Vanity Fair: The Media - Going After Gore

[Pirate Smile]

The Media
Going After Gore

Al Gore couldn't believe his eyes: as the 2000 election heated up, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other top news outlets kept going after him, with misquotes ("I invented the Internet"), distortions (that he lied about being the inspiration for Love Story), and strangely off-the-mark needling, while pundits such as Maureen Dowd appeared to be charmed by his rival, George W. Bush. For the first time, Gore and his family talk about the effect of the press attacks on his campaign—and about his future plans—to the author, who finds that many in the media are re-assessing their 2000 coverage.
by Evgenia Peretz October 2007


Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, arrive in Nashville on June 15, 1999, the day before Gore announced his presidential candidacy. John Russell/AP Images.

-snip-
What happened to Gore? The story promoted by much of the media today is that we're looking at a "new Gore," who has undergone a radical transformation since 2000—he is now passionate and honest and devoted to issues he actually cares about. If only the old Gore could have been the new Gore, the pundits say, history might have been different.
But is it really possible for a person—even a Goreacle—to transform himself so radically? There's no doubt that some things have changed about Al Gore since 2000. He has demonstrated inner strength, rising from an excruciating defeat that would have crushed many men. Beyond that, what has changed is that he now speaks directly to the public; he has neither the patience nor the need to go through the media.

-snip-
The Wonk Versus the Frat Boy

The media began the coverage of the 2000 election with an inclination not so different from that demonstrated in other recent elections—they were eager for simple, character-driven narratives that would sell papers and get ratings. "Particularly in presidential elections … we in the press tend to deal in caricatures," says Dan Rather, who was then anchoring for CBS. "Someone draws a caricature, and it's funny and at least whimsical. And at first you sort of say, 'Aw shucks, that's too simple.' In the course of the campaign, that becomes accepted wisdom." He notes, "I do not except myself from this criticism."

In 2000, the media seemed to focus on a personality contest between Bush, the folksy Texas rogue, and, as The New York Times referred to Gore, "Eddie Haskell," the insincere brownnoser from Leave It to Beaver. ABC anchor Claire Shipman, who covered the 2000 campaign for NBC, says, "It was almost a drama that was cast before anyone even took a good look at who the candidates were."

-snip-
But Gore couldn't turn on such charm on cue. "He doesn't pinch cheeks," says Tipper. "Al's not that kind of guy." With Gore still vice president, there was a certain built-in formality and distance that reporters had to endure. Having served the public for nearly 25 years in different roles—from congressman legislating the toxic-waste Superfund to vice president leading the charge to go into Bosnia—Gore could not be reduced to a sound bite. As one reporter put it, they were stuck with "the government nerd." "The reality is," says Eli Attie, who was Gore's chief speechwriter and traveled with him, "very few reporters covering the 2000 campaign had much interest in what really motivated Gore and the way he spent most of his time as vice president: the complexities of government and policy, and not just the raw calculus of the campaign trail."

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/10/gore200710

Seven page article, reads like The Daily Howler (which it mentions) chronicling the media distortions. The article analyzes the distortions, naming the specific reporters who initiated and propelled them.

[bryant69]

1. Jesus Christ. THe question isn't whether Gore has changed; it's whether the media has changed.

And I'm not sure I see much evidence of any such change, unfortunately!

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Pirate Smile]

14. Here are the last paragraphs of the article:

"Thanks to his newfound status, speculation about Gore's entering the presidential race has refused to die down. Alas, he's not going to announce his candidacy in the last paragraphs of a Vanity Fair article. "Modern politics seems to require and reward some capacities that I don't think I have in abundance," says Gore, "such as a tolerance for … spin rather than an honest discussion of substance.… Apparently, it comes easily for some people, but not for me."

Tipper says he has made zero moves that would suggest a run for the presidency, but adds that if he turned to her one night and said he had to run, she'd get on board, and they'd discuss how to approach it this time around, given what they've learned.

The reporters and opinion-makers have eagerly chewed over the possibility. After all, he's now a star. In step with the new enthusiasm for Gore, Dowd, in a February 2007 column, described him as "a man who was prescient on climate change, the Internet, terrorism, and Iraq," a sentiment echoed by many. The pundits, however, invariably come around to the same question: "But if he ran, would he revert to the 'old Gore'?" Another question—in light of countless recent stories about John Edwards's haircut—might be: Would the media revert to the old media?"

[bryant69]

15. The answer is almost certainly. Why wouldn't they? THey are punks of the highest order! n/t

[Pirate Smile]

17. The "old media" is still the current media.

[redqueen]

21. yes it is

i find it laughable that anyone would believe otherwise

[closeupready]

35. If that Tipper quip is accurate, that really sounds like he's gonna do it.

A wife would know in her heart, and that way she says what she's saying here tells me that, the chances are at least 50-50.

