Category: Media Watch

Some thoughts on the recent presidential press conference:

*Where was JFK when we really — REALLY — needed him? At least Sam Donaldson has suitable successors.

*Once again neither the press nor the president distinguished themselves. Too many network preeners and NPR wieners. As a result, too many queries were typical gotcha questions aimed at eliciting a headline-grabbing mea culpa from Bush on what happened — or didn’t happen — right before Sept. 11. All they prompted were some presidential mea, gulp, uhs.

*All the president’s handlers — well, Karl Rove, Andy Card and Karen Hughes — knew he would get a post-Richard Clarke barrage. At least they could have provided him with a cheat sheet saying:

“Stay in charge. Don’t refer to terrorists as ‘folks.’ Remember it’s a forum designed to make you look bad; it’s not a Moose Lodge love-in. Grandstanding reporters are asking the leading questions, but the rest of the world is listening to your answers. Don’t try to befriend anyone. Casual connotes the wrong image for the commander-in-chief during time of war. Bridge to your agenda of resolve. When in doubt, stop. Think deposition.

“As to those queuing up for their swing at the presidential piñata, respond this way to the lead-off man:

‘I was expecting this question, especially in the aftermath of certain 9/11 commission testimony. And I’ll be glad to answer it. ONCE.

‘As president, I take full responsibility for EVERYTHING that happens on my watch. I have ultimate accountability. Our capacity to gather, share and act on intelligence fell far short of ferreting out the most despicably cruel atrocity ever perpetrated on this country. As my national security advisor, Dr. Condolezza Rice, and others have told the 9/11 commission, although war had been declared on us, we were not on a ‘war footing.’ There were institutional walls and barriers and even statutes that precluded the best possible readiness. We know now what we didn’t know then. We always do.

‘More importantly, we’re changing that unacceptable culture as quickly as possible. But I’m not going to play the blame game. As I said, it’s my watch.

‘A day doesn’t go by that I don’t grieve for the innocent lives lost on Sept. 11. And a day doesn’t go by that I don’t grow more determined to do everything humanly possible to keep this country as safe as possible from those who would attack us.

‘Now, does anyone have a different question?'”

In the last fortnight there was a pretty scathing review in one of the local dailies of a new restaurant. I won’t, for obvious reasons, mention its name. The veteran reviewer took the restaurant to task over everything. Not even the art and music measured up.

I’ve not been there myself, so I can’t contest anything — from the “limp arugula” to sepia-photos-of-Fred-Astaire ambience. But I will say this — and I have done restaurant reviews in a previous journalistic incarnation — it’s imperative to be both honest — and fair.

Newly opened restaurants, whatever their investment and fanfare, are still doing a shakedown cruise in the early going. Patrons and reviewers alike could well have a decidedly different dining experience the second time. While recognizing that the reviewer’s obligation is to readers — and his role is not that of public relations flack — it just might be appropriate to return for a second look. Soon.

And if the arugula is still limp, the criticism should be crisp.

Where was JFK when we really — REALLY — needed him?

What else to ask after President George W. Bush’s annual prime time press conference? Unless it’s why do any at all?

Once again, neither the press nor the president distinguished themselves at a press conference. From network preeners to NPR wieners, too many queries were typical gotcha questions aimed at eliciting a headline-grabbing mea culpa from Bush on what happened — or didn’t happen — right before 9/11. What they prompted were some mea, gulp, uhs .

All the president’s handlers — well, Karl Rove and Karen Hughes — knew he would get this post-Richard Clarke barrage. At least, they could have provided him with a cheat sheet that read:

“I was expecting this question, especially in the aftermath of certain 9/11 Commission testimony. And I’ll be glad to answer it. ONCE.

“As president I take full responsibility for EVERYTHING that happens on my watch. I have ultimate accountability. Our capacity to gather, share and act on intelligence fell far short of ferreting out the most despicably cruel atrocity ever perpetrated on this country. As my national security advisor, Condoleeza Rice, and others have told the 9/11 Commission, although war had been declared on us, we were not on a ‘war footing.’ There were institutional walls and barriers and even statutes that precluded the best possible readiness. We know now what we didn’t know then. We always do.

