ABC Ignored Bush Approval Hike; ...But Did Note Support for Stem Cell Research; CBS: Bush an "Oil Man President"; Condit to CBS?
1) When an ABC News/Washington Post poll in early June
showed President Bush’s job approval level had fallen to 55 percent, it
led both World News Tonight and Good Morning America. But this week, when
the same survey discovered approval for Bush’s job performance had risen
to 59 percent, neither World News Tonight or Good Morning America uttered
a syllable about it.
2) ABC did consider one of its poll findings newsworthy.
Anchor Elizabeth Vargas announced "that 63 percent of Americans
support embryonic stem cell research; 33 percent oppose it." ABC used
the number to introduce a story about the "conservative
Christian" parents of a high school football player who was
paralyzed, leading them to back the research.
3) CBS’s Eric Engberg condescendingly claimed the
House-passed energy bill "includes the oil man President's pet oil
exploration plan" to drill in Alaska. The Senate, however, may save
us from this awful plan because Democrats "promised a filibuster to
prevent the oil rigs from going up on 2,000 acres of pristine
4) NBC Today news reader Ann Curry stressed how Bush’s
oil drilling plan for Alaska faces bi-partisan opposition: "Critics
on both sides of the aisle predict the harm would be severe."
5) "I regret" writing a column castigating First
Daughter Barbara Bush for wearing "a denim jacket and pants" to
visit the Queen, Roger Ebert asserted this week as he promised to never
mention her again. But he did not quite concede that his column had been
incorrect as he maintained that the White House never really denied that
Barbra wore a jeans skirt.
6) NBC’s Tim Russert predicted CBS will be rewarded for
avoiding the Chandra Levy story as Gary Condit’s team would prefer
granting an exclusive interview to "a national media outlet that has
covered this situation less than most."
months ago when an ABC News/Washington Post poll showed President Bush’s
job approval level had fallen eight points to 55 percent, the finding led
both ABC’s World News Tonight, where Terry Moran observed that "the
more people learn about this President, his policies, our poll suggests,
the less they’re likely to support him," and Good Morning America.
But this week, when despite ongoing media
hostility to his policies a new ABC News/Washington Post survey discovered
a four point jump upward in approval for Bush’s job performance, to 59
percent, neither World News Tonight or Good Morning America uttered a
syllable about it. They also skipped improvements in his ratings on
environmental and energy policy. Instead, looking ahead at the dim
prospects in the Senate for Bush’s victories on a Patients’ Bill of
Rights and an energy bill, Moran doused White House rejoicing: "It
looks like their celebrating over the President on a roll is very
ABC did not, however, totally ignore the poll.
On Thursday’s World News Tonight, anchor Elizabeth Vargas found one
answer, which matched the liberal agenda, newsworthy: "There is a new
poll tonight from ABC News and the Washington Post which finds that 63
percent of Americans support embryonic stem cell research; 33 percent
oppose it." (More on this story in item #2 below.)
Back on June 4, MRC analyst Jessica Anderson
reminded me, fill-in World News Tonight anchor Charles Gibson announced at
the top of the show:
"A new ABC News/Washington Post poll says
the President’s policies are not selling as well as he might hope; that
those polled don’t like his energy policy, give him no particular credit
for the coming tax cut and by a large margin think the change of control
in the Senate is a good thing."
Reporter Terry Moran elaborated: "Well,
Charlie, the really ominous thing in this poll for the Bush team is the
movement it shows in public attitudes. The more people learn about this
President, his policies, our poll suggests, the less they’re likely to
support him. Take energy, which is one of his signature issues: 58 percent
disapprove of the way the President is handling the energy situation.
That’s up 15 percent since he announced his comprehensive energy policy
last month. His overall job approval rating is at 55 percent, relatively
weak for a President so early in his term, and that’s down 8 percent
since our last check on it in late April. Of course, the big political
news since then is the Democratic takeover of the Senate, and 41 percent
of the respondents in our poll think that’s a good thing. Only 20
percent think the Democrats taking over the Senate is bad, and the reason
the Democrats did, one of them, is they’ve got a signature issue -- the
environment. And on that issue, on the question, ‘Whom do you trust to
handle the environment?’, the Democrats wallop Mr. Bush 54 percent to 35
The next morning the busy Gibson opened the
June 5 Good Morning America: "The balance of power in the Senate does
shift today. We're going to tell you exactly what happens. Also today, an
ABC News/Washington Post poll shows declining public support for the
President on his handling of international affairs, the economy, energy,
even his hallmark education plan. Sixty-eight percent of Americans say
they want the President to compromise with Democrats."
