I’ve been meaning to write about this but through a combination of busy-ness, and some other matters, I haven’t gotten the chance until now.
Several weeks back there was that Dean rally here in Houston. As part of the rally, I got the opportunity to do some “advance work” for the press corps traveling with Dean. That meant making sure the press corps had a place to go at the rally, getting them to that spot when they arrived at the rally, and then, after the rally, escorting them to the filing room in the hotel so they could file their stories (the hotel was the site of the fundraiser that Dean attended after the rally).
Anyway, the most interesting part of this all was the van ride from the rally site to the hotel. I recognized the names of most of the reporters in the van (there were people from 2 major newspapers, at least one major news service, and at least one national television network). I won’t name them here, but anyone who reads the Dean section of ABC’s “the Note” would recognize the names as well. What was most interesting was hearing them interact with each other. I always had this silly stereotype of journalists trying to scoop each other and keeping their information to themselves, but these guys were the definition of pack journalism. What was scary was that a lot of them didn’t really seem to know what they were talking about regarding some of Dean’s policy stances, things he said at the speech, etc. I got the distinct impression that they were interviewing each other for information (instead of, say, the official campaign spokesman that was in the front seat). Honest to Pete, I heard one reporter ask another “How do you think Dean is doing,” and the other went on to answer how he felt Dean probably wrapped up the nomination when he decided against campaign financing, but the test will be if his appeal extends beyond the base of radical liberal supporters…” The exchange was followed by the sound of fingers typing on keyboard. I guess that’s how memes like “radical liberal base” perpetuate themselves. It’s kind of scary how, I don’t know, lazy these guys are. I mean here they are serving as the information gateway between the Dean campaign and the public, and it appeared that they were basically winging it. In their defense, however, I will note that the life of a member of the traveling press corps is not glamorous. In fact, it pretty much sucks. That day, they traveled from Iowa to NH to Houston and then had to go on to New Mexico that night.
The point of my tale is to provide further proof that Democrats cannot depend on the SCLM to get the story right. The good news, for Dean Fans anyway, is that this plays directly into a strength of the Dean campaign. Part of the beauty Dean’s internet strength is the ability for the campaign to circumvent traditional media outlets and disseminate information through the grassroots organization with amazing speed. It allows the Dean campaign to be proactive instead of reactive. Of course, there are two challenges here. The first is to get as many people as possible to turn from the traditional media’s portrayal of Dean and tuned into the campaign’s message. The second is to keep the information on the blog from sounding like campaign propaganda. So far, I think the campaign has met both of these challenges. The grassroots seems to be constantly growing on it is own through word-of-mouth and through “Deaniacs” recruiting their friends and family. I think the campaign is meeting the second challenge by using the blog to personalize the campaign message. They build on Dean’s “You have the power” mantra by constantly referring to the campaign as “your campaign” and by featuring many guest writers who are often culled from the ranks of the grassroots volunteers.
In other words, the grassroots have become not just a group of volunteers but a community (or dare I say a movement) that feels a sense of ownership in the campaign. That is what I think the media is missing by focusing on just dollars and the polling horserace. Dean’s financial strength, his poll numbers, and his ability to get endorsements such as Gore’s are not the cause of Dean’s success, but symptoms of the huge grassroots organization.
The major reason why I think Dean is so electable is that he has an ever-growing army of supporters backing him up. It is much more difficult for people to believe media spin and memes when their friend, neighbor, brother, or spouse, is telling them that what the media is saying is not true and telling them why. It is all about controlling message and framing the debate. That is what the Dean campaign has been doing, that is why incredulous reporters are starting to see Dean as the Teflon-candidate, and that is why “we” can win.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://getdonkey.com/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/tweet-this-small.png)
Tweet ThisRelated posts:
- Always surprising I am always surprised at how Republicans can just spout...
- A Slew of Announced Democratic Candidates in NY-19 Republican Sue Kelly has held my “new” Congressional district since,...
- It’s All About the Giblets Like all good blog denziens, I bow before the insurmountable...
- Speeches like this… …are why I supported this guy. Howard Dean delivered the...
- Our true “moral values” E.J. Dionne’s column is today’s get donkey! must read. It...
4:44 pm on July 23rd, 2004
[...] post as well as the Daily Show clip I linked to earlier, and some things I observed while riding in a press van during the primaries seem to bolst [...]
