The NY Times caught the same thing that I noticed the night of the Indiana/NC primary and front paged this story about their absolute hubris.
The moment came shortly after midnight Eastern time, captured in a devastatingly declarative statement from Tim Russert of NBC News: “We now know who the Democratic nominee’s going to be, and no one’s going to dispute it,” he said on MSNBC. “Those closest to her will give her a hard-headed analysis, and if they lay it all out, they’ll say: ‘What is the rationale? What do we say to the undeclared super delegates tomorrow? Why do we tell them you’re staying in the race?’ And tonight, there’s no good answer for that.”
It was not exactly Walter Cronkite declaring that the Vietnam War would end in stalemate. But the impact was apparent almost immediately, starting with The Drudge Report, the online news billboard that is the home page to many political reporters in Washington and news producers in New York. It had as its lead story a link to a YouTube clip of Mr. Russert’s comments, accompanied by a photograph of a beaming Mr. Obama with his wife, Michelle, and the headline, “The Nominee.”
We’ve all been talking about how pompous and lousy our punditry class is and how they want to choose our candidates and select the issues (or controversies—phony or not) that should be covered while ignoring policies that have a real impact on all Americans. It’s been pretty sickening all around. Eric Boehlert wrote this great column weeks before Tuesday’s primary called “So now the press tells candidates when to quit?”
History continues to unfold on many levels as the protracted Democratic Party primary race marches on, featuring the first woman and the first African-American with a real shot at winning the White House. Here’s another first: the press’s unique push to get a competitive White House hopeful to drop out of the race. It’s unprecedented.
Looking back through modern U.S. campaigns, there’s simply no media model for so many members of the press to try to drive a competitive candidate from the field while the primary season is still unfolding…read on
The Russerts are not supposed to declare outcomes before it actually happens. That’s the job of opinion pundits, but not for the head of a major news department.
Since they were unsuccessful in their efforts, Howard Kurtz explains the media’s new role for Hillary Clinton in his article called: The Ultimate Punishment
The media have figured out how to end the Democratic race. Declaring it over doesn’t work. Urging Hillary Clinton to drop out doesn’t work. Putting Barack Obama on the cover of Time as the nominee doesn’t work.
What does work–ah, this is fiendishly clever–is to simply ignore the race. Many journalists are just moving on. What will become a tsunami of speculation about whom Obama will pick as his running mate is already under way. That’s not to say the MSM isn’t reporting on Hillary’s campaign stops, her $6-million loan to her struggling operation, the trickle of superdelegates toward Obama and similar developments. But we are now treating Obama as The Man.
Nice media, good media, abandon your function. My point on this is not about delegates or the popular vote or any one candidate or who has won or lost. It’s about the media’s behavior and the role they are playing during the process. Just think about this. Why is the polling data saying that a greater percentage of Hillary voters will not vote for Obama? Check out this Gallop poll.
Clinton supporters appear to be somewhat more reactive than Obama supporters. Twenty-eight percent of the former indicate that if Clinton is not the nominee — and Obama is — they would support McCain. That compares to 19% of Obama supporters who would support McCain if Obama is not the nominee — and Clinton is…read on
The on-line community is solidly behind Obama and I’ve read many posts and comments saying Obama voters would never, ever vote for Hillary so when I first heard these statistics on teevee I was quite surprised. Then I realized what is happening here. The media is fueling their anger. It’s that simple. And there are a lot of rank and file Democratic voters who are very upset. I might add that a few bloggers have had their bodies snatched away too. And on CNN Sunday, this notion was validated by Roger Simon:
SIMON: …I find that if you go into Hillary crowds, the anger you find on the part of her supporters, especially women supporters, is directed not against Barack Obama, but against the media.
ZERNIKE: Yes. I mean, I think what people were reacting to this week wasn’t so much the media declaring the race over, as it was this kind of “Ding dong the witch is dead” quality about that tone to the comments. And I do think people are angry.
And I think when you look at, you know, the percentages of Hillary Clinton supporters who say they won’t support Obama, I think Roger is right. They’re mad at — they’re mad at the media. They’re not necessarily mad at Obama.
They talk about it like it was somebody else who did it instead of themselves.
They showed they can give Barack the treatment too during the Wright business and they’ll be doing it with gusto going forward, I’m sure.
I do believe no matter who wins the nomination, (It looks like Obama) the Democratic party will unite in the end, but this information is very important to me and should be to you I would hope.
I say again, it doesn’t matter what candidate we’re talking about or who you are supporting—the media has never acted like this before. That’s astounding to me, but after the way they covered the Bush administration all these years I guess I shouldn’t be. That’s why I’m highlighting this to you. We always have to hold the media accountable for their behavior. I’ve been focusing on the horrendous Military Analysts story for this reason. Have you seen the networks cover this major story much at all? I haven’t. It’s partially responsible for the disaster known as the Iraq war. Glenn Greenwald had an email conversation with Rumsfeld’s man, Di Rita over his role in the scandal. I realized Di Rita was probably lying to Howard Kurtz over the weekend and asked Glenn to check it out.