News reader Antonio Mora made it the top story
for the 7am news update: "As President Bush prepares for the Senate
Democratic takeover, his approval rating is shrinking. According to our
poll that Charlie just mentioned, 55 percent of Americans approve of Mr.
Bush's overall job performance, but that's down eight points from April.
When it comes to the environment, the President has a 50 percent
Fast forward two months to Thursday morning
this week, the equivalent morning to compare to June 5 as it was also the
morning the Washington Post carried the poll results. But this week: Zilch
on GMA which led with the since-determined hoax tip that she was buried at
Fort Lee, Virginia. Antonio Mora’s 7am news update included updates on
Bush successes on a Patients’ Bill of Rights and an energy bill, but
didn’t mention the rise in Bush’s job approval found by ABC’s own
poll. Diane Sawyer also didn’t bring it up during a discussion with
George Stephanopoulos about the prospects for a Patients’ Bill of Rights
and Senator Clinton’s impending "first big win" in defeating
in committee the nomination of Mary Sheila Gall to chair the Consumer
Product Safety Commission.
Wednesday night, this week, the night before
the August 2 Washington Post featured the poll results, World News Tonight
didn’t touch them. Instead, ABC warned that Bush’s energy bill is a
payoff to Big Oil donors and relayed concerns from "moderate
Republicans" that Bush is cementing an anti-environmental image.
Anchor Elizabeth Vargas teased: "The $34 billion dollars in tax
breaks for the energy industry tucked away in President Bush’s energy
plan. Is it good policy or political payback?" Linda Douglass soon
stressed how "environmental groups say less than one-fifth of the tax
breaks are aimed at conservation. That worries moderate Republicans, who
fear their party is increasingly perceived as anti-environment." (For
more details, go to: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2001/cyb20010802.asp#1)
The Thursday, August 2, World News Tonight
provided a full report on Democratic reaction to Bush’s deal on a
Patients’ Bill of Rights with Congressman Charlie Norwood (R-GA)
followed by Terry Moran dousing White House excitement. Moran first
observed: "This is one happy place tonight because after weeks of
Senate Democrats dominating the policy agenda, the President, his top
aides here and their Republican allies on Capitol Hill are celebrating for
now a turnaround that has stunned Washington."
Moran cited the Patients’ Bill of Rights
deal with Norwood and the passage in the House of an energy bill that
included a "big surprise" victory for allowing oil drilling in
Alaska. But the victory may be short-lived, Moran cautioned, as Democrats
in the Senate are vowing to kill oil drilling and are not pleased with the
Patients’ Bill of Rights. Moran played a soundbite from Senate Majority
Leader Tom Daschle, referring to the energy bill: "They have a bill
and now we have a bill and we’ll go to conference and try to work out
our differences. This shouldn’t be viewed as the last word."
Moran warned: "Those ominous words show the
continuing difficulties the President is going to have in dealing with the
divided Congress. He got another cold slap in the face today from Senate
Democrats when his nominee to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Mary Gall, went down in a straight party-line defeat in committee.
Elizabeth, they’re saying here it’s partisanship but it looks like
their celebrating over the President on a roll is very short-lived."
It may well be, but if it’s newsworthy to
ABC News when their own poll shows a drop in the President’s public
approval level shouldn’t it also be newsworthy when that approval level
jumps a bit? (The four point hike was greater than the three point margin
In early June ABC reporters specifically cited
Bush’s disapproval numbers on the environment and energy. The new
late-July poll, the MRC’s Liz Swasey alerted me, showed jumps upward in
approval in both areas for Bush. His approval on the environment rose from
41 to 45 percent and on energy policy it soared six points, from 37 to 43
For a complete rundown of the poll questions
and results: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/vault/stories/data080201.htm
in item #1 above, ABC did consider one of its poll findings newsworthy.