“More importantly, we’re changing that unacceptable culture as quickly as possible. But I’m not going to play the blame game. As I said, it’s my watch.

“A day doesn’t go by that I don’t grieve for the innocent lives lost on Sept. 11. And a day doesn’t go by that I don’t grow more determined to do everything humanly possible to keep this country as safe as possible from those who would attack us.

“Does someone have a different question?”

The sober Wall Street Journal and the less-than-august New York Post were the strangest of journalistic bedfellows recently. They both found it fitting to publish the name of the controversial juror in the trial of two former Tyco execs.

That ethical — but not illegal — breach expedited outside contact to Ruth Jordan, the erstwhile juror No. 4. Ultimately such contact, threatening and intimidating, led to a mistrial.

In defense of themselves, both the Journal and the Post noted that Jordan’s identity was available in the public court record.

True, but most people are not about to access such information. And it’s not the media’s charge to I.D. jurors to all its readers or viewers while a trial is ongoing. It’s always the media’s job to cover the news; it’s never their purview to make the news.

Worse than the time wasted and the expense of Tyco II, however, is this cold reality. The arguments of those already seeking to restrict media coverage of high-profile cases have been considerably strengthened. Self-policing and self-interest may now appear incongruous.

Presumably the rationales of the Journal and the Post included the people’s right to know — as in who exactly was recalcitrant juror No. 4. Moreover, that it was the people’s right to know it before the trial ended.

And now, of course, the people also know what precipitated the mistrial.

If you’re a Dennis Miller fan — and I qualify — you had to be disappointed with his interview of Gov. Jeb Bush last week on the comedian’s new CNBC show.

Miller is acerbic, quick and topical. He cares about current events. But the post September 11 Miller is more of a political partisan. He has morphed into a Fox-like conservative on national defense — and is a staunchly outspoken defender of President George W. Bush.

As a result, Miller served up some deferential asides disguised as questions to the president’s brother — after beginning with a befuddling note about a cockfighting bust in Hendry County. It was a Saturday Night Live “Weekend Update”-type reference in futile search of a punch line.

Gov. Jeb looked properly quizzical at the Hendry County comment, but then had a chance to tee off on the Miller Light softballs. When your state is juxtaposed to California’s “Bataan death march to socialism,” you know you’ve got the high ground. And an opening to remind whoever needs reminding that Florida’s “guiding principle” is to “try to make government grow slower than people’s income.” If nothing else, it was better than Johnnie Byrd’s well-worn sound bites on fiscal restraint.

Overall, the governor was able to tout his spin on educational accountability, fiscal conservatism, in-state job growth and even Everglades’ stewardship. Everything went unchallenged unless you count: “You mean you paid to keep up a swamp?” Gov. Jeb also managed a dig at John Kerry and a nice plug for his brother’s tax cuts, which are, he stressed, especially helpful to small businesses — of which Florida has a bunch.

The governor, who doesn’t do many national interviews, got what he wanted out of the exposure. Good for him; he’s a consummately glib politician with a brother running for re-election to the presidency.

As for Miller, he ostensibly got what he wanted as well. And that’s too bad. He’s a lot more entertaining being irreverent — not reverential.

This media market — and, more importantly, this community — lost an invaluable asset with the passing of Chris Thomas. As so many have already noted, he was knowledgeable, witty and fun. Listeners to his late morning show on WDAE-620 felt better for having been privy to his insights and his antics.

Conversely, viewers of Channel 8 still felt cheated for having been deprived of his presence since WFLA-TV cut him loose in 2000 and started playing the junior varsity. Management still bears the responsibility — borne mainly of cost-cutting — for not renewing Thomas’ contract. And it still bears responsibility for having ratcheted down its on-air quality and chemistry — at 6 p.m and 11 p.m. — after Thomas’s firing.

What the station jettisoned was a media personality who truly saw sports for what they were. He was never defined by the athletic celebrities in his orbit. Nor did he ever play the part of “homer,” even if references to RayJay as the “CITs” wore a bit thin. No way were athletes “warriors” to Thomas.

