Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Free Ride (Book Review)
I have just finished reading David Brock and Paul Waldman's book, Free Ride: John McCain and the Media (Anchor, 218 pages). It is an exceptionally good book if you go into it noting that some things you will simply need to disregard because both authors are liberal partisans. But despite their partisan identities, they also prove that you can take on a subject and to do so objectively. How do these two different concepts jive--that the book is both partisan and objective? Much of the focus on McCain is viewed through a partisan lens, but the way in which the media has covered McCain is dead on, and it is this subject that makes this book a valuable addition to your books on the 2008 election.
The book looks at McCain's political life, which began following his return from Vietnam where he was held as a POW--a fact that anyone who even remotely pays attention to politics knows all too well. The authors demonstrate how the media will use a line about McCain's POW status even if it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. For the authors, this is a strategy cultivated by McCain to make him immune to political attack. The authors note how often McCain brings up his imprisonment when he is being grilled by political opponents or the press, which usually is captured in the following: "I haven't had this much fun since my last interrogation."
McCain got into politics after his first marriage ended and after his second marriage to Cindy, whose family was wealthy and a political force in Arizona. His father-in-law was owned a beer distribution plant, which is where his money was made (if you recall, McCain fought to the last to keep his wife's tax returns from going public because of how much money she has, which could be a political liability in the general election). In 1982, McCain ran for an open congressional seat in Arizona even though he lived outside of Washington D.C. He was able to use his father in law's political connections to get the Republican influentials in Arizona to back him over more established candidates in Arizona politics. Eventually McCain would move to the Senate when Barry Goldwater retired from the seat he had held for decades. McCain's first burst onto the national scene was not a positive one--it was via his connection to the "Keating Five"--a group of senators who had helped Charles Keating beat back federal regulations of the savings and loan industry that ended up in scandal. Following that, McCain has a transformation into the "maverick" crusader that we know today. Or do we? The authors' main argument is that much of what Americans know about McCain is a myth.
The authors argue there are three key foundations to the "Myth of McCain"--His Vietnam experiences, his advocacy for campaign finance reform, and his style when dealing with the press. Each of these things effectively neutralize the possibility of McCain being covered in the same way as any other political figure. They use the book to explain how McCain has exploited the national press to create a larger than life personality.
There are a couple of places where the authors are dead on. First, their discussion of (though they do not call it this) meta-narratives by the press can blind reporters to the truth. And the need to label candidates is an important part of the formation of these narratives. In the past, we have seen what a meta-narrative did to the candidacy of Al Gore, who the press characterized as a "schemer" or "opportunist" or a "liar." Thus the press often would report things that Al Gore purported to say when in fact the candidate did not say--"I invented the Internet" was never uttered by Gore. "I discovered Love Canal" was never uttered by Gore.
The same is true with McCain. The "maverick" or "crusader" means that the press drops its normal description of a political candidate as a "doing anything to get elected" and putting in place a lens that sees McCain as a savior or hero or crusader. Thus McCain gets no critical coverage of lobbyists involved in his political campaigns--from donating large sums of money to working outright on his campaigns--because of his role in campaign finance reform (which really was not reform at all). Thus the media does not cover the influence he receives from the telecom, gambling, and alcohol interests.
A second place where this book is important--and should be an important lesson going into the 2008 election--is the need to consult the newspapers of the state where the candidate is from to get the real skinny on who this person is. The state media often knows the candidate the best--particularly when you have a candidate who has been involved in national politics for more than 25 years as McCain has. The problem is that most Americans get their information about the election either from their own local media or the national media (which often supplies the local media with stories of national importance).
The most critical coverage that McCain has received has gotten has come from Arizona media, where several outlets are either banned from his events or never get calls returned or interviews with the Senator. One outlet has to ask other news media when McCain's press people announce an event so that they can also attend, and one had been banned from McCain's campaign bus, the "Straight Talk Express" and was forced to rent a car and travel behind the bus during McCain's campaign stops.
The important point made by the authors is that not one member of the traveling press made mention of this story. This "dog eat dog" atmosphere on the campaign bus was one of the more useful insights that came from Alexandra Pelosi's 2000 campaign documentary, "Journeys with George." It seems to me that the journalism course CAMPAIGN COVERAGE 101 (that is not taught anywhere) should make it lesson #1 for reporters covering presidential campaigns to first go through a "Lexis" search and read what the state and local press has written about the candidate, and once accomplished that, to contact reporters directly, buy them a beer or dinner, and get as much useful information as possible about what is not being said about the candidate you have been assigned to cover. You might be surprised what you find. For instance, in the 1988 election cycle, if any of the national press had bothered to ask any reporter in Massachusetts about the Willie Horton advertising that was being run by the "National Security PAC," they would have learned that almost every fact of the ad--and every fact the Bush-Quayle campaign parroted from the ad--was a lie. Yet no one bothered and the rest, as they say, is history.
There is a pretty good review of this book at "The New York Review of Books," and you can even read a chapter at the Media Matters website that was added after publication to take into account the most recent information regarding McCain, the media, and the 2008 election.
I encourage you to pick up the book and give it a read. It is a quick read and you will be astonished at what information is not reported about McCain that would be reported if it were any other candidate.
