Editor's Notes

Liar, Liar

2004-10-24T04:23:00.000-04:00

I'm not sure what to make of Lawrence O'Donnell's appearance on Scarborough Country on Friday. While Swift Boat Vets spokesman John O'Neill was trying to talk, O'Donnell just kept repeating that O'Neill was lying and demanded documentary evidence with John Kerry's name or initials. Is this the lowest or highest form of a cheap cable shout show?

Windows Media (via The Daily Recycler)

(Cit.: Reader Joe T.)

Stewart on Crossfire: Extended Cut

2004-10-24T01:29:00.000-04:00

The Sunday Times carries a piece debating what Jon Stewart and The Daily Show should and shouldn't be or do. I'm still trying to figure out the point of it, but there was this bit:

Even Mr. Carlson admits that Mr. Stewart is something of a political idealist, believing that issues matter. The comedian stayed at CNN for several hours after the show to discuss the issues that he raised on the air.

"It was heartfelt," Mr. Carlson said this week in an interview. "He needed to do this."

Court TV Host Target of Controversy

2004-10-23T11:25:00.000-04:00

"An absolute lie" is what Court TV's Lisa Bloom calls allegations that she relayed a settlement offer to O'Reilly's camp. Bloom, in turn, accuses Fox, notorious for unprofessional behavior toward those they don't like, of trashing her because her analysis isn't kind to O'Reilly. And indeed, an anonymous source identified as a "Fox insider" was trashing Bloom to TVNewser as early as Tuesday. But Fox News spokesman Brian Lewis says, "It's ironic that Lisa is accusing Fox of doing the same thing she's doing on a nightly basis to Bill and the network." What Bloom is accusing Fox of, however, is malicious lying. Lewis continues, "By not disclosing her conflict of interest, Lisa is just adding to her credibility problem."

Boston Herald Sorry for Controversial Cover

2004-10-23T10:46:00.000-04:00

A photo of a young woman who was killed in a Red Sox celebration appeared on the cover of Friday's Boston Herald. The photo showed the woman lying on the ground, bleeding, and provoked a vocal negative response from readers. The paper is apologizing.

(Cit.: Lost Remote)

Air America Lands in Seattle

2004-10-23T03:35:00.000-04:00

Seattle's 1090 KYCW will become 1090 KTPK "Progressive Talk Radio" on Monday, an Air America affiliate. 1090 is the former frequency of the legendary KING calls, a 50,000-watt blowtorch, and marks Infinity Radio's first foray into the liberal talk format.

From an Infinity memo, the schedule will be:

3-6a: Morning Sedition
6-9a: Unfiltered
9-Noon: Al Franken
Noon-3p: Ed Schutlz
3-7p: Randi Rhodes
7-10p: Majority Report

Left, Right Agree: Sinclair Caved

2004-10-23T01:25:00.000-04:00

Early reaction from liberals and conservatives to Sinclair's pre-election special is that Sinclair was more than fair to Kerry. Commenters at Free Republic, a conservative site, remark that "It looks more like a Kerry campaign ad about half the time," "I hoping for some 'steak' and all we're getting is hamburger," and, "More attention was given to Kerry's movie and it's director, George Butler, etc. than any of the Stolen Honor movie."

The folks over at Daily Kos, a liberal site, seem to agree. One commenter posted a long description of the piece and summarized, "I think if it has any impact it will help Kerry. I'm a bit stunned!"

I'm sure someone's processing it into QuickTime as we type.

Breaking FalafelGate News: Sources Say Settlement 'Imminent'

2004-10-22T21:06:00.000-04:00

Celebrity Justice:

Multiple sources directly connected to the Mackris case told "CJ" on Friday that lawyers for the talk show host and the TV producer were in serious talks and that a settlement appeared "imminent."

"CJ" has also learned there apparently was a settlement offer early on. A source close to Mackris claims that before the lawsuits were launched, O'Reilly offered Mackris $4 million out of his own pocket to keep quiet.

FalafelGate: Making Up for Lost Time Edition

2004-10-22T20:19:00.000-04:00

So what if I've been gone a while. I bring you falafel.

It appears Mackris is still hoping to settle out of court. NYDN, which has had by far the best coverage of this case, cites a source close to O'Reilly as saying Mackris' attorney used Court TV's Lisa Bloom as a go-between to notify O'Reilly investigator Bo Dietl that they're "willing to settle."

Mackris' side has maintained they always wanted to settle privately, that they never demanded $60M but simply stated $60M was O'Reilly's worth to Fox, and that it was O'Reilly's side that broke off negotiations by filing the first lawsuit.

This might explain why any supposed tapes haven't yet been made public: They're being used as a bargaining chip. If the case is settled, they don't become public. Just a theory.

And a side note: The law firm defending O'Reilly generously donates to Democrats, a charge he made of Mackris' lawyer as evidence of a partisan motive against him.

Update: AP and Reuters bring word of ongoing talks between the parties.

Antonin Scalia Frightens Photogs

2004-10-21T04:47:00.000-04:00

AP:

Scalia turned churlish, however, when a photographer began taking pictures during the session.

"That's enough," Scalia snapped at a photographer for The Associated Press, Manuel Balce Ceneta, who was shooting pictures of another panelist, former FBI Director Louis Freeh.

[...]

Another photographer ventured to the front to take pictures, but scurried away in the face of angry looks from Scalia - dropping some of his camera equipment, which he left behind.

FalafelGate: Tapes Will Prove Set-Up Job - O'Reilly

2004-10-21T03:53:00.000-04:00

In what appears to be a tacit admission that O'Reilly said at least some of the things Mackris alleges, O'Reilly's attorneys have filed a new affidavit demanding Mackris hand over whatever tapes she has, claiming they will prove O'Reilly was set up.

But in an interview with NYDN, Mackris asks, "How is it my fault, what has happened here? I could have stood naked in front of him and there was still no way he should be allowed to get away with what he did."

Mackris still refuses O'Reilly's demand, however, asking, "Why should we tell what evidence we have? [...] They've forced our hand enough. Now they're going on my timetable, and we want this trial to be in court."

Mackris maintains that O'Reilly's team ended negotiations by leveling the first lawsuit, and accuses O'Reilly of "trying to destroy me" ever since.

Conan Repeats May Kill CNBC's McEnroe

2004-10-21T03:28:00.000-04:00

Stephen Battaglio, TV Guide:

Struggling NBC-owned cable network CNBC is currently in talks to get second runs of Late Night with Conan O'Brien. CNBC wants to air Late Night a day after it airs on NBC, most likely at 10 pm, starting next month. Sources tell The Biz that the channel is just waiting for O'Brien to sign off on the deal.

Moving Late Night into prime time would likely mean the mercy killing of McEnroe, the train wreck of a talk show with former tennis star John McEnroe. Ratings for McEnroe have occasionally been too low for Nielsen to measure. CNBC will also have an opening at 7 pm when the Washington-based talk show Capital Report goes away, but we're betting on 10 pm.

Sen. Landrieu Goes All Jon Stewart on Hannity

2004-10-21T02:55:00.000-04:00

Sean Hannity interviewed Dick Cheney in the first half-hour of Hannity & Colmes tonight, and afterward, Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu was invited on as the "first Democrat to respond" to the interview. Hannity asked Landrieu about Kerry's reference to Cheney's lesbian daughter, and Landrieu responded:

First I want to say, I wouldn't call what just happened with the vice president an interview, it was an infomercial for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign.

Hannity was furious about this, calling Landrieu a "lousy senator," saying, "If you don't like it, I don't really care," and referring to Landrieu's comments as an "insult" and "cheap shot." Landrieu denied it was an insult, that it was her sincere judgement of the interview. When Hannity interrupted her, Landrieu ojected that he didn't interrupt the vice president. Hannity shot back, "Well, you're not the vice president and I doubt you ever will be."

While Colmes had his time with the Senator, Hannity jumped in with a finger-pointing retort ("It's a lie and you know it!") in response to Landrieu talking about privatization of Social Security. Colmes chided Hannity: "It's my turn to talk."

At the end of the interview, Landrieu talked about Republicans accusing Democrats of "giving aid and comfort to Osama bin Laden." Hannity asserted that she couldn't prove what she had just said, and invited Landrieu back on the show tomorrow to give the quotes.

Sinclair Stock Rebounds

2004-10-20T18:07:00.000-04:00

Sinclair stock rebounded from its steep declines this week, up 79 cents to $7.05, though that was still down 54 cents from its opening last Monday. This, after Sinclair annonuced its pre-election plans.

Sinclair had always mantained that it would not air Stolen Honor in its entirety, but its announcement that it will split the film into segments and intersperse it with a panel discussion seems to have satisfied most of its protesters, though one group is still keeping up pressure. I suppose things depend on what the panel has to say.

Just In: Controversy Boosts Ratings

2004-10-20T17:04:00.000-04:00

On Friday, Crossfire's ratings were up 58% from their Q3 average, and were up 24% on Monday. O'Reilly's much higher ratings have been up nearly 35% over Q3.

FalafelGate: More Details, Disputes Emerge

2004-10-20T04:30:00.000-04:00

From NYDN we learn that Mackris' lawyer says he was never seeking $60M, he maintains that he was only valuing O'Reilly as worth $60M to Fox. Lawyers for Fox say they offered a $2M settlement, but both O'Reilly's and Mackris' attorneys dispute that. Also, a source close to Mackris has supposedly given to CourtTV's Lisa Bloom the manuscript of a book that was previously characterized as some sort of tell-all. Bloom says the book is in fact a work of fiction that doesn't mention O'Reilly or Fox at all. In addition, regarding the incident in which Mackris supposedly "went nuts" with other customers in a hotel bar, it turns out the bar evicted the other patrons and offered Mackris a gift to make amends.

Mackris has now updated her lawsuit, accusing Fox of retribution for a story published the also-Murdoch-owned NY Post, and we're guessing it's this one.

The Post is now reporting on a lawsuit Mackris' attorney filed a couple years ago, which is called "eerily similar" to the current suit.

Media Mogul/Messiah Returns to U.S.

