Media Coverage: The Vote Is In

With the grueling presidential campaign coming to an end Tuesday, the results are already in today on how the media fared in their coverage. As in every election, there have been winners and losers.

Winner. MTV, for its get-out-the-young-vote crusade as part of regular campaign coverage that spoke to the youth crowd without being condescending. MTV was never better this campaign than when recently having Al Gore in to be quizzed by a studio audience and moderators Kurt Loder and Tabitha Soren. It was Soren, especially, whose precise, informed, incisive questions stood out. If only someone had had the foresight to suggest her as a press participant in some of the televised presidential debates.

Loser. Rush Limbaugh, for rarely elevating his anti-Clinton-Gore harangues on TV above shrill, sophomoric name-calling. By all reasonable criteria, Limbaugh is a burlesquing entertainer, not a serious political commentator. But what passes as entertainment on Limbaugh’s radio show, comes across on his syndicated TV series as wild flailing devoid of any philosophical underpinning. He represents the nyeh nyeh nyeh nyeh nyeh school of political analysis.

Winner. Linda Douglass, for insightful work this season on KNBC-TV Channel 4 that affirmed her standing as, far and away, the best political reporter on Los Angeles television. Unlike most of her counterparts assigned to politics, Douglass is not only experienced and well-informed but also scrupulous about never reaching too far or saying more than she knows, even when asked a dopey leading question by one of Channel 4’s anchors.

Loser. Bryant Gumbel, for smirking--and at times almost laughing--his way through interviews with Ross Perot on NBC’s “Today,” as if the Texas billionaire deserved ridicule merely because of his unorthodox campaigning. Gumbel was much more deferential with President Bush and Bill Clinton.

Winner. Bill Moyers, for his weekly PBS series, “Listening to America,” which has been a beacon of intelligence throughout a campaign in which many in the television press have spent much of their time listening to each other.

Loser. Late voters in the West, for possibly getting their clocks cleaned by the networks. On Tuesday, Westerners again may see the presidential race called by the networks before they have a chance to get to the polls. In past elections, ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN have used the results of exit polling to project a presidential winner before the closing of some states’ polls (with CBS leading the pack in 1988 when anointing George Bush at 6:20 p.m. PST), and they promise to do so again Tuesday if they get the opportunity.

There’s no knowing whether other races and election issues would be affected should potential voters be stopped in their tracks by early projections. But that’s always a possibility.

The issue may be moot should the vote be so close that the election hinges on California. But if not, well, networks will be networks.

Winner. Maidenform, for its current commercial that achieves the improbable by simultaneously encouraging Americans to vote and to buy the firm’s bras.

The spot begins with fast-cutting frontal shots of females (from the neck down) wearing buttons with an assortment of political messages. In addition, one woman wears a red ribbon signifying support for the battle against AIDS. Then, as the Maidenform signature appears on the screen, a narrator speaks: “If you’ve got something to say, now is the time to get it off your chest.” That’s called getting creativity off your chest.

Loser. Sally Jessy Raphael, for providing a forum in the week of the Democratic National Convention for a woman (not Gennifer Flowers) who claimed--while offering no evidence--to have had an affair with Clinton nine years ago. The woman said she was coming forward now to call attention to Clinton’s alleged inattention to women’s issues.

Even Raphael said she doubted the story. Then why promote it on national TV? Obviously, the talk-show host believes strongly in the public’s right to know unfounded rumors about presidential candidates.

Winner. Larry King, for shrewdly using the presidential campaign to transform himself and his CNN talk show into national institutions.

Before 1992, King was a mere star, heading popular talk shows on radio and TV. Since virtually fathering Part 1 of Ross Perot’s presidential candidacy on his CNN series, however, King’s fame has exploded, his show becoming a revolving door for presidential and vice presidential candidates and their spouses, culminating with last week’s separate 90-minute appearances by Perot, President Bush and Clinton. King is not just on the map; thanks to the presidential campaign, he is the map.

Loser. Larry King, for becoming the campaign’s equal opportunity pussycat. An occasional tough question from a caller wasn’t nearly enough to offset either the softballs that King lobbed at the candidates or his acquiescence when their responses amounted to little more than self-serving propaganda.

Proponents of this format argue that it’s educational without being confrontational. In fact, viewers did learn something about Bush, Clinton and Perot through watching this show. They learned that the candidates knew how to handle Larry King.

Winner. Sam Donaldson, for proving that rudeness pays when interviewing presidential candidates skilled at being evasive when asked questions they don’t want to answer.

After earlier complaining about the deference and passivity of King and other interviewers, that ABC bully Donaldson got his own crack at Bush and Clinton in separate interviews last Thursday night, and on several occasions virtually badgered each candidate into giving direct answers to his questions. When they appeared to be dissembling, he interrupted and pressed them for responses.

It wasn’t polite and it wasn’t pretty, but it was pure Donaldson. More importantly, it was effective.

Loser. Spin doctoring, for polluting the airwaves with partisan spewings that made a gas mask mandatory equipment for watching much of the campaign coverage. What a travesty it was that the media regularly gave these insincere political hucksters the opportunity to propagandize voters, all the while knowing that the predictable things they were saying about their candidates were nothing more than rehearsed campaign rhetoric. Everyone in the media knew this was a sham, yet just about everyone perpetuated it anyway.

But the media learned their lesson in 1992, right? By becoming almost laughable, these spinners have lost all credibility with the public and reporters. They’re a joke. Thus, be assured that you’ll see no more of them.

Until 1996.