Unedited Platform for Environmental Extremist
Today's Earth Watch
For the NBC Today show's recent
three-part "Earth Watch" series on the environment, producers
went beyond their regular stable of correspondents to "put the
world's environmental crisis in perspective." Whose perspective?
Introducing the series, Jane Pauley explained "Our guide is Paul
Ehrlich, the distinguished Stanford University biologist." Today
gave Ehrlich a production and travel budget as well as free air time on
three consecutive mornings starting May 3 to present his unique
diagnosis of the world's problems.
Ehrlich's claim to fame is his 1968 book The
Population Bomb, which began: "The battle to feed all humanity
is over. In the 1970's the world will undergo famines--hundreds of
millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash
programs embarked upon now."
Ehrlich saw widespread famine as part of
the solution to his theories of overpopulation. In what he called a
"cheerful scenario," the U.S. government would decide in 1974
it would no longer send food to countries considered "beyond
hope." Famine and food riots would ensue until 1985, "when it
is calculated the major die-back will be over," that is, when
enough millions have died to reduce Earth's population to some
arbitrarily acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people.
The Today reports were about as
"cheerful," and Ehrlich's predictions as pessimistic about the
coming decade. "We're going to see massive extinction," he
warned, not to mention drought, erosion, and famine. Global warming is
going to melt the polar ice caps, causing a flood in which "we
could expect to lose all of Florida, Washington D.C., and the Los
Angeles basin...we'll be in rising waters with no ark in sight."
Thus, industrial nations will have to abandon their wasteful lifestyles
using gas and electricity or risk global cataclysm. "Perhaps the
most explosive social problem of the next 50 years will be that the
ecosystems of the world cannot support the spread of the American
lifestyle to the Third World or even to the next generation of
Ehrlich's sorry record of failed
predictions and dire prescriptions was challenged by economist Julian
Simon's 1981 book, The Ultimate Resource. Simon argued that
resources are getting less scarce, that pollution and famine are
decreasing as the food supply increases, and that population growth has
long- term benefits. But Simon, who teaches economics at the University
of Maryland at College Park, just a few miles from the studios and
cameras of NBC's Washing-ton bureau, was never contacted by the network.
Jackson's Flack Bites Back.
Jesse Jackson delivered "constant unwarranted abuse" to his
campaign workers, including purposefully stepping on their feet to stop
them from talking, ABC News producer turned Jackson Press Secretary
Elizabeth Colton claims in her new book. In the just released The
Jackson Phenomenon: The Man, the Power, the Message, Colton
explains, "I had been forewarned by many" about Jackson's
disrespect for his staff, but took the job because "I had believed
in his message and the historic importance of his campaign."
Colton brought plenty of media experience
to the position she began in January 1988: She was an ABC News producer
in the early 1980's and again before jumping to the campaign staff. In
between she worked for Newsweek as a Middle East correspondent
and as a National Public Radio reporter. Colton relinquished her press
relations duties in April 1988 when Jackson "didn't think he needed
any help" since "the media were eating out of his hand."
Chafee Again. Michael
Healy left the office of Rhode Island Senator John Chafee in 1986 to
become a political researcher for the CBS News Election Survey Unit.
Now, he's back with the liberal Republican as a Legislative Assistant.
Writing Right. Bill
McGurn, Deputy Editorial Page Editor for the Asian edition of The
Wall Street Journal for the past three years, is the new Washington
Editor for the conservative National Review magazine. McGurn,
who previously wrote for the Journal's European edition and The
American Spectator, replaced John McLaughlin.
McNamara Resigns from Post.
Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense under Presidents Kennedy and
Johnson resigned from the board of The Washington Post Company during
its May 11 annual meeting. McNamara had reached the Post Company's
mandatory retirement age of 70.
On Kohl's Dole. Newly
elected Senator Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat, has hired former
Associated Press reporter Bill Ritz as his Communications Director. Ritz
covered the 1972 Olympics in Munich for the wire service according to
the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. He joined the Denver
Post in 1978 where he remained an investigative reporter until
Taking the Prosecutor's Side.
Washington Times reporter Mary Belcher has been covering
independent counsel Lawrence Walsh's prosecution of Oliver North. Now,
she's taken a side. Belcher has decided to work for Walsh. On June 19
Belcher becomes the Public Information Officer for the Office of the
She succeeds James Weighart, Editor of
the New York Daily News before he put in a brief 1986 stint as
Chief of Staff to Senator Ted Kennedy. This Fall Weighart takes over the
Journalism Department at Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant.
