Media haven't learned from their "death panel" mistakes
The media's reaction to Republican Congressman Joe Wilson's outburst during President Obama's health care speech to Congress illustrated two bad habits that encourage exactly the kind of political behavior reporters claim to dislike.
First is the media's reluctance to "take sides" in factual disputes (which is, in effect, siding with the incorrect claim) and their apparent belief that rudeness is a greater sin than lying. Scores of news reports covered the controversy over Wilson's shouted claim that the president was lying when he said proposed health care reform would not apply to those who are in America illegally -- but they focused on the breach of decorum rather than the question of whether Obama or Wilson was correct. (Independent, nonpartisan observers like PolitiFact.com and FactCheck.org have made clear that Wilson was wrong; Obama was not lying.)
Thursday's broadcast of the CBS Evening News, for example, led with a report about Wilson's outburst, during which anchor Katie Couric told viewers, "The congressman apologizes, but insists he's right on the issue." The report did not contain so much as a hint that Wilson is wrong on the issue: no assessment by CBS News, no reference to independent fact-checkers, not even a line about Democrats saying Wilson is wrong.
Likewise, MSNBC spent much of the day obsessing over the rudeness of Wilson's comment -- and relatively little making clear it was false. During one such segment, MSNBC played two minutes of Wilson talking about his comment, including a lengthy defense of the merits of his claim. Then, more a full minute after the end of the clip, anchor Tamron Hall provided the segment's only assessment of who was right: "There's also been a number of fact-checkers who said that Congressman Wilson is wrong, that there was nothing to indicate." That's it -- that's all she said. And it got worse. Andrea Mitchell led off her show with a discussion of Wilson's comments; 28 minutes later, during what was at least the third segment of her show that touched on Wilson's comments, Mitchell finally offered a tepid acknowledgement that Obama was correct.
Print and Internet coverage wasn't much better. The New York Times devoted an entire article to Wilson's comment -- an article that took no position on who was right and referred to no independent sources that did so. One Washington Times article quoted Wilson explaining why -- according to him -- Obama was lying, but omitted not only any of the independent determinations that Wilson was wrong but any comment from Democrats that Wilson was wrong. Then, a little later, the newspaper sent out a fundraising e-mail on behalf of Wilson.
It's obvious how this is going to play out. Before too long, polls will show a large minority -- maybe even a majority -- of Americans believe that Democratic reform proposals will provide subsidized insurance for people who are in the country illegally. And when that happens, Howard Kurtz and MSNBC will be gobsmacked. They'll wonder how this can be, when the media was so aggressive in reporting on Wilson's false comments. It'll never occur to them that the problem is their focus on the rudeness of Wilson's comment rather than the falsity of the comment; that they are to blame for doing a lousy job of fact-checking Wilson's comment while giving it priceless attention.
That is, after all, exactly what happened with things like Sarah Palin's "death panel" lie.
The other counterproductive media tic that surfaced once again this week is the tendency of many reporters to insist that no matter how far over the line a member of one political party goes, there's someone just as prominent in the other party who has done something comparable. This false equivalence serves to justify the worst behavior -- "Oh, everybody does it" -- thus contributing to the downward spiral of our public discourse.
Take, for example, The Washington Post's Dana Milbank. Last seen calling Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a "bitch" (and, shortly before that, calling Huffington Post reporter Nico Pitney a "dick"), Milbank took it upon himself to bemoan the loss of civility in American politics. But he didn't stop at Wilson's shouted lie, or the pastor in Arizona who says he's praying for Obama's death, or the Republican members of Congress who waved protest signs during the president's speech to Congress. No, Milbank needed an example of comparable Democratic behavior -- you know, for "balance." So he came up with two: a Democrat who "insisted on making a victory sign with his hand and waving it at Obama," and another who made what Milbank described as "a fascist salute."
"Fascist salute"? I don't even know what that means, and Milbank didn't explain. But that's a grossly inappropriate way to describe what Rep. Al Green did -- and one that conveniently plays into the right-wing memes that Obama is just like Hitler and Mao. Most of all, it demonstrates the problem with the "both sides do it" school of reporting.