2004-10-19T21:18:00.000-04:00

After declaring a self-imposed exile from the US until 2012 -- due to "homo marriage" -- Rev. Sun Myung Moon, self-proclaimed messiah and owner of UPI and the Washington Times, has returned a bit early. Welcome back, Father. We hope you'll provide us as much entertainment as has Bill O'Reilly.

Shareholders Plan to Sue Sinclair

2004-10-19T19:06:00.000-04:00

Shareholders are planning multiple lawsuits against Sinclair, alleging insider trading and damage from the decision to air their pre-election program, as well as demanding equal time.

FalafelGate: O'Reilly Scraps Kids' Book Interviews

2004-10-19T18:54:00.000-04:00

There will be no more appearances on Live! with Regis and Kelly for O'Reilly to defend himself from sexual harrassment allegations and tell kids how to live moral, upstanding lives.

Darn.

FalafelGate: O'Reilly Attacks Mackris' Credibility

2004-10-19T18:36:00.000-04:00

O'Reilly's lawyer is putting forward a Manhattan restaurant owner to challenge Mackris' credibility. The restaurateur, Matthew Paratore, says Mackris told him she wanted to take down O'Reilly to write a book, says she once dined with Al Franken, and says she was banned from the bar for drunken sexual rants and come-ons.

Mackris' lawyer dismissed the claims:

"Andrea never wrote a book, she never went to a publisher," he said. "And what would a book have to have in it to bring down a company as big as Fox?

"This is ridiculous. They have got nothing and they are grasping at straws," Morelli said. "They can find witnesses to say anything about anybody, but unless they have proof it's worthless."

CNN More Newyorkified

2004-10-19T18:01:00.000-04:00

Atlanta loses two more hours of the CNN schedule to the land of media elites as Carol Costello and her early AM "Daybreak" show pack up and move out. That leaves just four hours of programming from Atlanta: Live From and Live Today with two hours each.

Sinclair Announces New Pre-Election Plans

2004-10-19T16:23:00.000-04:00

After a late-session rally, shares of Sinclair stock fell 23 cents for the day to $6.26, down $1.32, or 17.4%, since last Monday, the first trading day after Sinclair's anti-Kerry film plans became public.

The late-day rally is due to word that Sinclair will only show part of "Stolen Honor," and will do so on 40 stations, not all 62, this Friday. It's unclear how this plan will affect the protests against Sinclair.

Sinclair's Top Political Reporter Fired

2004-10-19T02:15:00.000-04:00

In response to his harsh criticism of Sinclair's anti-Kerry film plans, Sinclair has fired their top political reporter.

Howard Kurtz, WP:

Jon Lieberman, who also was the lead political reporter for the 62-station television chain, told CNN last night that he was terminated for his criticism, which was quoted in yesterday's Baltimore Sun. He spoke out, he said, because "I feel so strongly that our credibility is at issue here. . . . I feel our company is trying to sway this election."

[...]

Sinclair Vice President Mark Hyman said in a statement: "Everyone is entitled to their personal opinion, including Jon Lieberman. We are disappointed that Jon's political views caused him to speak to the press about company business." The statement called him a "disgruntled employee."

Lieberman, 29, called that characterization "completely unfair," telling CNN's Paula Zahn that Sinclair had promoted him twice and treated him well until he criticized plans to have the news division handle the upcoming hour-long special at a meeting Sunday.

[...]

Lieberman acknowledged that he was violating Sinclair policy by giving an unauthorized interview and revealing part of what happened at a company meeting, but said he felt he had no choice but to speak out. "I knew I had nothing to gain by doing it and everything to lose," he said. "I need to be able to sleep at night."

(I believe the name is Leiberman.)

Update: The CNN transcript is online.

Over 500,000 Watch Stewart/Crossfire Clash on iFilm

2004-10-19T01:06:00.000-04:00

iFilm reports 505,948 views of its Jon Stewart/Crossfire clip as of this hour. Whose side do you think those visitors are on?

Jon Stewart Cares

2004-10-18T23:41:00.000-04:00

In response to Crossfire calling Jon Stewart an unfunny, uninformed pompous ass, Stewart today wanted Paul Begala, James Carville and Robert Novak not to feel left out.

"They're all dicks," he assured his viewers.

More to come.

Sinclair's Top Political Reporter Slams Network

2004-10-18T21:08:00.000-04:00

David Folkenflik, BaltSun:

"It's biased political propaganda, with clear intentions to sway this election," said Jon Leiberman, Sinclair's lead political reporter for more than a year. "For me, it's not about right or left -- it's about what's right or wrong in news coverage this close to an election."

[...]

Leiberman said he was anguished by his decision to speak out. But, he said, the influence of commentator Mark Hyman and Chief Executive David D. Smith has been devastating. "There is going to be a concerted effort on the part of my colleagues to make this as balanced a program as they can," Leiberman said. "But the selection of the material -- dumping it on the news department, and giving them four days, and running it this close to the election -- it's indefensible, in my opinion."

Leiberman said he told Sinclair's vice president for news, Joseph DeFeo, that he would not contribute to the program and that DeFeo suggested the reporter could lose his job.

Assorted Falafel Filling

2004-10-18T18:31:00.000-04:00

Bill O'Reilly is having quite the hard time in the media lately. The story's latest eight headlines on Google News are:

O'Reilly May Need Top Spin This Time
'PHONE-Y' BILL O'REILLY GETS COMEUPPANCE
Report: Fox May Fire Producer Who Sued O'Reilly
Fox News Covers for Bill O'Reilly
O'Reilly at the Whipping Post
O'Reilly's Turn at the Whipping Post
SAY WHAT REALLY IS SO, BILL O’
Sexual Harassment Factor

Yikes. You'd think he had a lot of enemies or something.

Fox News is attempting to fire O'Reilly's accuser, but wants a court to first rule that this would not be considered retribution. In the mean time, Mackris is barred from going to work, and hasn't been to her office or picked up her paycheck since she and O'Reilly traded lawsuits Wednesday. I realize she couldn't effectively work under O'Reilly now, but News Corp. is a pretty big company -- couldn't she just be transferred somewhere?

Predictably, O'Reilly's ratings surged on Thursday. Laura Ingraham thinks it's CNN's fault, but I somehow doubt CNN's 31 minutes of coverage has much to do with it. It's a celebrity scandal, Laura. People are interested.

Several readers have tipped me to an online forum message written by O'Reilly accuser Andrea Mackris in 2003, to which people are now posting all kinds of fascinating responses. I suggest, however, if you want to waste your time having O'Reilly-related fun, you try The Falafel Game.

Sinclair Stock Tanks

2004-10-18T17:48:00.000-04:00

Sinclair stock dropped 7.8% today on fears of advertiser pullouts in response to the company's controversial decision to air an anti-Kerry film in the run-up to the election, according to Jon Friedman of CBS Marketwatch. At $6.49, the stock is down over 13% from last Monday's opening of $7.58 a share.

Novak/Carville: Stewart an Unfunny, Uninformed Pompous Ass

2004-10-18T17:01:00.000-04:00

There was zero applause as James Carville welcomed Robert Novak back to Crossfire today after weeks of leave due to a hip injury. At the end of the show, however, Crossfire gave viewers what they really wanted to see: a reaction to Jon Stewart's extraordinary appearance on Friday's show.

They picked one positive and one negative reaction from their mailbag, with one man going so far as to call Stewart "the most overrated, overhyped comedian in the world today," protesting that he could see through the talking points put forth on the show just fine. The viewer didn't explain, however, why he would then bother to watch the show.

Not surprisingly, Novak had even stronger words for the comedian who has dubbed him a "douchebag of liberty." Novak said, "I don't think he's funny and I know he's uninformed." Carville did Novak one better, calling Stewart a "pompous ass" -- not for anything he said on the show, but for debating with Ted Koppel, who is apparently beyond reproach. (See item two of Tuesday's Lloyd Grove.)

Simplistic name calling. Stewart clearly elevated the dialogue.

Update: The transcript is up.

FalafelGate: FNC Silent

2004-10-17T18:07:00.000-04:00

MediaMatters does the math: While CNN devoted 31 minutes of its live news day to FalafelGate, and 82 minutes of MSNBC air time went to the story, Fox News was silent, save for 36 seconds of O'Reilly's Talking Points Memo.

CBS talked about its scandal.

Fmr FCC Chair Slams Powell's Sinclair Statements

2004-10-17T13:40:00.000-04:00

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo posts a letter from former FCC chair Reed Hundt:

Chairman Powell instead pretends that he has been asked to bar the showing of the propaganda -- which no one has asked him to do. His remarks are so far off the point, and he is so intelligent, that one must conclude that he knows what he is doing and intends the result -- tacit and plain encouragement of the use of the Sinclair airwaves to pursue a smear campaign. No broadcast group in the history of America has ever committed an hour to smearing a presidential candidate, and no FCC chairman before this one would have reacted with equanimity to this radical step down in broadcasting ethics.

Pierre Salinger Dies

2004-10-16T21:02:00.000-04:00

AP via ABC News:

Pierre Salinger, who served as President John F. Kennedy's press secretary and later had a long career with ABC News, has died, the network said Saturday.

Salinger, 79, died from a heart attack at a hospital in France, the network said. It was not immediately clear when or where in France he died, ABC News said.

Video: Jon Stewart on Crossfire

2004-10-15T20:51:00.000-04:00

Windows Media, MPEG-4 (From Media Matters)

QuickTime (From onegoodmove)

iFilm

Windows Media (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) (From Free Speech Zone)

BitTorrent (For BitTorrent information, visit BitTorrent.com)

MTV: 'Strangest, Most Refreshing Media Moment' of Election

2004-10-15T19:28:00.000-04:00

Robert Mancini writes for Comedy Central sister network, MTV:

In what could well be the strangest and most refreshing media moment of the election season, "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart turned up on a live broadcast of CNN's "Crossfire" Friday and accused the mainstream media — and his hosts in particular — of being soft and failing to do their duty as journalists to keep politicians and the political process honest.