But before the DoD released these emails to the public, Di Rita — on April 27, 2008 — appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources, was questioned by Howard Kurtz about the program’s purposes, and made statements that, as we now know from those documents, were completely false (h/t John Amato via email):
KURTZ: I talked to retired Colonel Bill Cowan, who was a Fox military analyst. He said that three years ago, after he criticized the war effort on “The O’Reilly Factor,” he was booted off the group, was never invited to another briefing, never got another telephone call, never got another e-mail. So it sounds like access was provided to those who weren’t too critical.
DI RITA: I don’t know anything. I heard — I saw that in the story. I’ve heard other assertions to that effect. It was certainly not the intent.
What Di Rita denied knowing about — that “access was provided to those who weren’t too critical” — was exactly what the plan he endorsed provided.
Thank you, Glenn. He did an outstanding job of exposing Di Rita’s role in the scam of the American people. I emailed Howard Kurtz to ask his opinion on this matter also. I’ll let you know what he says.
To wrap this up, I do hope that everybody keeps an eye on the Villagers. I know C&Lers are because they email me their letters to editors about their blatant disregard for their role every day. Remember, how quick were they to jump on the Rev. Wright saga and how did they handle John McCain’s—Catholic hating Pastor John Hagee? Were their endless loops of Hagee’s rants on teevee? O’Reilly mentioned it, but let him skate easily away like most pundits do on every issue. Did he ask why McCain sought out his endorsement? Nope, he allowed him to spin it that Hagee just happened to endorse him which is a partial truth. Or the fact that his wife will not release her tax information. (The ‘Cindy McCain Watch’ continues) Why not? Who knows, the media doesn’t care so they won’t bother to ask. I’m sure we’ll see much more of this behavior as November roles around. Stay tuned and sound off…
Filed Under: Election 08, McCain’s Media, Media Bias, Media Criticism
Tags: Media Criticism
No Trackbacks To “When Pundits Decide“
I always thought Russerts was a potato. (head)
Now I know.
By the way, which military “advisor” was he in bed with?
just another unmoral gop pundit taking orders
from the reichwingneocons. he talks and gets anal itch.
The media over sensationalizes the news. In a effort to “scoop” or get the story first, the stick their feet in their mouths.
Wouldn’t be the first time, and won’t be the last.
I always thought Russert was a potato (head).
Now I know.
BTW, which ex-military advisor was he in bed with when Russert decided for the country that Iraq was a threat and must be attacked?
Tim, do us a favor and shut your pie-hole.
JoGoBamma(formerly Jo) @ 4:
Didn’t I just say that upstream? Or somthing similar? Damned machine acting up again.
The only reason Hillary Clinton is still in the race is because she needs to raise more money to cover her losses rather than paying out of her own packet!
so Hillary’s not toast and hasn’t been for months?
it is over though. if you still think hillary can win you either don’t understand math or don’t understand the democratic primary system. and it’s not true that the media has never acted like this before. they ALWAYS compete to be the first to call elections.
While I do agree that it is over and Obama is the nominee, I totally agree that Russert was completely out of line. Was floored when I saw him say this.
I think this video says it all at this point
only the msm and “the russerites”? our own bloggersphere had its own too as i recall huffpost also had the headline “The Nominee.” proudly plastered up.
hillary hatred abounds and is very enticing bandwagon when a better approach might be, what might be best after she *finally* gives (or is forced to give) up?
we don’t *have* to follow the msm’s lead you know.
It’s “almost” enough to make me wish Hillary could pull a rabbit out of her hat and win this sucker.
Just to mode Tim Russert and the rest of the asshats in the MSM.
This cycle was a disgusting spectacle like the Iraq occupation with the corporate media.
Instead of pimping war, they pimped Obama.
They will turn on Obama and continue to give McCain a free pass.
Know how to shut Russert up? Put a Boston Cream Pie in front of him and tell him you stole it from a food bank in New Orleans where iot was headed to a starving family.
Russert was right. His only fault was not explaining the media should have called an end to this ridiculousness months ago, they were the ones keeping her narrative relevant. Clinton has been mathematically finished for quite a while now.
lafin gas @ 7:
Bada Bing, give that poster a CEEEGAR.
Also, Give plenty and give often to the Presidential Candidacy of “Former GOP Rep” Bill Barr on the Libertarian ticket.
http://www.breitbart.com/artic....._article=1
You go Bill. Spout your Conservo crap and steal votes from McFlip-flop, by the thousands. And talk about CHAOS THEORY, HEY RUSH, SUCK ON THIS.
Go Bill Racer, Go Bill Racer, go Bill Racer…gooooo.
I fu(king LOVE IT!!!! I hope another wingnut muddfugger comes out on the Conservative ticket and totally blows McCrazy out of the FU(KING water.
WOOOO HOOOO.
Yes, McDonalds, “I AM LOVING IT!”
I think this is overblown. People hate the media for using pundits instead of reporting the facts. Instead of telling us the facts and realities of political situations, pundits from each side of the debate try to spin the truth to represent their interests. Sometimes the facts of the issues are exposed, but too often the spin obscures it.
Now we have a media figure stating what plenty of people have known for a month - mathematically Clinton can’t win unless something politically suicidal happens to Obama. Yes it could happen, but so could both Clinton and Obama meltdown - and then wouldn’t John Edwards hate himself for not staying in!
Well Clinton and Obama aren’t likely to meltdown, so Edwards was right to drop out. Obama isn’t likely to meltdown, so Clinton should have dropped out after Pennsylvania.
The media is on all day, every day. I doubt Wolf Blitzer has a home he is on so much. Now just think, there are about maybe 20 talking heads we are all familiar with: Tim, Chris Matthews, David Gregory, Andrea Mitchell, David Shuster, KO, Rachel Maddow, Richard Wolffe, Jonathan Alter, Howard Fineman, O’Reilly, Dan Abrams, Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Mika B, Hannity, Colmes, Brit Hume, Wolf, Jack Cafferty. And they are paid big bucks to do what? Talk. That’s all they do. Talk, talk, talk. So pick a candidate and let’s see if we can show our corporate bosses how important we are by slanting the race between one candidate or another. This shows our collective paymasters how good we are in picking a winner and the ordinary guy out there watching will be so impressed. To hell with democracy, decency, or fair play. We are the Big Guys to watch. So when we declare the race is over, the race is over. End of story. Now let’s get on to better things like the latest blonde disappearance.
Hats off to C&L for having the cajones to call the MSM et all out on this..
But it’s about 4 months overdue.
Now that the MSM and HuffPo have run all the headlines about ‘their candidate”, someone, perhaps actual journalists, are starting to take notice about how the majority of voters feel about this coronation.
Before I’m labeled as racist, I’ve supported Hillary because, as a resident of Michigan (where my vote
has not been counted) we have waited a loooooong time for a turn in the economy. The recession for Michigan started not long after the monkey boy came to power.
Don’t expect too many voters in Michigan jump at the chance to put another inexperienced guy at the helm.
Been there, didn’t work.
Don’t care what Timmy, Matthews and Olbermann are telling us. But they’ll figure it out eventually.
There are millions of us who have turned off MSNBC.
FBush @ 20:
It was not just MSNBC and the progressive blogs.
Jack Cafferty did a hit piece on the Clintons every single day.
He quoted Peggy Noonan and other RW pundits to attack President Clinton.
It was beyond pathetic.
CNN attacked her shamelessly.
Well, all fine and good, the MSM are going to do to drive the better headline.
But I’ll say this as I’ve said before. As a FL voter, I’m mad as hell that my vote doesn’t count and the millions that feel the way I do won’t change just because the Blogger Boyz and the MSM say so.
“The Russerts are not supposed to declare outcomes before it actually happens. That’s the job of opinion pundits, but not for the head of a major news department.”
BULLSHIT. Everybody here already knows that Diebold has that job locked up. ;)
I’m usually with you guys on this stuff, but c’mon he was just stating fact here.
I agree with everyone else that says that this is being overblown. Did he have to say it? No. But did he somehow change the facts but stating the obvious? No.
I think it was a bigger crime for the MSM to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt and carry her after 11 straight losses that she could somehow win by ignoring the pledged delegates which are party rules, then to admit the obvious when she was clearly defeated.
And it’s far worse that Obama had to deal with Wright for a month or more, and McCain gets a free ride on Hagee and the other evangelical extremists. The ultimate crime is how the media sold the American public this war. Only PBS, Helen Thomas, Keith Olbermann, Jack Cafferty, and a couple of war correspondents were giving the facts.
I can’t fake outrage for Russert stating the obvious. By not stating the obvious, he would be enabling the Clinton campaign to stick to their mission or circumventing the rules.
FBush - I’m one who turned off MSNBC. After being a hardcore viewer for at least six years. Chrissy lost me first after the Ann Coulter/Liz Edwards display. And sadly, Keith lost me with his bias.
I’m sure MSNBC could give a shit about me as a viewer. They can put on another episode of “Lockdown” for all I care.
*by stating the obvious
FBush @ 20:
oh excellent! so bush has been good for you and you’ll be voting for mccain then?
