Despite the ratings problems, the "CBS Evening News" won the Edward R. Murrow Award as best newscast in 2008 and 2009. Couric's interview with then-Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in 2008 was a memorable moment in the campaign after Palin couldn't or wouldn't answer Couric's question about books or magazines she regularly read.
Even with those high points, broadcast news economics had changed markedly since she signed on with CBS and her reported $15 million a year salary became increasingly hard to justify for a third-place telecast.Bauder's summary of the Palin exchange isn't 100% accurate. Palin wasn't asked about books and magazines. Couric's question, according to the CBS transcript, was as follows:
Couric: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?I don't know if Bauder's oversight was deliberate, but it's certainly substantive.
What newspapers does President Obama read? Vice-President Biden? Senator McCain? How did they answer Couric's question? If you don't recall, it's probably because they were never asked it.
I've seen politicians asked to name their favorite books, movies and philosophers. I've seen them asked about the contents of their iPod. However, I cannot recall any politician, other than Palin, being asked to endorse a newspaper. There is a good reason for this.
Newspapers are different than books and movies. It is a news organization's job to follow power, and report to the public what power is doing. Persons seeking positions of power should not be asked to endorse specific news organizations because it would compromise the paper's integrity. If I were the editor of a major daily which had been endorsed by a candidate, I would be livid. My organization would now be open to the accusation of being shills for the campaign. I'd also fear that we could lose access as the campaign tried to eliminate the appearance of favoritism.
Couric's question is disastrous for a free press, which is why it's so rarely asked, and might explain why Couric phrased it in the past tense ("what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this"). Despite such hedging, Couric was still asking for an endorsement. It is shocking that an AP reporter would cite it as a high point, and that the media in general heaped so much praise on Couric's performance, for the question was undermining the news gathering process.
One is left to ask: why does the media have this blind spot regarding Couric's question? The only explanation can be Palin-hatred. The Couric question was catnip for Palin-bashers, which is why it was re-asked two more times. It fed into their preconceived notions that Palin was uneducated and little read. No matter what her answer, the question served as a dog whistle. The AP report even went so far as to suggest that Palin couldn't answer the question (i.e., couldn't name a newspaper). A poll of a lunatic asylum's inmates would reveal that half of them could name a newspaper, but the preferred interpretation of Palin's response to Couric's insult is that the journalism major and Governor of Alaska couldn't name one. This preposterous explanation of the exchange has become so entrenched that AP reporters are speculating that it's a possibility.
The Couric question was a blind side. No politician should answer it, and it's designed to make them look foolish as they evade it. That's why it was asked three times. But, the question wasn't just an attack on Palin, it was an attack on a free press. It should not be applauded.
No comments:
Post a Comment