Reaching well outside his usual youthful "Daily Show" demo, Stewart took to "Crossfire" [and] used his time to verbally slap the network and the media for being "dishonest" and "doing a disservice" to the American public. After co-host Tucker Carlson suggested that Stewart went easy on Senator John Kerry when the candidate was a guest on "The Daily Show," Stewart unloaded on "Crossfire," calling hosts Carlson and Paul Begala "partisan hacks" and chiding them for not raising the level of discourse on their show beyond sloganeering.

Update: More reaction from WP's Lisa de Moraes and Salon's War Room.

Tucker: 'I Can Be a Dick'

2004-10-15T19:18:00.000-04:00

Wonkette calls Tucker:

While admitting that "I can be a dick," Tucker also was shocked at the sheer unfunniness of it all: "It was like being lectured at by Kathleen Hall Jamison! Like being given a lecture on ethics by an assistant professor of journalism at Blue State Junior College!"

Viewer Alert: AC360 Tonight

2004-10-15T18:47:00.000-04:00

TVNewser:

Begala and Carlson are going to be on AC360 tonight, a source says: "Look for Anderson to ask them what happened."

What, is something wrong with my tip form, people?

Update: It looks like TVNewser's source was wrong. Like I was saying, it's a good thing I'm not the one getting these tips.

Breaking: Transcript of Crossfire Casualties

2004-10-15T18:04:00.000-04:00

Transcript hits. Excerpts soon.

Update: You've got to read the whole thing. It's hard to decide what to excerpt. All references to crosstalk and laughter removed:

STEWART: [...] I made a special effort to come on the show today, because I have privately, amongst my friends and also in occasional newspapers and television shows, mentioned this show as being bad.

[...]

STEWART: Here's just what I wanted to tell you guys.

CARLSON: Yes.

STEWART: Stop.

STEWART: Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America.

[...]

STEWART: No, no, no, you're not too rough on them. You're part of their strategies. You are partisan, what do you call it, hacks.

[...]

CARLSON: [...] I want to contrast our questions with some questions you asked John Kerry recently.

[...]

STEWART: If you want to compare your show to a comedy show, you're more than welcome to.

[...]

STEWART: But my point is this. If your idea of confronting me is that I don't ask hard-hitting enough news questions, we're in bad shape, fellows.

[...]

BEGALA: Well, [...] see, we're a debate show.

[...]

STEWART: No, no, no, no, that would be great. To do a debate would be great. But that's like saying pro wrestling is a show about athletic competition.

CARLSON: Jon, Jon, Jon, I'm sorry. I think you're a good comedian. I think your lectures are boring.

[...]

STEWART: [...] What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it.

CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?

STEWART: Absolutely.

CARLSON: You've got to be kidding me. He comes on and you...

STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls.

[...]

CARLSON: Well, I'm just saying, there's no reason for you -- when you have this marvelous opportunity not to be the guy's butt boy, to go ahead and be his butt boy. Come on. It's embarrassing.

STEWART: I was absolutely his butt boy. I was so far -- you would not believe what he ate two weeks ago.

STEWART: You know, the interesting thing I have is, you have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably.

CARLSON: You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think.

STEWART: You need to go to one.

[...]

CARLSON: Wait. I thought you were going to be funny. Come on. Be funny.

STEWART: No. No. I'm not going to be your monkey.

[...]

STEWART: I watch your show every day. And it kills me.

[...]

STEWART: You know, because we need what you do. This is such a great opportunity you have here to actually get politicians off of their marketing and strategy.

CARLSON: Is this really Jon Stewart? What is this, anyway?

STEWART: Yes, it's someone who watches your show and cannot take it anymore.

STEWART: I just can't.

CARLSON: What's it like to have dinner with you? It must be excruciating. Do you like lecture people like this or do you come over to their house and sit and lecture them; they're not doing the right thing, that they're missing their opportunities, evading their responsibilities? STEWART: If I think they are.

CARLSON: I wouldn't want to eat with you, man. That's horrible.

STEWART: I know. And you won't. But the thing I want to get to...

[...]

STEWART: Why can't we just talk -- please, I beg of you guys, please.

CARLSON: I think you watch too much CROSSFIRE.

We're going to take a quick break.

STEWART: No, no, no, please.

CARLSON: No, no, hold on. We've got commercials.

STEWART: Please. Please stop.

CARLSON: Next, Jon Stewart in the "Rapid Fire."

STEWART: Please stop.

CARLSON: Hopefully, he'll be here, we hope, we think.

[...]

CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

We're talking to Jon Stewart, who was just lecturing us on our moral inferiority.

[...]

STEWART: [...] But let me ask you guys, again, a question, because we talked a little bit about, you're actually doing honest debate and all that. But, after the debates, where do you guys head to right afterwards?

[...]

STEWART: Yes. You go to spin alley, the place called spin alley. Now, don't you think that, for people watching at home, that's kind of a drag, that you're literally walking to a place called deception lane?

[...]

BEGALA: [...] They actually believe what they're saying. They want to persuade you. That's what they're trying to do by spinning. But I don't doubt for a minute these people who work for President Bush, who I disagree with on everything, they believe that stuff, Jon. This is not a lie or a deception at all. They believe in him, just like I believe in my guy.

[...]

STEWART: I think they believe President Bush would do a better job.

And I believe the Kerry guys believe President Kerry would do a better job. But what I believe is, they're not making honest arguments. So what they're doing is, in their mind, the ends justify the means.

[...]

CARLSON: I do think you're more fun on your show. Just my opinion.

[...]

STEWART: You know what's interesting, though? You're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show.

CARLSON: Now, you're getting into it. I like that.

STEWART: Yes.

CARLSON: OK. We'll be right back.

[...]

QUESTION: Renee (ph) from Texas. Why do you think it's hard or difficult or impossible for politicians to answer a straight, simple question?

STEWART: I don't think it's hard. I just think that nobody holds their feet to the fire to do it. So they don't have to. They get to come on shows that don't...

BEGALA: They're too easy on them.

CARLSON: Yes. Ask them how you hold...

STEWART: Not easy on them...

BEGALA: ... saying we were too hard on people and too (INAUDIBLE).

STEWART: I think you're - yes.

CARLSON: All right. Jon Stewart, come back soon.

BEGALA: Jon Stewart, good of you to join us. Thank you very much. The book is "America: A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction."

From the left I am Paul Begala, that's it for CROSSFIRE.

CARLSON: And from the right I'm Tucker Carlson, have a great weekend. See you Monday.

Wow. I know what two shows I'm TiVo'ing Monday.

As they closed the show, Stewart's face was a mix bewilderment, mischief and resignation.

Breaking: Internet Buzzes over Crossfire Casualties

2004-10-15T17:40:00.000-04:00

While the transcript has yet to be posted, the Web is buzzing about the confrontational interview of Jon Stewart on Crossfire.

Daily Kos provides excerpts (not in chronological order):

"Youre as big a dick as you are on any show" - Jon Stewart to Tucker Carlson

[...]

[Stewart:] We need help from the media, so Im here to confront you

[...]

[Stewart:] The media is failing miserably. It is painful to watch. You have the opportunity to knock politicians off of their mark, instead you offer knee-jerk reactionary talk. PLEASE STOP!

[...]

[Stewart, in response to plea from Tucker to be funny:] No, I wont be your monkey

[...]

[Stewart:] We look to present the absurdity and theater of politics. Thank you both. I watch Crossfire every day.

[...]

[Stewart:] Bush says Kerry's rhetoric doesnt match his record. Well, Bush's RECORD doesnt match his record!

Also humming: Free Republic, Television Without Pity.

Wonkette: "Score: Fake News 1, Grown Men in Bow Ties 0."

Breaking: Jon Stewart Blasts Crossfire

2004-10-15T16:49:00.000-04:00

Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire today and caught the hosts off-guard with a damning critique of the show's reactionary left-right format and a sincere plea to have a meaningful debate about this election. Tucker Carlson seemed quite annoyed. "Rapidfire" is still coming up, and Stewart's scheduled to stick around for that.

I'll link to transcripts as soon as they're available.

Update: it was off-camera, so I couldn't tell whether this was a joke, but it certainly didn't sound like one: In response to Tucker saying he thinks Stewart's more fun on The Daily Show, Stewart said, "You know what, you're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show."

Update: If Jon Stewart hadn't been live, I doubt this segment would have aired. When released, the transcript should be available here.

Kerry Seeks Equal Time from Sinclair

2004-10-15T15:45:00.000-04:00

In non-falafel-related media scandals today, the Kerry campaign has requested equal time from Sinclair, though the campaign did reject an earlier invitation from Sinclair for Kerry to appear in a forum after the film.

It's been a rough week for Sinclair stock. With 15 minutes left in the trading day, SBGI is down about 7% from Monday's open. And according to one website, 17 advertisers have agreed to cancel their commercials, while another site claims to have collected 80,000 petition signatures against the company, though it's unclear what impact that would have.

Rumors Swirl Around CNN Sched

2004-10-15T10:45:00.000-04:00

CNN Blog:

A source tells CNN Blog, CNN will debut the new program "Off Topic" October 24. All that's known is Carlos Watson will be hosting the program.

That would be a week from Sunday. And this, from TVNewser:

From an anonymous e-mailer: "Lou Dobbs has called a staff meeting for noon today for his show's entire staff. Could this be an announcement of a timeslot move?" Can anyone confirm this?...

These anonymous sources are probably just too intimidated by my tip box. Not that I'm jealous.

Yesterday's NYDN, by the way, is where the speculation of a primetime move for Lou comes from.

FalafelGate: Lawyers Weigh In

2004-10-15T09:47:00.000-04:00

NYT:

Suing an opposing lawyer over an effort to settle a case for money is extremely unusual, said Stephen Gillers, vice dean at New York University Law School and an expert on legal ethics. "Telling someone you will seek legal redress unless they are willing to pay a certain cost is not within the extortion statues," Mr. Gillers said, "as long as you have a plausible basis for your legal claims."

He said that suggesting Mr. Morelli had a political motivation [...] was simply not relevant. "It won't work in the courtroom," Mr. Gillers said. "It may play better in the tabloids, but not in a courtroom."