Anchor Elizabeth Vargas announced on the August 2 World News Tonight:
"There is a new poll tonight from ABC News and the Washington Post
which finds that 63 percent of Americans support embryonic stem cell
research; 33 percent oppose it. For several months President Bush has been
trying to decide if he will continue federal funding for this research. It
could lead to treatments for many serious diseases and injuries but it
involves the destruction of human embryos. So far the debate has largely
taken place in hearing rooms and press conferences, but in Odessa, Texas
it has a human face."
From Texas, reporter Erin Hayes looked at the
plight of Joe Beene, a high school football player injured and left
paralyzed. His parents, Hayes asserted, are "conservative
Christians," but as you probably already guessed, they support
embryonic stem cell research for the hope it provides to help their son.
While Hayes noted that their pastor disagrees
with them as does one of Joe’s uncles, Hayes concluded with an emotional
pitch on behalf of embryonic stem cell research. Referring to Joe’s
parents, Hayes pleaded over video of someone feeding Joe in his
wheelchair: "They want President Bush, in reaching his decision, to
know everything that’s at stake here."
John Beene, father: "We understand President
Bush’s dilemma and his struggle because it’s not cut and dry and
it’s not black and white."
Hayes: "It goes to the heart of so much they
hold dear: Life and the life their son will lead."
reporter Eric Engberg on Thursday night condescendingly claimed the
House-passed energy bill "includes the oil man President's pet oil
exploration plan -- drilling in the now-protected Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge of Alaska." The Senate, however, may save us from this awful
plan because "the Democratic leadership immediately promised a
filibuster to prevent the oil rigs from going up on 2,000 acres of
pristine wilderness." Isn’t it more like barren tundra?
CBS Evening News fill-in anchor Scott Pelley
introduced Engberg’s August 2 piece by referring to "President
Bush’s controversial energy plan."
Engberg began his polemic in the guise of a
news story: "House Republicans, helped by more than 30 Democratic
crossover votes, were ecstatic after pushing through an energy bill that
includes the oil man President's pet oil exploration plan -- drilling in
the now-protected Arctic National Wildlife Refuge of Alaska."
Tom DeLay, House Majority Whip: "This
morning, the prospects for America's energy security are a lot brighter,
and we're proud to say, 'Mr. President, mission accomplished.'"
Engberg held out hope the bill could be undone:
"Really only half accomplished. The bill substantially scales back
the amount of land Mr. Bush wants drilled. Beyond that, it must still get
through the Senate, where the Democratic leadership immediately promised a
filibuster to prevent the oil rigs from going up on 2,000 acres of
Senator Joe Lieberman: "The Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge drilling proposal will be dead on arrival in the United
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle: "What we
will not do is destroy our environment."
Engberg continued: "The Senate debate,
still weeks away, will also give Democrats a chance to chip away at the
heart of the bill -- $35 billion in tax breaks granted to the oil, gas,
coal and nuclear industries as a means of promoting increased exploration.
Democratic critics charge that those industries, which gave an estimated
$69 million to congressional campaigns last year, are simply getting a
Congressman Henry Waxman: "We're not
addressing energy issues of the country. We're addressing energy issues
for the special interests."
Engberg concluded: "The auto companies also
won a big victory in the House bill, as an effort to impose tougher fuel
efficiency standards on sport utility vehicles was beaten back. But that
issue, too, is likely to be revisited by the Democratic-controlled
So there’s still hope Engberg’s views will
even CBS’s Eric Engberg, as quoted in item #3 above, acknowledged that
the energy bill’s provision to allow drilling in Alaskan tundra was
"helped by more than 30 Democratic crossover votes," earlier in
the day on NBC’s Today news reader Ann Curry chose to stress how the
"controversial" bill includes drilling and "critics on both
sides of the aisle predict the harm would be severe."
MRC analyst Geoffrey Dickens caught this
August 2 Today item from Curry: "The President is enjoying two big
victories this morning. First overnight the House approved a sweeping and
controversial energy bill. It would boost energy conservation and
development and allow oil companies to drill in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge
in northeastern Alaska. The President has argued that the drilling can be
done without harming the environment. Critics on both sides of the aisle
predict the harm would be severe. The bill now goes to the Senate."
column this week movie reviewer Roger Ebert said "I regret"
writing a column castigating First Daughter Barbara Bush for wearing
"a denim jacket and pants" to visit the Queen and promised that
he would adhere to her mother’s request and not mention Barbara again.
