Monday, January 14, 2008
The Conservative Echo Chamber
There has been a lot written since Bush won election in 2000, followed by the Republican gains in the midterms in 2002, and then the re-election of Bush in 2004 that dramatic changes would need to take place if the Democrats were ever to find their way out of the minority party wilderness. One suggestion was to copy the tactics of the Republican machinery--help Republican candidates to develop talking points to use in an election, work with Republican legislatures in the states to place "wedge issues" on the ballot in order to bring out your base, and coordinate with outside organizations to work over the mainstream media--organizations such as think tanks, bloggers, and Republican media outlets such as conservative talk radio.
As to the last--coordinating with conservative media in order to drive issues into the MSM--has worked very well for Republicans, and has mostly been understudied. In 2002, I sketched out what I called the "Conservative Echo Chamber" to demonstrate just how effective this relationship was. In the fall of 2002, conservative media outlets and personalities were able to bring a ridiculous story onto the MSM radar at the same time a damaging story for conservatives went uncovered for several days.
The ridiculous issue was a story about how much John Kerry paid for a haircut. A story first appeared on the Drudge Report that John Kerry had paid $150 for a haircut. This was supposed to have been damaging to Kerry's appeal to be an "everyman." Within two days, that story bounced to Talk Radio "bloviator" Rush Limbaugh, to Fox News pundit show Hannity and Colmes, to CNN's "Crossfire" and then to reports on the network news. The story was partially true. Kerry did pay a high price, but not $150. Instead, he paid $75. The bigger question was why did it matter what he paid for a haircut? This didn't seem to phase Judy Woodrow, who at the time worked for CNN and declared on the afternoon news program "Inside Politics" that the haircut story may prove devastating to Kerry's run for the presidency in 2004!
At the same time, Mississippi Senator Trent Lott appeared at a 100th birthday celebration for Strom Thurmond, and made a stunning announcement:
These remarks were incredible given that Thurmond ran as a segregationist in 1948 as a member of the States Rights Party. Lott's remarks were taken to mean that if the country had not desegregated, things would be great today.
As insensitive as these remarks were, it was days before the so called "liberal media" reported on it. One regional paper, the "St. Louis Dispatch" ran a story about it over the weekend, and the Prince of Darkness Robert Novak, when asked about the incident on the Sunday taping of "Meet the Press" claimed that this was a typical case of liberal media piling on--despite the fact that only one newspaper had even run the story. It was largely because of the blogosphere that the remarks properly generated a feeding frenzy, costing Lott the Minority Leader position.
That was then, this is now.
Another clear example of the conservative echo chamber comes by way of PBS's NOW. A couple of weeks ago they focused on South Carolina politics for an episode titled "Dirty Politics 2008." In this instance, echo chamber was focused on Barack Obama. The origin of the initial story (the echo chamber always begins with a spark) was traced to a firm owned by the same South Carolinian who was responsible for the nasty "push poll" against John McCain in the 2000 Republican Primary. The story, released some time in 2006, to the conservative publication Insight Magazine, claimed that when Obama is a Muslim, and as a young child living in Indonesia, was sent to a madrassa. A madrassa is a school that teaches radical Islam, and is responsible for the same people who suicide bomb and commit other acts of terrorism. A great deal was also made of Obama's name--Barack "Hussein" Obama.
Within two days, the story is picked up by a morning show on Fox News, which also takes calls from "the average Joe" about the story. Also in this time frame the story runs in another Murdoch owned media, "The New York Post." By the fourth or fifth day, the story was reported by CNN, ABC News, and the AP.
Despite stories that have attempted to deflate the smear against Obama, in 2007 the rumor persisted, with bits and pieces added to it in order to refuel it. For example, to drive home the point that Obama's allegiances were not to the United States,
this photo, taken from Time Magazine, was circulated around the Internet. This fueled MSM chattering about whether Obama's alleged statements that he refused to hold his hand over his heart were true. Remember the power of visuals. When the photo was shown either in newspapers or on the nightly news, it is not likely that the audience remembered the words. But he or she would remember the picture. And jumping into the fray, weeks before the Iowa Caucus, was the blowhard Bill O'Reilly, who answers a caller critical of Obama with: "I think that Obama needs to answer some questions about his point of view, not only on the USA, but on a lot of things."
As the folks at NOW conclude:
The echo chamber works, especially for conservatives, for two reasons. The first is a desire not to hear the liberal bias slam if a MSM journalist questions the veracity of the information. But more importantly it works because little bits of the information are true, and if there is not a concerted effort to debunk the rumor, it gains legs. In the Kerry case mentioned above, it was true that Kerry paid a lot of money for a haircut. His desire not to answer the charge was based on a desire not to give the story any more life than it deserved. In the Obama case, it was true that he lived in Indonesia for a period of time as a child, and Indonesia is a Muslim country. But Obama has never said he is anything other than a Christian. And given his name has "Hussein" as a part of it, that is good enough for most. The interesting thing in this case is there have been several legitimate efforts to debunk it, including a piece by Howard Kurtz, the media critic for the "Washington Post", and Snopes.com, as well as Politifact and Factcheck.