Janet Cooke Award
SALUTING SOCIALIZED MEDICINE
To help attract viewers to third-ranked NBC
Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, news executives exploited concerns
about health care to boost their ratings. Beginning May 1, NBC News
aired "America's Vital Signs," an "unprecedented
month-long report on the nation's health" which would probe
The series did not help NBC Nightly
News' ratings, but it did give some insight into how the network
would solve what it called "America's severely strained health-care
system." The solution, according to reporter Fred Briggs, is a form
of socialized health care similar to Canada's. Briggs' May 5 Nightly
News report earns the June Janet Cooke Award.
Even before the Briggs report, it was
obvious where NBC News was heading. In a pre-report "teaser,"
anchor Tom Brokaw stated: "And on 'Vital Signs' tonight, Fred
Briggs compares American health care with the Canadian system. The
differences just across the border are dramatic, cradle to grave."
Introducing the report, Brokaw showed no
less enthusiasm: "Throughout this first week on 'America's Vital
Signs,' we have seen the way that high medical costs are putting
tremendous strain on American patients and American hospitals alike. One
factor: insurance. Thirty-seven million Americans have no insurance at
all. Many health experts believe that some sort of universal health
insurance is the answer. The problem: how to pay for it. Well, you don't
have to look far to see one system that seems to work well. NBC's Fred
Briggs tonight on the Canadian way."
Briggs spent 90 percent of his report
praising the Canadian government health system. He began: "When a
baby is born in Canada it's given a birth-right denied to U.S. citizens
-- free health care, a lifetime of preventive and corrective medicine
without ever getting a bill from a doctor or a hospital."
Admiring the system, he continued:
"Remarkably, most procedures cost from one-half to one-sixth of
what would be charged in the United States." But do Canadians get
lower costs and universal coverage by forfeiting high-tech equipment and
quality health care? Briggs did weigh in with Canada's shortcomings:
"There is a negative side to such cost control. Some doctors would
like to see more high tech diagnostic equipment in hospitals and, above
all, more beds. Many patients are put on waiting lists for surgery not
considered to be urgent. And a few have died waiting for it." But
he stopped there -- with just 25 seconds of the 4:15 report.
As Michael Walker, Executive Director of
The Fraser Institute in Vancouver, British Columbia, points out in Health
Management Quarterly (First Quarter 1989): "Canada's
health-care costs may actually be altering the quality of health care
provided." Briggs only alluded to problems with supplies of
diagnostic equipment, but Walker spells it out. In Seattle, Washington,
17 CAT scanners are functioning. That's more than the whole province of
British Columbia, claims Walker. In Vancouver, a city the size of
Seattle, there are only seven CAT scanners. In all of Newfoundland, with
a population of 570,000, there is only one functioning CAT scanner.
The waiting lists that Briggs' passed
over so quickly are indeed frightening. According to Walker's Institute,
urgent pap smears in Newfoundland currently take two months, sometimes
up to five months. Mammograms take two and one half months; bone scans
one and one-half months. Simple neurological procedures take up to five
months. Country-wide, says Walker, heart patients wait months for
surgery. In British Columbia, there is an average four week waiting time
for elective and urgent general surgery.
Market forces ensure timely, quality
health care in the United States; given caps on health spending, there
seems no end in sight in Canada to waiting lists and inferior treatment.
Still, Briggs was unabashedly supportive of the Canadian system in his
conclusion: "In Canada, the young can grow old knowing injury or
disease will never cripple them financially. Everyone is covered by a
system that is more than a safety net, it's a security blanket."
Contacted by MediaWatch,
Briggs defended his story as fair and balanced, but revealed he held a
strong view: "You're coming from the standpoint that their system
is a total failure. I totally disagree with that. I think it's a very
successful system. And frankly I think it's a very civilized
As for critics of the system, Briggs
dismissed Walker, saying: "I don't think he carries very much
weight." Briggs denied his conclusion called for a Canadian-style
health system for the United States: "I was not endorsing it. I'm
telling you how Canadians feel about it. Polls reinforce that." He
did concede that those who can afford it come to the U.S. for health
care. Perhaps that is more indicative than any statistic, any poll.
Not Right to Blame Wright.