He blamed Matt Drudge for his original misinformation, but he did not
quite concede that his column had been incorrect as he pointed out that
the White House never really denied that Barbara wore a jeans skirt.
The July 26 CyberAlert picked up on how his
July 24 op-ed piece in the Chicago Sun-Times degenerated into a bashing of
President Bush's intellect as Ebert equated Bush's lack of interest in the
world with his off-base conservative policies. Noting that before assuming
office President Bush had made only two overseas trips, Ebert opined:
"No wonder he wants to beak the missile treaty, alienate NATO, ignore
global warming and reinstall Russia and China as enemies: Those foreign
countries scarcely exist in his imagination. Why go to Australia when you
have the Outback Steakhouse right here at home?"
Ebert didn’t apologize for that liberal
An excerpt from Ebert’s August 1 Chicago
Sun-Times op-ed, headlined, "Apologies to Barbara for fueling denim
ruckus," and brought to my attention by Jim Romenesko’s MediaNews (http://www.poynter.org/medianews/).
The First Lady has asked the news media to leave her twin daughters
"totally alone." She said on CNN Monday night: "If we never
saw their pictures in the paper again, we'd be a lot happier. I think it's
selling magazines and newspaper articles and television at the expense of
my children, that's what I think it is."
She is correct in asking for privacy for the girls. I regret that I
have been one of the violators. Last week I wrote an opinion piece based
on two reports in the Times of London that said her daughter Barbara
attended a luncheon at Buckingham Palace "wearing a denim jacket and
pants." I wrote what was intended to be a humorous piece about this
transgression, using the fashion angle on my way to observing that we have
a President who is not well-traveled.
I should have cut directly the chase. But noooo, I had to be Dave
Barry. I wrote the piece on July 21. It appeared on July 24. What I did
not know was that Laura Bush appeared on the Today show the morning of the
23rd, decrying "tabloid reports" that her daughter had worn
jeans, and saying, "of course, she wore a dress."
If I had been watching TV that morning, I would have yanked the column.
Assorted pundits on the Internet attacked my impertinence (they had a
point), and accused me of writing even though I knew of the First Lady's
denial (I did not).
Had I not checked my facts? I confess I took the word of two separate
reports in the Times of London (not a tabloid) -- links I found, for my
sins, on the Drudge Report. I wrote Matt Drudge. "The Times stands by
its report," he wrote back, observing that the First Lady had
specified a "dress" but that Matt Lauer had not asked her if it
Through our paper's Washington bureau, I sought official word. Ashley
Adams, the First Lady's deputy press secretary, said Barbara Bush wore
"a blouse and a skirt" at the Palace. Was any part of the outfit
denim? She declined to elaborate. Was there a photo we could run? She did
not think there were any photos, and even if there were photos, she would
not release them, since "the episode is old news."...
Frankly, I don't care whether or not Barbara Bush wore denims to
Buckingham Palace, it was rude of me to write about her, and I will never
mention her again. She deserves to be as much of a regular American kid as
you can possibly be when your father is the President. I was wrong....
To read the entire column, go to: http://www.suntimes.com/output/eb-feature/cst-edt-ebert01.html
The July 24 column is no longer posted by the
Sun-Times, but you can read an excerpt in the July 26 CyberAlert: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2001/cyb20010726.asp#5
Rather’s payoff from Gary Condit? The CBS Evening News hasn’t touched
the Gary Condit/Chandra Levy story since its first report back on July 18
-- and that may pay off for Rather, NBC’s Tim Russert suggested, with
Condit granting an exclusive interview to CBS.
On Thursday’s Today, MRC analyst Geoffrey
Dickens noticed, Russert outlined Condit’s PR strategy:
"Phase Two will be an attempt to reach out
to his constituents. They are not quite sure how to do that yet. Although
they believe that Phase Three, Katie, last week of August, first week of
September, the plan right now is to do some local media interviews and a
national interview. And they're very, very open about saying they would
prefer a national media outlet that has covered this situation less than
Katie Couric: "Oh. So that would mean
Russert: "That certainly the strong
indication in, in my discussions."
Sounds like they turned down Russert.
If they want to reward non-coverage, Dan
Rather and or/60 Minutes/60 Minutes II are the Condit team’s only
options since no other CBS News program has avoided the story.