ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, February 21, 1996 TAG: 9602210028
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-7 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: CAL THOMAS
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
Chuck Scarborough, the anchor for WNBC-TV New York's local evening news, has donated $1,000 to Steve Forbes' presidential campaign. Scarborough was reprimanded by management, who said he had made ``an error in judgment.'' He will be prohibited from doing any ``original reporting'' on Steve Forbes so long as Forbes remains a candidate.
In 1989, Ed Bradley of CBS News and Charlayne Hunter-Gault of PBS contributed $500 and $700 respectively to Doug Wilder's campaign for governor of Virginia. Neither network issued a public reprimand or restricted their reporting, though both appeared to violate policy guidelines at their networks.
Campaign contributions by journalists is nothing new. Most journalists have contributed what might be called ``in kind'' gifts through favorable and uncritical reporting of those they admire and unfavorable and inaccurate reporting of those they don't.
CBS News correspondent Bernard Goldberg, the Whittaker Chambers of broadcast journalism, has blown what cover remains on the contention that the networks are fair, balanced and unbiased. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Goldberg noted that while there are many reasons fewer people are watching network news, ``one of them, I'm more convinced than ever, is that our viewers don't trust us. And for good reason.''
Goldberg cites the reporting of his CBS News colleague Eric Engberg on the flat tax idea of Steve Forbes as a glaring example of editorializing: ``Mr. Engberg's report set new standards for bias.'' Noting Engberg's use of such ideologically loaded words as ``elixir'' and ``scheme,'' Goldberg dissects Engberg's report and exposes the inner poison that makes it not reportage but unlabeled opinion. By noting Engberg's choice of anti-flat tax spokespersons and his labeling of conservatives as such (but not liberals as such), and his deliberate leading of interview subjects to give the answers he wants, Goldberg demolishes his colleague more effectively than any conservative critic could hope to do.
Lest Engberg's message fail to reach even the biggest dunce, he concludes, ``Forbes' No. 1 wackiest flat tax promise'' is the candidate's belief that it would give parents ``more time to spend with their children.''
``Can you imagine,'' writes Goldberg, ``a network news reporter calling Hillary Clinton's health plan 'wacky'? Can you imagine an editor allowing it?'' No, but I can imagine a network reporter giving Mrs. Clinton a free ride, which is precisely what NBC's Maria Shriver did when interviewing the First Lady about her book, ``It Takes a Village.''
Shriver told NBC's Tim Russert that it took her two to three weeks to prepare for the interview: ``I memorized that book up and down. I memorized everything that was written about Whitewater, about Travelgate...''
All of that hard work produced such probing and unbiased questions as this: ``You write about preparing your daughter Chelsea for the negative things people might say to her about her father. But you don't say in the book about preparing her for the negative things people might say about her mom. What's this past week, two weeks been like for her?''
Or how about this one: ``You clearly have an iron will, you clearly are skilled. How are you going to turn this personal misfortune into a personal triumph?'' Or, ``Do you wish you'd never worked for Madison Guaranty?'' This pap required study? This homage required preparation?
The networks just don't get it. They're losing market share because those they regularly offend in their one-sided reporting have tuned out. On ``Larry King Live'' a few weeks ago, several television journalists (but no critics) were interviewed, and all denied they slanted the news. I guess that settles it, then. It's all in our minds, not theirs.
The networks refuse to hire known conservatives who would ask tough questions of all sides because, as Bernard Goldberg notes, they have an agenda. Goldberg has provided a rare glimpse from the inside. It will be interesting to see if he's allowed to keep his job now that the dirty little secret is finally out.
- 1996, Los Angeles Times Syndicate
LENGTH: Medium: 76 linesby CNB