[Laurab]

39. I thought exactly the same thing.

And I'm hoping I'm right!

[seafan]

2. On Al Gore's credibility: Karl Rove: "We attack them on their strengths."

Nothing else exposes this tactic quite as well as this, imho.

Is everyone ready to grind this right wing screech act into the ground permanently, at long last?

[bryant69]

3. THere it is

A year before the election - well two years maybe, you would have said the big problem with Gore was that he was too earnest, too much of a boyscout. A year later he's a reckless liar, lying even when he doesn't need to.

Bryant

[asjr]

4. It is a little late for a media mea culpa.

[Pirate Smile]

18. You're not the only one that has that feeling.

Over the years since 2000, some journalists have attempted to reach out to the Gores. At a pro-choice event a few years ago, Time's Karen Tumulty gave Tipper her card and asked her if she would ever want to talk. "When I saw her that night, she looked as though a gigantic weight had been lifted," recalls Tumulty, who'd recently seen the couple agonizing over Gore's political future. At the East Coast premiere of An Inconvenient Truth, the Gores bumped into Fineman, who recalls, "I said to , on a personal level, I want you to know that I admire you for the way you have stayed in the game and taken the mess of a few years ago and turned it around and become such a leader in this debate." At the time, Tipper just said thanks and moved on, thinking to herself, Too little, too late, buddy. In retrospect, she appreciates the gesture.

[Skittles]

43. she's a better woman than I am

I would have thrashed that whore-bastard Fineman to within an inch of his life

[BrklynLib at work]

26. BINGO! Like 8 years too late!!!!

Is it that they are so afraid a Dem will win in 08 and they won't have access that they are already starting to kiss-ass???:mad: :spank: :grr:

[Warren DeMontague]

30. No shit. On this, on Iraq, etc. etc. etc. nt

[peacetalksforall]

5. The only thing he did wrong was put himself in the hands of the DLC.

"What happened to Gore? The story promoted by much of the media today is that we're looking at a "new Gore," who has undergone a radical transformation since 2000—he is now passionate and honest and devoted to issues he actually cares about. If only the old Gore could have been the new Gore, the pundits say, history might have been different. "

While these pimps want us to believe their lie about him?

The media that loves the DLC and only gave THEM, the DLC, a voice in 2000 -
the DLC that WOULDN'T EVEN SHUT DOWN THE LIES? With any kind of authority. The pimping DLC?

I wanted to start today in some kind of normalcy.

That lying, thieving media - we are so screwed in this country.

And they, the DLC, only chuckled along with Matthews and other pimps when they attacked him for his shirts and his stiff neck. Endless, endless physical dress and look insults.

[karynnj]

7. Gore was the first DLC Presidential candidate in 1988.

The OP discusses the coverage as I remember it in 2000. The media made the race this contest of personalities and slogans. They created these enormous crises over minute things - Al Gore's sighing was made to be more important than Bush's pathetic answers to some questions, Gore's personalization of the fact that the same medicine from the same production was sold cheaper to vets than to pharmacies - where the price facts were true, etc was what hurt.

The media lied on both sides. They ignored many flaws in Bush's character. They were equally unfair - or worse in 2004. They allowed the SBVT to get an incredible amount of free coverage - without asking them for a shred of proof for saying things that contradicted the official record.

Gore was DLC in 2000 - though on many issues he had moved to a somewhat more progressives stance. He was somewhat radicalized by the SC 2000 stuff - who wouldn't be. There are many things the DLC can be blamed for but not being anti-Gore in 2000. The challenge to Gore came from Bradley, a member of the liberal wing of the party.

[peacetalksforall]

16. No - I didn't say they were anti-Gore. They were his advisors -

ineffectual, wimping, full of the wrong ideas, and totally incapable of defending him and getting the lie and personal attack campaign shut down. I seethe with what they allowed. He was their person to get elected - he deserved the selection by Dems - they, the DLC, ruined it all for him and the Supreme Court finished it off. 2000 was my wake-up and the beginning of my intense disrespect for the DLC. I don't want any candidate that they support and think they can select for all of us.

[karynnj]

27. I wonder if the problem was that the media was becoming more tightly controlled by a small number of

people even in 2000.

The problem I see is that the percent of people who read the papers has been declining. So, where do people get their news mainly radio and TV. Radio is very dominated by the right as is cable TV. What scares me for 2008 is that even PBS may not be ours as it is headed by a Bush political appointee. We've seen the 3 networks move to the right.