Sports, as Thomas would remind us in his inimitable way, could be fun and exciting, but they — especially at the professional level — were also part of a parallel universe that was more like the theater of the absurd. Ultimately sports were just about games.

Thomas called it as he saw it — through his unique prism of knowledge and surrealism.

But in so calling, he manifested a depth of understanding and frame of reference that surpassed anyone else in this market. Thomas was the only on-air, sports personality in Tampa Bay who could have made it in any market. He was a pro’s pro who made it fun.

He has left both a legacy — and a void.

Let me say this up front: the unfolding sex-and-rape scandal at the University of Colorado is beyond abhorrence. If the allegations are proven — and there are seven rape claims since 1997 — the university needs to take a long look at what it has, in effect, condoned in the name of fielding a competitive Division 1-A football team. It needs to consider imploding the program and starting over — maybe at the intramural level. Moreover, it should be an alarm bell for a lot of other major college programs that don’t exactly comport themselves like monasteries.

If the charges are proven, then head Coach Gary Barnett, is at fault and accountable — even if he had “plausible deniability.” The person in charge is the point man for the group culture. If you don’t know what’s going on, it’s because you don’t want to know.

But it also appears that the media could have been flagged for piling on. Many outlets played fast and loose with some of Barnett’s quotes, such that they were seen as the epitome of insensitivity and a basis of culpability. One typical account, which was picked up across the country, was from the Los Angeles Times. It said: “Coach Gary Barnett was placed on leave after downplaying an allegation by Katie Hnida, a former Colorado kicker, who said she was assaulted by a teammate. Barnett called her a ‘terrible’ player.”

Most pundits jumped at such an assessment as proof positive that Barnett was somehow dismissing the seriousness of the allegation because the alleged victim wasn’t very talented. Barnett certainly could have picked a better time and place for such candor, but what he said was in answer to a direct question — one of many — about Hnida’s skill level.

This often happens in journalism. The reader/viewer never sees the complete context of a comment. Only in this case the answer to a direct question was inserted into a context that read a lot differently than it sounded at a pack-journalism interview with individual questions raining down. Even Barnett, who has a lot to answer for, deserved better than that.

Fortunately, I was among those at a Super Bowl party where the camaraderie and cooking were the main attractions. I saw little of the game and none of the cultural sludge that passed for half time entertainment. Frankly, football in February is pushing the envelope. And the largely overbearing and preening personalities who analyze and chatter for a living hardly help.

As for that notorious half time, I’ve long since come to grips with this sobering reality: I’m an alien in my own culture. I didn’t sign on for any of this — from crotch-grabbing as choreography to the American flag as poncho to flashing as finale. Are marching bands and majorettes just too corny for a football game with Roman numerals?

Anyhow, I don’t regret missing most of Super Bowl XXXVIII, however close the over-hyped game was. And I don’t see that changing — unless, of course, the Bucs are in it again.

If Dr. Howard Dean doesn’t become the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, there will be ample reasons to cite. But one of them shouldn’t be his “I Have a Scream” speech after his loss in the Iowa caucus to Sen. John Kerry. It was much ado about nothing more than throwing some rhetorical red meat to a bunch of 20-something volunteers who were feeling disappointed.

The media characterized it as a “rant,” a “primal scream” and a “manic outburst.” And everyone, including Dean, agreed it wasn’t “presidential.” The tape played as a continuous loop till the New Hampshire primary. It became a running joke with late-night comics.

But as ABC reported a week later, Dean’s hand-held microphone distorted his delivery to those watching the video by eliminating most of the raucous crowd noise. It was that din that Dean was trying to yell above.

More to the point, if Dean’s loud exhortation was so unpresidential, what does that make much of the demeanor of George W. Bush? Remember candidate campaign references to “Grecians?” Or misplaced, “Bring it on” bravado aimed at Iraqi insurgents — who continue to do just that.

I tend to pay as much attention to Oscar nominations as I do the NBA, but even this one jumped out at me. Best Actor: Johnny Depp, “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl.” Depp shuffled and slurred his way through the role as an (acknowledged) Keith Richards knock off. Keith Richards — even at his dissipated worst — had to be embarrassed, if not the Academy Awards.