{"article":{"id":110806,"heading":"Kerry "Missteps" Get Lavish Media Attention, While Bush Falsehoods Ignored","author":"FAIR","created":"2004-05-21 18:01:09","modified":"2004-05-21 18:56:07","last_modified":"Sat, 22 May 2004 01:56:07","article":"

MEDIA ADVISORY:

Campaign Double Standards:

Kerry \"Missteps\" Get Lavish Media Attention, While Bush Falsehoods Ignored

May 20, 2004

Recent media coverage of Democratic presidential contender John Kerry has

often focused on alleged gaffes or misstatements, ranging from convoluted

explanations of his Senate voting record to whether or not he owns a

sports utility vehicle. But while these relatively trivial aspects of John

Kerry's record have come under intense and prolonged media scrutiny,

journalists have shown a reluctance to highlight much more significant

falsehoods or \"gaffes\" by Kerry's main rival, George W. Bush.

Time magazine's May 10 story, \"What Kerry Meant to Say,\" is a typical

example of recent Kerry coverage. After noting Kerry's opportunities to

score points against a White House besieged by questions about Iraq, the

September 11 commission and the Supreme Court, reporter Karen Tumulty

asks, \"'But what did the challenger find himself talking about for three

days?' The answer is whether or not Kerry threw away his medals or his

ribbons in the early 1970s.\"

Tumulty attributes this story line to a personal flaw in Kerry: The

campaign has been largely about the \"traps that the Bush campaign is adept

at setting for Kerry, and the personality trait that makes Kerry walk

right into them.\" In fact, of course, it's up to the media to decide what

questions to ask candidates and which issues to run stories about. And

again and again, the press corps has latched onto stories of dubious

importance in order to portray Kerry as faltering or changing course.

After Kerry pledged on NBC's Meet the Press to release medical records

from his service in Vietnam, ABC World News Tonight (4\/21\/04) reported

that Kerry's service \"has become the subject of controversy\" because some

of his critics were raising doubts about his first Purple Heart. When the

medical records did little to bolster their case, the press corps switched

to another GOP spin point: Kerry didn't get the records out fast enough.

ABC's report included a soundbite from Republican National Committee Chair

Ed Gillespie: \"When President Bush committed to release all his military

records on the same program, he kept his word. John Kerry should do the

same.\" The fact that Bush took five days after his Meet the Press

appearance to get his full records out while Kerry took three did not

deter media outlets from doing stories on this nonexistent issue.

While the press corps applies microscopic scrutiny to Kerry's statements,

looking for evidence of misstatements or \"flip-flops,\" Bush gets little

criticism for making blatantly false assertions. Last July (7\/14\/03), Bush

revised the history of the run-up to the Iraq war, claiming that Saddam

Hussein refused to allow weapons inspectors into Iraq in late 2002: \"Did

Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is absolutely. And

we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them

in.\" Of course, Iraq did allow U.N. weapons inspectors into the country in

November 2002; they were withdrawn when war was imminent in March 2003.

Few reporters ever mentioned this substantive falsehood. NPR reporter Mara

Liasson (7\/17\/03) called it \"revisionist history,\" while the Washington

Post (7\/15\/03) timidly noted: \"The president's assertion that the war

began because Iraq did not admit inspectors appeared to contradict the

events leading up to war this spring.\" But most major news sources chose

not to bring up Bush's false statement-- the New York Times was silent on

the issue, as were the nightly newscasts of ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS.

Bush's record is full of similar untrue statements: His claim that Enron's

Ken Lay supported Bush's opponent in his 1994 gubernatorial race, when Lay

actually contributed three times as much to Bush (ABC World News Tonight,

1\/10\/02); his insistence that the White House was not responsible for the

\"Mission Accomplished\" banner on the U.S.S. Lincoln (New York Times,

10\/29\/03); his statement that in 2002 the economy \"was pulling out of a

recession that began before I took office\" (when it actually started in

March 2001-- Slate, 12\/30\/02); his assertion in a 2000 debate that in his

tax cut plan, \"by far the vast majority of the help goes to the people at

the bottom end of the economic ladder,\" when the bottom 50 percent really

got roughly 10 percent of the benefits (Extra!, 1-2\/01); his boast that

\"I've been to war\" (Associated Press, 1\/27\/02)-- to list just a few.

In 2000, journalists seemed to be tailoring their coverage to a

well-defined theme: \"The story line is Bush isn't smart enough and Gore

isn't straight enough,\" explained pundit Cokie Roberts (Washington Post,

10\/15\/00). The coverage so far in 2004 suggests that Kerry is now getting

the Gore treatment (Daily Howler, 5\/4\/04).

But for Bush, the story line has changed; now reporters consider

resolution to be Bush's defining trait. A day after a Bush press

conference, New York Times reporter David Sanger (4\/14\/04) wrote that

Bush's \"singlemindedness\" is the \"hallmark of his presidency,\" seen by

admirers as \"his greatest strength\" and by his critics as \"a dangerous,

never-change-course stubbornness.\" Washington Post columnist David Broder

agreed, writing (4\/15\/04) that while Bush \"will not be deflected from his

chosen course by criticism or evidence of public doubts about the wisdom

of his policies,\" that could be a good thing, since \"this idealism forms

an image of resolute leadership.\"

The idea of a leader who friends and foes alike say never changes his mind

bears little resemblance to the actual George W. Bush, who has taken

diametrically opposed stands on the need for a Homeland Security

Department (Time, 4\/26\/04), an independent September 11 commission

(Baltimore Sun, 3\/31\/04) and a patients' bill of rights (Political Animal,

3\/21\/04; Washington Post, 4\/5\/04). His flip-flop on \"nation-building\" was

so pronounced that Comedy Central's Daily Show (4\/30\/03) once staged a

debate on the subject with taped statements from Bush taking both sides.

But if it doesn't match reality, the media image of a resolute Bush does

conform remarkably well to Karl Rove's 2004 campaign slogan: \"Steady

Leadership in a Time of Change.\"

<\/p>\n","contact":"","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"The media is being easy on Bush (again).","numcomment":1,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2004\/05\/110806.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":110812,"heading":"Why klueless Kerry will be dismissed by voters","article":"First off, a "thinkpiece" by FAIR, a notorious liberal "news" media organization, isn't exaclty an objective review of the facts. Nor is quoting Slate. \r\n\r\nThere is no spin involved on a few observations:\r\n\r\nHow Kerry, arguably more liberal than Ted Bourbon Kennedy, votes on the issues is a matter of public record. His flip-flopping is there for all to see.\r\n\r\nHis personality is that of an elitist fop. Again and again, incidents demostrate how he looks down on "common folks." His claim to fame? He married money that married money.\r\n\r\nNo one is quicker to mention Kerry served in Viet Nam than Kerry. His answer to every inconsistency about his record is the same: "I served in Viet Nam." \r\n\r\nAny good Kerry once did overseas has long been overshadowed by falsehoods Kerry told later about the war to jumpstart his political career.\r\n\r\nJohn Kerry has undone John Kerry. No one else is to blame.\r\n","author":"FALD","parent_id":110806,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2004-05-21 18:56:07","modified":"2004-05-21 18:56:07","fileurl":""}]}