It seems clear that the trend in the news media toward superficial coverage of politics topped with a generous helping of punditry will make the echo chamber all the more prolific in the future. And the Democrats development of their own cacophonous network does nothing for the citizen attempting to decide what is true or legitimate in politics.
|
As to the last--coordinating with conservative media in order to drive issues into the MSM--has worked very well for Republicans, and has mostly been understudied. In 2002, I sketched out what I called the "Conservative Echo Chamber" to demonstrate just how effective this relationship was. In the fall of 2002, conservative media outlets and personalities were able to bring a ridiculous story onto the MSM radar at the same time a damaging story for conservatives went uncovered for several days.
The ridiculous issue was a story about how much John Kerry paid for a haircut. A story first appeared on the Drudge Report that John Kerry had paid $150 for a haircut. This was supposed to have been damaging to Kerry's appeal to be an "everyman." Within two days, that story bounced to Talk Radio "bloviator" Rush Limbaugh, to Fox News pundit show Hannity and Colmes, to CNN's "Crossfire" and then to reports on the network news. The story was partially true. Kerry did pay a high price, but not $150. Instead, he paid $75. The bigger question was why did it matter what he paid for a haircut? This didn't seem to phase Judy Woodrow, who at the time worked for CNN and declared on the afternoon news program "Inside Politics" that the haircut story may prove devastating to Kerry's run for the presidency in 2004!
At the same time, Mississippi Senator Trent Lott appeared at a 100th birthday celebration for Strom Thurmond, and made a stunning announcement:
I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either.
These remarks were incredible given that Thurmond ran as a segregationist in 1948 as a member of the States Rights Party. Lott's remarks were taken to mean that if the country had not desegregated, things would be great today.
As insensitive as these remarks were, it was days before the so called "liberal media" reported on it. One regional paper, the "St. Louis Dispatch" ran a story about it over the weekend, and the Prince of Darkness Robert Novak, when asked about the incident on the Sunday taping of "Meet the Press" claimed that this was a typical case of liberal media piling on--despite the fact that only one newspaper had even run the story. It was largely because of the blogosphere that the remarks properly generated a feeding frenzy, costing Lott the Minority Leader position.
That was then, this is now.
Another clear example of the conservative echo chamber comes by way of PBS's NOW. A couple of weeks ago they focused on South Carolina politics for an episode titled "Dirty Politics 2008." In this instance, echo chamber was focused on Barack Obama. The origin of the initial story (the echo chamber always begins with a spark) was traced to a firm owned by the same South Carolinian who was responsible for the nasty "push poll" against John McCain in the 2000 Republican Primary. The story, released some time in 2006, to the conservative publication Insight Magazine, claimed that when Obama is a Muslim, and as a young child living in Indonesia, was sent to a madrassa. A madrassa is a school that teaches radical Islam, and is responsible for the same people who suicide bomb and commit other acts of terrorism. A great deal was also made of Obama's name--Barack "Hussein" Obama.
Within two days, the story is picked up by a morning show on Fox News, which also takes calls from "the average Joe" about the story. Also in this time frame the story runs in another Murdoch owned media, "The New York Post." By the fourth or fifth day, the story was reported by CNN, ABC News, and the AP.
Despite stories that have attempted to deflate the smear against Obama, in 2007 the rumor persisted, with bits and pieces added to it in order to refuel it. For example, to drive home the point that Obama's allegiances were not to the United States,
this photo, taken from Time Magazine, was circulated around the Internet. This fueled MSM chattering about whether Obama's alleged statements that he refused to hold his hand over his heart were true. Remember the power of visuals. When the photo was shown either in newspapers or on the nightly news, it is not likely that the audience remembered the words. But he or she would remember the picture. And jumping into the fray, weeks before the Iowa Caucus, was the blowhard Bill O'Reilly, who answers a caller critical of Obama with: "I think that Obama needs to answer some questions about his point of view, not only on the USA, but on a lot of things."
As the folks at NOW conclude:
Taken together, InsightMag.com's anonymously-sourced report inspired numerous "baseless" accusations about Sen. Barack Obama in the media and widespread coverage from mainstream news sites and other news sources. Whether this rumor had any significant negative impact on Obama's campaign is unclear.
The echo chamber works, especially for conservatives, for two reasons. The first is a desire not to hear the liberal bias slam if a MSM journalist questions the veracity of the information. But more importantly it works because little bits of the information are true, and if there is not a concerted effort to debunk the rumor, it gains legs. In the Kerry case mentioned above, it was true that Kerry paid a lot of money for a haircut. His desire not to answer the charge was based on a desire not to give the story any more life than it deserved. In the Obama case, it was true that he lived in Indonesia for a period of time as a child, and Indonesia is a Muslim country. But Obama has never said he is anything other than a Christian. And given his name has "Hussein" as a part of it, that is good enough for most. The interesting thing in this case is there have been several legitimate efforts to debunk it, including a piece by Howard Kurtz, the media critic for the "Washington Post", and Snopes.com, as well as Politifact and Factcheck.
It seems clear that the trend in the news media toward superficial coverage of politics topped with a generous helping of punditry will make the echo chamber all the more prolific in the future. And the Democrats development of their own cacophonous network does nothing for the citizen attempting to decide what is true or legitimate in politics.