He added, "Fox is being so aggressive it suggests to an outsider that Fox and Mr. O'Reilly are quite worried about this lawsuit."

WP:

Plato Cacheris, a former lawyer for Lewinsky, said potential plaintiffs negotiating for money is "very routine: 'I'm thinking of suing you but I'd like to discuss a settlement.'"

Debra Katz, an attorney who specializes in sexual harassment cases, said that when a company sues an employee who is about to file a harassment complaint, "the courts are more inclined to see it as a retaliatory lawsuit." Asked if Mackris's case was weakened by her decision to return to Fox, Katz said O'Reilly's alleged conduct "went from what could be seen as sexual banter about 'you should buy a vibrator' to really disgusting, unwelcome sexual remarks."

But Washington lawyer Lanny Davis said he would have advised O'Reilly to seize the offensive because "when a charge of sexual harassment makes the headlines, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent. That's a reality, whether it's fair or not."

Newsday:

Lisa Bloom, a Court TV anchor and veteran sexual harassment attorney, said Morelli's and Mackris' demand for $60 million, which led Fox to sue for extortion, "is an extraordinarily high number. And in my experience, in a lot of these cases against celebrities, $4 million to $6 million would be high."

But, she added, "It looks like she has a viable claim ... If she's got tapes [with him]* making these extremely explicit comments to her, she's got a strong case, and it would be clearly sexual harassment under New York law. The only defense is that she welcomed, encouraged and participated in it, and I haven't heard Fox say that so far."

On the cable news circuit, Van Susteren was absolutely silent on the issue (and so's her blog); Abrams led with it, summarizing that if Mackris has tapes, O'Reilly's in trouble (though he said Mackris had some work to do in proving damages); Cooper had the aforementioned Bloom and defense attorney Lisa Weintraub battle it out; and Toobin told NewsNight, "The law is almost entirely on Andrea Mackris' side," and called O'Reilly's suit "borderline frivolous."

FalafelGate: What's at Stake for Bill O'Reilly

2004-10-15T09:11:00.000-04:00

In addition to hosting the top-rated show in cable news, O'Reilly has expressed senatorial, even presidential ambitions. And the now ill-timed "The O'Reilly Factor for Kids" comes on the heels of "Who's Looking Out for You?" in a series of steps that could precede a foray into politics. Those hopes are dimming with each hour O'Reilly fails to say, "I didn't say those things."

The burden's still on Mackris, though, to prove she's telling the truth.

Welcome

2004-10-15T07:48:00.000-04:00

Call me a spectacular boob, but this site is still in beta, so I don't have much in the way of advertisements for all this new traffic to click on, and everyone is experiencing their own browser incompatibility issues. Look for some changes to come soon, but in the mean time, check back at EditorsNotes.com later today for more on the O'Reilly/Mackris suits, including what some lawyers have to say about their validity, as well as for new developments in the Sinclair Broadcasting situation.

"FalafelGate" is hereby coined by Editor's Notes.

O'Reilly On Tape

2004-10-14T17:07:00.000-04:00

I want to be clear that I don't know if Mackris' allegations are true, but, in response to this post, I got an email challenging whether I could possibly believe O'Reilly would ever say those kinds of things.

In fact, I have proof that O'Reilly would ever say those kinds of things. It comes in the form of a book on tape of O'Reilly's thriller novel, "Those Who Trespass." It's read by the author.

Compare paragraph 78 of Mackris' complaint (NOT WORKSAFE) with the following audio (also NOT WORKSAFE):

Or, just to prove that O'Reilly could conceivably make any crude sexual statement, try this clip (again, NOT WORKSAFE):

There's more in the book, including the infamous bit in which Mr. O'Malley's "tongue was inside her, moving rapidly." But I'll spare you that.

FCC Chair: Blocking Sinclair Film 'Disservice to 1st Amendment'

2004-10-14T14:40:00.000-04:00

AP:

"Don't look to us to block the airing of a program," Michael Powell told reporters. "I don't know of any precedent in which the commission could do that."

Eighteen senators, all Democrats, wrote to Powell this week and asked him to investigate Sinclair Broadcast Group's plan to run the program, "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," two weeks before the Nov. 2 election.

Powell said there are no federal rules that would allow the agency to prevent the program. "I think that would be an absolute disservice to the First Amendment and I think it would be unconstitutional if we attempted to do so," he said.

Also, a paper in one Sinclair market finds that experts say challenging stations' licenses would likely be unsuccessful:

Cathy Packer, an associate journalism professor at the UNC- Chapel Hill, suspects Sinclair protesters would have little footing in a public interest argument.

"They have every right in the world to air it. A broadcast station is committed through the terms of its license to air programming that serves the public interest," she said. "They can't decide they just don't like the programming."

[...]

But complaints about "Stolen Honor" are unlikely to force the FCC to yank the station's license, said Herb Terry, associate professor of telecommunications at Indiana University.

In the 1980s, the FCC did away with the fairness doctrine, which required a station to air both sides of an issue, Terry said. The commission predicted viewers could always change the channel for another viewpoint.

"Places are free to be as unfair as they want be," Terry said. "The FCC's position is its regulation of content needs to be light-handed because of the First Amendment."

Licenses are rarely yanked, and then typically only for fraud, lying to the commission or flagrant equal employment opportunity violations, Terry added. The FCC can do nothing until the documentary airs but will probably inform the senators that it will consider whether Sinclair violated rules and regulations, he said.

Does O'Reilly Dispute Mackris' Quotes?

2004-10-14T14:23:00.000-04:00

USAT quotes Mackris' counsel as saying, "The most striking element that should be noted is that neither Fox nor Bill O'Reilly deny the specific behavior Ms. Mackris alleges in her complaint."

O'Reilly's complaint opens with a reference to "a scandalous and scurrilous claim based on alledged inappropriate comments" and refers to "the baseless nature of Mackris's claims" several paragraphs down, yet O'Reilly's lawyer thinks Mackris recorded the conversations and he wants to hear the tapes.

The closest O'Reilly's attorney comes to saying he didn't make the statements is, "O'Reilly believes he knows what he said and didn't say, so he does not expect to be surprised by what any tape contains."

O'Reilly Suit: Mackris' Re-Employment Detailed

2004-10-13T23:52:00.000-04:00

Newsday:

O'Reilly's and Fox's attorney Ronald Green said that Mackris and O'Reilly have always had a professional relationship and that she even asked O'Reilly personally for her job back. According to Fox News' complaint, she makes $92,300 in her current job.

Celebrity Justice:

Sources at CNN say she missed working for O'Reilly and that he hired her back over the objections of FOX's top boss, Roger Ailes.

Celebrity Justice is on the case, can we expect Abrams, Toobin and Van Susteren all over it, too?

Update: NYDN has more:

O'Reilly called again in April after Mackris' boss at CNN was terminated - for sexual harassment - and suggested they have dinner.

Mackris agreed - "if the talk was professional," the court papers state.

During that April 13 dinner, Mackris says she agreed to return to "The O'Reilly Factor" but only if O'Reilly behaved himself, stating that he had harassed other female staffers - and warning that they "might tell someone."

Report: Sinclair Loses 10 Advertisers

2004-10-13T20:56:00.000-04:00

The dKosopedia entry on Sinclair Broadcasting claims 10 advertisers have pulled their ads from Sinclair stations and websites. They include companies in Minnesota, Michigan, North Carolina, Florida and Maine, as well as Tyson Foods nationally.

O'Reilly Atty Wants to Hear the Tapes

2004-10-13T19:06:00.000-04:00

The following words will appear in small-town newspapers across the country, thanks to the fine folks at the Associated Press:

During a phone conversation this August, Mackris, 33, said O'Reilly suggested she buy a vibrator and was clearly excited.

[...]

O'Reilly's lawyer, Ronald Green, said he believes there are tapes of conversations between the two and asked a court to compel Mackris to produce them so they could be played publicly.

[...]

Her complaint said that the first time she noticed odd behavior by O'Reilly came in 2002, when the Fox host allegedly urged her to use a vibrator after her engagement broke off.

[...]

Fox produced an e-mail Mackris sent to a friend last month, saying things are "wonderful, amazing, fun, creative, invigorating, secure, well-managed, challenging, interesting fun and surrounded by really good, fun people. I'm home and I'll never leave again."

Mackris said in her lawsuit that she told O'Reilly she would return to Fox only if he stopped the inappropriate behavior.

She said O'Reilly told her: "If any woman ever breathed a word I'll make her pay so dearly that she'll wish she'd never been born. I'll rake her through the mud, bring up things in her life and make her so miserable that she'll be destroyed."

On his show Wednesday, O'Reilly called the case "the single most evil thing I have ever experienced, and I've seen a lot. But these people picked the wrong guy."

The AP also appears to have found the single least flattering photo of O'Reilly in existence.

Also in the article, Morelli says his political contributions have nothing to do with the case, and the AP points out that Mackris was a White House intern in the first Bush administration. Mackris says she felt trapped after the first inappropriate phone call, but O'Reilly agreed to match Mackris' salary at CNN in getting her back to work on his show.

Mackris Atty Claims Solid Evidence of O'Reilly Harassment

2004-10-13T18:49:00.000-04:00

Newsday:

Mackris' attorney, Benedict Morelli, said in a news conference Wednesday afternoon that they had "concrete and verifiable evidence" in regard to the sexual harrassment allegations.

Morelli said O'Reilly's retaliatory lawsuit is meritless, noting, "the type of negotiations that occurred between us and the attorneys for Fox and Bill O'Reilly happen every day in civil lawsuits."

Fox and O'Reilly call the sex-harassment claims "baseless" and politically motivated designed to "embarrass and tarnish the reputations of Fox and O'Reilly."

[...]

Mackris worked as an associate producer on "The O'Reilly Factor" from April 2000 through Jan. 2004. She left for competitor CNN in early 2004 but returned to Fox in July.

O'Reilly's suit says Fox and the commentator first learned about the sexual harassment claim in late September only after Morelli presented the network with excerpts of transcripts of taped conversations. The network alleges that Morelli threatened to file a high-profile lawsuit unless a settlement could be reached.