But Milbank may have been outdone by the Politico, which ran an article about Republicans behaving badly -- Palin's "death panel" lie, the birther conspiracy theories, claiming Obama seeks to "indoctrinate" schoolchildren by encouraging them to study. But, Politico quickly added, it isn't just Republicans who cross the line:
Nor are Democrats strangers to having their crazy uncles take center stage. During the run-up to the Iraq war, for example, Reps. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and David Bonior (D-Mich.) famously flew to Baghdad, where McDermott asserted that he believed the president would "mislead the American public" to justify the war. The trip made it a cakewalk for critics to describe the Democratic Party as chock-a-block with traitorous radicals.
President Bush, as you may remember, did mislead the American public to justify going to war with Iraq. But to the Politico, saying so is the "crazy" statement of "traitorous radicals" -- and on the level of claiming Obama is a secret Kenyan with a plan to kill your grandmother and indoctrinate your children. According to the Politico, a member of Congress less than 1 percent of the American public could pick out of a lineup correctly saying Bush would mislead the nation about Iraq is comparable to the most recent Republican vice presidential nominee falsely suggesting Obama wants to put your loved ones to death.
To paraphrase Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction: It ain't the same ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same sport.
Now, what happens when the media refuse to call a lie a lie and insist that, no matter how badly you behave, your political adversaries have done something similar? Right: It encourages politicians to behave badly and lie. The negative consequences are mitigated, and it gets them attention.
Given the way the media covers these things, it isn't surprising that people who oppose health care reform feel comfortable lying and being disruptive. Why wouldn't they?
Jamison Foser is a Senior Fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog and research and information center based in Washington, D.C. Foser also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter and Facebook or sign up to receive his columns by email.
We all KNOW the Dems have REFUSED to add any provisions to the health care bill that REQUIRES proof of citizenship. It is amazing to me how the Dems in Congress will demand an ID at a Town Hall meeting, but refuse to require an ID to vote, or to receive Health Care. Plain and Simple, Obama was misleading the American Public on this, and Wilson called him out.
Let not forget, Pelosi called the CIA Liars, and Obama said Clinton was telling Bald face lies in the campaign. Dems have thin skin, and short memories.
Wilson was Right.
But the blood on this ...bloody shirt is merely ketchup. The same goes for the Space amendment, an equally hollow provision in the Medicaid part of the bill.
Among H.R. 3200’s shortcomings pertaining to immigration are sins of omission and shifting the detail writing to bureaucrats. This can be an expensive sin, given the bill is a thousand-plus pages and costs a trillion-plus dollars.
No where does the bill require verification of one’s eligibility on citizenship or immigrant status. Not in the Medicaid part. Not in the Health Insurance Exchange. Not in the government-run insurance option. Not in the taxpayer subsidy for health premium payment. Nowhere.
You libs. on here really need to get educated a little better on how to read and understand loop holes
We understand perfectly, and so do the fact checking groups, which deem Wilson's statement a lie. That loophole wouldn't allow anything untoward, most likely, but more importantly, it has nothing to do with Wilson's statement, which is false.
Looks like you are the one who needs the education. The white house has FINALLY agree that there needs to be verification.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/11/2065287.aspx
ONCE AGAIN WILSON WAS RIGHT!!!!!
It's called taking away the strawman argument. The White House is kicking the legs out from under your chair, and you want to claim that you WANTED to be embarrassed and flat on your back on the floor?
If I am right, then the white house fixed a real problem, and in the process, made passing the bill easier.
If you are right, then the white house truly has no spine, and you are seeing the beginning of the end of this bill.
It's apparent you need a dumbed-down explanation:
In order to get insurance, you have to PAY something that's called a premium. And by paying this thing called a premium, you get a little rectangular thing called an insurance card. And when you get a boo boo and have to go to the doctor, you must show the doctor that rectangular thing called the insurance card.
Your explanation is exactly right. It will be near impossible for illegal aliens to get government subsidies, just as the fact check sites have pointed out.
