WHEN GOVERNMENT officials misbehave, the media should report on it. This is a no-brainer. However, when our beloved Fourth Estate decides to cover one side of the story, instead of seeking out all the facts, it moves from being a news dissemination business to a propaganda spin machine. All too often we see this trend, with the most recent culprit being -- who else -- the illustrious New York Times.
The Times has embarked on a campaign to ruin Rep. Tom DeLay's, R-Texas, career and reputation. In addition to reporting heavily on his so-called scandals over the past few weeks, (a legitimate action, as the media should play a government watchdog role), The Times has gone one too many steps too far.
The third most widely circulated newspaper in America, right behind USA Today and The Wall Street Journal, has committed a big journalism no-no that syndicated conservative columnist Robert Novak has uncovered. Novak has authored his "Inside Report" columns for The Chicago Sun-Times since 1963, which are also currently syndicated in over 300 newspapers thrice-weekly.
According to Novak, on March 24, a Times editorial page staffer, Tobin Harshaw, e-mailed former Rep. Bob Livingston, R-La., asking him to write a piece about DeLay's "political future." Livingston, now working for The Livingston Group, a lobbying firm based in Washington, D.C., was amenable to the idea. (If you recall, Livingston resigned from Congress in 1998 after admission of a sexual affair.) Chris Terrell, a principal in The Livingston Group, called Harshaw and relayed this message, adding that Livingston would "write a favorable piece." According to Terrell, Harshaw said, "we are seeking those who would go on the record or state for the good of the party he [DeLay] should step aside." Apparently, Harshaw also hypocritically declared, "we would welcome any thoughts." Any such column by Livingston has yet to grace The Times' editorial pages. Harshaw has confirmed to Novak that the conversation did take place, but didn't elaborate any further.
The Times essentially attempted to manufacture a Republican coup against DeLay. Novak contests that this gesture by Livingston would be enormous, shattering "a solid GOP front supporting DeLay." This is not the job of a news publication, even the editorial staff of a news outlet. The Times should not be meddling in political affairs, tacitly seeking out individuals to call for DeLay's resignation, while ignoring those who support him.
The Times didn't print a clarification or a response to this revelation. The Times' Public Editor, Daniel Okrent, didn't mention this circumstance in any of his columns published since March 24. Moreover, the mainstream media hasn't put any pressure on The Times to justify its actions, let alone cover The Times' actions. Fox News and The Washington Times reported on this, but, based on a simple Lexis-Nexis search, no other major media outlet -- CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC or The Washington Post -- mentioned the story.
The media is probably one of the only facets of American life that isn't accountable to any authority, other than its reading audience. There's no formal system of checks and balances to prevent the media from stepping out of bounds. The only entity that the media have to answer to is itself, and The New York Times' colleagues are not doing a very good job of that.
The Fourth Estate is a branch of our society that the public should be able to trust. A free press is one of the essentials for a strong, healthy democracy. The media should inform citizens -- not present a tainted and distorted image of the truth. Not everyone is perfect, and certainly, no one can operate absent any sliver of opinion on a hot button issue. Nevertheless, the media should try their very best to remain uninhibited from any prejudices or agendas. Blatantly trying to drum up opposition against a political figure would be a violation of this mission of objectivity.
Some might contend that objectivity is an impossible, ambiguous standard to strive for and should be thrown out the window. While it is difficult, as long as the media claim that their aim is balanced coverage (and in America they do), they should endeavor to accomplish this.
The fact that the Times rescinded its offer to Livingston for a column once he indicated it would be a pro-DeLay piece should shock and outrage their reading audience. Why shouldn't The Times run the column? If objectivity is the goal, shouldn't The Times present all points of view? The Times could run an anti-DeLay piece written by a guest columnist right next to Livingston's, something common to op-ed pages, including The Cavalier Daily's.
This probably isn't likely though, since even Public Editor Okrent commented in his March 27 column about the existent influence of the editorial page on the news coverage that the "voice" of the editorial page has "in recent years has been so assertively left." Case in point: since March 24, The Times has run four negative columns and two editorials about DeLay or mentioning DeLay, and one column about DeLay by the only conservative columnist on the page, David Brooks, that was neutral.
The Times has some explaining to do. Let's hope it holds itself to the same standard that it holds conservative politicians to. I wouldn't be surprised if pigs fly before that happens.
Whitney Blake is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at wblake@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
Letters to the Editor: The resignation of University President Jim Ryan
54 minutes agoFollowing this resignation, The Cavalier Daily has received letters from the University community which provide various perspectives on what this moment means to them and to the University’s future.
A statement by 40 Jewish faculty and staff on antisemitism and DEI at U.Va.
By Jewish Faculty & Staff at U.Va. | YesterdayAs scholars and teachers, we know that dissent and debate strengthen our intellectual commitments and moral judgments rather than threaten them. We reject any attempt to deny these basic truths.
KURTZWEIL: Little sympathy for LittleJohn’s closure
By Paul Kurtzweil | 6 days agoWith a new class of students arriving in August, Corner restaurants will face another test of their price discrimination and thus need to learn LittleJohn’s lesson quickly.