"As a public figure, I have received many threats. But enough is enough... the threats stop now. I will not give in to extortion," O'Reilly said in a statement, adding that he would donate any damages awarded to charity.

The Bloggermann Will Get You

2004-10-13T18:11:00.000-04:00

Keith Olbermann launches his new blog in time for the final presidential debate.

Watch Your Back, Al Franken

2004-10-13T18:04:00.000-04:00

One of the few sections of the lawsuit that I can excerpt without triggering workplace filters:

55. During the course of this conversation, Defendant BILL O'REILLY further sternly warned, to the effect:

If you cross FOX NEWS CHANNEL, it's not just me, it's [FOX President] Roger Ailes who will go after you. I'm the street guy out front making loud noises about the issues, but Ailes operates behind the scenes, strategizes and makes things happen so that one day BAM! The person gets what's coming to them but never sees it coming. Look at Al Franken, one day he's going to get a knock on his door and life as he's known it will change forever. That day will happen, trust me.

56. During the course of this conversation, Defendant BILL O'REILLY bizarrely rambled further about Al Franken: "Ailes knows very powerful people and this goes all the way to the top." Plaintiff queried: "To the top of what?" Defendant responded: "Top of the country. Just look at who's on the cover of his book [Bush and Cheney], they're watching him and will be for years. [Al Franken's] finished, and he's going to be sorry he ever took FOX NEWS CHANNEL on." Plaintiff found O'REILLY's paranoid rambling both strange and alarming.

O'Reilly Suit: Mackris Hits Back

2004-10-13T17:35:00.000-04:00

O'Reilly Factor producer Andrea Mackris responds to O'Reilly's lawsuit with a juicy lawsuit of her own. The suit accuses O'Reilly of repeated sexual harassment, including frequent, explicit discussions of phone s-x, vibr-tors, thr--somes, mast-rbation, the loss of his virg-nity, and s-xual fantasies (edited to fool your workplace filter). The Smoking Gun will guide you to some of the most interesting bits. They conclude, and I agree, that some of O'Reilly's discussions appear to have been recorded.

O'Reilly Alledges $60M Extortion Demand in Lawsuit

2004-10-13T16:31:00.000-04:00

Bill O'Reilly is accusing Factor producer Andrea Mackris and Manhattan lawyer Benedict P. Morelli of demanding $60M in extortion money. According to O'Reilly, Mackris claimed he "engaged in offensive conversations" with her, then demanded $60M to quash a highly publicized lawsuit. Curiously, O'Reilly calls it all a conspiracy to help CNN and the Democratic Party.

It is apparent that Defendants' outrageous monetary demand is motivated by their greed and also by Morelli’s political connections. Morelli, his firm, and his wife, Arlene, are known supporters of and contributors to the Democratic Party, contributing to the campaigns of U.S. Senators John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, and Charles Schumer, among others. He perceives Fox and O’Reilly as politically conservative and supporters of the Republican Party. If he does not receive his share of $60 million, he would like nothing more than to embarrass and tarnish the reputations of Fox and O’Reilly.

So what they're saying is, he's a Manhattan attorney.

The extortion attempt is timed to cause the maximum disruption and damage to Fox and O’Reilly. Fox News coverage and O’Reilly’s program in particular have consistently drawn higher ratings during election periods, and the upcoming, tightly-contested Presidential election between Senator John Kerry and President George W. Bush has been drawing record-setting ratings for The O’Reilly Factor and Fox News Channel programming. In fact, Fox News Channel is the most highly rated cable news network in the United States and has continued to increase its lead over CNN in recent years. Its expectation has been that viewership, and thus revenues, will continue to increase, particularly as the electorate becomes even more involved with the presidential race.

Well, it's a good thing they didn't put themselves in the center of a controversial lawsuit, then highly publicize it, since such a move would undoubtedly hurt their ratings.

(Cit.: TVNewser)

You're Not Alone in Hating Spinners

2004-10-13T15:20:00.000-04:00

Will anyone join ABC News in dumping them?

Bob Scheiffer: They're "a waste of time."
Gloria Borger: "They do not add one thing."
Debra Saunders: "I'm really sick of it."
Thomas Lang: "One way to free up space would be to eliminate the endless quotations from campaign flacks."

They Get Letters

2004-10-13T01:03:00.001-04:00

Bob Schieffer received 11,000 letters in advance of hosting Wednesday's final presidential debate. But even more surprising are the 17 letters by a Duke University class that got published in the New York Times. The international relations students used their home towns to avoid a suspicious flood of mail from Durham, N.C., and even used pseudonyms to write multiple times. NYT's letter page editor is not pleased.

Stewart v. Koppel: It's War!

2004-10-12T22:48:00.000-04:00

Lloyd Grove:

It looks like "Nightline's" Ted Koppel and "The Daily Show's" Jon Stewart - who had words on the air during the Democratic Convention over who's to blame for a badly served viewership - still aren't ready to kiss and make up.

"I wouldn't touch him," Koppel told TV Guide's Stephen Battaglio, who asked if the ABC News star was willing to give the satirist a hug.

Stewart also begged off. "If I had known," he said, "I would have showered."

[...]

In their latest encounter, Stewart argued: "There is something to the idea that the news media could be doing a better job of being arbiters of hypocrisy or absurdity. Ted - with the credibility he has earned over the years - could take a more activist role."

Koppel answered: "To the degree we have any disagreement, he's pushing me to be more opinionated on the air. ... The minute the opinion expressed is anti-Bush or anti-Kerry, that person who feels skewered will immediately say, 'Well, "Nightline" used to be a legitimate news program.'"

Stewart insisted: "As long as you stick to your barometer of truth - if you're a guy that goes out there night after night and demonstrates your integrity and your credibility - you can pull it off."

Reports: Sinclair Loses Advertisers Over Film Plans

2004-10-12T18:45:00.000-04:00

Liberal blogs are claiming a handful of companies have pulled advertisements from Sinclair-owned stations and websites today. They reportedly include an auto dealership and realtor in Ohio, a furniture store in Minnesota and a law firm in Florida. USAT's David Lieberman writes that investors, regulators and the Democratic Party are asking questions about Sinclair's move, with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps calling it "an abuse of the public trust," while WaPo's Howard Kurtz and Frank Ahrens provide background on the family-owned company.

Sinclair's stock price has suffered in the last two days of trading with more activity than normal, while a one-year chart shows this is part of a larger downward trend.

In addition, the Democratic Party has set up its own Sinclair webpage, and the Anti-Defamation League has joined in, objecting to a Sinclair executive's use of the phrase "Holocaust deniers" in reference to other broadcasters' treatment of Kerry's Vietnam-era activities.

Stephen Holden: Diva Among Mortals

2004-10-12T16:49:00.000-04:00

Disclaimer: This may not be Stephen Holden.

Lloyd Grove:

Ever wonder just how powerful The New York Times is?

Apparently powerful enough to abort a screening for two dozen movie reviewers from other outlets yesterday to accommodate the tight schedule of Times critic Stephen Holden.

[...]

"There were about 25 to 30 people in the room, all of us equally bewildered," [NYDN critic Jack] Mathews told me [...]. "I said to the publicist, 'Whose fault is it?' [...] she said it was The New York Times' Stephen Holden."

Mathews continued: "I walked out and asked Holden, 'You can't wait 15 minutes?' He said, 'I can't, I have something at 2.' I said, 'Why can't you be inconvenienced instead of all these people?' He didn't answer, and I left."

Judith Miller's Transformation

2004-10-12T16:00:00.000-04:00

Jossip:

Judith Miller: From jackass journo to media martyr

No, seriously, how did America's media go from hating Judith Miller for her WMD falsehoods to falling in love with her for not revealing her Valerie-Plame-as-CIA-operative sources?

Sinclair Threatened With Lawsuits, Lost Licenses

2004-10-12T01:19:00.000-04:00

The left blogosphere is devising a shareholder lawsuit against Sinclair, the company planning to air a pre-election anti-Kerry documentary on its 62 stations. An emailer to Josh Marshall recommends a shareholder's derivative action against the company, claiming Sinclair is misusing corporate property in a way that could lose them ad revenue, open them up to elections law complaints and subject them to license renewal contests. Readers at Daily Kos are discussing a shareholder lawsuit as well.

Marshall also claims a copy of a letter sent to Sinclair by FCC Chairman Reed Hundt. In it, he asks, "Why should a broadcaster keep its licenses if it behaves in this manner?" On a similar note, The Left Coaster offers instructions on how to challenge a station's license renewal.

What Coverage for Bush's Bulges?

2004-10-11T21:54:00.000-04:00

Pictured: the back of President Bush's jackets in the first and second presidential debates.

Romenesko:

Was President Bush wired to get help with his answers during the first debate? Howard Kurtz says his in online chat: "It is nothing but a rumor at the moment and deserves very little, if any, coverage." Post associate editor Robert Kaiser seems more interested. He says in his Monday chat: "I have ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE to support any theory in this matter. But given the apparent visual evidence of the photo, I hope we can keep pursuing this question and get an answer."

NYT, WaPo Criticize Their Critics

2004-10-11T21:00:00.000-04:00

Howard Kurtz, WaPo:

Political passions are running high these days, and plenty of media people are feeling under siege. In an era of partisan Web sites and attack e-mails, what might once have been dismissed as a minor misjudgment or harmless joke becomes, in the eyes of some critics, a capital offense.

Daniel Okrent, NYT:

This piece turned out to be more of a rant than I intended, but given the vicious nature of some of the attacks levied against certain reporters, I wasn't inclined to be temperate. [...]

But before I turn over the podium, I do want you to know just how debased the level of discourse has become. When a reporter receives an e-mail message that says, "I hope your kid gets his head blown off in a Republican war," a limit has been passed.

[...] Maybe the bloggers who encourage their readers to send this sort of thing to The Times might want to ask them instead to say it in public. I don't think they'd dare.

