Death Panels

"Death Panels": A Journalism Case Study

Brian Beutler | August 14, 2009, 9:35AM

Two contrasting headlines from two very different news outlets.

New York Times: "False 'Death Panel' Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots"

Politico: "Sarah Palin and "death panels" - is she helping or hurting her political future?"

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (20) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Death Panels, Health Care, Mainstream Media

Barack Obama

The Odd Pulitzers

Matthew Cooper | April 20, 2009, 5:54PM

Big congratulations to all of the Pulitzer winners this year. As always, they seem worthy.

You can argue about whether this series or that cartoonist should have won instead but it's hard to look at the winners and not think them worthy of the distinction bestowed on them.

I would think TPM readers would particularly love, as they should, David Barstow's piece on the military message machine.

Taken as a whole, though, the prizes seem a little odd. First, it's kind of weird that more of the prizes didn't focus on the 2008 campaign and the financial crisis which were kind of, oh, big last year.

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (21) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Barack Obama, Mainstream Media

Bailout

Shocker: Media Let Wall Street Chieftain Praise His Own Idea

Elana Schor | March 24, 2009, 9:28AM

In today's flurry of positive press about the stock market's 7% uptick in response to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's bank rescue plan, one name stands out: Bill Gross, chairman of the vast PIMCO bond fund.

Bloomberg, Time magazine, the Financial Times, and other outlets all picked up Gross' punchy declaration that the Geithner plan is "win-win-win." Reuters even touted as an "exclusive" its report that Pimco would be participating in Geithner's public-private initiative to buy up toxic mortgage-backed assets.

There's only one problem with this: Gross is practically duty-bound to love the plan, since it was partly his idea. As the WaPo reported on Sunday: (emphasis mine)

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (27) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Bailout, Mainstream Media, Timothy Geithner

Bailout

Rep. Sherman Squares Off With Pro-Wall Street CNBC Host

Elana Schor | March 20, 2009, 12:41PM

On CNBC this morning, host Mark Haines -- who is catching heat this morning for arguing that Wall Street can't "be run well" by anyone making under $250,000 -- was at it again defending the need for high executive bonuses in order to keep Wall Street running.

But Haines' interviewee, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), pushed right back at the host's conspicuously pro-Wall Street line.

When Sherman observed that "most people on Main Street do not" agree that AIG can't be put into government receivership (an assertion supported by recent polling on nationalization), Haines replied: "And what do the people on Main Street know about running a financial system?"

To which Sherman quipped: "What do AIG executives know about running a financial system? They only know how to destroy one."

Video of the exchange is below, and a full transcript is posted after the jump.

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (34) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)
Bailout, Executive Compensation, Mainstream Media

Barack Obama

Obama's Too-Busy Meme, Cont'd

Matthew Cooper | March 11, 2009, 10:37AM

This morning, Matt Lauer continued the meme by asking Council of Economic Advisers Chair Christina Romer whether the president had "bitten off more than he could chew." Romer responds here:

Most of the he's too-busy meme has been absurd. But the always-smart Bill Galston, over at The New Republic, raises a more nuanced proposition here.

Galston notes that, unlike FDR, Obama doesn't have the same clout in a more divided Congress and that FDR really did keep things focused on the economic emergency in his first months. Galston notes:

Roosevelt delayed most of the structural reforms that did not bear directly on the economic emergency. For example, he did not even propose a commission to consider social insurance until June of 1934. Social Security legislation was introduced six months later, in January 1935, and was not signed into law until August of that year, after the provisions relating to health care had been stripped out.

Roosevelt organized his first term around two principles that the Obama administration would do well to ponder. First, he kept his (and the country's) attention firmly fixed on a single task: ending the crisis of confidence and restarting economic activity. While he was more sensitive than previous presidents to the links among seemingly disparate issues, these interconnections in his view did not warrant trying to move on all fronts at once. The people and the Congress had to be brought along with an agenda and a narrative that they could understand.

Fair enough, but I think there's a response to that, too.

First, distraction is a two-way street. Congress is constantly deviating from the economic emergency to deal with other stuff. I watched a fulsome debate on the transportation of chimpanzees and other primates the other day on C-SPAN. The House was taking up a bill in the wake of that chimp attack. It's not reasonable to focus just on one branch of government.

Second, Obama is talking about a lot of things but he's not sending up a torrent of legislation. There was the stimulus bill but everyone agreed there needed to be some kind of stimulus. He's encouraged Congress to come up with a health care plan but he hasn't forced a bill on them to consider. And besides is health care really a distraction? The facts show that you can't get entitlement reform or any control over future red ink without it. Why wait?

Third, Congress is a much bigger institution than it was in 1933 or even 1977, the other example the Galston cites. Staffs are bigger, there's more capacity to deal with more issues. If we have more of a logjam these days, it's owing to the partisan redrawing of districts, the culture of lobbying and so on but not an innate inability of Congress to handle more than a few things at a time.

