Paul Ryan’s RNC convention speech kicked off a lot of discussion about how and when journalists should do factchecking. Some reporters noted that, for instance, the people you factcheck can push back; other pieces wondered if it was making any difference at all. There are plenty of factchecking operations, but there seems to be a feeling that the lying and deception is more significant now than it’s ever been.
But if you watched TV coverage of the Republican convention, you may not have seen much in the way of factchecking. More to the point, some of the discussions could get a little, well, foggy.
Take NBC veteran Tom Brokaw, speaking on a Meet the Press roundtable (9/2/12) about Ryan:
One of the problems I have… was that for example, Congressman Ryan overreached a couple of times and got caught in those overreaches. The Janesville plant, for example, which was closed in ’08, they ended up blaming it on President Obama.
And the cuts in Medicare, which were very similar to what he had in mind, taking on the president for not invoking Simpson-Bowles, which I agree with him on that. I think the president made a mistake in not playing up front Simpson-Bowles. He was a member of Simpson-Bowles, and he voted against him, went on the floor and said it’s not a good idea to do it.
So I think that’s a problem for the Republicans in overreaching. They can make a very good case about the last four years, but when they overreach, then the next day’s stories are all about the course corrections that have to be made. And I think it goes to their credibility some. And I think the American people are out there looking to say, I don’t know which of these guys to believe, which is going to make those debates all the more important.
Ryan doesn’t lie, or distort reality–he “overreaches.” And that’s bad because “the next day’s stories are all about the course corrections that have to be made.” No, I’m not really sure that what means either. But this all “goes to their credibility some.” And viewers might say they don’t know which guy to believe–but that the debates might clear this all up.
Why should we wait for the debates? Shouldn’t journalists consider their job to sort this all out now–without resorting to weak excuses and euphemisms?
One of the main lessons one can draw from all this attention is that truth-telling actually isn’t a priority for many media outlets. Evidence of that could be found on the very same Meet the Press broadcast. The first interview guest was Democratic Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and host David Gregory asked him about Republican lies about Obama’s welfare policies–the phony, racially loaded charge that the White House is getting rid of work requirements for welfare recipients. Emanuel explained the White House policy, rebutting Gingrich’s bogus charge.
So who showed up, minutes later, on the show’s roundtable? Newt Gingrich, of course. And he explained that one difference between the Republican and Democratic agendas was that the GOP “believe in the work requirement for welfare.”
Why tell the truth? Lying doesn’t seem to have any impact on whether news shows will keep giving you a platform–depending on who you are, of course, and the kinds of lies you’re telling.
Thank you, FAIR, for your clarity. I am becoming more and more disillusioned with TV “journalists” who seem to be more interested in maintaining their “contacts” than in asking probing questions, calling out liars, and maintaining control of their interviews rather than just giving partisans a platform to spew their canned talking points. Every time a guest refuses to answer the question asked, his mic should be cut off until he can do so. It is so obvious that these guests’ aim is to monopolize the “conversation” and lay out their prepared talking points–not to answer questions directly and truthfully. Keep up your good work!
I forget one point: When a politician tells a flat-out LIE, it should not be said that “…it goes to his credibility SOME.” A real journalist would call a spade a spade. In a courtroom, a person is either credible or not, period. To cowards like Brokaw: Have the guts to call a lie a lie—or go into another line of work.
I’m old enough to remember this lyric:
I can still hear you saying those words that never were true
Spoken to help nobody but you
Words with lies inside
But small enough to hide till your playing was through
So is Brokaw.
But here life doesn’t imitate art, by his lights, does it?
(Bonus points for guessing the song and band)
I think the biggest problem I see is not that the Journalists don’t want to call em on lying; they honestly don’t see it as lying either. Not if you rubbed their nose in it.
Like Molly Ivins wrote: “Who let the dogs in?”
I am more likely to recall the lyrics from “Don Henley’s – The Garden of Allah”.
Today I made an appearance downtown
I am an expert witness because I say I am
And I said gentlemen, and I use that world loosely
I will testify for you, I’m a gun for hire,I’m a saint, I’m a liar
Because there are no facts, there is no truth
Just data to be manipulated
I can get you any result you like
What’s it worth to you?
Because there is no wrong, there is no right
And I sleep very well at night
No shame, no solution, no remorse, no retribution
Just people selling t-shirts
Just opportunity to participate in the pathetic little circus
and winning, winning, winning
http://youtu.be/vpP017P3D6k
The news media just does not do the job it’s meant to. With each passing year, as the bar is lowered, mainstream journalists line up behind it, lowering their professional standards in kind.
What a living, right? I wish I could afford to be so uncaring about ethics at MY job.
In addition to the Brokaw inanities you mentioned, and while we are talking about air-headed punditry, Brokaw should be exposed for his remark that his “favorite line” (!!!) of Romney’s speech was the one in which he tried to joke about climate change. This is unforgivable. He needs to be fired.
I thought Paul Ryans speech was good but probably not a key moment in swaying independents.Fact checkers have given him good marks on the speech with some “over reach”.Meaning it is fair if you see his facts another way.No lies ,just perceptional half truths.Biden they gave less of a good grade .With a few “Ryanisms”thrown in ,with some real belly wopper untruths.So be it.I thought as a conservative that the Dem speeches were empty of truth.Obama we now know lifted an old Jimmy Carter speech word for word for word.It is called boiler plate.Same old song and dance.