3:41 pm on December 11th, 2003
I can’t believe the SCLM thinks Dean is unelectable.
Anyway, if there’s one thing I’ve learned from following the press as closely as I do, it’s that they don’t really know much more than I do about what’s going on; in many cases, they know a whole lot less.
Pundits are especially embarrassing. I’m holding down a full time job, taking classes, and still kicking their asses on the daily.
4:12 pm on December 11th, 2003
Name the names………..
4:19 pm on December 11th, 2003
“I heard one reporter ask another “How do you think Dean is doing,”
Sounds like the school bus:
“I heard Suzi likes Gerald”
“Ya but Gerald likes Courtney, an’ she likes him back!”
Rob says he can’t believe how lazy they are, but I think it takes effort to become and remain that oblivious.
4:40 pm on December 11th, 2003
Katarina,
You nailed it. It was exactly like a schoolbus.
Trust me, I have no trouble believing how lazy they are, but it’s still scary when you see it going down in person.
BudMan,
The only reason why I don’t name the names is because I was in the front row and most of the reporters were behind me. I can’t really be sure who said what. I can say that the two reporters sitting next to me were Matea Gold of the LA Times and Patricia Wilson of Reuters. They were both quite nice and just worked on their laptops while we rode over to the hotel.
4:42 pm on December 11th, 2003
Rob Humnik got it right when he referred to pack journalists. Yes, many of them are lazy. Many of them don’t want to stick their necks out and write something that doesn’t jibe with what other reporters are saying. Many will hold little conferences to decide on just how many people they thought were in the crowd, and how enthusiastic they thought the crowd was, etc. etc. If their stories don’t jibe with what the major wire services are saying or what the networks are saying their editors will get on their backs. Rob also got it right when he mentioned the importance of the internet. Yes, it is important, in fact, as many of you now know, it is the very key to this campaign. Others may follow in the future but John Dean thought of it first and utilized the internet to the fullest. And his website and his backers and volunteers will spread the word about Dean everytime someone tries to sully his reputation. Dean is the winner make no mistake about it. Look at his enemies…see how they squeal. And I must say…I am really surprised at the surly attitude some of Dean’s primary opponents have taken on. I mean, they’re downright nasty. If John Kerry and Joe Lieberman had expended as much energy in attacking Bush as they are in attacking Dean this would be a much closer horse race.
4:45 pm on December 11th, 2003
Forgive me…of course I mean to say HOWARD Dean…
that’s not to say I don’t appreciate all that John Dean has done in the years since Watergate.
5:16 pm on December 11th, 2003
Once, back in the day, while working for the Mondale campaign I had the distinct displeasure of driving two CNN reporters, and a crew from CNN, from the (then) Marc Plaza Hotel (now the Hilton) in Milwaukee to Machinists Victory Hall in Cudahy, Wisconsin.
The most professional moments I observed during the ride were the minutes Tom Mintier and Jim Miklaszewski spent trying to get me to turn the headlights of the station wagon on as we drove down I-94 so they could giggle that they were in a funeral procession.
Nothing has surprised me since.
6:32 pm on December 11th, 2003
Thanks, Rob. I do understand, but it is getting frustrating to see how these people do their jobs. I can’t “phone it in” like they do.
6:42 pm on December 11th, 2003
Don’t forget that the business model that media operators follow is to sell advertising. If journalists produce bland filler that the general public is happy to read, they’re doing their jobs perfectly. It would be unsafe to do it differently.
And it’s a bonus for the media owners if the reporting benfits the pro-corporation, tax-cutting agenda.
7:45 pm on December 11th, 2003
It’s too true. I was a reporter for a large U.S. newspaper and many of the reporters did not conduct enough hard research – mostly as a result of the fast-paced pressure of deadlines and wide-range of stories covered.
10:30 pm on December 11th, 2003
Eric’s got the right of it. A lot of it is just the need to churn things out.
But as for the “what do you think?” question, it becomes an issue of what they are doing with the question. I’ve asked other reporters what they thought of something, just to see if their opinion jibed with my own. Or if they noticed something I didn’t.
But when you are doing it because you have no idea what is going on, you have a problem.
