The Public Eye Chat With .... Sharyl Attkisson

By: Matthew Felling
Topics: The Public Eye Chat

(CBS)

It's Thursday, and that means it's time for the Public Eye Chat. This week's subject is CBS News Capitol Hill Correspondent Sharyl Attkisson.

Matthew Felling: Many reporters have a few politicians or individuals they cover. But in a sense, you have 535. What challenges or opportunities does that present?

Sharyl Attkisson: The challenge? There are so many stories going on up here on a given day, I couldn't possibly cover them all. It's difficult to cover all the machinations of the members and the committees. The opportunity? There are so many stories going on up here on a given day. Another benefit is that you will always be able to find someone willing to talk to you.

Matthew Felling: You've been the Capitol Hill correspondent for over a year. How has reporting changed since the 2006 elections? What was the before and after like?

Sharyl Attkisson: I think in many ways it's the Democrats, now in the majority, who've had to make the biggest attitude adjustment. They just weren't used to the media appearing to "come after them" or challenge them the way Republicans have been challenged all the years they held the majority. In fact, some Democrats and their staffers appeared surprised if not offended when they took over leadership and we asked them the type of tough, challenging questions that we'd been asking Republicans when the GOP was in the majority. One example was when we asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to explain her alleged desire for a bigger, more expensive jet to fly her to and from California at taxpayer expense. I've probably asked Ms. Pelosi for an on-camera interview 40 times in the past couple of months and she has never granted me one, on the jet topic or any other – even on matters that are positive for her party. The fact is, whoever is in the majority has to spend more time than the minority justifying what is or isn't getting done on the hill and will be questioned harder by the public and the press if it appears they aren't following through with promises. They're a bigger target for attack and criticism because they're in essence "running the show." But I just think this caught some Democrats by surprise.

A few Republicans have told me it's fun to be in the minority where you can play spoiler to the majority, rather than be the ones on the defense all the time. I don't really think Republicans enjoy being in the minority, but I understand where they're coming from. The American public elected a Democrat majority to Congress yet I've seen a couple of polls stating that public approval of Congress is below that of the President. It just goes to show that when you're in charge you may get some credit, but fairly or not, you probably get more blame than anything.

On Iraq, Democrats swept into office partly on a mandate to "do something" about Iraq, but found that once here they really didn't seem to have a stronger consensus of the answer than the Republicans did. It may be that nobody really likes the way the war in Iraq has turned out, but nobody seems to have consensus on the supposed "solution." On the other hand, you can't say "nothing" has changed. Democrats in Congress have successfully hammered on the issue in a way that's definitely shaped the War and its politics. They've been able to force a change in military leaders and pushed President Bush to embrace a change in strategy and ideas that he might not otherwise have embraced at this stage.

Matthew Felling: How difficult has it been to cover the evolution of the immigration debate?

Sharyl Attkisson: More interesting than difficult. The immigration debate has almost exactly parallelled the immigration process last year... there was a deal in the Senate, there were arguments, it was dead, it was revived. Now we're at the stage where it could eventually pass in the Senate, like last year before it got killed in the House. The most frustrating thing about the immigration story as a human, perhaps, is that there is so much consensus on this issue that "something" needs to be done... but you have the sense that nothing will get done because there's not enough agreement on which course to take.

Matthew Felling: What do you wish you could tell people about covering Congress?

Sharyl Attkisson: Whether you like them or not or agree with them or not, the members of Congress and their staff work their tails off. I have to jog to keep up with even the oldest Senators as we meander through the Capitol basement. They shuttle from interviews to meetings to votes, they're read-up on a wide range of national and local issues and they're fundraising in between, and often raising families. There's rarely a meal that isn't mixed with business somehow. Then they leave the Hill in the evening and go to more business related functions. Lots of them also exercise and eat healthy on top of everything else. Anyone who knows me knows I'm not a huge fan of politicians in general -- any more than they are fans of journalists -- but I'm impressed by the amount of work they do.

Matthew Felling: You've been in DC with CBS for over 10 years. Those have been like dog years in media, with so many changes. What's that been like for you? Moving from a fax machine to blackberries in one decade?

Sharyl Attkisson: It's opened incredible doors as far as doing investigative journalism, putting information at our fingertips that we might never have been able to find ten years ago.

Matthew Felling:What are some of the tactics press secretaries use to try to manipulate coverage?

Sharyl Attkisson: When you call about a story a member of Congress doesn't want covered, the press secretary will say "That's old news" no matter how recent the story is or "Everybody's already done that story" even if nobody has. When a press secretary does want a story covered, he/she will say: "There's interest from other networks" or "I can give you the exclusive now but if you don't take it now I'll have to shop it around"

Matthew Felling: Do you ever get blowback from a report that someone didn't like? Can you give me an example?

Sharyl Attkisson: Of course, especially for investigative work. But that's mostly off Capitol Hill. On the Hill, public figures know they're fair game and are used to seeing all kinds of stories being done. For my work off the Hill, I've had pharmaceutical companies, other corporations like Firestone, non-profits like Red Cross, and other non-profits associated with pharmaceutical companies and government entities try to prevent my stories from airing, call CBS executives, cancel advertising, hire PR firms, hire former CBS producers as PR people to call CBS.

Matthew Felling: You've got a black belt in taekwondo. Have you ever been tempted to use it on the Hill?

Sharyl Attkisson: Yes. And that's all I'll say.

2 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by hernancortez June 21, 2007 8:47 PM EDT: Attkisson herself reported Pelosi's denial that she requested the aircraft, and acknowledged that it may be true (Pelosi's denial). From the February 9 edition of the CBS Morning News:

ATTKISSON: Thursday, Pelosi swung back, suggesting the Pentagon may be leaking misinformation about the whole flak as payback for her criticism of the Iraq war.

PELOSI: I have never asked for any larger plane. I have said I'm happy to ride commercial and if the plane they have doesn't ... go coast to coast, I'm happy to ride commercial and coast to coast that way.

ATTKISSON: Maybe Pelosi didn't ask for a big plane, but her good friend Congressman Jack Murtha, who oversees the Pentagon budget, did fess up to putting a call in to the Defense Department about a plane on Pelosi's behalf. He's not giving details.; Reply to this comment


by cktirumalai June 21, 2007 2:38 PM EDT: James Madison, the two-term President who is sometimes called the Father of the Constitution, thought that the representation of so many interests and regions in Congress and the inevitable clash between them would eventually lead to the formulation of sound laws. I wonder to what extent his prediction has been realized in recent years. The answer probably depends on the people of whom you ask this questiion.; Reply to this comment