Spitzer and the Media’s Double Standard

From MRC’s CyberAlert:

Incredibly, in lead stories Monday night about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer being linked to a prostitution ring, neither ABC’s World News nor the NBC Nightly News verbally identified Spitzer’s political party. Must mean he’s a liberal Democrat—and he is. CBS anchor Katie Couric, however, managed to squeeze in a mention of his party. Last August when news of Larry Craig’s arrest broke, both ABC and NBC stressed his GOP affiliation.

On ABC, the only hints as to Spitzer’s party were a few seconds of video of Spitzer beside Hillary Clinton as they walked down some steps and a (D) on screen by Spitzer’s name over part of one soundbite. NBC didn’t even do that.

While ABC and NBC failed to cite Spitzer’s political affiliation in the four minutes or so each network dedicated to the revelations, both managed to find time to applaud his reputation and effectiveness as the Empire State’s Attorney General before becoming Governor. Fill-in ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas hailed how “he gained a reputation around the country for aggressively cracking down on corporate corruption. He was elected Governor with a reputation for fighting crime.” ABC reporter Dan Harris maintained “Governor Spitzer is known as a straight arrow, an ambitious overachiever...” Substitute NBC anchor Ann Curry pointed to how Spitzer’s “reputation for righteously prosecuting wrongdoing gave him the nickname Eliot Ness.” ...

The networks hardly hesitated last August to identify Senator Larry Craig as a Republican and, in October of 2006, to highlight how then-Congressman Mark Foley was a Republican ...

In a large swath of the media, you’re starting to see two spins on this story. First, it’s a tragedy that such a promising leader has seen his career get derailed. Second, that partisan politics was behind the bust. (Short answer to that one: If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.) Somehow I don’t remember the media telling wither of those tales about, say, David Vitter.

Posted on Tuesday, March 11 2008 | Permalink

Did I violate some code of commenting, PB?

Posted by  on  03/11  at  02:16 PM

Hui asked:

Did I violate some code of commenting, PB?

Nope. You’re a great commenter who is very welcome here.

However, I’ve had a problem with the software creating double posts today, so I may have inadvertently deleted a comment of yours while cleaning up duplicate posts. If so, sorry about that.

Posted by Professor Bainbridge  on  03/11  at  02:27 PM

PB: No worries.

What I had said was that I didn’t have much of a problem with what Curry says here. Spitzer is seen that way, publicly for the most part. So it seems descriptive, whether you like him or the policies or not. It’s like labeling Nader a consumer advocate. That’s what he is known as—whether you think he’s misguided or not.

That said, political affiliations should be made known, both on the screen and in voice. It’s not acceptable to leave them off, unless you do it across the board. They need to be more self-conscious as anchors and reporters in this area.

However...it should be noted that Fox News, that pearl of objectivity, goes far beyond forgetting to say what affiliations people have when the scandals at hand are against Republicans. They do this often, but they also have a very bad—and well documented too, I might add—habit of MIS-identifying political affiliations. It’s jaw-dropping how many disgraced republicans have been identified by Fox (on screen, mostly) as Democrats.

That’s far beyond what you’re accusing ABC and NBC of here. I might be willing to believe that in the case of ABC/NBC, it is unintentional bias at best. But for Fox? Repeatedly misidentifying political affiliation is at BEST an intentional attempt to deceive.

Posted by  on  03/11  at  03:07 PM

Maybe it’s just more ironic that a male member of the party that prides itself in its traditional Christian family values would be soliciting men or boys for sex.

True, Spitzer was prosecuting rings at the same time, but that doesn’t have much to do with his political party.

Lastly, Spitzer, being governor of New York is a much more recognizable figure (especially to the New York news media ABC/NBC) than congressmen from Idaho (Craig) and Florida (Foley), and so would not require an introduction . You would hardly expect the President to be introduced as “George W. Bush, Republican from Texas.”

Posted by  on  03/12  at  12:22 PM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Today's Huge Eliot Spitzer Roundup

Previous entry: Don Spitzer

Introduction


Recent Punditry Entries


Hot Topics on Food & Wine

Hot Topics on Law & Business


Punditry RSS Feed

Flickr

Archives

My Books



Blogroll