Anatomy of a Presidential Endorsement

2004-10-11T20:40:00.000-04:00

The Oregonian endorsed Kerry Sunday, the only Democratic presidential candidate they've endorsed besides Clinton. They also gave their readers a behind-the-scenes look at how their decision was made:

Publisher Fred Stickel argued strongly in an editorial board meeting that The Oregonian should endorse George W. Bush.

On today's editorial page, the newspaper backs John Kerry.

[...]

[Columnist David] Reinhard says he was bothered by what he saw as the board's strong opposition to Bush. In a swing state, he says, the newspaper's editorial writers should be more reflective of the divided community. "What happens in that meeting is symptomatic of the problem in the newspaper industry, because we're out of touch," he says.

Stickel was disappointed by the decision but says he respects it. Although he could have overridden the choice, he considers that foolish. "Why would you have an editor of the editorial board, why would you have six associate editors, if you're going to sit there and tell them what to do?" he says.

[Editorial page editor Bob] Caldwell says the decision was difficult for him, especially because the board so respects Stickel's opinion. [...]

[Joanne Byrd, former WaPo ombudsman and Seattle PI editorial page editor] considers the independence of The Oregonian's endorsement process to be rare. "I've always presumed that the publisher really had all the votes he needed to get his way, especially on the presidential endorsement, what we think is the most important decision the editorial board will make," she says. "It's such a critical statement of what the newspaper thinks."

Sinclair Under Fire for Anti-Kerry Film Plans

2004-10-11T17:27:00.000-04:00

After it was reported that Sinclair, the largest television station group in the country, would air an anti-Kerry film on its 62 stations prior to the election, the company has come under swift attack from Democrats in Washington. They're filing complaints with the FEC and FCC, claiming the move amounts to an in-kind contribution to the Bush campaign and could be ruled as an improper use of the public airwaves. The web has also been buzzing with activity, prompting a dedicated blog, petition site and Sinclair advertiser database for petition and boycott purposes.

Crowdsurfing by Popular Demand

2004-10-10T20:33:00.000-04:00

CNN's Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson crowdsurfed on Crossfire the other day, and our readers are clearly too fascinated by it to continue leading normal lives. You can now stop sending this image to me.

(Cit.: Student Life, TVNewser, reader tips)

The Liable Source

2004-10-10T14:46:00.000-04:00

Michael Kinsley, LAT:

Should it be illegal for a government official to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA agent? Most reasonable people, including most reporters, would probably say yes. Lives can be at stake. But for all practical purposes, such a law (which in fact we have) is unenforceable if a government official chooses to reveal the agent's identity to a journalist, and the journalist ignores a subpoena to testify about it.

[...]

[I]f the crime consists of a private conversation between two people, you need at least one of them to 'fess up. The government official is protected against self-incrimination by the 5th Amendment. If the journalist has an absolute right and an absolute duty to shield the identity of a source, both sides of the conversation are immune and prosecution is impossible.

Take the poll:

The Bloggermann Cometh

2004-10-09T22:34:00.000-04:00

At the bottom of Keith Olbermann's latest debate commentary is tacked this announcement:

Keith's blog 'Bloggermann,' debuts next week. Find it at Countdown.MSNBC.com.

Yes, but is he man enough for a comments section?

(Cit.: Lost Remote)

Mark Halperin in Memo Controversy

2004-10-09T21:25:00.000-04:00

Drudge has published an internal memo written by ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin. The controversial section:

The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.

Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.

We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.

I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.

Why does something generate scandal when said privately, and not generate scandal when said publicly?

This memo echoes what LAT's Michael Kinsley said last week about the requirement of balance being "often just not justified by reality," and, as Halperin himself points out, builds on what was reported in the Times today. One can make a perfectly reasonable argument that Halperin, et al. are wrong, but why does Halperin get in a "scandal" over it, when others are saying it scandal-free? Is it simply because Drudge splashed it at the top of his website, or is it that it was written privately and can be construed as something meant to be hidden? This is much like how Farnaz Fassihi became a lightningrod for saying privately that Iraq was a mess, while other reporters were publicly saying the same with impunity, or even calling Fassihi's words "an understatement." Why wasn't Walter Rodgers raked over the same coals as Fassihi, and why isn't Kinsley being taken out to the same woodshed as Halperin?

ABCNews.com Gets 'Extreme Makeover'

2004-10-09T20:45:00.000-04:00

ABCNews.com got its own "Extreme Makeover" today, with a lighter, cleaner look, more text-rich pages, and a free daily video clip among the most obvious changes. Initial feedback is mostly negative, though.

Sinclair to Air Pre-Election Anti-Kerry Flick

2004-10-09T17:04:00.000-04:00

LAT:

The conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group, whose television outlets reach nearly a quarter of the nation's homes with TV, is ordering its stations to preempt regular programming just days before the Nov. 2 election to air a film that attacks Sen. John F. Kerry's activism against the Vietnam War, network and station executives familiar with the plan said Friday.

Sinclair's programming plan, communicated to executives in recent days and coming in the thick of a close and intense presidential race, is highly unusual even in a political season that has been marked by media controversies.

You may remember Sinclair from when it refused to air Nightline's reading of the names of war dead, rejecting the program as thinly veiled anti-war propaganda. Sinclair also airs a one-minute conservative commentary by Sinclair executive Mark Hyman each day on its 62 stations, usually during newscasts. According to Broadcasting & Cable, Sinclair is the largest television station group in the country.

(Cit.: Sinclair, Stolen Honor, Boycott Sinclair)

CNBC Loses Rukeyser

2004-10-09T15:17:00.000-04:00

AP:

Veteran financial journalist Louis Rukeyser, who has been off television for a year due to cancer, has asked CNBC to pull the plug on his long-running Friday night business news show. CNBC said that "Louis Rukeyser's Wall Street," which has been airing with Consuelo Mack as substitute host, will cease production by the end of the year.

Rukeyser, 71, had announced earlier this year that he had cancer in his lower back and said Friday that complications had developed.

"I can no longer predict when I will be ready to rejoin you here," Rukeyser said.

Irreplaceable, shmirreplaceable: that edgy new Martina Navratilova project is just waiting in the wings.

(Officially, though, does this now mean God hates CNBC?)

Chicago Media Struggle over Keyes Daughter's Sexuality

2004-10-09T13:03:00.000-04:00

Chicago Reader:

Daily papers have lost a lot of their authority to decide what's news. A story they refuse to cover will get to the public some other way, and if the dailies don't lead the discussion it'll go on just fine without them.

A couple of weeks ago the sexual orientation of the daughter of Alan Keyes became various bloggers' new hot subject. As I write this column, the Tribune and Sun-Times have published nothing on it. They've stood on principle, and the principle is hard to fault. They saw signs that Maya Keyes, only 19, dreaded the attention they were thinking of paying her. There is, after all, a big difference between her playing with the subject of lesbian romance on a Web site read by a few friends and having it exposed to the world. When bloggers began calling attention to www.xanga.com, the site where they said she posted her blog, the intimate material they'd noticed there promptly disappeared.

[...]

Rich Miller, publisher of the newsletter "Capitol Fax," reported on September 30: "Almost every Chicago political reporter is currently and actively pursuing the Keyes controversy, and his refusal to talk about it is starting to drive them a little crazy. You can see it in their stories. They're champing at the bit, eager to find the hook that justifies blowing this thing wide open. Most of them are also sensitive about the daughter, but this thing is obviously driving them nuts. Millions of people already know about this, but they're not allowed to report it."

And should the press provide the same protections when the person in question is a powerful congressman with an anti-gay voting record? More on that later.

NYT's Eyes Drawn Toward Bush's Bulge

2004-10-09T01:57:00.000-04:00

Sorry for my Friday vacation, but I brought back a double entendre to make it up.

NYT:

What was that bulge in the back of President Bush's suit jacket at the presidential debate in Miami last week?

According to rumors racing across the Internet this week, the rectangular bulge visible between Mr. Bush's shoulder blades was a radio receiver, transmitting answers from an offstage counselor into a hidden presidential earpiece. The prime suspect was Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's powerful political adviser.

For those keeping track, this is not a new low for the Times, since, for this story, Bumiller has inconclusive photographic evidence.

(Cit.: Salon, MediaChannel, Is Bush Wired?)

FBI Raids US & UK Independent Media Servers

2004-10-07T21:48:00.000-04:00

NYC Indymedia:

The FBI took the hard drives of Global IMC servers in the USA and the UK. It appears that a court order was issued to Rackspace (Indymedia's service provider with offices in the US and in London) to physically remove the hard drives from Global Indymedia servers (backup servers are now in place). Rackspace was given no time to defend against the order before it was acted upon and turned over the hard drives, both in the US and the UK. [...]

During the Republican Convention, the ISP of the NYC IMC was informed that it was the subject of a Secret Service / FBI investigation into an article submitted to its Open Newswire identifying delegates at the RNC. While the FBI has made it clear to members of the press that the investigation is ongoing, there is not necessarily a connection between events in NYC and the FBI's seizure of the Rackspace servers. Currently, much of the speculation about the reasons for the FBI's move centers around photographs posted to the IMC-Nantes website.

The only information about those photographs I can find is from a commenter on Slashdot:

Another theory is around some pictures of undercover Swiss police (photographing protesters) that were posted on an IMC site (IMC Nantes) - Indymedia got a request to remove 'identifying information' from the site (apparently the FBI got involved 'as a courtesy' to the Swiss authorities). Since there were no identifying details, Indymedia didn't do anything in response.

AP: Bush Wins Election

2004-10-07T17:51:00.000-04:00

Original link #1, screen shot #1:

At this hour, President Bush has won re-election as president by a 47 percent to 43 percent margin in the popular vote nationwide. Ralph Nader has 1 percent of the vote nationwide. That's with 51 percent of the precincts reporting.

Bush has won 324 electoral votes in 33 states. He is leading in 4 states for a total of 43 more electoral votes.

Kerry has won 105 electoral votes in 8 states and the District of Columbia. He is leading in 5 states for a total of 48 more electoral votes.

Nader has not won any state and is not currently leading in any state.

