Suppose that a first cousin of Al Gore had been running one of the
network news teams issuing election night projections. Suppose that,
having previously recused himself from a columnist job, saying his
objectivity would suffer from family loyalty, this cousin had chatted
with Gore six times on election day. Suppose that the same cousin had
been first to declare Gore as the winner in Florida on election night,
helping coax the rival networks to follow suit, leading George W. Bush to
call up Gore in order to concede, thereby helping create a presumption
that Gore was the duly elected president of the United States long before
all the votes had been counted.
Can anyone reasonably doubt that the pundits would be working
themselves into a nonstop lather charging "the liberal media" as
accessories to grand larceny? Can we imagine, say, Rupert Murdoch's Fox
News Channel right-leaning barking heads dropping the subject?
Just kidding, of course. John Ellis, the cousin in question, is George
W. Bush's. Ellis' own account reports his chatty times with his cousin.
The network is Rupert Murdoch's. Murdoch defends Ellis in these words:
"Every journalist is desperately trying to get in touch with
candidates--that's their job." Just as the U.S. Supreme Court enunciated
a special rule for Bush vs. Gore, shutting down the Florida vote count by
suddenly discovering the principle of equal protection of the law in an
election--a principle it hadn't troubled itself to notice since Jim Crow
days--the media have "moved on," as they like to say, to show business as
usual.
As the House Energy and Commerce Committee begins hearings today on
the networks' bad election night calls, let it also consider the
tremendous subsidy that our political system hands the media plutocrats.
The maximum network commitment is to convenience their own status quo. In
more than one way, the television networks conduct themselves as if
democratic elections take place for their own delectation.
It's rare for network arrogance to matter as egregiously as on Nov. 7.
But Ellis' private family channels are the tip of a grander scandal,
which is the dominance of the national voicebox by vastly profitable
organizations, their pundits tilting rightward as they blare their
talking points, stripping everyone else's sound bites to seven seconds
each, all the while operating on public airwaves, collecting hundreds of
millions of dollars from political ads while lobbying furiously against
campaign finance reform.
Try finding a discussion of these issues on any news network. The
barking heads who usurp the space of public affairs with high-volume
jeers are not equal-opportunity offenders. Ever since Ronald Reagan's
presidency, when George Will, the president's debate chum, became
inescapable in newspapers, magazines and on television, there has been no
left-of-center equivalent. Would Jim Lehrer's "Newshour" tolerate a
Democrat who, like its regular Paul Gigot, the Wall Street Journal
columnist, celebrated a riot (the one that had been organized on Nov. 22
by Republican operatives to shut down the Miami-Dade vote count)? Onetime
Democrats like Chris Matthews and Tim Russert have absorbed the
pugnacious atmosphere, with Matthews insulting anyone to his left and
Russert flattering the likes of Rush Limbaugh, kowtowing to James Baker
while cutting off Warren Christopher, and telling viewers no fewer than
three times on Nov. 8 that, the way things were going in Florida, it was
time for Al Gore to play statesman and concede. Not one barking head ever
suggested that Bush concede under any conditions whatever.
The election night debacle was not partisan, but it dovetails nicely
with normal network presumption. Embarrassed, the networks have been a
tiny bit chastened. ABC, CBS and NBC appointed in-house commissions to
see where they went wrong in their statewide projections, having suddenly
been shocked--shocked!--to discover that by rushing their judgments, not
only do they affect voting elsewhere across our six time zones, but
candidates may make crucial decisions on the basis of TV projections.
But don't let anyone tell you that the Voter News Service is to blame
all by itself. The Associated Press, which is co-proprietor, received the
same dubious Florida projections but did not announce them. Of course the
AP does not have advertising dollars at risk in rushing to judgment.
It's rare, of course, for network arrogance to loom so large, just as
it's rare for vote malfeasance to tilt an election. It's also rare for an
airliner to crash. Nevertheless, when it does crash, we expect the
authorities to figure out exactly what happened and what needs reforming.
Todd Gitlin, a professor of culture, journalism and sociology at New York University, is author of "Sacrifice" (Henry Holt & Co., 1999)
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
###