Charges of ethical misconduct led House Majority Whip Tony Coelho and
Speaker Jim Wright to resign near the end of May. Who is to blame for
the fact "the Washington atmosphere has turned as bitter as anyone
can remember," as CBS anchor Bob Schieffer put it during the
Memorial Day Evening News? Could it be the Democrats whose
continual attacks drove Richard Allen, Ray Donovan and Ed Meese from
office? Or kept Robert Bork off the Supreme Court? Of course not. CBS
reporter Eric Engberg went all the way back to 1988 to find the culprit:
"It evolved from a nasty presidential campaign that featured the
GOP's famous Willie Horton ad."
Pious Peter. How do
major media figures spend their time off? ABC's Peter Jennings goes to
church. On April 30, Jennings preached at the groundbreaking ceremony
for the new Diocesan Center for the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland.
Jennings used the opportunity to urge the flock to meet such challenges
as the homeless, the environment, and AIDS. "We must find the
ingredients to do more, much more."
According to the Baltimore Sun,
Jennings "was particularly critical of the United States for
spending too much on defense and comparatively little on the nation's
many other serious problems. He noted, for instance, that Congress was
considering a $300 billion defense appropriation request, but said
agencies responsible for environmental protection, housing or schools
received only a fraction of that amount."
Forcing Family Planning? CBS
correspondent Susan Spencer joined Dan Rather in insisting China's
"very future may depend" on the success of state-imposed
family planning. Spencer outlined China's infamous "one-child"
policy, conceding that couples who violate the policy by becoming
pregnant a second time are threatened with loss of income or housing,
but adding "experts say reports of actual forced abortions are rare
Rare? Last November 24, CBS News reporter
John Sheahan told Evening News viewers "the government
does admit that some women have been forced to have abortions."
Sheahan's expert from the U.S. Census Bureau said: "China's
national government requires the local cadres to succeed in family
planning, and therefore the cadres cannot get away with allowing all the
unauthorized births to take place."
"To the American Indian, Leonard Peltier is their Nelson
Mandela," said CBS West 57th correspondent Steve Kroft
leading off the April 28 show. Peltier, a South Dakota Sioux Indian
convicted of the murder of two FBI agents in 1976, is "the man the
vast Soviet propaganda machine believes to be the best living example of
American injustice." So, Kroft told viewers "In the spirit of
glasnost, we thought it was time someone examined his case."
Kroft's entire report built support for
the Soviet contention, eloquently referring to Peltier as a political
prisoner, one of the "ultimate symbols of governments gone astray:
men or women with dangerous or unpopular ideas who may have been
unfairly tried and imprisoned for who they are and what they believe,
and not necessarily for the crimes they're supposed to have
Kroft said "Americans are used to
looking abroad for them [political prisoners], though much of the world
believes they exist right here." Much of the world may fall for
Soviet propaganda, but that doesn't mean CBS should help legitimize it.
NATO Peace. The West
Germans aren't the only ones lulled into complacency by Soviet
"peace initiatives." Two network reporters have the same
ideas. The fact that the East bloc retains the world's largest defense
establishment makes no difference to them.
On April 20, ABC 's Bob Zelnick cheerily
reported, "after 40 years of dealing with the Soviet military
threat, NATO must now come to grips with the idea of peace."
NBC's Arthur Kent used the strategy of
the unnamed critic to attack the U.S. policy of non-negotiation on
short-range missiles. "There have been suggestions," he
reported on April 30, "that President Bush could help [prevent
squabbling in NATO] by leading the search for compromise rather than
following the Thatcher hard line."
Church of Arms Control.
Gorbachev's had a hard time getting Bush to buy his arms control
proposals, but Time magazine was not such a hard sell. Senior
Writer George Church attacked Bush in the May 15 issue, condemning him
as "recklessly timid, unwilling to respond with the imagination and
articulation that the situation requires." The real danger is not
the "highly overrated" forces of the Warsaw Pact, he wrote,
but "that the U.S., in taking a purely reactive attitude, will
undermine its own interests by continuing to leave all the initiatives
to Gorbachev." Church concluded that "a smiling Soviet leader
who speaks of peace and fellowship poses a greater challenge to U.S.
leadership than a rocket-rattling blusterer. George Bush has not yet
figured that out."
