[NYTr] FAIR - Media to Voters: It's Over

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

FAIR - Jan 8, 2008
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=146

Media Advisory

Media to Voters: It's Over

Pundits rushing to end primaries and preempt voter choices

As the results of the Republican and Democratic primaries in New
Hampshire are reported tonight, it's a good bet that many prominent
pundits and journalists will declare the race for the White House all
but over--long before 98 percent of voters have had any say in the
matter.

The Washington Post's David Broder wrote on January 4 that "New
Hampshire is poised to close down the race for the Democratic
presidential nomination." Newsweek's Jonathan Alter (1/3/08) likewise
declared Obama to be the new inevitable after he won the Iowa caucus:

"With his victory tonight, Barack Obama is now the strong favorite to
be the Democratic nominee for president. The only one who can stop
Obama from making history is Obama.... Unless he makes a terrible
mistake in this weekend's WMUR debate in New Hampshire, Obama will be
the strong favorite to win in the Granite State.... Should the Illinois
senator win New Hampshire and South Carolina, it will be next to
impossible to prevent him from becoming the nominee on February 5,
Super Tuesday."

Actually, it's easy to imagine at least three Democratic candidates
still having substantial support on February 5, meaning that Super
Tuesday could produce no clear winner. The Republican race has much the
same dynamic; though it hasn't happened in decades, one or both of the
major parties could go into their conventions not knowing who their
nominee is.

By any reasonable standard, then, the race for either major party's
presidential nomination is far from settled. But Broder nonetheless
argued that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's campaign was
virtually finished: "A second Romney loss would effectively end the
former Massachusetts governor's candidacy."

NBC anchor Tim Russert sounded a similar alarm (1/4/08): "Bottom line,
Brian, only McCain or Romney can come out of New Hampshire to fight for
another day in South Carolina, only one. One stays behind. It is make
or break for McCain or Romney in New Hampshire."

Why are the media rushing to end the primary season just as it's begun?
It's sometimes difficult to follow the logic. Consider a USA Today
report from January 7:

"The Democratic contest is a two-person race, dominated by Clinton and
Obama. That leaves Edwards, a former North Carolina senator who is a
close third, and Richardson, New Mexico's governor who is a distant
fourth, waiting for a stumble or a political earthquake to create an
opening for them."

How are four candidates participating in a "two-person
race"--especially given that one of the lesser candidates--John
Edwards--finished ahead of Hillary Clinton? Similarly, the New York
Times' Adam Nagourney (1/5/08) argued that "the results in
Iowa...suggested that the Democratic and Republican contests were to a
considerable extent two-way races: Mrs. Clinton and Senator Barack
Obama of Illinois for the Democrats, and Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney for
the Republicans." How Mike Huckabee coming in first in his race and
Edwards coming in second "suggested" that their candidacies should be
dismissed, Nagourney didn't explain.

The press has been more harshly critical of Edwards' campaign, so it
could be the case that many in the media would be happy to see him out
of the picture. (See Action Alert, 12/21/07.) Indeed, much of the
conventional wisdom after Edwards' second-place finish in Iowa
suggested that his campaign for the White House was all but over. As
New York Times columnist David Brooks (New York Times, 1/4/08) boldly
pronounced, "Edwards's political career is probably over." David Gergen
agreed (CNN, 1/3/08): "John Edwards I think has nowhere to go
now...even with a second-place win, because he has no money."

In an interview with Edwards, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann (1/4/08)
expressed bewilderment:

"I didn't understand the conventional wisdom last night.... If you
finish second in Iowa with more support from the previous national
front-runner, who dropped from first to third, many of the pundits,
many of the so-called experts, are describing you as being in trouble,
rather than Senator Clinton. Do you know why that is?"

It'd be nice if more in the media asked such questions about what
passes for conventional wisdom in their election coverage. Indeed, some
articles have noted that winning early primaries isn't necessary to
winning the nomination; in 1992, Bill Clinton lost the first five
contests, but somehow managed to win the White House nonetheless. This
very recent history would suggest that, at a very minimum, campaign
reporters refrain from handicapping the outcome of the nominating
process in early January. After all, it's voters, not the news media,
who are supposed to elect the next president. 

******

FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: fair at fair.org