It's a large, open democratic system. There's no monopoly--but it's not easy.... There are the dangers of the star system, the celebrity culture, the casinos of wealth. There's the cynicism of pure attitude substituting for knowledge, masquerading as hipness. There's the cowardice of easy lashing out at progressive figures attempting very difficult political tasks.
The press corps became supine under Reagan. It took a Lebanese newspaper to break the Iran-Contra scandal. The right-wingers who depicted themselves as journalists were allowed in in the Reagan era. Journalistic objectivity was cast as liberalism. A false polarization of objectivity versus conservatism was created, with each side having equivalent status. On the one hand, "This Week With David Brinkley" features Brinkley, Sam Donaldson, George Will, and then for balance Bill Kristol.
This Town is an insider's look at D.C., so one would tend to believe its depiction. But in the interest of being optimistic, where to now? Is there hope for a commendable Washington, or is it destined to drown in a sea of Scampergates?
Well, one of the most interesting features of this reelection is that the public is rejecting the press' presentation of reality, which is why the press is almost completely without influence at the moment....
Journalistic values, specifically skepticism, must be applied to journalism itself. What has happened in the last few years is that journalists who thought they were acting in the spirit of the Watergate journalists of the past have abandoned their values of skepticism. It is a sorry, pathetic spectacle. It is one of the lowest moments in the history of American journalism. And in this moment, the American public is repudiating it.
Blumenthal is correct that the American public is reacting against "the nadir of the coverage of politics," but does that mean that we can look forward to a day when we will no longer be bombarded with scandal after scandal? While Blumenthal seems to place most of the blame on the press, there is a public that sops up the drivel coming out of media outlets. Who is providing the scandals?
Certainly, a market exists for sensationalist intrigues, but the relative insignificance of, say, Dickmorrisgate, seems to substantiate the claim that Americans care less and less about scandals that have no effect on politics. American culture is one that thrives on sleaze in all forms. The success of such shows as "Hard Copy" and "A Current Affair" is testament to America's affinity for tender half-truths. But these shows' half-baked scandals are not on a par with Whitewater.
The administration has made blunders, but the reason nothing substantial has stuck to Clinton is that in terms of major policy scandals, he has stayed clean. Look no further than his popularity to convince you that America is not skeptical of Clinton's character. In this scandal-hungry and hypercritical America, winning a presidential election without having one's name smeared is virtually impossible. Many forces work to expose the personal lives of public officials in America today, including perhaps their own ethical breaches, but we should not provide a demand for the incessant barrage of overblown snafus we now face.
The press should magnify wrongdoings when they matter, not when they involve a presidential haircut. It is irrelevant whether the press constitutes the cause or the effect. What we know is that journalists have not risen above the desire for gossip; they have not embraced the ethic of their trade; instead, they have kow-towed to the public thirst for all the trash not fit to print.
This Town will be put on at the Arco Forum at the Kennedy School of Government this Saturday at 8 p.m. and Sunday at 7 p.m.