10:33 pm on December 11th, 2003
I hope the rubric of the SCLM includes NPR for they are one of the more egregious practitioners of the “art” of turning press releases and gossip into “news.” This very afternoon I heard a news — as opposed to opinion, mind you — report on the glee of the Republican party in Howard Dean’s potential candidacy. We were told how they were “licking their chops” at the opportunity to run against this man with “no foreign relations experience during wartime”, this “angry”"liberal”.
But then as we all know NPR is liberal, thoughtful, and, between commercials, operated as a public service.
12:28 am on December 12th, 2003
I’ve had the displeasure to work with TV news people for about 3 years and soon came to the following conclusion: television news isn’t “dumbed down” for the masses as many have complained—it’s the producers, journalists, & the editors that are dumb.
I was consistently amazed at how ill informed people who make their living gathering news were on basic issues. And don’t even get them started on that whole news as a public service vs. commercial enterprise debate. Maybe for the ‘old school’ it is, but anyone I met under 45 would laugh if you ever insisted it was anything other than a way to make themselves and their network richer. That battle has been lost.
3:57 am on December 12th, 2003
can we interview the press? all the drivers are dean volunteers, can the drivers (again, i stress volunteers) ask to interview each member of the press before driving them? and then somewhere we could do a blog of driver interviews of the press?
8:03 am on December 12th, 2003
Fascinating post.
It’s only gotten worse; the SCLM has learned nothing from their hideous coverage of Gore in 2000; they remain unembarrased by their unprofessionalism,and the constant lies they told about Gore; one can tell by the speed with which those lies were recirculated the minute the Gore emdorsement became a story.
Something Dean and his campaign are going to have to reckon with – already this week I’ve seen two to three references on MSNBC and Fox reportage and punditage that Dean was trying to plant the rumor that Bush might have had some advance notice that 9/11 was going to happen, and though in each case whoever was talking about it said that Dean, when asked, explained he didn’t believe it himself, that was taken by the speaker and whomever he was speaking to as evidence of Dean’s intention to float a vicious rumor about the President. It happened last night on Hardball, where Ralph Reed was given time to attack Dean, unbalanced by any pro Dean voices, and Matthews, the original know-nothing, became convinced that Dean had done something irresponsible. Similar I’m shocked, shocked was expressed on Hannity and whatshisname. No mention in either case of the fact that Dean was talking explicitly about the lack of cooperation on the part of the administration with the 9/11 commission, which leads to circulation of such ridiculous rumors.
I’d be interested in hearing what someone close to the Dean campaign thinks can be done about stuff like this. I realize that it’s difficult for a candidate or a campaign to make threats against media outlets, but this stuff is so egregious, and its not something that can be corrected on the internet…someone high up should be calling MSNBC, Matthews, etc. to tell them they got it wrong, wrong, wrong, and that an apology and a retraction will have the happy result of avoiding any further action on the part of the campaign…
10:10 am on December 12th, 2003
My favorite bit of constant repetition is “Dean’s going to be in trouble when his liberal supporters find out that his real views aren’t as liberal as how he’s been labeled…” Um, guys? We know what his real views are, they’ve been on the website for months. They’re in his speeches. I don’t agree with all of them, but they’re good enough; winning is more important. And you (and the RNC) are the ones who labeled him ‘liberal’, not us.
9:10 am on January 24th, 2004
From what I have heard he is populist- balanced budgets, gun control rights, good on health care to the point it has a carry-over/price reduction effect. Sounds like a conservative who is pro-choice, moderate on social policy without being too over-the-top unless the attempt to plant those ridiculous questions is made to scare people into a leftist corner (gay rights, affirmative action, etc,) .
He is solid there with good backing of policy but not making a preachy point. His replies come as value-centered with respect for individuals. Avoids this mandate choice on others, tactful professional terms instead.Like someone who worked with these issues in employer/employee relationships.
He has some decent labor interests as well, but not antibusiness in the areas of working with business to provide incetive to keep jobs and value in his home state.
This guy really is middle of the road, the only guy I see more so is Mr.Clark simply because he has populist appeal for heartland/southern demographics and less of established true Democrat voting record.
8:51 am on January 26th, 2004
I like kevin lyda’s suggestion (scroll up 4 comments): Interview the press (preferably editors as well as journalists). Do it in a way that is aimed at getting a better understanding of their constraints, but don’t give them a free pass.