We do not expect the media to be neutral. We expect the media to be disinterested and report the facts as clearly as they can be stated. In this case, Russert is asserting something passes muster and has passed muster for a few months now. He is very late to the ball, and his commentary has been riddled with inconsistencies and bluster for this entire primary season, but he is right in this particular instance nonetheless.
Reporting both sides as if they hold equal merit is a core problem with the press. Oftentimes both sides of an argument do not hold equal merit. The press almost seemed to realize this on the gas tax holiday issue. However, when George Bush says the sky is green, and the press report reads “Bush declares sky green; some Democrats voice opposition,” we are justifiably pissed. So I don’t understand how you’re upset when the press tells Hillary Clinton that the sky isn’t green.
After Russert’s news career ends, hopefully soon, he can have the job of the Kool Aid Pitcher dude.
John, thanks for pointing out what has been obvious to a lot of feminist during this entire primary season. Anyone who thinks Sen. Clinton has NOT been in a race against her opponents AND the media, simply hasn’t been paying attention.
I do place some of the blame on Obama. He could have spoken out about the sexism, but didn’t. One would think a father of two daughters would be more concerned about how women are viewed. And make no mistake, a sexist remark directed at Hillary Clinton harms ALL women.
As others have said, if Clinton is the nominee I will work my heart out for her to win in November. If Obama is the nominee, I will work against John McSame. And in Nov I will hold my nose and vote.
BAC
I wonder what McBush’s pastor Hagee would say about this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....01423.html
Must be a lot of “homersexul purades” going on across the globe!
FBush @ 20:
Oh, please, I’m, a racist too, and I probably have as much African DNA as Obama does.
Millions of people have caught on the fascist frat-pack mentality going on. That’s why Hillary’s still in the race, because WE, the other 50% that’s “invisible,” aren’t down with the “Hope & Unity, Everybody gets a Pony” candidate” - and KEEP voting for her.
Why? She’s like the Kanye West/Daft Punk song, Bigger, better, faster, stronger. Smarter, with a plan.
But whatever, flame away, it ain’t gonna change my mind.
abarts @ 26:
I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree. MSNBC is more representative of the netroots and blogosphere than any other network in my opinion. You guys can hate Russert and Matthews, but who are the real alternatives on network TV? The netroots and blogosphere are largely made up of political outsiders. The Clintons are the ULTIMATE INSIDERS. I remember a lot of you on the message boards were TRASHING them a few years ago because of their involvement in the DLC. So why would someone like Olberman, the ultimate outsider, have a un-bias opinion about Hillary, the ultimate insider?
If you want fair Clinton coverage then watch CNN because they’re all nothing but a bunch of Insiders.
Boy, and here I am cursing at the media for artificially keeping this race alive. Wasn’t that what we were all complaining about just last month?
If one tried one could not create better set of comments to demonstrate just how big a set of delusional fools the Obamacans are.
Tim Russert goes overtly Fascist and declares the Democratic Primary over, when it is not, and that’s a good, great and just okay thing because it means….
The Precious One ‘wins’.
I’ll be back, unless banned, to laugh long and loudly in your faces as Ol’ PumpkinHaid broadcasts a Obama hit piece featuring one of the Tres Amigos, Wright, Rezko, and Auchi, every night from the day Obama is actually declared the winner, if that happens, of the Dem primary until McSame pounds The Precious One into mush in the GE with the help of PH here and his buddies.
Just think back to your complacency here as PumpkinHead repeatedly highlight’s Obama’s record, character and yes, marriage night after night as you sit there glassy-eyed from one too many Bud’s angry and impotent as PH does Barry like he’s done The Hill. Dirt, lies, facts in the end PH will twist it into a masterpiece of political assassination. And….yeah, it will be easy for him…he’s got so much great dirt to smear Senator ‘Hopey’ with…much of it true. And who will speak out against him. You….hahahahhah….if any Obamcan opens their yap Russert will shut them up with, ‘We’re only treating Obama as we did Hillary what’s the problem…We are fair and ballanced….’
This campaign has opened my eyes. I used to think all the mentally challenged and low-info idiots hung at RedState of LGF…
Was I ever wrong.
BAC @ 31:
If Obama was really interested in “Unity” - he would have put a stop to the hate game as Hillary as in many recorded occasions. C’mon, he know that being a guy benefits him completely. It’s the “Bros before Hos” pledge.
So is this C&L finally coming out fully for Clinton? Seriously, this is Taylor Marsh level denial here.
Spoiler: the race has been over for a while now, and Indiana pretty much sewed it up statistically. Come on Crooks and Liars, let’s move past this kind of finger wagging and get to the real business of exposing the conservative agenda for what it is.
The bad guys lost, a new day is upon us.