You can always tell a Harvard story when it appears in the media. They're the ones about the famed "Harvard mystique," the envied "Harvard old-boy network" and the "much-imitated Core Curriculum." But as the stories longingly leer at Harvard's financial prowess, or snidely sneer at its fall from the top of the academic mountain, you can't always tell much from them.

In 1936, The New York Times snagged a Pulitzer Prize for its exhaustive coverage of Harvard's 300th birthday celebration. Now, 50 years later, as more than 900 journalists descend upon Cambridge to report on Harvard's 350th anniversary, three major national newsmagazines have already chipped in with lengthy cover stories prompted by the event. But don't count on any walking off with journalism's top prize this time around.

That's not to say that the coverage has been or will be bad, or not comprehensive. Boston's WNEV-TV, Channel 7, for instance, is providing extensive pool coverage of the three convocations as well as several symposia, and will air a one-hour special on Harvard Saturday night. The station will also air today's speech by Prince Charles live, and air special reports throughout the celebration.

Diminished media coverage of the festivities, overall, though, is largely the result of the University's decision to downplay the "real world" significance of the event. The 300th was billed as an international gathering of the best and brightest, while the 350th has been dubbed a mere "family affair." But the media can only blame itself for largely superficial coverage of the general state of Harvard as it prepares to enter the 21st century.

Harvard is, of course, an ingrained part of American lore and legend. The phrase "Harvard man," for instance, has connotations that a century could not erase. But what would the average guy in Middle America gather about the place from a perusal of the coverage of Harvard at its 350th birthday in the print media? And why does the media think he would even care to read the stuff?

"After 350 years, Harvard certainly qualifies as a national institution," says Time magazine senior editor, Christopher Porterfield. "From an educational standpoint, what happens at Harvardis extremely influential in the rest of thecountry."

The September 8 issue of the magazine containsportrait of a chubby-faced and baggy-eyedUniversity President Derek C. Bok amidst enduringsymbols of academia and veritas on the cover, anda trio of Harvard stories inside. The editorialcontent was handled by Porterfield, Time'seducation editor, and, not surprisingly, itfocuses on the educational side of Harvard life.

But Time's emphasis on the modern Harvardeducation and the school's academic reputationdistorts its overall portrayal of Harvard, circa1986. Mention of the divestment controversy, forinstance, does not pop up until several thousandwords into the articles, towards the end of aprofile of Bok sympathetic enough to make up forthe unflattering portrait of the patricianpresident on the cover.

As extensive as Time's coverage is--it alsoincludes a lengthy history of the College from itsinception to Bok's installation--it will not printdetailed reports on 350th festivities.

"It's hard to get a handle on [thecelebration]," says Porterfield. Time will coveronly those events, he says, "with an importancebeyond the occasion." The magazine will relegatethe rest of its coverage to the gossipy Peoplepage.

Time's chief rival in the national news-weeklygame, Newsweek, gave Harvard and its birthday acomparative pittance of coverage. A teaser at thetop of its cover asks, "Harvard at 350: Why theMystique?" Inside, playwright and author MarkO'Donnell '76, attempts in an idiosyncratic essayto answer that question, as only a former Lampoonpresident can. But the editors deemed a story on"TV's Fun Couple," Bruce Willis and CybillShepherd of "Moonlighting," more worthy of a coverstory.

"It's a big anniversary for Harvard, but notfor the rest of the nation," says Newsweek BostonBureau Chief Mark Starr. "People in Boston tend tolose their perspective, and we didn't find anycompelling reason to do [a big story]."

"Everyone has some fascination with Harvard,but [the 350th] is not the most important story tomost of our readers," he adds. "A lot of peopledecided to do a big story on it, but we thought wewould take an offbeat approach...irreverentwithout lacking respect."

The third member of the national news-weeklytroika, U.S. News and World Report, also gave bigplay to Harvard. In the most balanced andcomprehensive coverage of the University at its350th birthday, the magazine attempts to take itsreaders "Behind the Harvard Mystique."

The 10-page spread examines the pedagogic andintellectual controversies at the College andgraduate schools; the evolving composition of theundergraduate student body; divestiture; theold-boy network; and fundraising. It also offersprofiles of eight faculty superstars.