THE ENDURING APOLOGY.
Why do John Harris and Jim Vandehei keep doing this?
Media madness. Reporters complain about the lack of spontaneity in politics. Then we punish spontaneity by ensuring that any impolitic comment gets played and replayed, often simplified and distorted in each replaying—usually accompanied with disapproving analysis about a candidate’s lack of discipline and inability to stay on message.Every couple of months, they come out with a new op-ed that lambastes the media's role in cheapening our democracy and creating a substanceless, horserace-obsessed politics. Then, in the interim, they run a major political publication whose latest innovation is crowning a daily winner of the day's news cycle. Either they should become that "news media that would devote as much attention to ideas as to gaffes" or they should admit that it's impossible and quit their jobs in a very public protest. But to keep writing op-eds pointing out the harm their industry, and their publication, does to American politics is extremely weird. I'm glad they're publicly making the case -- they have, to be sure, a unique credibility -- but I'd be even more glad to see them start trying to change the game.The lack of press access to both candidates this fall is frustrating. But the truth is McCain would be foolish to indulge in the kind of free-flowing, free-associating conversations that won such notice in 2000. Obama’s natural instincts are to tightly control his image and words, which works nicely in this media environment.
An unscripted campaign would be more interesting and more useful to voters, but it would require two unlikely ingredients: Candidates self-confident enough to throw out the script, and a news media that would devote as much attention to ideas as to gaffes.
Feeds: 


COMMENTS (15)
Either they should become that "news media that would devote as much attention to ideas as to gaffes" or they should admit that it's impossible and quit their jobs in a very public protest. There's a third possibility: they could turn Politico into a serious news organization.
Posted by: Cheryl Rofer | September 25, 2008 11:53 AM
Very little, with the possible exception of Drudge and the wingnut blogs that no one takes seriously anyway, sucks as hard as Politico sucks.
One of their guys sneered at me like an Eddie Haskell wanna-be when we met up in the Big Tent in Denver. Gave me great pleasure, it did, to tell him what his blog is worth to me -- not a rat's ass, that's for sure.
If Politico disappeared from the internets tomorrow, we'd all be better off. The faux non-partisanship wears thin when you're fellating the GOP all day ...
Posted by: Sinfonian | September 25, 2008 12:00 PM
An unscripted campaign would be more interesting and more useful to voters...
Senator Biden has not disappointed anyone.
Posted by: El Viajero | September 25, 2008 12:01 PM
There's a third possibility: they could turn Politico into a serious news organization.
The response to that suggestion would be, it just won't sell, we wouldn't get the attention, we'd go out of business. The evidence cited for that point of view would be, this is what everybody does and it sells, and when organizations don't do it they die -- we're giving the people what they want.
The implicit assumption is that there is no market for a "serious news organization" because people are stupid &/or they can't develop a taste for it.
(There probably is also an unstated assumption that politicians, like lawyers choosing a jury, prefer their audience dumb and emotionally reactive rather than smart and rational, so the politicians would abandon any news organization that got serious.)
Whichever is true, the nub of the issue is, they're not willing to take the risk of testing those assumptions.
And so we're stuck.
Posted by: bleh | September 25, 2008 12:02 PM
He's a certifiable wing nut and was removed from the WaPo White House beat for his proven and public nuttiness.
It's been a while, but I remember wingnut finery, just liek yesterday.
Posted by: Nosey Parker | September 25, 2008 12:10 PM
"And so we're stuck."
Actually I don't feel stuck at all. The only time I read anything from Politico is when someone is pointing out their bullshit and links to them.
Posted by: Henk | September 25, 2008 12:30 PM
The lack of press access to both candidates this fall is frustrating.
Love the false equivalency, but I wouldn't expect anything less from them.
Posted by: ThresherK | September 25, 2008 12:37 PM
If you read the comments there (& somehow manage not to claw your eyes out) you have to realize the audience they've built just ain't ready for reality.
Posted by: Downpuppy | September 25, 2008 12:59 PM
Sinfonian,
let me guess, you are referring to Ben Smith. Oh he's the worst at Politico.
Posted by: Rosie | September 25, 2008 1:52 PM
((If you read the comments there (& somehow manage not to claw your eyes out) you have to realize the audience they've built just ain't ready for reality.))
You know, that is so true. Politico has the dumbest, most obnoxious commenters of any major Internet news site. I always feel the need of disinfectant after I go over there. I can't imagine hanging out there on a regular basis, rather than an occasional foray following a link. Teh stupid on that site is depressing.
Posted by: val | September 25, 2008 2:02 PM
"I'm glad they're publicly making the case -- they have, to be sure, a unique credibility -- but I'd be even more glad to see them start trying to change the game."
I disagree. If punditoids "publicly (make) the case" for better reporting and then do nothing about it although they're in a position to do something about it, then they're either weaklings or hypocrites.
Posted by: Alec Mento | September 25, 2008 2:32 PM
The reason the press is jumping all over McCain and Palin gaffes IS that their campaign is so tightly scripted. That means that the gaffes or whatever are either planned or the two candidates really, really stupid. I think the latter.
For once, though, the media are doing their jobs.
Posted by: Pete H. | September 25, 2008 2:58 PM
The other night on Hardball Chris Matthews raved about how "fantastic" Politico is.
Posted by: Jafafa Hots | September 25, 2008 3:53 PM
actually, it's a handy gauge of how the Corp Media will play - we no longer have to wait for Tweety or the next morning's WaPo - just go on over to the school paper at Kewl Kidz High
still chortle at the idea of "subscribing" to Mike Allen
Posted by: clarice | September 25, 2008 4:32 PM
Ezra, as you no doubt recall Harris sooling the WaPo Ombudstravesty onto Froomkin, and why, let me compliment you on your politeness. You are a saint.
Posted by: AlanDownunder | September 26, 2008 7:10 AM