What matters after all the smoke and mirrors of speech making is the facts you wake up to.The Jobs numbers.”A complete disaster.Sliding into another recession”(CBO).Why anyone would pull the lever for this bunch is beyond me.The question becomes for any of you….How bad a job must a guy on your side of the coin do before you fire him and give the other side a chance?Will you truly follow him to perdition?
And with a wonderful, serendipitous turn, now Ryan = liar. See, truth can rush in where even media fears to tread.
Michael E,
The question for you is why would anyone vote back in the party that left the incumbent with unprecedented structural flaws and challenges. What merits the GOP running the federal government again? Where was Paul Ryan during the debt run-up of the 2000’s under the prior President? Where was Eric Cantor? They were running up the debt too. Funny how the party out of power always clings to debts and deficits. Remember the Democrats during Reagan? What was their main pitch? Debts and deficits. Ryan, Cantor, Boehner et al are the biggest hypocrites out there. Suddenly, the GOP is steadfast on debt. But only after Obama wins the presidency.
Jesse It is simple really.Every failure you can recall ,whether right or wrong is four years ago.Of course I could argue with you all day about the failures on both sides but one fact remains.We were four years ago.You are now.And you and yours have failed.The next guy is up to bat.A different path.I tell you this…….If we fail,we should be one term governors.Obama said it himself and I agree whole heartedly with that sentiment.Difference is I actually mean it.I did not vote for Bush because I felt he was not good enough to be president.I did not vote for Obama because I knew he was in no way qualified.I will vote for Mitt/Ryan because they are miles (and then some) better prepared to help this country forward than the last two presidents.But if they fail I will pull the plug on them two.This country can not Afford 4 more years of this.12 years by Obamas own economic council ,and we will begin collapsing.How big do you have to fail before your side sees the magnitude of that failure?
…too
In the context of where the economic crisis started and where we are now, I can’t say that Obama represents a failure. In addition, there just isn’t any historical data supporting the success of a philosophy of cutting spending and taxes and then a national economy simply correcting itself entirely through market forces. This is what the GOP is banking on. One of the Godfathers of trickle down economics, David Stockman now believes this cannot work.
In the larger picture, the current GOP economic platform seems out of touch with history and the rest of the world. And, that’s not even factoring in social issues. Once that gets thrown in the mix, I just can’t pull the lever for the GOP even when they have good economic ideas (which they have at times in the past but I am not seeing now). The simplicity of “reducing government” to spur the “jobs creators” sounds storybook. Private sector and public sectors work together in successful economies. The current GOP contends that they don’t believe this. Even Reagan, Ford & Nixon (possibly even Goldwater) would not recognize their own party. If you feel comfortable with that then vote Ryan/Romney.
…I would like to see a truly clear checking of ALL facts….starting with a list of the so called facts ….then a discernment of, truth and/or falsehood….cherry picking tidbits and amplifying them….makes the echo chamber effect …and is boring.
As a mother, grandmother and great-grandmother, I have a little insite on Paul Ryan. It is so easy to tell when he is lying – his eyes open wide, his eyebrows go down at the outside – he looks like a 6 year-old lying about being caught in the cookie jar!!~
Brokaw made the mistake of going on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart last week to discuss this very issue. And Jon, as he always so brilliantly does, called Brokaw out on his “overreaching” verbiage, and how today’s media is impotent when it comes to true journalism.
Too bad there aren’t more Jon Stewarts in the mainstream.
Jesse..God I think you are wrong.You have two visions here.One is to cut taxes ,cut spending.Stop printing and borrowing money .Allow business to get out from under the government yoke.Allow for the recreation of wealth.The other vision is exactly opposite.It envisions an ever expanding Fed to control the people in all realms of life for their own good.You state one has never worked(it never has failed to work actually).And you still….after every failure…..after the jobs reports the other day…believe in Obama.How you do is the question.Or a better question is if he wins, will we find ourselves in fours years still with no budget?Still have no jobs.Foodstamps doubling again?Have a healthcare bill promised at 700 billion, riding along at the now projected 3-4 trillion?Find ourselves 5 trillion more in debt(not counting The Obama tax healthcare)?A military eviscerated by inept bungling and dangerous core beliefs about said military.Gas doubling again as he hampers every development of our own energy.Taxes going up.On our way to a 12 year walk off a bridge(medicare)One message resounding.Now that government has the power…it will take care of all your needs. This is what you will be voting for AGAIN!!!!
We on this side of the coin told you where this country would find itself in four years- four years ago.And here we are.You dare say lucky guess?In four years from now when it is exactly as I have painted it for you……..For Gods sake shut your God damn mouths,and take some responsibility for YOUR failure.And your vote
TD(On Jon Stewart)
John Stewart is about as mainstream as you can get if being rich ,famous,and successful is any measure.I love his show.He is funny as hell and through his humor and sarcasm often makes salient points that gives one points to ponder.Brokaw is a stuffed shirt who would never fare well with the “wise guy” in the class.Bill o does better.Look at the full interview from 2011 in April I believe ,where Stewart and Bill O have a very good substantive ,respectful talk ,on a good many issues.They obviously respect one another,and yes….maybe even “like” one another.Bill from mars and Ann coulter are friends who have dinner together in New york.How can that be ?In the world of liberal personal politics and scorched earth it is rare.But its a good thing.