This does make a difference, especially because people believe what they see. But, almost everything in a political campaign is edited and thus the potential of distortion is great. Only the convention and the campaign's ads get through the media unfiltered. Even then, the media selects what parts to highlight. Until 2000, I would have included the debates - but we saw how the media took the first debate and played mostly Gore sighing - something none of the 5 people at my house had even noticed live. (It is a measure of how good Kerry was both in answers and demeanor that he was able to be seen as clearly winning - Gore's answers in debate 1 were far better than Bush's.)

This Vanity Fair article is giving examples of how even the print media negatively framed Gore and positively framed Bush. (I wish thaey would have looked at the same sources and showed that the media did the same to Kerry - not just to allow Kerry to recover some of the reputation that he, like Gore, lost to these poor excuses for journalists. The point is that in both those years, our candidate was head and shoulders better than theirs - if the media did not act like the mirrors at an amusement park, either election should have been a landslide. By generalizing it, it would show that this should be a huge issue for Democrats no matter who is nominated in 2008.

[peacetalksforall]

37. Yes, I hope we shut down the stuff that went on back then. We are

much more knowledgeable and the internet is more organized and there is cooperation between different groups. We should be able to use the petition software to send a message to the Chris Matthews and their bosses. Let them know we know what they're doing and then tell and teach others.

Yes, Gore and Kerry - both DLC and both mishandled.

[Pirate Smile]

8. I think the new Gore meme comes from the people who bought into the Nader crap - Gore = Bush.

They also have to justify how they were so wrong.

[Duppers]

44. yeah, with the like of Donna Brazile running his campaign

what a pseudo-expert she is/was, uh! talk about polymorphic--she's still on the talking heads circuit, selling herself as an informed expert! ha! she's an idiot.
What was Al thinking when he hired her?! Being too politically correct, I suspect.

[Armstead]

6. ...And they're still at it this year with otehr candidates...

The problem, IMO, is that the MSM is too lazy and stupid to go beyond the "memes" they are handed.

Therefore Obama has too little "experience, despite being a Senator with just one less term than Hilary and a long history of community organizing; Edwards is a hypocrite because he has money and spends it; Dodd is a non-entity despite a long career as a liberal senator; Biden is a blowhard (...well) despite his long experience; Richardson isn't a feal candidate despite being a governor and long experience in federal government and foreign policy, Kucinich is a joke because he's short and funny-looking.....

And it's like the media mea culpas after 9-11. "We spent too much time on trivia before. Now we're going to get serious..." Yep. Paris Hilton sure does have serious problems.

Bastids

[bbgrunt]

34. it's not that they are lazy or stupid. They are CONTROLLED.

[Duppers]

46. they're BOTH

note one of the threads on the greatest page the other day about a 30-yr veteran 'journalist' who had not even heard of the DSM - DOWNING STREET MEMO! They're lazy, stupid, and controlled.

and the big media 'journalists' just wanna collect their $1M+ salaries and party with K street.

[Duppers]

45. yes and the big dog was on Today,

that dumb morning program on NBC, talking about just this. 'that's what Hillary has to fight' the most, Bill explained: 'the caricature that the right-wing media has created of her, not the person she really is.' (paraphrased, of course.)

Still, as the VF article mentions, it's about character-driven sound bites and not policy/policies at all. the American public cannot be bothered to learn a damn thing about policy.

we are an entertainment-above-all society. what bare little info presented has to be dumbed down to an easy to understand 6th grade level, about which we need absolutely no background knowledge. to be sure, the damn media will not present any background either.

ever watched any of those silly Leno's jaywalking segments? they aren't setup skits, those people are really that dumb and they represents most of the American public. and take note of the latest 'miss teen S.C.' thing. makes ya wanna go cry in your beer, doesn't it.


Btw, I think Bill can still charm the pants off of also any liberal female, but that's not enough to get me to support his hand-out-to-K-street wife...in the primaries. I'll support any dem candidate running for prez.

[DeepModem Mom]

9. A TRAGIC disservice by the media to the public and our country. Shame! K&R

And thanks for posting, Pirate Smile.

[Pirate Smile]

10. Thanks, Mom. The article nails the reporters by name but it is so

tragic to read.

I want to call in the next time Cece Connelly is on Washington Journal and ask her how she sleeps at night. She is probably as much to blame for the Iraq War from her reporting in 2000 as Judy Miller is from being Scooter, Cheney and Chalabi's stenographer.