As I said originally, if Obama suddenly decides to immerse himself in an obscure border dispute or something truly far afield, he ought to be called out on it. But green energy, health care, education, and other things he's pursuing all seem germane to the economy. You can disagree with them individually but it's hard to chide their relevance to the crisis at hand.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (50) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (9)
Barack Obama, Business Lobby, Capitol Culture, Environment, Health Care, House of Representatives, Mainstream Media

Bailout

Taking Their Cues From The New York Times, GOPers Go All Financial Crisis, All the Time

Elana Schor | March 10, 2009, 5:46PM

In his Times opinion column this morning, David Brooks urged Republicans to adopt a singular focus on the financial crisis as a way of countering President Obama's agenda. As Brooks wrote:

Republicans could admit that they don't know what the future holds, and they're not going to try to make long-range plans based on assumptions that will be obsolete by summer. Unlike the Democrats, they're not for making trillions of dollars in long-term spending commitments until they know where things stand.

...

Do I expect them to shift course in this manner? Not really.

But Brooks appears to have underestimated his own influence. Senior Republicans came out in force today to contend that the financial crisis was getting short shrift from the White House, expanding on the "Obama is distracted" meme that Matt has blogged about this week to accuse the president of not tackling the economy as intensely as he should.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) relayed the new message loud and clear, as The Hill reports:

Following the GOP's weekly conference meeting, the second-ranking House Republican told reporters that President Obama should be focusing on the "economic crisis," as opposed to holding four-hour meetings on healthcare, as the president did last week. The efforts may be laudable, Cantor said, but the White House should be devoting all resources to fixing the economy and not to "impose these cap-and-trade schemes."

And Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) echoed the assertion that Obama's team needs to do more intense work on the economy. "I wish Secretary Geithner and the president would actually begin to solve the problem that's Number One, the credit crisis," he told me today, urging the president to "attend to the problems of the most importance to our country first."

The GOP also seems to be moving forward on Brooks' other recommendation this morning: the introduction of a coherent conservative alternative to the Obama administration's financial policies. Ideas under consideration include a tax credit to homebuyers who make a 5% down payment, tax benefits for those who sell investment properties ... and likely more breaks in the tax code.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (12) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Bailout, Eric Cantor, Mainstream Media, Republicans

Barack Obama

The Too-Busy Meme Cont'd

Matthew Cooper | March 10, 2009, 3:14PM

President Obama took on the can-he-walk-and-chew-gum media today:

I know there are some who believe we can only handle one challenge at a time. They forget that Lincoln helped lay down the transcontinental railroad, passed the Homestead Act, and created the National Academy of Sciences in the midst of Civil War. Likewise, President Roosevelt didn't have the luxury of choosing between ending a depression and fighting a war. President Kennedy didn't have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon. And we don't have the luxury of choosing between getting our economy moving now and rebuilding it over the long term.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (37) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
Barack Obama, Mainstream Media

Barack Obama

The Media's Meme: Obama's Too Distracted

Matthew Cooper | March 9, 2009, 4:55PM

Is Barack Obama "trying to do too much"? It's been a topic on the morning talk shows and again today.

For an example, see this video from The Page by Mark Halperin.

Halperin is joined by Louis Burgdorf from MSNBC who says this question of distraction is a big deal and suggests that if Obama put other things aside it will "restore confidence in the consumer." Halperin asks Bergdorf if Obama should cancel today's stem cell event. Bergdorf says no, citing it as an important issue and noting that his stepmother has MS.

The whole conversation seemed slightly ridiculous, if you ask me. Presidents obviously do more than one thing at a time. No one asked Reagan to ignore the Cold War and focus on the recession.

Yes, a president can wander too far afield. If Obama suddenly devoted significant energy to a border dispute between Columbia and Venezuela or a revamp of the Law of the Sea Treaty that would be a distraction from the pressing matters facing the country. But to sign an executive order reversing George W. Bush on stem cells and to do an event publicizing the new order seems eminently reasonable in a country where so many are looking to embryonic stem cell research to improve their lives. And, of course, many of the things that may seem like a distraction--health care, green energy--are inextricably linked to the economic health of the country. You can disagree with Obama's policies but to talk about distraction seems like a misunderstanding of what presidents do. Send in examples you see of the "distracted" meme.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (35) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (9)
Barack Obama, Mainstream Media

Barack Obama

A Ban on Goofballs

Matthew Cooper | March 3, 2009, 3:26PM

At today's press briefing, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked by the NBC correspondent, Tom Costello, to respond to the complaints of CNBC's Jim Cramer, made on NBC's "Today" show that the president is scaring investors. Anyone who has listened to Jim Cramer already has plenty of reason to be scared because his advice has been so consistently wrong. Anyone listenting to Tom Costello might think that NBC is in the business of self promotion. Anyone listening to Gibbs respond might thing that the White House loves to use goofballs as strawmen.

