May 2008

Monitoring the Maverick

The relationships between the news media and the candidates are generally much more complex than the reigning narratives of the moment would suggest. There's no doubt that Sen John McCain (R-AZ) has long had a good relationship with reporters. And no wonder. He gives great access. He seems to enjoy the give-and-take. He conveys an air of authenticity. And he makes for great copy. The POW saga gives him serious street cred. The post-Keating Five, born-again reformer is another good story line. Then there's the "straight talk." And — sorry, there's no way around this — that whole "maverick" business. Once a public figure's image is established, it can be tough to change. Think of Al Gore, forever the Internet-inventing résumé padder. Or John Kerry, forever the chardonnay-sipping, windsurfing Brahmin who ordered a cheesesteak in Philadelphia with, ohmigod, Swiss cheese. That phenomenon hasn't been so good for Gore and Kerry, as you may have noticed. But it has paid big dividends for McCain. But the John McCain running in 2008 is a far cry from the one who ran in 2000. A lot less mavericky. The old — sorry — McCain back then was against George W. Bush's tax cuts. The current McCain embraces them. McCain was 100 percent against torture. Then he voted against legislation that would have banned the CIA from waterboarding. McCain once called Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson "agents of intolerance." He later withdrew the remark and spoke at Falwell's Liberty University. Then there's the whole business about Hamas looking forward to an Barack Obama presidency. This is an odd gambit indeed for a candidate who insists the campaign should be played out on the high road.
http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4514

How small stories become big news

The signature defect of modern political journalism is that it has shredded the ideal of proportionality. Important stories, sometimes the product of months of serious reporting, that in an earlier era would have captured the attention of the entire political-media community and even redirected the course of a presidential campaign, these days can disappear with barely a whisper. Trivial stories — the kind that are tailor-made for forwarding to your brother-in-law or college roommate with a wisecracking note at the top — can dominate the campaign narrative for days.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10604.html

Obama ahead in Hollywood donations

Barack Obama has pulled way ahead of Hillary Clinton in money raised from the entertainment business -- and could very well finish the nomination battle as the victor when it comes to Hollywood dollars. The latest figures from the Center for Responsive Politics show that Obama collected $4,022,006 from movie, TV and music sources through the end of April, compared with $3,413,024 for Clinton. That may not seem like such a surprise given that many consider Obama the likely nominee. But Obama and Clinton have been battling for entertainment industry donors throughout the campaign cycle, raising almost equal amounts. At the end of February, for instance, less than $300 separated the candidates in show business fund-raising. CRP spokesman Massie Ritsch wrote on the org's website that Obama has become the "industry's clear favorite."
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117986510.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&nid=...

FCC can't turn back media tide

[Commentary] From the Senate floor, the Federal Communications Commission is denounced for kneeling before business by allowing broadcast owners to buy newspapers. From the executive suite, the same FCC is denounced for bullying business by forcing broadcast owners to file meticulous reports detailing what they do to serve their communities. So does that mean the commission is getting things about right -- maneuvering between industry and the public in a way that favors neither unduly and annoys both in rightful measure? Or do we have a moment when the way policymakers think about media power is exposed as the incoherent muddle it is? Policymakers spar over issues that either don't matter or matter in ways that they misunderstand. The consolidation they deplore is a sideshow, the localism they extol may yet make the rest of us shudder.
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other_views/story/546825.html

We need a national broadband policy

[Commentary] If there is a sleeper issue on which any enterprising candidate could capitalize, it is the issue of bringing the Internet's broadband revolution to more and more Americans at affordable prices. Why broadband? Simply put, there is no other business in America that can have such a dramatic effect on our lives, our economy and our security. In the crudest of terms, the "broadband industry" — from wire-line broadband providers to dot-com boomlets and all of the equipment, devices and software programs in between — is giant, representing more than one-fifth of the gross domestic product, with a combined market cap well into the trillions. The importance of information technology to virtually every facet of American life has been evident for some time, yet our leadership has done little to promote it. Presidential candidates could make good policy and good politics by speaking up for a national broadband policy that brings meaningful competition to the nation's broadband marketplace.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004435284_simsop27.html