"Tactical nuclear weapons have never
made sense," Time's D.C. Bureau Chief Strobe Talbott
proclaimed in a commentary for the same issue. Denouncing "the dark
faith" of "the NATO catechism," Talbott wrote that
"Once the Bush Administration stops cursing Kohl under its breath,
it will probably do what he is asking... Too bad the U.S. will have been
dragged kicking and screaming into a decision that it should have
reached on its own."
Faw's Afghan Flaws. CBS
News reporter Bob Faw blames the ongoing war in Afghanistan not on the
Soviets who invaded, but on the U.S. Reporting from Kabul May 1, Faw
claimed: "With Soviet troops now withdrawn, many here blame the
slaughter on the U.S. In the market place and in the mosques, 'Why,'
they ask, 'is the U.S. still providing guerrillas with weapons which
prolong the war?'" Faw charged that "as rockets made in the
USA keep falling here... resentment towards the United States
grows." Describing the anti-communist mujahedeen, Faw said
"they are regarded by some of their countrymen as bloodthirsty
bandits." Faw concluded, "For many here, what is bleeding now
is America's image."
But on May 7, New York Times
reporter Donatella Lorch, after spending a week under cover in Kabul,
found "the rebels say an increasing number of Kabul residents are
turning to the under-ground." In contrast to Faw's anti-U.S.
sources, Lorch quoted an Afghan woman who placed blame differently.
"The communists have torn our families to pieces," she said.
According to Lorch, the image of the mujahedeen as "bloodthirsty
extremists" is "a description the [communist] government has
emphasized." So did CBS.
Blame Anything But Communism.
What's behind China's abysmal standard of living? Dan Rather had two
answers. On the May 16 Evening News, he said, "it is the
size of China that's such a barrier for economic reform. That, and
cultural traditions bred through the centuries."
The next night, communism again escaped
blame. Rather reported "one big problem that underlies everything
else here in China," is "a population of more than a
billion." From the Forbidden City, Rather announced, "Today's
communist rulers know there's no way to meet the rising expectations of
a billion Chinese outside these walls until and unless the population
time bomb is somehow defused."
Makes you wonder: With reports like
these, why did the Chinese authorities bother to censor CBS?
Thrashing Thatcher. With
Reagan out of office, some reporters think his friend Margaret Thatcher
should go, too. During a May 3 story on Thatcher's ten years as Prime
Minister, NBC's Peter Kent charged that "Thatcher has ruthlessly
applied her conservative solutions."
ABC's John Laurence agreed during World
News Tonight the same evening, noting "Mrs. Thatcher has
imposed her conservative convictions on British society" and
alleged that in doing so "she converted 10 Downing Street into
what's been described as an elective dictatorship." Laurence
supported his assertion by then putting on Anthony Sampson, who said
Thatcher's problem washer "astonishing autocracy."
Laurence failed to mention Sampson's
involvement in the leftist Social Democratic Party and that his book, The
Changing Anatomy of Britain, has been described as "highly
authoritative" by Soviet commentator Nikolai Gorshkov. And neither
report mentioned Thatcher's overwhelming re-election victories, which
allowed her to undertake those "ruthless" conservative
Summer Camp Kemp. Jack
Kemp's "sturdy forehead" of conservative doctrine needs a slap
from "the 2-by-4 of intractable reality," New York Times correspondent
James Traub concluded in a profile of the HUD Secretary in the May 7 Times
Magazine. "There was something potentially ludicrous in this
voyage to the heart of inner-city misery by the new HUD Secretary,"
Traub asserted, "with his earnest manner and polystyrene hair, his
sunny, summer- camp enthusiasm and his devout faith in free enterprise.
It looked like a cartoon...It's been a long time, as Kemp himself
acknowledges, since the Republicans 'got real' about poverty."
Traub said Kemp wanted to change
radically "the Reagan era thesis of neglect and defunding,"
but "the question housing professionals ask is: Will Jack Kemp
accept that the reality of the situation, his free-enterprise model
notwithstanding, demands federal spending, not only to stimulate new
construction but also to modernize public housing and provide increased
housing subsidies to the poor?"
Enberg's Iran Contra Complex.
On May 4, the day the verdict on Oliver North was handed down, CBS News
correspondent Eric Engberg engaged in a full fledged attack on the
conduct of the administration, especially President Reagan. Dan Rather
prefaced Engberg's report as an investigation of "the use of
secrecy, lying, and deception as instruments of ideology and
policy." Engberg then paraphrased unnamed "scholars,"
predicting that to avoid the same problem in the future, Presidents must
"accept the need to compromise with Congress."