This comes on the heels of the administration responding to Rush Limbaugh--and elevating his status to leader of the Republican party--and the White House using CNBC's Rick Santelli as a foil. Before we have the president responding to Glen Beck or Erin Burnett, can we have a ban on reporters asking the White House to respond to a blowhard and can the White House stop using blowhards as a foil?

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (31) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Barack Obama, Mainstream Media, Robert Gibbs, Rush Limbaugh

Capitol Culture

The Fairness Doctrine, R.I.P.

Matthew Cooper | February 18, 2009, 6:47PM

Well, it looks like "the fairness doctrine" died a quiet death today. White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told Fox News that President Obama was not interested in restoring the Federal Communications Commission rule that basically requires broadcasters to give equal time to opposing points of view.

If enforced, the rule would obviously create havoc in talk radio land where conservatives dominate the airwaves. Not surprisingly, the right has been in a tailspin about this, predicting that Obama would somehow take away half of Rush and Sean and Laura and but liberals in their place. Talk about redistribution! But despite some congressional interest in the measure, the idea of restoring it was never really in play.

Intellectually, I think the idea is weak and the administration seems to think so, too. After all, it hearkens back to a pre-internet era when finding an opposing view was harder. But there were some lingering questions about what Obama would do. David Axelrod got asked about it on Fox News Sunday--yes, this is a News Corp obsession--and he punted, saying it was a decision best left for Julius Genachowski, Obama's not-yet-announced nominee to chair the FCC. (Genachowski is a close friend, for what it's worth.) But it looks like the decision's already been made. Seems sensible to me but the right loses something to fulminate about. I'm curious to see how much disappointment there is on the left.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (41) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Capitol Culture, David Axelrod, Democrats, Mainstream Media, Progressive Community, Republicans, Rush Limbaugh

Capitol Culture

More Malkin Insanity

Matthew Cooper | February 18, 2009, 9:57AM

Conservative commentators are going wild over the small number of journalists who have chosen to go into the Obama administration. It's proof, they say, of the media's liberal bias. Michelle Malkin goes into a rant on this.

Oh, please.

We're in economic chaos and print media is in free fall. I have no doubt that if John McCain had won, you would have seen some journalists head into the administration. In case, you missed it, no shortage of reporters love the guy.

As for the bias of those who've gone into the administration, let's take them one by one. There's my old Time colleague, Jay Carney, who is working for Biden. I don't think I'm giving away a state secret to say that more than a decade ago, as I recall, McCain had some interest in hiring Carney and the two have been friendly personally even while occasionally battling it out in print. Carney is probably one of the least partisan people I know. Jill Zuckman of the Chicago Tribune, after all, went to work for Ray LaHood, the Republican Secretary of Transportation from Illinois who she knew well from writing for the state's largest daily. Peter Gosselin of the L.A. Times, the widower of the late and much liked New York Times reporter, Robin Toner, who passed away recently, should hardly be begrudged for giving up the maelstrom of the Tribune company and Sam Zell to go work for Tim Geithner who was Hank Paulson's partner as much as he is Barack Obama's. In other words, big deal.

And even if they'd gone to work for more partisan figures or had more partisan leanings themselves, so what? I'm not sure it's a bad thing.

Besides, I'm of the school that service in government is good for journalists. I worked at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights after college and the experience has always given me a more supple understanding of how government works. Many of my colleagues from the center-left The Washington Monthly where I began my career in journalism--James Fallows, Walter Shapiro, Paul Glastris, Steven Waldman and the magazine's founder, Charles Peters--have all worked in government.

I see no one on the right complaining about Michael Gerson having gone from U.S. News & World Report to the George W. Bush administration or William Safire's exodus from the Nixon administration to The New York Times. (I realize I'm conflating columnists and reporters here, but still, the point is the same.) Left and right can bitch about the MSM but I really don't think government service, whether it's Jay Carney or Tony Snow or Chris Matthews, should really be condemned. Geoff Morrell of ABC News went to work as the Pentagon spokesman under W. Now he's still there under Bob Gates who obviously stayed. Am I supposed to be alarmed by that?

Media bias is a perennial debate and I know how many TPM readers, I'm sure, see a right leaning bias in the MSM. But it strikes me that bias and government service are different questions, each worth parsing on their own.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (36) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Capitol Culture, Mainstream Media

Bailout

Can't Forget: The Exec Pay Limits Were Not Last-Minute Additions

Elana Schor | February 17, 2009, 3:14PM

If you read the major news media's reporting this week on the executive compensation limits that were included in today's newly-signed stimulus law, you'd think the pay caps were one of those sneaky, dark-of-night maneuvers on the part of Senate Democrats.