In the 435 U.S. House races, the Republicans have won 173 seats and are leading in the races for 56 seats. The Democrats have won 145 seats and are leading in the races for 56 seats. Independent and other party candidates have won or are leading for 3 seats. If these trends continue, the Republicans will retain control of the Senate and will gain 3 seats.

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

I'm claiming fair use.

Original link #2, screen shot #2:

With less than a month before the presidential election, an Associated Press test article declaring President Bush the winner was picked up by WBAY.com's automated system. The headline of the AP story did not bear that all-important word for the automated filters... "test."

The mistake was picked up by a discussion group on Daily Kos, prompting a phone call that alerted us to the problem. Our web host, WorldNow, removed the story within five minutes.

WBAY apologizes for the error, and we took quick action to correct it.

(Cit.: Daily Kos, MyDD,, reader tip)

Judith in Jail?

2004-10-07T15:38:00.000-04:00

AP:

A federal judge held a reporter in contempt Thursday for refusing to divulge confidential sources to prosecutors investigating the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity.

U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan ordered New York Times reporter Judith Miller jailed until she agrees to testify about her sources before a grand jury, but said she could remain free while pursuing an appeal. Miller could be jailed up to 18 months.

Miller has previously expressed willingness to go to jail to protect her source(s).

Hardball in the Crossfire

2004-10-06T23:34:00.000-04:00

Does being criticized by both sides mean that you're doing something right or that you unanimously suck?

From the left, MediaMatters:

While the clear majority of commentators described the debate as a draw, MSNBC pundits expressed a dramatically different view, declaring Vice President Dick Cheney the undisputed victor.

[...]

CHRIS MATTHEWS (host of MSNBC's Hardball): Will it be apparent enough to The New York Times to mention tomorrow, will the liberal press admit Cheney won? [...] The analogy would be a water pistol against a machine gun.

And from the right, the Grand Old Party itself:

DEMOCRAT CHRIS MATTHEWS' SELECTIVE "ANALYSIS" - Matthews Pinch Hits For Edwards And Strikes Out The Truth

The GOP says Matthews was wrong in it's "fact check" of Cheney's debate statement, "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

Insta-CW

2004-10-06T18:34:00.000-04:00

Brian Montopoli examines the immediate consensus after the first presidential debate. To spare you his 700 fancy-pants writer words, it boils down to snap polls and real-time blogging.

Changes Coming to WaPo?

2004-10-06T15:35:00.000-04:00

WaPo Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. approached the keyboard today in Ask the Post. Asked about the importance of network news anchors, Downie said, "[N]one of the potential successors to Brokaw, Rather and Jennings have anything like their breadth and depth of reporting experience before they became anchors, so I do not expect expect any of the successors to have the same influence." Also, Downie was quizzed on his earlier statement, "We are not judging the credibility of Kerry or the (Swift Boat) Veterans, we just print the facts." He elaborated, "There is a difference between judging and giving readers all the facts. We have thoroughly investigated and analyzed the claims on both sides and presented them to our readers in very lengthy, detailed stories [...] and then let our readers do the judging." I wonder what CJR's Campaign Desk would think of that?

Downie also hinted at changes coming to the paper:

Kingstowne, Va.: What is your reaction to the report in the alternative weekly that The Post's focus groups revealed a lack of enthusiasm for paying for the dead-tree version of the paper?

Leonard Downie Jr.: While we understand that many people now read news online, and we welcome all who read washingtonpost.com, we are also working on making the ink-on-paper newspaper more attractive and accessible to as many readers as possible.

[...]

Arlington, Va.: How do you plan to stem the decline in circulation, which seems even worse given our region's massive population growth?

Leonard Downie Jr.: We are continuing to expand our local news coverage. We are working on ways to make the paper more physically attractive and easier to navigate through each day. And we are increasing our coverage, particularly on the front page, of subjects that matter most to our readers in their daily lives, including health, pop culture, education, entertainment, technology, etc.

Brokaw Bothered by Brent Bozell

2004-10-05T19:44:00.000-04:00

MRC:

On Saturday, for the third time this year, Tom Brokaw lashed out at the Media Research Center. At the New Yorker Festival, Brokaw rued how "Brent Bozell has, you know, an entire organization devoted to doing as much damage, and I choose that word carefully, as he can to the credibility of the news divisions." We couldn't have done it without their help.

To be fair, Brokaw recognizes their liberal critics as well, but in different language:

And now, on the left, there are the young bloggers out there who are anti-establishment and have their own kind of schematic for, as is their right, to offer up this criticism and to develop constituencies around it. These three aging white men are stuck somewhere in the middle trying, on a nightly basis, give a fair and balanced picture of what's going on in the world....

Walter Rodgers: 'Disaster' Email 'An Understatement'

2004-10-05T16:21:00.000-04:00

Orignially intended as a private message to friends, an email written by Farnaz Fassihi, WSJ's correspondent in Baghdad, has exploded across the Internet and created a debate about whether the situation in Iraq is as bad as Fassihi says. Quoting Fassihi today on Business International, CNN's Richard Quest asked senior international correspondent Walter Rodgers whether Iraq was indeed a "disaster":

"That's probably an understatement." Rodgers asked, "Where's the good news?"

Later, he added, "The Americans, the Bush administration [...] has failed." Rodgers said he personally suspects, without knowing, that all of the Western networks are just "waiting for one Western reporter to be killed" before they pull out. "They don't want to be there," he said. He pointed to European news outlets that have already begun to withdraw.

Though not directed to Fassihi, Rodgers offered some advice: "If you expect to be liked, don't be a reporter, and don't be a war correspondent."

Kerry Rep Walks Out on Hannity

2004-10-05T15:50:00.000-04:00

TVNewser:

Kerry spokesperson Michael Meehan prematurely ended his appearance on Hannity & Colmes segment after Sean and Bush rep Nicolle Devenish "ganged up" on him. One e-mailer called it the "most blatant example of attack journalism that I've ever seen on TV:" "They wouldn't let him answer with anything besides a yes or a no." As the first of two planned segments concluded, Meehan said: "If you're not going to let me answer, then I'll just cede my time." He walked out during the commercial, while Devenlish stuck around for part two.

Did anyone here see it?

Sumner Redstone Exposes Self

2004-10-05T14:29:00.000-04:00

Johnnie Roberts, Newsweek:

Should media moguls refrain from endorsing presidential candidates? [...] The question has gained new urgency in New York and Washington after Sumner Redstone, who controls CBS-parent Viacom, enthusiastically endorsed President George W. Bush. From a "Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal," Redstone told an audience of CEOs in Hong Kong in late September, "because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on." In the widely-reported remarks, he added: "I vote for what’s good for Viacom." [...]

Critics, in a debate that’s now beginning to take hold, say Redstone may have risked exposing the entire media sector to the unwelcome appearance of coziness with federal regulators.

Yes, how dare he. What next? Telling us how Viacom hosts parties for congress members and sends them on vacations, then asks them to vote Viacom's way on legislation?

FNC: If Cameron Does It Again, He Can Be Fired

2004-10-04T22:38:00.000-04:00

TVNewser gets its hands on an internal FNC memo:

"Last week, we experienced separate lapses of judgment, resulting in the posting, on our website, of inaccurate material," Moody writes. "Credibility is our lifeblood. When we make factual mistakes, we affect adversely all the hard work that we've done for eight years to become the country's leading news channel." He calls Cameron's quotes a "stupid parody" that was included in the scripts queue, then picked up and added "unthinkingly" to the web site.

"For that reason, we are implementing a number of changes," he continues. "First, and immediately, the scripts queue is OFF LIMITS for editorial use until the item has been broadcast or the script is approved for use. Second, the use of scripts queue for humor, sarcasm, parody or other unprofessional conduct is strictly forbidden. Failure to follow this directive is a dismissable offense."

An anonymous tipster claiming FNC employment raises an eyebrow, however:

When I saw the language, it was abundantly clear that he wanted it leaked to the press. Notice that even in an advisory memo, he still takes the time to trumpet FNC over its competitors.

In addition, a FoxNews.com article offers regrets and a joke after publishing quotes from satirical group, "Communists for Kerry":

FOXNews.com regrets the error. From now on, polygraphs for everybody.

Frank Luntz: GOP Hack or Not?

2004-10-04T22:07:00.000-04:00

Howard Kurtz quoted Frank Luntz today on his being dropped by MSNBC after MediaMatters complained:

"I think they buckled to political pressure," says Luntz, who has advised Republicans from Newt Gingrich to Rudy Giuliani but says he's done no GOP work since 2001. "They caved. . . . Why is it that Democrats are allowed to do this" after leaving politics, "but Republicans aren't?"

But MediaMatters says Luntz has indeed done GOP work recenty:

But as MMFA has noted, the St. Paul (Minn.) Pioneer Press reported on September 2: "Earlier this year, GOP pollster Frank Luntz advised Republicans to never talk about Iraq or homeland security without first mentioning how '9/11 changed everything.'" The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported on September 1: "Republican pollster Frank Luntz did his best Tuesday to pump up Ohio's Republicans at a delegation breakfast. 'If you guys fail, if John Kerry becomes president by a percent or half a percent, I think you're going to be pretty regretful,' he said."

MediaMatters has more examples and links, including a report of paid work for "Rescue California, Recall Gray Davis." It could be, though, that what Luntz said was imprecisely summarized by Kurtz, or that Luntz has another idea of what "GOP work" means.

Real News About Fake News

2004-10-04T20:48:00.000-04:00

NYT's Warren St. John files a piece on fake news, and Fimoculous offers an idea: What about an entire blog on fake news?

If it's any good, I'll link to it.

(Cit.: MediaBistro)

Michael Moore Rejected Killian Docs?

2004-10-04T19:59:00.000-04:00

The Washington Note received this report from a Michael Moore Q&A in Arkansas (consider the source):

Moore said he looked into it at the time and concluded that they weren't reliable. Not surprisingly, he really didn't seem to have any sympathy for Rather's mistake. He mentioned Burkett's name during the discussion, but never said that Burkett was his source.

