Despite warning that any "gaffe" by Obama on his trip could be disastrous, nets' evening news broadcasts ignored McCain misstatements in same period
SUMMARY: Despite media figures from the three broadcast networks asserting that because of the extensive media presence on his trip to the Middle East and Europe, any "mistake," "gaffe," or "misstatement" by Sen. Barack Obama would be amplified and could have vast negative consequences, none of the networks' evening news programs has reported on Sen. John McCain's recent misstatements regarding a nonexistent Iraq-Pakistan border and the timing of the Anbar Awakening.
None of the three broadcast networks' evening news programs -- ABC's World News with Charles Gibson, the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, and NBC's Nightly News with Brian Williams -- has reported on Sen. John McCain's recent misstatements regarding a nonexistent Iraq-Pakistan border and the timing of the Anbar Awakening. In contrast with the networks' ignoring McCain's misstatements in their nightly news broadcasts, both of which have been made during Sen. Barack Obama's trip abroad, media figures from each network warned of what they said would be the great impact of any "mistake," "gaffe," or "misstatement" by Obama during his trip.
For instance:
- In advance of Obama's trip, ABC News chief Washington correspondent George Stephanopoulos said during the July 18 edition of ABC News' Good Morning America that in his trip Obama has "got to show he can do the job. And above all ... not make any mistakes on this trip. A gaffe could be a killer for Obama." Stephanopoulos went on to say that the "McCain campaign is very frustrated by this" because "[a]ll three evening news anchors going over to -- on this foreign soil with Barack Obama." He added, "I think they will look to take quick hits every day and, of course, pounce on any mistake that Barack Obama makes. That would be the big opening for the McCain campaign."
- On the July 18 edition of the CBS Evening News, senior political correspondent Jeff Greenfield said that the "saturation coverage" of Obama's trip "has already led the conservative blogosphere to offer blistering critiques of a liberal media slavishly treating Obama as a pop star, but of course, Katie [Couric], the sheer presence of media in no way guarantees favorable coverage. In some ways, it makes the possibility of a misstep that much more dangerous." In response to anchor Katie Couric's question, "What do you think is the biggest potential landmine for him," Greenfield responded: "You know, I think it's everything from an untoward photo opportunity -- [former Democratic presidential candidate Michael] Dukakis in a tank -- to a misstatement that makes it seem to critics that he really does not know the nature of the terrain that he's -- that he's talking about."
- NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell said that Obama ran the "risk of making a mistake in a very high-profile trip," during the July 18 broadcast of MSNBC's Morning Joe. David Gregory, NBC News chief White House correspondent and host of MSNBC's Race to the White House, teased a discussion on the July 17 edition of his MSNBC show by stating: "Next up, Obama studying the script for his world stage debut next week. He's expected to stick closely to campaign talking points to avoid a potential gaffe that, as we say, could be heard around the world."
Notwithstanding the importance they attached to any potential "gaffe" by Obama during his trip, the three networks have ignored two missatements by McCain in the same time period. None of the networks has reported during its evening news program that in an interview with Couric, McCain falsely claimed that the 2007 troop surge "began the Anbar Awakening." As Media Matters for America has documented, the Anbar Awakening reportedly began in September 2006, months before the surge was even announced. Indeed, as blogger Jed Lewison noted, in the March-April 2008 issue of Military Review, Col. Sean B. MacFarland -- who McCain said "was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks" -- and Maj. Niel Smith wrote: "The 'Anbar Awakening' of Sunni tribal leaders and their supporters that began in September 2006 near Ramadi seemed to come out of nowhere." President Bush announced the surge on January 10, 2007, asserting in an address that he had "committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq."
In the case of CBS News, rather than airing McCain's falsehood in response to Couric's question on Obama's statements regarding "increased security in Iraq," CBS cut out the falsehood completely and instead aired comments by McCain that were spliced together from three separate statements he gave during the interview, one of which was in response to a different question. Couric gave no indication that these comments had been edited in any manner, nor did she otherwise note McCain's falsehood. In a statement reported in The Washington Post on July 24, CBS News acknowledged it erred, but maintained, falsely, that the video as aired did not misrepresent McCain's comments.
In addition, while being interviewed on the July 21 broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America, McCain referred to "the Iraq-Pakistan border" -- which does not exist -- while discussing the ongoing war in Afghanistan. As Media Matters noted, host Diane Sawyer did not correct McCain's statement or otherwise point out that Iraq and Pakistan do not share a border. The ABC News political newsletter The Note stated of McCain's "Iraq-Pakistan border" comment: "[I]t was McCain who owns the first big gaffe of the trip," referring to Obama's trip to the Middle East and Europe. But none of the three networks -- including ABC -- reported on the misstatement during its evening broadcast.
From July 18 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI (co-host): Let's talk about Barack Obama's trip overall.