The Chicago Tribune says the compensation rules were "inserted at the last minute" into the stimulus. USA Today goes with "thrown in at the last minute," while CBS News makes the dramatic claim that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) "slipped in [the] little-noticed provision."

Incredible! If only it were true. Dodd's CEO pay limits were added to the Senate's stimulus plan by voice vote, with no objection from either party, more than 10 days ago.

It was only the fact that the pay caps survived an attempt to slice them from the bill that was at all unexpected. Two other strong proposals to limit compensation at bailed-out banks were yanked from the stimulus at the last minute -- not added.

In fact, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), the House Financial Services Committee member who first blew the whistle on the attempts to scrap the pay caps, reminded Fox Business Channel of the truth during a weekend interview. We've got the video for you after the jump.

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (7) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
Bailout, Barack Obama, Business Lobby, Mainstream Media, Stimulus

Health Care

Right-Wing Media Compares Health Care Modernization to Nazism

Elana Schor | February 11, 2009, 11:57AM

During the Bush years, Republicans displayed a particular fondness for fomenting anxiety over comparisons made between the former president's administration and the Nazi party.

But now that a Democratic president is in charge, the right-wing media has no qualms about comparing President Obama's initiatives to Nazism. Witness this morning's Washington Times editorial, which runs a photo of Hitler alongside a wildly off-base attack on the health information technology (IT) provisions in the stimulus.

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (18) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Health Care, Mainstream Media, Rush Limbaugh

Stimulus

Can't Forget the Fat Cats!

Elana Schor | February 2, 2009, 12:45PM

From a CNBC interview this morning with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA):

LANDRIEU: A lot of fat cats have gotten a lot of money. We want to get some of these little Main Street cats getting some money down in our part of the town. And that's what we want to do.

REPORTER: Senator Landrieu, we all love Main Street cats. But there's a role for fat cats, too. Let's not punish successful entrepreneurs.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (25) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Mainstream Media, Senate, Stimulus

Mainstream Media

Silly Democrats! Who Cares About Keeping Health Care Costs Down?

Elana Schor | January 30, 2009, 1:42PM

This just makes me cringe. In an interview this afternoon with Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), a CNN reporter practically snickered at the idea of spending $75 million on smoking cessation programs as part of an economic stimulus bill. The anchor introduced the segment this way:

HARRIS: You know, just about every line of the huge stimulus bill contains millions for what most Democrats are calling job creation and many Republicans are calling waste, arguments based on differing political philosophies perhaps. But who could argue that spending millions to help people quit smoking will create jobs?

No one is arguing that. But as Harkin tried to explain, small investments in preventative care measures, such as smoking cessation, have a hugely beneficial effect on overall health care costs. And he was mocked for attempting it:

GRIFFIN: Senator, it just seems like this is not the bill. We're trying to get the economy moving, we're trying to get people back to work, and I'm having a hard time understanding how $75 million to tell people to stop smoking is going to put anybody back to work.

HARKIN: Well, first of all, I would tell you, we put -- we put over $5 billion in this bill on prevention so that we can get ahead of the curve and start cutting health care costs.

GRIFFIN: Senator, I've got to be skeptical, because what I think I'm hearing from you is, yes, we want to get people off of smoking, but here you go, Joe, you're out of work, but, by golly, at least you're not smoking.

Did this approach come straight from Rep. John Boehner's (R-OH) cigarette-adorned mouth?

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (8) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Democrats, John Boehner, Mainstream Media, Stimulus

Stimulus

GOP's Successful Media Message: This Stimulus Needs to be More Ineffective!

Elana Schor | January 28, 2009, 11:08AM

Republicans have blanketed the airwaves in the past week, carrying a single message that's been well-amplified, with almost no skepticism, on MSNBC ...

[Sen. John] ENSIGN [R-NV]: You know, politically, what we're trying to do is choose the right policy, something that actually stimulates the economy, that creates jobs. ... If we could lower the corporate tax rate, that would be one of the best things that we could do to make American business more competitive in the world and actually help stimulate the economy.

... not to mention CNBC:

[Rep. Spencer] BACHUS [R-AL]: We have said let's do tax cuts, let's let the American people make the decisions on how they'll spend the money. That will stimulate the economy more than bringing all that money to Washington and then distributing it out in all sorts of government programs.

... and, of course, on Fox News:

[Rep. Mike] PENCE [R-IN}: What House Democrats have done here is get out a dusty old wish list of liberal spending priorities, dump it all in a bill, and throw in a few token tax cuts on top of it. That's not going to create jobs. It's not going to put this economy back on its feet.

There's only one problem with the stimulus debate's focus on whether the percentage of spending on tax cuts should be 40 or 20, as opposed to the outright merits of such breaks: Tax cuts are an ineffective economic stimulus.

Read more »

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (26) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Mainstream Media, Republicans, Stimulus