But even beyond that, Obama said that his plan will not insure illegal aliens. And it won't. Whether you think illegal aliens can cheat is a whole other matter.
You better check out factcheck, polifact, and CNN--all have ruled that Wilson was wrong, and he is. The only one misleading here are the fringe right wing.
Good grief! You should be able to call the president a liar--otherwise, we don't live in democracy. But the decorum of these speeches is you don't yell it out in the middle of a speech. It is obvious Wilson has begun to believe his own propaganda and has contempt for the pres.
Oh, by the way, in a current poll, Wilson is only 1 point ahead of his opponent, in what should be a very safe seat for him.
EXACTLY!
I am also retired Army, SSG/E-6, so my apologies for this Birther who most likely failed the TABE test during BNCOC and had to go to the ED Center in the evening to make up for it (if he or she is a Commissioned Officer, then no comment). Please be assured that there are a lot more of us progressive soldiers then you may think.
Bossblues, it is President Obama, not “so called” anything. If you are retired and not an officer, then you can call the President anything you wish, as long as you do not threaten him. But if your son is still active, remember that UCMJ Article 88 and Article 89 still apply.
Most people don't have their original birth certificate. Most people use copies given to them by the vital statistics organization in the state they were born in. That's why Obama had digitally copied. And a few groups have seen the actual piece of paper.
How come you don't know this?
How many citizens of the USA have seen your original birth certificate? Do you show it to everyone you know, or only the people who had to document who you were? Obama has done that. He did that when he got a passport. He has shown it to FactCheck.org and other groups too. It has been seen. But somehow, you don't know this, yet you think you should be a source for info on this subject? Geez Louise.
Let it Go!!!!
2. Requires That If One Family Member Is Covered, All Members Covered: Another provision states that if one member of a family is afforded coverage all members would have coverage, thereby creating another loophole to give taxpayer-subsidized health care to illegal aliens. If a child of illegal aliens is born in the United States, then the entire family becomes eligible for coverage (Page 133).
3. Requires Free Translation Services: Sections 1222 of the bill will provide free translation services and interpreters to those who are not proficient inRead More
the media always, always goes along with the meme the Republicans are promoting, and never ever goes after the core amoral actions of the Republicans and those who have been looting this country for the last 30-40 years.
a consistent and relentless and detailed account of how and what the Republicans have done with their insatiable greed for power and control. and this press exposure has to be continual to counter the endless lies that have gone unquestioned and accepted as true.
also why doesn't someone ever expose the reasons why the Republicans can continually control the "conversation." never holding Democrats to the fire or vote them out... for a Republican whom we know is nothing but a liar, thief and amoral member of the Looters.
Democrats can't be expected to hold the Republicans actions to account. the Democrats aren't even held up as accountable. Watching Democrats waffle is one reason the Rebublicans get away with the looting and pillaging of the last 35 40 years. Democrats are part and parcel of the scam going on.
without someone standing up and to the Republicans and Democrats, which used to be the Press' duties before The Village bought the Media out, America hurries on its' way to a 3rd world status.
being tolerant of the Republican lies, greed only abets and encourage the amoral behavior of the "lord of the flies" running our government/society/world.
To you right-wingers: It's not that I have some thing in my brain telling me that the person lying (if there is one) must be a Conservative. It's just that the statistics point to that conclusion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/12/us/12medicaid.html
To participate in the health care reform laid out they intend to expand Medicaid for the lowest income "citizens" and by enrolling in Medicaid, proof of citizenship is required, these same requirements would apply to enrolling in the health care exchange.
I watched the debate/discussion on C-Span while Henry Waxman's committee was working on HR3200. They felt it was redundant to reaffirm the proof of citizenship since there is already legislation in effect that applies to that issue.
Those opposed to reform will latch onto anything.
You know, these bills, (there are 5 of them) are NOT final by any means, there are still a lot of areas that will need clarification. They will mark up ideas from ALL the proposed bills to craft the final bill.
Reform has to start somewhere, and fixing/tweaking as time goes on...even after we have a final bill, will need to be done. No bill will be perfect, but laws can be rewritten/amended. Let's at least get started.