BuzzMachine
by Jeff Jarvis

October 27, 2004

The Arafat surprise

: Not to work too hard to find the local angle, but if Arafat dies before Tuesday, what does it mean to the election? I'd say it pumps another point to Bush. Anything that puts the focus on the Middle East and instability benefits him.

Sell blogs short!

: Mary Meeker sees money in blogs. Get the pins out now. Her report here.

Top 10 blog moments?

: Someone has asked for examples of the top moments of blog influence in politics and the presidential campaign. Obvious starting nominees:
: Howard Dean and MeetUp
: Trent Lott
: Rathergate.

What else? Please leave lots of suggestions in the comments....

The story of the story is the real story

: Just got booked on CNBC's Capitol Report (again) tonight, this time with (whew) John Hinderaker.

The topic: the reverse October surprise, the story of the missing explosives in Iraq. My take: The timing and placement and motive behind this story is every bit as significant as the explosives, missing or not. Of course, this smells like a campaign ploy. Media must recognize that it is used all the time; it is spin alley. And so the story of the story of explosives is the real story.

And, of course, it could have an impact on the election. Dick Morris said in the NY Post today:

Ultimately, this is not a contest of two men or two parties or two ideologies for supremacy. It is a battle of two issues — the War on Terror vs. domestic policies. And the outcome depends on whether America feels we are at war or at peace. Do we need a wartime leader or a peacetime president?
I wouldn't go quite that far, but he's not far off. I'm sure a lot of voters are leaning toward Bush because of security but if they see a critical mass of questions on the competence of the securing of Iraq, they may lean against.

When the New York Times and 60 Minutes decide to do this story -- just as when the LA Times decided to run its last-minute koocheekoo story on Schwarzenegger before his election -- they must realize the active and direct role they are playing in the campaign. If it's news (which is debatable in both cases, it appears) do you still run it? OK, yes. But media also has to recognize that their acts are news as well -- and so, there's all the more need for transparency. The Times should let us know where this story came from and talk to both sides about the impact. Not to do so is to do half a job of reporting.

What do you think? Join in with comments....

: Says John Podhoretz today:

John Kerry has seized on a New York Times/"60 Minutes" report about 380 missing tons of high explosives in Iraq and the administration's supposed dereliction in failing to secure them.

It's hard to fault the Times for pursuing the story aggressively. In an official document sent to a U.N. agency two weeks ago, the Iraqi interim government said the explosives had disappeared during the looting that followed Saddam Hussein's fall in April 2003.

That official Iraqi communication makes the story news, no matter the source or the motive behind the document being leaked.

The problem is that the story drew unsupported conclusions about how the explosives had disappeared while the United States military should have been guarding them.

And that's why it's a late hit — designed to do maximum damage to the president's re-election effort and designed as well to give John Kerry a weapon to use against George Bush in the closing days of the campaign.

For that reason, the Times spun its own story, even though the evidence that its conclusions were unsupported is right there in the story itself.

Hyper about hyperlocal

: Mark Glaser writes about a topic dear to my heart: hyperlocal citizens' media.

Podcasting on the air

: As I told you last week, WNYC's Brian Lehrer show was planning to do a show on podcasting. And they're doing it this morning with Adam Curry at 10:40 (you can listen to it later on their stream).

Questioning power

: Howard Stern said this morning that the only reason his call to Michael Powell yesterday (transcript below) is making such big news today is that journalists no longer ask tough questions.

He's all too right.

TV especially thinks toughness (and balance) come from getting people from two sides on the air to yell at each other.

Last night, I was on CNBC's Capitol Report again with right-wingnut Bob Kohn -- Ana Marie Cox and I were expecting smart and reasonable blogger John Hinderocker instead. This time, instead of getting into a fussfest with Kohn, I decided to just make fun of him. He started going at it with the host, Gloria Borger. I shouted: What, did I walk into Crossfire here? I said that he, like John Kerry, was humorless. At the end, I begged him to say just one bad thing about George Bush, just for the balance and entertainment. I took my cue from Jon Stewart: Make a joke of the fools.

When Powell went on Ronn Owens' show on KGO, a condition was that he would not take phone calls. Get that: A government bureacrat who works for us, the people, refuses to talk to the people. What isolation! What arrogance! What crap!

Ronn, to his credit, took Stern's call anyway. And Stern got in the questions he could, before he was cut short. There was no yelling, no shouting, no sputtering.

A citizen with a grievance finally got to question someone in power.

These days, that's news.

The problem with a future of citizens' media, distributed media is that it will get harder and harder for us, the people, to question power. We the people don't have the access (which makes me regret that I didn't attend Always On just so I could ask Powell questions of my own about his First Amendment hypocrisy or that two years ago at Foursquare, when I did ask Powell a question about copyright and Larry Lessig I should have asked about Stern). The journalists are supposed to do it for us and they have the access but they get scared of pissing off power. They wimp.

The problem media today isn't that it's biased. Or that it's unbiased. The problem is that media stopped thinking like a human being and asking the questions human beings would ask.

The other day, I saw a WNBC morning show "report" on yoga for little kiddies and their too-rich, too-indulgent, too-stupid parents who'll pay $400 to have their infants stretch to relieve their terrible tensions (like what, not getting candy when they want it from nanny?). I wanted to shout at the TV. But more than that, I wanted the "reporter" to say to these people: Are you nuts? Do you really think this is worth 4 cents? Do you think this makes a bit of difference to a kid? Don't you feel like fools? But, no, of course the "reporter" just gives us the yoga nuts' PR spin and leaves it at that. No confrontation. We do that on Crossfire. That's what TV says.

Jay Rosen complains, properly, about TV reporters going to spin alley at political events. The problem is, TV is spin alley.

This isn't a matter of left or right, of bias or objectivity. It's a matter of common sense: When reporters lose their common sense, they lose their humanity and their credibility and their usefulness.

They need to remind themselves that they are asking questions on behalf of the rest of us who don't have the chance to. Howard got to ask a few questions of power yesterday. He should not have had to. Reporters should have beaten him to it.

kerrysign.jpg

Swing state

: A week or two ago, I reported that I saw few campaign signs in my neck of the woods and fewer Kerry signs. That is changing. Maybe New Jersey is a swing state afterall. Mind you, to see anything Democratic in my county is cause for calling the cops in: clearly outsiders, you know. But Kerry signs are popping up next door to Bush signs and this morning, I found this big sign put up by a neighbor.

Archives:
06/05 ... 05/05 ... 04/05 ... 03/05 ... 02/05 ... 01/05 ... 12/04 ... 11/04 ... 10/04 ... 09/04 ... 08/04 ... 07/04 ... 06/04 ... 05/04 ... 04/04 ... 03/04 ... 02/04 ... 01/04 ... 12/03 ... 11/03 ... 10/03 ... 09/03 ... 08/03 ... 07/03 ... 06/03 ... 05/03 ... 04/03 ... 03/03 ... 02/03 ... 01/03 ... 12/02 ... 11/02 ... 10/02 ... 09/02 ... 08/02 ... 07/02 ... 06/02 ... 05/02 ... 04/02 ... 03/02/a ... 03/02/b ... 02/02 ... 01/02 ... 12/01 ... 11/01 ... 10/01 ... 09/01 ... Current Home



. . .