloggers, who were bang on in their criticisms. It’s hard to overstate the effect of those first few years of web-interaction on the mainstream media.
Relatedly, when I refer to the liberal-industrial-complex, I’m referring to a far, far broader universe of people than those engaged in “left-wing character assassination.” Most of the people I’d place in that community—including most of the contributors at outlets like MSNBC, Talking Points Memo, Daily Kos, Mother Jones, Ezra Klein’s operation at The Washington Post, and (yes) The New Republic—engage in pretty serious and scrupulous reporting and analysis. It just comes from a clear liberal perspective.
Follow me on twitter: @noamscheiber
9 comments
How Romney killed the Romney campaign: by being too stupid to learn from the mistakes of the past, or not paying attention and becoming a mistake of the past himself in many instances. The only reason this man is still in it is because he's not Barack Obama and the economy still sucks donkey for the average Joe.
- GSpinks
August 8, 2012 at 2:18pm
I would have thought that Bush v Kerry was more pertinent to this question than Bush v Gore.
- AaronW
August 8, 2012 at 2:19pm
It's like our adversarial system of justice: opposite, but theoretically equal, sides give a one-sided presentation of the case and the scales of justice, weighing each side, reach the correct result. It's the "theoretically equal" that throws things out of whack. And in politics, there wasn't anything "theoretically equal" about it: one side, the right side, had far superior team of media advocates on their side. Now, the media advocates are theoretically equal (or closer to it), thanks to the wave of liberal bloggers and other liberal advocates, and, hence, the scales of good politics (a/k/a voters) should receive a more equal presentation of the case from which to produce the correct result.
- rayward
August 8, 2012 at 2:24pm
AaronW - I agree. I think the Kerry campaign played a big role too. In the piece, I say the evolution basically started with Bush in 2000 and ended with the swift-boats.
- Noam Scheiber
August 8, 2012 at 2:59pm
I like nearly all of the stuff Scheiber writes, but it's hard to reconcile an inflammatory phrase like "liberal-industrial-complex" with this milquetoast explanation about just coming from a "clear liberal perspective." Liberal bloggers have may encouraged mainstream, non-partisan media to live up to their professed standards, but that etiology hardly qualifies as a "liberal-industrial-complex" and its nefarious implications.
- polcereal
August 8, 2012 at 3:50pm
Since when did "reality" and "facts" become evidence of a "lefty" bias? I thought we were all trying to discern what the reality and facts are? Except for Fox-News, of course, they've admitted that their "Fair And Balanced" mantra really means "Moving as far right as possible to balance what WE see as Liberal Bias in the Media". This whole conservative "whatever the Media perceives to be Reality is instead Liberal Bias" is an extremely dangerous idea. It enables that Rovian "Reality is what we SAY it is" attitude. It enables that whole "Yellow-Cake Means WMD. Invade!" thing on Iraq. It even enables Romney to seriously suggest lowering tax rates EVEN MORE in a time of trillion-dollar deficits, and a near-Depression. We ignore reality at our peril.
- AllanL5
August 8, 2012 at 4:51pm
I remember when TNR was a distinguished journal and didn't waste time on this silliness. The WSJ Interview with Marty Peretz was really good and made me miss him even more. The new Absentee Owner has been a disappointment. Mentioning TNR and MSNBC in the same breath is so sad. MSNBC has been sucking wind for about 10 years now. No direction, no investigations, just a bias looking for an outrage. There never was any MS in the MSNBC, and now that they have offically broken up, I don't know why they change the website to NBCNews, but the TV station rolls on. I guess the marketing of MSNBC is too important to change to an accurate name, like NBC News. I don't think the world needs a Liberal-Industrial Complex. TNR really needs to get their Mojo back.
- CRS9TNR
August 8, 2012 at 6:05pm
It's as Stephen Colbert once said: reality has a liberal bias.
- ironyroad
August 8, 2012 at 6:15pm
I agree with AllanL5 here. Claiming there's a lefty bias to the news is pretty off base. Besides MSNBC, which does lean left (praise be) there's FOX and the very disappointing, of late, CNN - which leans right imo, as they're constantly trying to find "balance" even when the GOP is outright lying. The Rovian meme is scary and more than a tad reminiscent of Goebbels. Making stuff up and passing it off as truth - especially on a "news" channel - that's a real nightmare. The media haven't done nearly enough imo. PS I sure hope the Romney campaign is killed. Let's wait for the election ok? Meanwhile I see Tea Party reps on the tube and they scare me.
- Sophia
August 8, 2012 at 9:56pm