Engberg insisted that "critics
remain skeptical" about Reagan's ignorance of the diversion of
funds to the Contras. Engberg's sole "critic" was liberal
Democratic consultant Clark Clifford, who asserted his experience leads
him to believe that the decision on diverting funds from the arms sales
was "not taken without authority at the highest level at the White
Garrick Throws A Curve.
At the end of the May 7 Meet the Press, NBC
"reporter" Garrick Utley used an abstract sports anecdote to
portray Oliver North as a liar and a fool. Utley recalled a briefing
session Tom Brokaw attended "several years ago" conducted by
While exhibiting evidence on the Cuban
presence in Nicaragua, Utley claimed North noted reconnaissance photos
of "baseball diamonds dotting the landscape." North went on to
say that "Cubans play baseball, Nicaraguans don't." Utley
contradicted North: "The fact is, Nicaraguans do play baseball; it
is the national sport there."
Utley used this supposed miscue to
justify a sweeping charge that North was either "deliberately
trying to mislead a journalist and through him the public or he was
ignorant of such a basic fact and therefore not fully competent to do
what he was in fact doing." The anecdote, Utley sarcastically
concluded, "is one of the best at summing up the question that runs
through the entire enterprise: Who were they trying to kid?"
Carter Rehab. He has
rehabilitated homes. He tried to rehabilitate the Panama Canal Treaty.
And now Jimmy Carter is being rehabilitated himself -- at least by ABC's
Peter Jennings, who named the former President "Person of the
Week" May 12.
Jennings began by citing Carter's life of
"distinction, considerable grace and...very strong commitment to
peace and justice." He said Carter "sets an example by rolling
up his sleeves on a regular basis, building homes for the poor;"
that is, when he's not traveling "in search of peace in the Middle
East and better ways to understand and develop the underdeveloped
The public's inability to realize
Carter's international contributions troubled Jennings: "In the
public mind, the scales were never balanced. Carter's success in foreign
affairs: peace between Egypt and Israel, renewed respect for the United
States in Latin America, have always been outweighed in the public mind
by the hostage crisis."
Were You Watching, Kathleen?
On May 12, when U.S. troops were sent to Panama to protect U.S.
interests, CBS This Morning co-anchor Kathleen Sullivan queried
National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. She asked what the Soviets
would think of U.S. actions, because "Mikhail Gorbachev, when he
was on his trip to Cuba, made gestures in pulling out of Central
America, and now we're doing the opposite." Scowcroft curtly told
Sullivan: "He didn't make any gestures in pulling out of Central
America; in fact, quite the contrary."
Sullivan ought to have known better,
since she and the rest of CBS This Morning broadcast live from
Havana during the Castro- Gorbachev summit. And even left with egg on
their faces after falsely predicting that Gorbachev would then announce
his withdrawal of aid to the Sandinista regime.
Van Sant's Louisiana Slant.
Whether it's Washington, D.C. or Baton Rouge, La., when government
spending is at issue, you can bet your last tax dollar which solution,
budget cuts or tax hikes, the media will advocate.
On the May 2 CBS Evening News,
Dan Rather reported "a new jolt today to the Louisiana state
economy...Saturday, voters of Louisiana rejected Governor Roemer's
tax-overhaul package. Today, as CBS News correspondent Peter Van Sant
reports, the people of Louisiana found out what that could cost
them." Van Sant then related how "voters resoundingly rejected
new taxes, digging Louisiana's already-troubled economy ever deeper in
debt and forcing reform-minded Gov. Buddy Roemer to scramble his way out
of a new financial crisis." Van Sant added that "the massive
cuts will be felt across virtually all income levels. The poor will see
dozens of vocational schools disappear, and several charity hospitals
that treat the penniless shut down."
On May 14, Washington Post
reporter Thomas B. Edsall concurred, writing "Were Louisiana forced
to reduce the deficit solely through program cuts, it would devastate
not only such institutions as the faltering network of public colleges
and universities and the Louisiana system of charity hospitals, but the
entire economy of the state."
A recent direct mail letter from a far-left magazine highlighted an
endorsement from NBC News Moscow Bureau Chief Bob Abernethy. "To
find in one magazine both excellent reporting and commentary, and also
deep Christian commitment, is inspiring," Abernethy oozed. "Sojourners'
ability to serve as a caring observer is a model for all of us." Sojourners
Editor Jim Wallis, who once said he hoped "more Christians will
view the world through Marxist eyes," argued in the May issue that
"because of the war" by the Contras, "justice requires
American reparations to Nicaragua."