Peter Jennings, Eater of Sheep Testicles

2004-10-04T19:45:00.000-04:00

NYDN:

FINGER-LICKIN' GOOD? Peter Jennings is quite the culinary risk-taker, judging by his recent revelations to Webster Hall curator Baird Jones: "As part of my travels as a journalist, I have had the chance to sample many bizarre menus. For instance, I've eaten sheep's testicles in Jordan, python in the Philippines and, in Mexico, I had a dinner of ants which were quite small and well cooked. But the strange thing about the dozens of exotic foods I've eaten is that they all seem to taste the same - like plain-old chicken!"

Squibs

2004-10-04T19:21:00.000-04:00

Bob Edwards debuts on satellite radio. ... Sharon Bush drops retraction demand, lawsuit threat against Kitty Kelley. ... Euro news orgs recede in fear from Iraq. ... Letters to editors laced with harmless powder. ... Network news gets marginalized. ... Publisher William Holiber to become US News prez. ... Bernard Shaw roasted at Spina Bifida Association benefit. ... Wonkette crashes Bob Schieffer book party.

NYT Furtively Criticizes Self

2004-10-04T15:11:00.000-04:00

E&P

In Sunday's 10,000-word indictment of the Bush administration's misuse of prewar intelligence on Iraq's nuclear capabilities, The New York Times did not spare itself in apportioning blame in the fateful rush to war. Readers had to dig deep into the massive story, and understand some of the subtleties in the self-criticism, but it was there.

[...]

The first hint of self-criticism in the Times article comes just past the midway point, when the writers observe that on Sept. 8, 2002, the top article on page one of their newspaper "gave the first detailed account of the aluminum tubes. The article cited unidentified senior administration officials who insisted that the dimensions, specifications and numbers of tubes sought showed that they were intended for a nuclear weapons program."

[...]

Today's Times story dryly observes: "The article gave no hint of a debate over the tubes," adding, "The White House did much to increase the impact of The Times article."

[...]

Today, however, the Times revealed that the vast majority of scientists and nuclear experts at the Energy Department's labs, in fact, disagreed with the CIA assessment. [...]

Finally, much later in today's story, the reporters note that their paper, on January 10, 2003, reported that the International Atomic Energy Agency was challenging the "key piece of evidence" behind "the primary rationale for going to war." The article, the paper said, in passing, appeared on Page A10.

When Daniel Okrent solicited suggestions for a new type of correction last week, I don't imagine anyone chimed in with the Where's-Waldo sorta-culpa.

Swallow Your Pride, Credit Blogs

2004-10-04T13:59:00.000-04:00

Campaign Desk:

Scoops and attribution are our topic today; specifically, who deserves credit for breaking one of the weekend buzz stories coming out of the debates. We're referring to Fox News' fake posting which quoted John Kerry as saying: "Didn't my nails and cuticles look great? What a good debate!" [...]

Stephen C. Clemons at The Washington Note writes that Josh Marshall broke the story about the phony cuticle quote, attributed to Fox's Carl Cameron. Clemons writes: ["]Eric Lichtblau of The New York Times in his report on the fabricated Kerry posting says nothing of Joshua Marshall's investigation or his reporting.["]

Now, in this case, it's Josh Marshall. Real journalist, real name, credit him. But are you really going to credit some person of unspecified gender named "Stet," some guy named "Gen. JC Christian, Patriot," or some blog named "Little Green Footballs?" Their reporting may be as gossipy and dodgy as a blog's, but there may still be things that are below The New York Times.

Bill Maher on Fox Debate Coverage

2004-10-04T08:08:00.000-04:00

Caution: not worksafe (1.2MB Quicktime).

Brokaw, Jennings: Rather Unfairly Treated

2004-10-03T15:54:00.000-04:00

AP:

While acknowledging mistakes in CBS anchor Dan Rather's "60 Minutes" report [...] Brokaw blasted what he called an attempt to "demonize" CBS and Rather on the Internet, where complaints about the report first surfaced. He said the criticism "goes well beyond any factual information."

"What I think is highly inappropriate is what going on across the Internet, a kind of political jihad ... that is quite outrageous," the NBC anchor said at a panel on which all three men spoke.

[...]

"I don't think you ever judge a man by only one event in his career," said Jennings, anchor on ABC.

Check the C-SPAN video, though, because I'm sure I saw Jennings direct the international "crazy" signal Rather's way during the Q&A's.

Later:

Rather said he did not ask enough questions before the war or conduct enough follow-up reporting.

"If the country is in dire peril, as the president of the United States says it is ... I want to be a patriotic journalist," he said.

"You know that the role of the patriotic journalist is to put your fear aside, stand up, look them in the eye, ask the rough questions. But you also know that when you do that, you're going to get hammered..." Rather said. "So what happens is you just say ... maybe tomorrow."

McEnroe vs. Boiling Water

2004-10-02T22:26:00.000-04:00

The cancellation of CNBC's Capital Report was reported Thursday by TVNewser, yet the show was also the second-highest rated on the network that day. This is nothing new for NBC's cable division: when The Phil Donahue Show was cancelled by MSNBC in the run-up to the war, it was MSNBC's #1 highest-rated show.

In other CNBC news (how boring is that phrase?), McEnroe had its worst night ever on Thursday, according to TVNewser. NYDN reports that the show was 833rd of 834 shows in the cable ratings Monday, ahead only of the Food Network's "How to Boil Water."

And while we're on the topic of almost interesting cable news, Robert Novak is in the hospital:

Before we go tonight, we want to bring you news about one our colleagues, Bob Novak, who was injured in an accident in Miami, Florida, this morning. He is under going right now a partial hip replacement. So keep him in your prayers.

BEGALA: And he did say, instead of flowers, send money to Billionaires for Capital Gains Tax Cuts.

(LAUGHTER)

CARLSON: Amen.

(Cit.: CNNFan)

Update: WaPo has even more Novakian details you're not interested in.

FoxNews.com: Punk'd, Day Two

2004-10-02T21:51:00.000-04:00

Just one day after being fooled by its own chief political correspondent into publishing clearly false quotes of Sen. Kerry, FoxNews.com was fooled by Republican front group "Communists for Kerry" today:

Of course, there were some Kerry supporters in attendance who had no doubts whatever about their candidate.

"We're trying to get Comrade Kerry elected and get that capitalist enabler George Bush out of office," said 17-year-old Komoselutes Rob of Communists for Kerry.

"Even though he, too, is a capitalist, he supports my socialist values more than President Bush," Rob said, before assuring FOXNews.com that his organization was not a parody group. When asked his thoughts on Washington's policy toward Communist holdout North Korea, Rob said: "The North Koreans are my comrades to a point, and I'm sure they support Comrade Kerry, too."

It is unclear whether the Kerry campaign has welcomed the Communists' endorsement.

FoxNews.com even provides a link to Communists for Kerry, yet appears not to have been suspect of the anti-Michael Moore, pro-W Ketchup agitprop, nor tipped off by the About Us page, which states: "'Communists for Kerry' is a campaign of the Hellgate Republican Club."

KleenexGate!

2004-10-02T15:01:00.000-04:00

LAT's Michael Kinsley wanders by the Campaign Desk:

The conventions of objectivity make it very difficult to say that something is a lie. And they require balance, which is often just not justified by reality. [...] "Candidate X murdered three people at a rally yesterday, and candidate Y sneezed without using a Kleenex. This is why many people are saying this is the roughest campaign ever."

[...]

I think it's absolutely true that Bush and his administration are better than anyone ever has been in sticking to the party line. I would be quicker to criticize people for not adapting if I could think of a way to adapt. [...] So I think all you can do is point it out and let people draw their own conclusion.

[...]

I think that, possibly, if your editorial page is one way, the op-ed page should tilt slightly the other way. But I also think you want to have a general standard of fairness, but you don't want to start counting articles and having rigid quotas, because the most important thing is to find ideas that are interesting and important.

If anyone has the scoop on this Candidate Y incident, use our tips form, because that kind of thing is just nasty.

And Where Can We Purchase This 'Naughty News Nymphs?'

2004-10-02T01:37:00.000-04:00

Don Farmer, Naples Daily News:

In Los Angeles, where all trends begin, hot bodies and hard bodies are scampering all over TV newscasts. That's after they display their pointedly nonjournalistic assets in racy men's magazines and steamy Web sites.

It's a multimedia circus: Sexy anchor chicks, pouting through the TV news, then preening in "Skin World."

At news time, the anchor gal reads scripts written by plainer Janes behind the scenes.

Later, the TV temptress bursts from the pages of "Naughty News Nymphs," her hair and her spaghetti straps down, so to speak.

Of course, we're sending Don an email to follow up on this, in the name journalistic integrity.

FoxNews.com: Punk'd by Carl Cameron

2004-10-01T18:00:00.000-04:00

CuticleGate! Carl Cameron must resign! The proportional font spacing and superscripted ordinals were so obvious! Or something.

FoxNews.com:

Earlier Friday, FOXNews.com posted an item purporting to contain quotations from Kerry. The item was based on a reporter’s partial script that had been written in jest and should not have been posted or broadcast. We regret the error, which occurred because of fatigue and bad judgment, not malice.

Apparently, Carl Cameron filed what Fox spokesman Paul Schur calls a "poor attempt at humor," which was linked on the front page of FoxNews.com. Josh Marshall has the offending grafs:

"Didn't my nails and cuticles look great? What a good debate!" Kerry said Friday.

[...]

"It's about the Supreme Court. Women should like me! I do manicures," Kerry said.

[...]

"I'm metrosexual — he's a cowboy," the Democratic candidate said of himself and his opponent.

A "metrosexual" is defined as an urbane male with a strong aesthetic sense who spends a great deal of time and money on his appearance and lifestyle.

DNC Ticks Off Reporters on Deadline

2004-10-01T15:27:00.000-04:00

Dana Milbank, WaPo live chat:

The DNC made a terrible mistake, I think, in forwarding hundreds of supporters' emails to reporters, flooding inboxes just as the journalists were on deadline. Some of my colleagues got nearly 700 emails, all with individuals' names but apparently sent by the DNC. This has produced much aggravation in the press corps.

Isn't that called spamming?

(Cit.: Romenesko, Lost Remote)