| About | |
| Contact Us | |
| Articles | |
| Topic Index | |
| Reports | |
| Quotes | |
| On the Web | |
| Links | |
| TW Tracker | |
| Support | |
Times Watch for
July 15, 2003
The
Times Newsroom Lets Off Some Steam
Tuesday’s Times fronts the news of Bill Keller’s imminent ascension to the executive editor’s slot (effective July 30). Media reporter Jacques Steinberg’s piece lets off some more internal newsroom steam against pushed-out executive editor Howell Raines: “After the disclosure of extensive journalistic fraud and plagiarism by a reporter, Jayson Blair, other reporters and editors came forward to describe to Mr. Sulzberger (and to other publications) their discontent with Mr. Raines's management style. That style was so pressure-driven, they said, that it had helped foster the atmosphere that allowed Mr. Blair to flourish.”
Even Raines’ successor got into the act: “Alluding to Mr. Raines's repeated admonitions to staff members to raise their ‘competitive metabolism,’ Mr. Keller, who won a Pulitzer Prize in 1989 for his coverage of the Soviet Union, said yesterday that he did not view journalism as ‘an endless combat mission.’ While saying it was not his intention to ‘play defense,’ he nonetheless encouraged reporters and editors to do ‘a little more savoring’ of life, whether with their families or viewing art, and suggested, ‘That will enrich you and your work, as much as a competitive pulse rate will.’” As Newsweek’s Seth Mnookin reports, Raines’ interview with Charlie Rose may have lost Raines any remaining friends he had at the paper.
For the rest of Steinberg’s story on the Times’ changing of the guard, click here.
• Bill Keller | Howell Raines | Jacques Steinberg
In Adam Nagourney’s Monday piece, “Democrats Say Bush’s Credibility Has Been Damaged,” Nagourney says Democratic presidential candidates sniff a political opportunity on Bush: “The shift in the debate from the Democratic side reflected a sudden confluence of events: the administration's admission of error regarding the State of the Union speech, the continuing carnage in Iraq and the failure of the United States to find the weapons that it used as a justification for invading Iraq.”
The “continuing carnage in Iraq?” From May 1, when President Bush declared that major combat operations in Iraq had ended, through July 14, 82 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq. Clearly, that’s 82 deaths too many. But to keep it in perspective, that’s an average of one death a day over a period of some 80 days, and that perhaps half of those died in vehicle or non-combat-related accidents, in a war zone. In that context, “carnage” overstates the case considerably.
For the rest of Adam Nagourney’s piece on Democrats on Iraq, click here.
• George Bush | Campaign 2004 | Democrats | Iraq War | Labeling Bias | Adam Nagourney
“Unpopular”
Ashcroft? Only At The Times
Adam Nagourney’s Sunday piece on the Democratic presidential field, “For Democrats Challenging Bush, Ashcroft Is Exhibit A,” asserts that Attorney General John Ashcroft is an unpopular and polarizing figure nationwide.
Nagourney writes: “It is hardly unusual so early in a campaign for candidates to demonize an unpopular figure on the other side in order to draw cheers and checks from the most committed party members, who are likely to be paying attention now….But a senior political adviser to Mr. Bush argued that no matter how unpopular Mr. Ashcroft might be, he would not hurt the president. And this adviser suggested that there were no plans, at least now, to try to keep Mr. Ashcroft out of public view as the election approaches.”
But as Ramesh Ponnuru points out at National Review Online, Democrats may dislike John Ashcroft, but the public doesn’t: “Last month, Harris Interactive found that 54 percent of respondents rated Ashcroft's job performance positively, only 32 percent negatively. Gray Davis would kill for those numbers. Ashcroft is more popular than Hillary Clinton (barely), Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, or John Kerry.”
Nagourney’s article ends with a couple of name-calling parting shots: “‘Ashcroft has become a symbol of ideas and doctrine and ideology that are just unacceptable in the Bush administration,’ said Chris Lehane, who was Al Gore's press secretary and is this year advising Mr. Kerry. ‘He is a living, breathing troglodyte who happens to run the Justice Department.’ He then quotes another “hard-core Democrat,” a Dartmouth student who says: ‘I think he might be the most loathed man in America. The way he is undermining civil liberties is disgraceful.” No evidence of Ashcroft’s “undermining of civil liberties” or fondness for caves is offered by Nagourney.
For the rest of Adam Nagourney’s piece on Democrats vs. Ashcroft, click here.
• John Ashcroft | Civil Liberties | Adam Nagourney | War on Terrorism
Still
Looking for the Liberal Label
“Compromise Seen As Harder To Find On Medicare Drugs,” Sunday’s front-page story by Robin Toner and Robert Pear, went crazy with the term “conservatives,” employing that ideological label seven times. Instances of the “liberal” label? None. This in a story featuring Sen. Ted Kennedy.
Here, Toner and Pear identify the ultra-liberal Sen. Kennedy (again) simply as a Democrat of Massachusetts: “The Senate bill was passed with a bipartisan majority of more than three to one, but many Democrats supported it reluctantly. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said many would withdraw their support if the conference committee embraced some critical provisions of the House bill, which was drafted almost exclusively by Republicans.”
In contrast, Congress is just crawling with conservatives: “On the House side of the Capitol, conservatives are in no mood to compromise with Mr. Kennedy. Many are already angry over what they assert is a vast expansion of benefits without much structural ‘reform’ of Medicare. Conservative analysts and policy groups like the Heritage Foundation have urged those Republicans to stand their ground, and not bow to political pressure before the election. Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin and an influential young conservative on the Ways and Means Committee, is one of several in the House who suggest that Republican leaders should simply defend the bill that the House passed and try to push its principles through the Senate with the 51 Republican votes.”
For more of Robin Toner and Robert Pear’s story on the Congressional battle over prescription drug coverage, click here.
• Drugs | Labeling Bias | Medicare | Robert Pear | Robin Toner
E-mail TimesWatch Director, Clay Waters, with TimesWatch feedback at cwaters@mediaresearch.org