:(

[DeepModem Mom]

22. You are correct -- they are largely responsible for the mess we are in, IMO. They represent media..

people have trusted. People took their spin on the campaign as the truth -- when, in fact, GW Bush should never have been nominated by one of our two major parties. He was as unacceptable as a candidate as he is as "President." They should have exposed him at the outset as unacceptable. Instead, apparently thinking they were "cool," they mythologized him, and demonized Al Gore. And here we are.

[riona]

11. There is nothing the media could say

that could change my mind on Al Gore. With few exceptions, they lost my attention and respect years ago. Gore has served his country and the world well. I believe he has been the most influential person today in bringing a significant percent of public's attention to our deteriorating environment, and to the ineptitude of our present administration. But, I think that becoming our president, he could accomplish far more. No doubt this would be a sacrifice for him in many ways, but the country's need is very great.

[seafan]

12. '99 M Dowd: "Gore is so feminized & diversified & ecologically correct he's practically lactating."

Maureen Dowd's June 16, 1999, New York Times column.
Vanity Fair





SPRINGTIME FOR THE GREENIES

By Uli Schmetzer
March 7, 2007

When the New York Times (a daily always eager to head the media pack) suddenly praises Al Gore as a visionary environmentalist and superstore chains like Walmart and Tesco don the mantle of ‘friends of the earth’ one can safely conclude the snow has melted clearing the way to a ‘Springtime for the Greenies.’

The thaw-out began some time ago but turned into a flood after global scientists last month tabled a doomsday report on climatic changes and former U.S. vice-president and presidential candidate Al Gore shared a Hollywood Oscar for a documentary on global warming.

Overnight converts blossomed on every political patch. Chronic and calcified skeptics like President George Bush and Australian Prime Minister John Howard stumbled towards the new bandwagon. Cabinet ministers down to village mayors extolled their virtues as environmentalists and announced their own ‘significant’ efforts to save the earth. Fierce critics of global warming executed one hundred and eighty degree turns while industry, once the sworn nemesis of any change that could imperil their profit margins, fell over one another to add ‘ecologically friendly’ tags to their advertising blurbs.

New York Times’ columnist Maureen Dowd, notorious for mocking Al Gore during the 2,000 election campaign as ‘The Ozone Man obsessed about global warming and the information highway” this month did one of those opportunistic ‘turn and face the other way’ switches when she wrote the world would be in better shape if Gore sat in the Oval Office instead of the current occupant. (Gore lost to George W. Bush in a much disputed razor-edge election)

Needless to point out much of the new interest in Mother Earth has been prompted by opportunism and hypocrisy, the former to cash in, the latter to save face. Even presidents, premiers and prime ministers suddenly and ardently wished to save water - to save energy, to stop pollution, to reduce fossil fuel emissions after having dismissed or ridiculed the peril of global warming and climatic change for decades as ‘unproven scientific speculation’ or the more blunt ‘hogwash.’

......

In her past columns Dowd sneered at Gore as a member of ‘the wackadoo wing of the Democratic Party’ and derided him as “the champion of Kyodo and author of a chicken-little polemic warning of an ecological Kristallnacht and wasteland….”

Before the 2,000 election she told her readers: “I have zero desire to see President Gore round the clock putting comely interns to sleep with charts and lectures on gaseous reduction.”
In 1999 Dowd wrote: “Al Gore is so feminized and diversified and ecologically correct he is practically lactating.”

And she made more fun of Gore in recent years after he had told his ‘fellow Americans’ during a TV interview that President Bush “has created more anger and righteous indignation against us as Americans than any leader of our country in the 228 years of our existence as a nation.”
Of course Gore has now been vindicated, both for his assessment of the Bush Effect and his battle against global warming. Hollywood honored him with an Oscar and Ms Dowd, like so many politicians and heads of state, is back-pedaling as fast as she can pedal while pretending she was never wrong.

.....

[mod mom]

25. I hope these "pundits" realized they share a big chunk of the blame in what has transpired

and it haunts them until their final days. They have blood on their hands, as well.

[Apollo11]

13. Great article!

Thanks for the link!

Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Sign the Live Earth Pledge: www.liveearthpledge.org

Then ask all your friends and family to sign it too! :-)

Visit Al's site www.algore.com and read his blog http://blog.algore.com

Sign the petitions at www.algore.org and www.draftgore.com

:kick:

[Hamlette]

19. k&r for a great read. If only. . . n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

20. "Gosh, if we only knew then what we know now!"

Rest assured, the MSM will never learn.
If you don't believe me, watch how they wind up carrying Bush's water in the Iran propaganda campaign.

[MetaTrope]

23. Now how about if they write the same story for John Kerry?!

Can't believe all the liberal friends I have who said they "didn't like" Kerry...and whose only information came from the press and media.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

24. May I just point out one tiny thing...

Chris Matthews says:

"The last six years have been a powerful bit of evidence that we have to judge candidates for president on their preparation for the office with the same relish that we assess their personalities."