Kurtz on Bias at MSNBC

MSNBC, which bills itself as "the place for politics," is being pummeled by political practitioners. "It's an organ of the Democratic National Committee," says Steve Schmidt, a senior strategist for John McCain's campaign. "It's a partisan advocacy organization that exists for the purpose of attacking John McCain." Ed Gillespie, President Bush's counselor, says there is an "increasing blurring" of the line between NBC News and MSNBC's "blatantly partisan talk show hosts like Christopher Matthews and Keith Olbermann." Terry McAuliffe, chairman of Hillary Clinton's campaign, says Matthews has been "in the tank" for Barack Obama "from Day One" and is practically "the Obama campaign chair." Why are operatives from across the political spectrum suddenly beating up on the third-place cable channel? Phil Griffin, the NBC senior vice president who runs MSNBC, dismisses the criticism, calling Schmidt's broadsides "pretty outrageous accusations."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR200805...
(requires registration)

Study: NBC Stations Dominate Local News

A new report from The Media Audit comparing local early evening and prime newscasts reveals that 10 of the top 20 news programs are produced by NBC affiliates while the country’s top ranked news program is produced by a CBS affiliate. The Media Audit report went on to say that news programming continues to be important for local television stations because it represents a disproportionate amount of a station's income. It cited a recent survey conducted annually by the Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) that said that news accounts for almost 16 percent of a typical station's programming each day (almost four hours per day), but news programs on average represent nearly 45 percent of a station’s revenue. The study further suggests that the percentage of revenue from news may not be affected by a weak economic climate. Historical data from the RTNDA surveys show that the share of revenue from news was slightly higher in 2001 than it had been in 1999, even though 2001 was a down year in the economy and 1999 was near the end of the 1990s boom. According to The Media Audit report, 25.2% of U.S. adults currently tune in to a local NBC affiliate for early evening news in the typical week, down 3.3 percentage points from a 2005 survey, followed by 24.9% for ABC stations, down 1.7 percentage points from 2005 and 21.6% for CBS stations, down 2 percentage points from 2005. Currently, 19.3% of U.S. adults tune in weekly to a Fox affiliate for a prime time newscast, a figure that has remained unchanged over the past three years.
http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/05/27/daily.7/

FCC Has DTV-Heavy Schedule

The Federal Communications Commission is having a busy week on the digital-TV front. FCC Chairman Kevin martin and Commissioner Michael Copps are meeting with officials of Wilmington (NC) about the test the FCC is conducting there of the digital switch. Commissioner Copps said that the entire nation will benefit from the lessons learned when TV stations cut off their analog signals in Wilmington. “In any effort of this scale, there are unknowns that no one anticipates and you find out about only when you throw that switch,” Commissioner Copps said. “That's the category that really keeps me up at night. That’s why this test is so important.” The FCC is also hosting a town meeting at its Washington (DC) headquarters aimed at seniors, one of the groups targeted for special attention and help. That meeting will include D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton and local news anchor J.C. Hayward, a member of the National Association of Broadcasters' speakers bureau on the DTV transition. The NAB estimated that about 50,000 Washington households receive over-the-air TV exclusively. "One in five households [are] at risk of losing their television signals Feb. 17, 2009, if they do not take the necessary steps to prepare for the transition," the NAB said.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6564378.html?rssid=193

Agreement may mean end of cable set-top boxes

The set-top box, a necessary appendage for millions of cable television customers for decades, is moving toward extinction. A leading television manufacturer, Sony Electronics Inc., and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association said Tuesday they signed an agreement that will allow viewers to rid themselves of set-top boxes, yet still receive advanced "two-way" cable services, such as pay-per-view movies. In most cases, cable viewers also could dispose of another remote control since they could use their TV's control rather than one tied to the set-top box. The agreement marks a significant meeting of the minds between cable companies and one of the world's dominant makers of consumer electronics. The two industries have been feuding for a decade about how best to deliver cable service to customers while allowing them to buy equipment of their own choosing.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20080527/cable-boxes/

Canada auction aims to reshape wireless market

Canada's government launched an auction of wireless spectrum on Tuesday that it hopes will bolster competition and lower prices by allowing new players to break into the cellular phone market. In a process that Industry Minister Jim Prentice estimates could take up to a month to complete, 24 companies can bid electronically on 292 licenses for chunks of wireless airwaves in different geographical regions across the country. Of the 105 megahertz (MHz) of spectrum to be auctioned, 40 MHz will be set aside for new players. That provision is a source of worry for the three big players -- Rogers Communications, Telus Corp and BCE -- which control about 95 percent of the wireless market in terms of revenue.
http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2737547420080527

Benton

Search