Fire Sale. "Last
Summer's devastating forest fires focused attention on Yellowstone Park.
But environmentalists believe the greatest damage had already been done
-- by the Reagan Administration." With that opening, PBS' May 9 Frontline
kicked off an hour-long protest against the sale of federally-owned
public lands, which encompass a third of the United States.
Under Reagan, Frontline
complained, "the federal government would add fewer lands to the
national park system than any administration in history," and
"sold off more public land than any other Interior Department in
history." Selling land is more dangerous than letting it burn? It
becomes the environmentalists' version of the Brezhnev Doctrine: once
the feds have acquired public land, it must never be relinquished to
On May 18 ABC News presented its vision of the future through a one-hour
special, The Electronic Time Machine: 1939-2039. Using the 1939
World's Fair as a model for seeing into the world of 2039, Paula Zahn
promised: "You won't hear talk of ...global disaster." Really?
Co-host Forrest Sawyer soon charged that "we're forced to ask a
question we humans have never had to face before: are we going to get
there  at all?" Sawyer claimed that "2039 will be a
crowded world, the population twice what it is now and it will be
divided, the rich enjoying the advances of science, the poor struggling
As the show came to a close, Zahn and
Sawyer explained that "difficult choices" must be made. The
two reporters then proceeded to lay these choices out one by one,
supported each time by a clip of a liberal environmentalist. "The
environment," Sawyer claimed, has been "devastated by human
growth." Paul Ehrlich, a leftist professor who has made a living
threatening global disaster [see page one article], explained that the
sky is falling because "Humanity as a species is doing something
that no wise family would ever do in its economics, that is, it is
burning its capital."
Far-left activist and presidential
candidate Dr. Barry Commoner later predicted "economic collapse
long before 50 years from now" unless we stop using fossil fuels.
Sawyer, worried about the lack of family planning, said "The world
population will double by 2039 and right now 850 million do not have
enough to eat." This belief was supported by Lester Brown,
President of the Worldwatch Institute.
Zahn thought only one proposal, by
Malthusian Dr. Garrett Hardin, was "controversial." He
demanded Americans "stop sending gifts of food to a starving
country. Just grit your teeth and tell them 'you're on your own and
you've got to make your population match the carrying capacity of your
Three Sandinista Spins.
The three major networks had three different spins on Mikhail
Gorbachev's announcement that Soviet military aid would no longer go
to Nicaragua. ABC's Bob Zelnick softpedaled Soviet aid, saying U.S.
military officials are "encouraged by the fact that most of this
year's equipment has consisted of non-lethal supplies and spare parts.
The shipments this year have not included tanks, armed personnel
carriers, air defense or anti-tank guns, artillery, or
On CBS, Lesley Stahl reported "the
Pentagon today estimated the Soviet bloc has already supplied Nicaragua
with $80 million worth of military goods so far this year," and
then aired a clip of Pentagon spokesman Dan Howard explaining that this
leaves a stockpile of "150 tanks, 237 armored vehicles, 549
surface-to-air missile launchers, 772 air defense guns" and so on.
NBC's John Cochran used a number more
than four times greater than referred to by Stahl: "According to
U.S. intelligence estimates, Nicaragua has received up to $350 million
worth of military hardware and spare parts in the first four months of
this year." Noting the Bush Administration was "leery to say
the least" of Gorbachev's announcement, Cochran concluded "the
feeling around the White House is that Gorbachev has successfully sold
some snake oil to the Western news media."
REPORTING FOLLOWS MEDIA MONEY
Last month MediaWatch
published a study of the media's philanthropic foundations,
demonstrating a pattern of financial support for liberal groups. When
the foundations studied gave to political groups in the 1980s, they
allocated 89.7 percent of their donations to liberal organizations and
only 10.3 percent to conservative ones.
This month we have taken the research a
step further, using the Nexis news data retrieval system to survey all
news stories on selected political grantees from 1987 and 1988 in The
New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post.
The foundations connected to them are, respectively, the New York Times
Company Foundation, the Times Mirror Foundation and the Philip L. Graham
selected three issue areas that were supported most by media
foundations: environmental groups, judicial groups opposed to the
nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, and political think
tanks. The study found that newspapers whose foundations donate money to
a group also give that group more coverage. Think tanks that benefitted
from media funding got less ideological labeling than newspapers
connected to foundations that did not contribute.
