STUMP: media and politics

Verbal Fisticuffs

TV and radio shows like Hardball, Crossfire, and the O'Reilly Factor thrive on the clash between bombastic hosts and opinionated guests. But with its Debating series, The New Republic shows that print organizations can get in on some of that action, and add substance and style, to boot. Over the past few months, TNR writers have engaged other prominent journalists in debates on issues ranging from the Pledge of Allegiance controversy to California politics. So far, the debates have been absorbing and informative.

The Journalism of Why

The New Yorker
Weekend reading on the California Recall yielded two pieces with particular lessons for politics coverage in general. The first, a New Yorker profile of Arnold Schwarzenegger by Hendrick Hertzberg, sheds considerable light on why Arnold is running and why voters are responding. Herzberg tracks it all back nearly 30 years to Schwarzenegger's early dominance as a body-builder and the hints that more was in store.

What comes through above all, however, is a sense of Schwarzenegger’s indomitable will. That will is manifested not only in his spooky ability to sculpt his own body and in his outlandish (at the time) vision of himself as a man of destiny but also in his total, and apparently effortless, psychological domination of his fellow-musclemen—the way he intimidates and tames them with his charm, his confidence, his humor, and his obviously superior intelligence. And this domination is not simply instinctual. It is strategic. Everything Arnold does to advance himself (which is to say, everything Arnold does) is carefully thought through by an analytical mind that always looks many steps ahead and is acute and coldly realistic about the strengths and weaknesses of everybody in the game, himself included. Megalomania usually leads to hubris, but not in Arnold’s case. Not so far.

OK, Hertzberg had 5,700 words to work with and probably plenty of time to report. But as a reader, I got the sense of him continuing to ask, why this, why that, as he encountered various aspects of the Schwarzenegger phenemenon. As a bonus, he explains the nearly 100 year-old roots of the California Recall culture.

The 'Minor Candidates' Problem

The New York Times Magazine
The hed on today's cover piece -- "All Politics Are Loco!!! -- is a nice riff on Tip O'Neill's "All Politics Are Local" line. The story by Michael Lewis is better than the hed. In addition to exploring the weird and wacky, Lewis displays great pursuit of unknown candidates -- and discovers attitudes and motivations that explain a lot of what this recall is all about. Not to mention his eye-opening interview with the lady who lives next door to the governor. If only the discussion forum attached to Lewis' piece at NYTimes.com measured up to the quality of the story itself in any way at all.

Speaking of the 'too many names on the ballot" problem, my Poynter colleague, Steve Outing, describes a cool use of interactivity by LATimes.com in this E-Media Tidbit from last week.

Mendacity Index

The Washington Monthly has created a Mendacity Index aimed at measuring the truthfulness of the last four presidents. The index accompanies this piece on presidential deception by Joshua Michael Marshall.

On the one hand, I like the Mendacity Index as an enterprising new form of telling the politics story. Readers will be far more likely to explore something like this than a traditional story about the truthfulness in the White House. As intrigued as I am by the numbers, though, they seem hopelessly subjective. What think? Any other enterprising ways to get at the issue of political honesty?