MITCHELL: My pleasure.
BRZEZINSKI: What are the risks that he faces politically along the way here?
MITCHELL: Well, first of all, the risk of making a mistake in a very high-profile trip. Also, the risk of getting involved in Middle East diplomacy.
From the July 18 edition of the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric:
GREENFIELD: The second part of Obama's trip will be a campaign-funded visit to Europe and the Middle East. He'll meet with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, walking a fragile diplomatic tightrope.
JOE TRIPPI (CBS News political analyst) [video clip]: This is a high-stakes game for Obama. He doesn't want to make any mistakes. Certainly if he does make one, make a statement that causes a problem, it'll be a huge one.
GREENFIELD: But with voters concerned about the freshman senator's foreign policy and national security experience, Obama has little choice but to take the overseas gamble to shore up his credentials. For its part, the McCain camp was on the attack with a new ad.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE [video clip]: He hasn't been to Iraq in years. now Obama is changing to help himself become president.
GREENFIELD: There's little question that throughout this trip, Senator Obama will be walking a fine line.
TRIPPI [video clip]: You want to look presidential, but you don't want to look like you're president. That could be presumptuous and it could backfire here in -- here with the electorate.
GREENFIELD: This saturation coverage has already led the conservative blogosphere to offer blistering critiques of a liberal media slavishly treating Obama as a pop star, but of course, Katie, the sheer presence of media in no way guarantees favorable coverage. In some ways, it makes the possibility of a misstep that much more dangerous.
COURIC: Of course, he does, as you mention, have to walk some tightropes. What do you think is the biggest potential landmine for him?
GREENFIELD: You know, I think it's everything from a -- an untoward photo opportunity -- Dukakis in a tank -- to a misstatement that makes it seem to critics that he really does not know the nature of the terrain that he's -- that he's talking about.
COURIC: And while the political benefits are -- are many, i.e., you know, visuals of him appearing statesmanlike with a variety of world leaders, can a single trip wipe out the perception in the minds of some that he lacks the credentials in foreign policy?
GREENFIELD: Well, assuming he doesn't come back with a Mideast peace plan that all -- everybody signs on to, which is unlikely, no, but it can neutralize the fears. He doesn't have to equal McCain in that stature; he just has to make voters seem like he's OK, he knows what he's talking about.
From the July 18 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:
ROBIN ROBERTS (news anchor): Well, how is he going to kind of change the perception out there? Because our latest poll shows that most Americans, even most Democrats, say that Senator John McCain would be a good commander-in-chief of the military. Fewer than half of those polled feel that way about Obama. So, what does he need to do on this trip to change that?
STEPHANOPOULOS: He's got to show he can do the job, and above all, Robin, not make any mistakes on this trip. A gaffe could be a killer for Barack Obama. In Iraq, he's got a special problem. As Martha hinted at just a couple of minutes ago, he is going to be talking to commanders who disagree with the timeline he's set out for Iraq.
And he -- somehow, he's got to find a way to show that he's listening to the commanders but is not giving up on his principles. That's going to be difficulty number one. Number two, in Israel, he'll face this tricky thicket of -- of questions about the Middle East peace process. Many presidential candidates have made mistakes on -- on that before. He's going to have to avoid that. In Europe, it's slightly different. In Europe, he -- he's -- he's facing a situation where he does have an advantage on foreign policy, improving America's image in the world. And somehow, he's got to express the aspirations for the United States, the aspirations of an Obama policy without appearing to criticize President Bush overseas.
ROBERTS: And finally, how does McCain counter all of this attention that Obama is going to be receiving on this trip?
STEPHANOPOULOS: The McCain campaign is very frustrated by this, as you know. All three evening news anchors going over to -- on this foreign soil with Barack Obama. They know he's gonna get a lot of attention. I think they will look to take quick hits every day and, of course, pounce on any mistake that Barack Obama makes. That would be the big opening for the McCain campaign.
ROBERTS: All right, George, thank you as always for "The Bottom Line," and have a good weekend.
From the July 17 edition of MSNBC's Race for the White House:
DAVID GREGORY (host): All right. Next up, Obama studying the script for his world stage debut next week. He's expected to stick closely to campaign talking points to avoid a potential gaffe that, as we say, could be heard round the world. The big challenge is meeting with General Petraeus.















1. The media isn't "ignoring" McCain's "gaffes." They are simply over-occupied with giving Obama as much glowing coverage as they can. They barely even cover McCain at all! At a recent McCain stop in New Hampshire, there was ONE photographer there!
2. MM has made a BIG error about Al Anbar. They are "ignorant" and "don't know what they're talking about"!
Once again, Shoes slithers in, posts some crap that has NOTHING TO DO with the subject at hand, and then high-tails it out of here. What's worse, she included a link to some worthless "Olmermann Watch" site.
We know you have a problem with reading comprehension and recognizing the difference between facts and right-wing propaganda, Shoes. You've shown that time and time again. You don't have to keep demonstrating your ignorance for all to see.
Talk about posting crap, better look in the mirror wzwriter.
Shoes post was on topic, you just don't like what he or she has to say. The media has been reporting McCain's gaffes, but they might not be loud enough for you since they are being drowned out by the excessive slobbering over BHO.
When it comes to ignorance, you are at the top of that list.
Hey Taz,
What does Shoes' post about Olbermann have to do with this particular subject again?
MMFA does have a point here. McCain's missteps largely go uncovered, that appears to be the case.
But it is curious the way the "media", generally speaking, is covering Obama. It's almost like a love/hate relationship. There is no doubt that he is a media darling and has been afforded this "rock star" type treatment throughout the campaign. However, as much as the media fawns over him, they won't let him get too "big", they prop him up, and then seem to enjoy taking shots at him to knock him down a peg or two. Put him on their pedestal just so they can aim at him more successfully, or something like that.
As arrogant and full of themselves as our "media" is these days, they can't let someone get too far out ahead of them - their collective egos won't allow it.
Well said, Tommy.
Beyond the argument about conservative or liberal bias is the gospel truth about the motives and morals of the media. By and large, their main goal in life is promoting themselves.
Personal destruction is what drives them...after all...no one ever gets promoted or famous by writing nice, factual stories. You can bet that many of Obama's current supporters in the media are salivating at the day when they might be the one to bring him down.
Clowns to the left and jokers to the right...
Hey Tommy & Wesley, I was on the road this morning , & heard a little of El Rushbo, and , strangely enough,he's on the same page with you, regarding the idea of the medias competitive nature with those they're supposedly promoting.
I say strangely enough, because I know none of you conservatives listen to the most popular conservative talk show host in the country. ;0)
Nice jab Col...but I'm an unabashed fan and regular listener for 19 years...and Rush and I have held this same position on the media for many of those years.
Your scoop on Rush's show today is old news.
Aw, Wes, have a sense of humor.
I do stand corrected and apologize.There have been so many conservative posters here that insist they never listen to Rush, but magically have the exact same thoughts on the same day, I just unfairly lumped you in with them.
Now, about that agreeing with Rush for a couple of decades...are you also a regular 3 card monte player?
It doesn't seem that the media coverage of Obama is ingrained with the Republican framing the way it was in those previous elections, when the background was always "Gore is a liar" or "Kerry is a flip-flopper."
Not that there hasn't been an effort, notably by Chris Matthews, to promote the "Obama is not one of us" meme. It just hasn't stuck.
As arrogant and full of themselves as our "media" is these days, they can't let someone get too far out ahead of them - their collective egos won't allow it.
I still wonder why they can't bring themselves to report the glaringly obvious fact that McCain simply has no clue what he's talking about. Middle East border confusion, repeatedly talking about non-existent countries, no consistent understanding of what the so-called Surge is, what it did and when it started. I mean really, the guy's lost his bearings. Why can't media report on McCain's documented ineptitude?
There is no doubt that he is a media darling and has been afforded this "rock star" type treatment throughout the campaign.
Nonsense.
Not only do I doubt that, I refute it utterly. The web is FULL of examples of the media not only giving McCain a pass, but actively hounding Obama on the very same issues. One has but to look around with even a tiny bit of objectivity.
Obama's supporters may treat him like a "rock star," but the media LOVES McCain and will cover for him and defend him to the death.
Are you being serious?
The media has been slobbering and fawning over BHO since January. If you can't see that, it's because you're blinded by your own bias.
Yeah, Clams. Take Taz as an example of how clear one's perspective can be without bias. Maybe THEN you'll see how the media has been "slobbering" and "fawning" over Barrack Hussein Obama - friend of Weather Underground radical William Ayers, follower of Rev. Wright, and former madrassa student - since January. Hell, they haven't spread one single original rumor about him in 6 monts.
How are they supposed to come up with new stuff when the inexperienced empty suit hasn't accomplished anything? And now, back to the unbiased Taz providing those examples of the slobbering. I'm guessing he may go back to the Chris Matthews tingly leg thing from several months ago, as many of his am radio puppet masters are still playing that sound bite* as an example of the daily slobbering.
* that's "audio sound bite" to you dittoheads.
Oh, come on Col. I realize that hambaugh and linnety are extraordinarily talented journalists, so I don't expect the MSM to come up with a rumor a week, like them. But really, is a mere one or two in 6 months so hard to ask for? I mean, even Kerry "looked" french. Hell, Barry IS black. Are you implying that they can't come up with something from such an obvious fault?
Get real...
Maybe it's vacation time. For us ! Har.
No, he's actually an OK guy on his good days.He can get a little snappy when cornered, like even the best pup.
Yeah, media is all over McCain with critical coverage...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXjFK4vcHY8
And fawning all over Obama...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms
It's just the way it is.
Hey Taz,
Can you provide some examples of "slobbering" and "fawning"?
I mostly agree with your observation. However, it is limited to 2008 Presidential race only. I could not think of a similar pattern in 2000, 2004.
My thinking is that the 'media' would want ANY election to go to the haywire so they can make money. And they will frame the canidates / cover the news to fit that goal.
An inconsequential typo. The media will be in ecstasy whether it goes to the wire, or goes haywire.
I kind of like "goes to the haywire"...
-- As arrogant and full of themselves as our "media" is these days -- Tommy
To validate your comment...this from Jake Tapper-ABC on the Obama campaign trail:
-- Inside, the plane has been redesigned to separate the senator and his staff from us lowly reporters --
I suggest that Obama may not have removed them from the classroom and made them stand in the hall if they had been doing their jobs...objectively reporting the campaign news...instead of scurrying around like cockroaches...eavesdropping for sound bites that they could distort...to make a name for themselves.
Arrogant? Damn skippy!
Hey Wes,
Isn't Jake the same clown that tried to pin Obama as a liar for not coming forth and telling the public that he had a cigarette once in awhile?
I think Jake may be throwing a little tantrum and whining like us liberals do (according to Tommy).
Skep,
I'll just leave it at this...Tapper's whining like a spoiled egotistical media whiner...
A really obvious posting, but good work, MMFA. Obama was warned by the MSM to watch out for everything-- all weekend-- but McCain got a free pass about his nutty claims. The rules are different.
And McCain's blatant 'working the refs' tactic of intimidating the media about Obama coverage-- to make it even more unbalanced than it already is-- may bear fruit, unfortunately.
The MSM harasses Democrats and they go further to take their story cues from Republican red-meat ideologues.* The Dems are always placed on the defensive, and the Repubs set the agenda, always. Until this changes, it's going to be difficult for Obama to score lasting points anywhere.
* Just today, Andrea Mitchell asked John Kerrey if he thinks that "Americans are over their dislike of Europe and everything European." Where did that nutty, bigoted idea come from?
The media is ignoring McCain and scrutinizing Obama. It is certainly good for McCain that he is being ignored since he comes across badly everytime he either shows his face or opens his mouth. The claims by the Republicans that the media favors Obama is totally false.
However, fortunately Obama has been self confident and error free as of late.
His trip abroad seems to be helping him a lot.
His handlers are doing a very good protecting him from a hostile media.
Funniest thing I heard tonight, on NBC, and I think attributed to McCain spokespeople, was that the reason for all of his bloopers is his "unscripted style" and "constant attention from the media".
Considering Grampy mostly reads talking points, and surrenders on impromptu questions, and he's constantly whining about the lack of media coverage, I'd call that excuse an 0 for 2.
mccain said the "situation on the iraq-pakistan border". if he meant to say the iran-pakistan border, i did not know there was a situation there. there is a "situation" on the afghanistan-pakistan border with taliban crossing back and forth, but that really has nothing to do with iraq. hard to say what he was thinking. the countries are far apart.
Another point on this: CBS lied. In your face, through its teeth, down and dirty lied. It took what McCain said, removed the part that made him look bad, and strung together three clips to make it look like he said something else.
That is no "error," it is a simple, direct, bold-faced lie. Not a mistake and not an accident, as it had to have been done consciously and deliberately. The corporate attempt to dismiss it as an "error" as if it was some slip of the tongue is bogus.
It was a lie and should be labeled as such.
Right! And they had the bleeping gaul to sight time constraints as to why they made their little "mistake". Please. Getting it so wrong took far more time than what the truth would have taken.
SIMPLE EXPLANATION: It's not news when John McCain commits a gaffe. Dog bites man... ;>)
SIMPLE EXPLANATION: It's not news when John McCain commits a gaffe. Dog bites man... ;>)
Besides, if they reported every gaffe or falsehood Gramps McCain utterred, the folks on the right would accuse the media of attacking Gramps because of his age...
The New York Times slams Obama's speech prominently on its front page this morning.
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2008/07/25/pageone/scan/index.html[/url]
The New York Times slams Obama's speech
No, it doesn't. Other than the rather flip phrase "tone poem" and the statement that it was "vague" on issues separating the US from Europe, the article didn't characterize the speech at all. And even the latter comment was related to the overall theme of the article, which was that of a mixed response among European governments to the question of how much of a change from current policy an Obama presidency would represent on those same issues.
Hey, big deal that he doesn't know there was a conflict in Afghanistan in Oct. 2001 or anything about that weirdo Anbar Awakening. He's running for president of the UNITED STATES not the president of the Iraq-Pakistan border.