Environmental Groups: A
good example of the differences in coverage emerged in stories on the
environment. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), a recipient of
$21,000 from the New York Times Company Foundation, had 123 mentions in The
New York Times. By comparison, non-contributing media companies
covered EDF markedly less: 70 mentions in the Los Angeles Times,
and 46 in The Washington Post. The National Audubon Society,
given $8,000 by the New York Times Company Foundation and $90,000 by
Times Mirror, was a subject of 72 stories in The New York Times
and 69 stories in the Los Angeles Times. The Philip L. Graham
Fund gave no money, and The Washington Post mentioned them in
only 27 stories. The World Wildlife Fund-Conservation Foundation, which
took in $157,000 from Times Mirror and $13,000 from The New York
Times, appeared in the Los Angeles Times on 66 occasions
and The New York Times on 61 occasions. The Graham Fund did not
contribute, and the Post included them in only 27 articles.
Bork Opponents: A second
area of marked difference in coverage was among judicial interest groups
who opposed the nomination of Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court.
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the most
active anti-Bork lobbies, took in $20,000 from the Philip L. Graham Fund
in 1987 and $4,000 from the New York Times Company Foundation over four
years. Times Mirror did not provide any financial support. In 1987 and
1988, The Lawyers Committee was a subject in 50 Washington Post
stories, 14 in The New York Times, but only 7 in the Los
The Women's Legal Defense Fund (WLDF) was
granted $30,000 by the Philip L. Graham Fund, and was mentioned in 25
stories in The Washington Post. Compare that to 16 mentions in The
New York Times, and 5 in the Los Angeles Times, which
refrained from giving. The Graham Fund has given to WLDF's domestic
violence project in Washington and not ostensibly for their liberal
judicial agenda, but when the D.C. police department decided to make
arrests in domestic violence cases, the Post placed the story
on the front page and referred to WLDF four times, using their
The Children's Defense Fund (CDF)
received $2,000 from the Washington Post Company and $10,000 from the
New York Times Company Foundation. CDF tallied 86 mentions in The
Washington Post and 51 in The New York Times. The Los Angeles
Times, which did not give, was last with 41. The Feminist Press has
received $15,000 from the New York Times Company Foundation, but nothing
from Times Mirror or the Philip L. Graham Fund. In 1987 and 1988, the Times
mentioned the Feminist Press in 15 book features, compared to two
each in The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times. The
Post's "Book World" gave two brief mentions to
Feminist Press books in its "New In Paperbacks" section. The
Los Angeles Times reviewed one book and mentioned another in
passing. But The New York Times gave them an entire feature
story, two mentions in their "New and Noteworthy" section, and
nine full-fledged reviews of 12 Feminist Press books.
Think Tanks: Differences
are obvious in the coverage of two think tanks the media have identified
as conservative: the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the
Heritage Foundation. AEI received $32,500 from Times Mirror, $6,000 from
the New York Times, and $10,000 from the Philip L. Graham Fund. Heritage
received no money. AEI was mentioned in 478 stories to Heritage's 385.
Of those mentions, 58.7 percent tagged Heritage and 17.2 percent labeled
AEI. Heritage managed to place 18 editorials and book reviews in the
three newspapers, while AEI had 64, not including editorials from
moderate AEI political analyst William Schneider, a regular Los
Angeles Times columnist.
The liberal think tanks that received
media money were even less labeled than conservative groups that were
funded. The Urban Institute has received $115,000 from Times Mirror,
$5,000 from the New York Times Foundation, and $50,000 from the Philip
L. Graham Fund. While AEI was labeled 17.2 percent of the time, the
Urban Institute received only three labels in 140 stories (2.1 percent).
The liberal Brookings Institution obtained $29,000 from the New York
Times Company Foundation, $55,000 from the Times Mirror Foundation, and
$10,000 from the Philip L. Graham Fund. Brookings was mentioned in 737
stories, but labeled only 10 times (1.4 percent).
It's hard to imagine any direct orders
from corporate management to reporters demanding more coverage for grant
recipients, but the pattern that emerges reveals very interesting, if
merely coincidental, correlations. A media company which feels that a
group is impressive enough to deserve funding seems to feel it is
impressive enough to deserve their publicity.
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact
the MRC | Subscribe