No shit, Sherlock. Jesus fucking Christ.

[BrklynLib at work]

31. Let's see if even Chris Matthews remembers that during the upcoming campaign...

:grr:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

40. Hasn't he been...

...getting a bit riled up about Fred Thompson's supposed uber-manliness lately?

[Skittles]

41. OMG that is just plain SICKENING

that he has just NOW come to that realization? ;puke:

[Tactical Progressive]

28. Al Gore is the same lying DINO he was in 2000

Dishonest serial exaggerator, Republicrat corporate whore, desperate to be liked while thinking he invented the internet, and not a dimes-worth-of-difference from any Republican.

Either that, or Al Gore hasn't changed appreciably since then, and it's really:
- a dishonest, right-wing mainstream media
- along with dishonest, politically puerile, Dem-Hating-Leftists

who were and still are the problem this country faces. A stereo sneerfest from both sides of the political spectrum combined to give us Bush and Cheney and everything they have wrought.


Now, the right-wing media whores seem to have some misgivings about their behavior.
And the DHLs have made Al their champion. Isn't that special?
Unfortunately, the dead don't rise with the magical incantation of 'Al Gore has changed'.

Neither of these groups has faced up to what they are or what they've done. They have concocted the lie that Al Gore has changed so that they don't have to face either of those questions. The DHLs have simply shifted targets to now pour their mindless, dishonest slime on Hillary, and you can bet the media whores will turn their right-wing attitudes on Dems whenever the political environment allows them to feel safe in doing so.

The mainstream media and the DHLs are nothing but a bunch of dishonest, lying twerps. Their political attitudes should never be trusted. That's the real story of our political era. Not Al Gore changing. He hasn't, and unfortunately the evidence is they haven't either.

[Pirate Smile]

36. Good post - it came from both sides and both use the "new Al Gore" mantra to avoid dealing with

what they did in 2000.

[seafan]

29. Robert Parry wrote extensively on the culpability of Big Media for the tragedy we are living in now.

Will the Press Idiocy Ever Stop?
By Robert Parry
July 2, 2007


U.S. News Media's 'War on Gore'
By Robert Parry
March 22, 2007


Gore & the Need for a 'Counter-Media'
By Robert Parry
December 19, 2002


Al Gore v. the Media
By Robert Parry
February 1, 2000



Many more articles in Parry's archives



And today, Vanity Fair's expose, Going After Gore, October 2007 Issue


A quote from that piece:

"The last six years have been a powerful bit of evidence that we have to judge candidates for president on their preparation for the office with the same relish that we assess their personalities." ----Chris Matthews, MSNBC

It's time to clean out the rats of Corporate Media, who have so cannibalized the name of true journalism.

[Uncle Joe]

32. Regarding this exchange

"As with all campaigns, the coverage of the 2000 election would be driven by a small number of beat reporters. In this case, two women at the most influential newspapers in the country: Seelye from The New York Times and Ceci Connolly from The Washington Post.

A prominent Washington journalist describes them as "edgy, competitive, wanting to make their mark," and adds that they "reinforced each other's prejudices."

"It was like they'd been locked in a room, and they were just pumping each other up," says Gore strategist Carter Eskew.

"They just wanted to tear Gore apart," says a major network correspondent on the trail. (Both refute such characterizations of themselves. "Why would reporters major news organizations confer with the competition on such a fiercely competitive story?" asks Connolly.)"

I believe by this time, the corporate media didn't really consider them selves as competitors with each other so much as sharing anxieties from the growing competitive pressures from the Internet as their primary motivations. Al Gore was the primary champion of their nemesis so he had to be punished for empowering the American People over the corporate medias' heads. I believe their open disdain of him would've been a fraction of it self, had he never championed the Internet.

Overall a great column, by Evgenia Peretz with Vanity Fair:thumbsup:

Thanks for the thread Pirate Smile.

[Richard Steele]

33. K&R

[Elspeth]

38. Maureen Dowd, Ceci Connolly, and others like them bear the blood of 3000+ dead Americans

and the blood of thousands and thousands of Iraqis.

If they had been honest reporters instead of shallow media tools, Gore would have won easily against a nothing person, and we wouldn't be in the middle of the hell we are in now.

[Skittles]

42. THANK YOU

it's why it pisses me off when DUers post Maureen's articles - I boycott that treasonoous piece of SHIT until she APOLOGIZES TO AMERICA

[Duppers]

47. hell yes, right on!

:applause: