Media Bias Turncoat?

By: Matthew Felling
Topics: CBS News Issues

52718CBS White House correspondent Jim Axelrod – you might remember him as the fellow labeled "defeatist" by then-White House press secretary Tony Snow – was involved in another tense exchange last week, this time with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

According to the Examiner article "Pelosi, Reid Take On Reporter":

CBS White House reporter Jim Axelrod mentioned to Pelosi that, come November 2008, the number of American troops in Iraq likely will be the same as in November 2006, when Democrats were swept into power. Then, he asked, "How do you view your stewardship of Congress as anything other than a failure to make the president change course?"

Pelosi was instantly taken aback. "What a lovely objective question on the part of the press!" she remarked.

And the blog world exploded with headlines like "Pelosi Shocked by CBS's 'Failure' Hardball from the Left ..." and "Nancy Pelosi Accuses Reporter of Bias"

I reached out to Axelrod to ask him about the incident, and here is how our considerably-less-testy exchange played out via e-mail:

Matthew Felling: You had a run-in with Snow and a run-in with the Speaker of the House … what do you make of these spats? Is the vitriol from the right different from the left?

Jim Axelrod: To be honest, I don't see them as run-ins. We ask. They answer. Every now and again, they take exception to either the tone or substance of the question. This was one of those cases -- though I'm still not sure if it was the tone or the substance or both.

Matthew Felling: Were you surprised that Pelosi took such offense at your question?

Jim Axelrod: I've read over the transcript of the question a number of times now. I still don't understand what's remotely objectionable about it. So if Speaker Pelosi was put out at all, I suppose I'm still in the dark as to why.

Matthew Felling: What was your thinking in when asking the question?

Jim Axelrod: My thinking was very straightforward. I try never to forget a basic premise -- I get to ask the questions that a lot of people wish they could. This might be the most common charge from a significant portion of the Speaker's base. That is, why haven't Democrats been more aggressive in challenging the Bush Iraq policy? I've heard more than one Democratic voter describe the party's approach to challenging the President as "failed". So I asked the leadership if they felt that way.

Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid could have used the platform to address the perception.

Or they could have taken offense at the question.

Their call.

I'm just happy to have the chance to prove that journalists can be charged with "bias" from both sides of the spectrum.

11 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

See all 11 Comments


by memekiller September 18, 2007 6:28 PM EDT: So much for the even-handedness. All anti-war posters have no problem with Axelrod''s question, and the chickenhawks complain about the liberal bias.

So, better shift right until us extremists complain. That''s the only way you''ll know you''re in the center.; Reply to this comment


by Labadorable September 18, 2007 5:01 PM EDT: Thank you for giving me hope that the MSM has gotten some guts & skepticism back. Skepticism a key ingredient for a good journalist %u2013 compliments from Helen Thomas.

The Democrats and the Republicans are playing %u201Cpin the tail on the donkey%u201D and our Representative Democracy, citizens of Iraq and our military are the victims of this game. The Democratic leadership is concerned with 08 %u2013 they are so obsessed with this that they are ignoring reality and the abuses that is happening today such as holding a full house vote on Criminal Contempt charges for Miers & Bolton. Two key components for a functioning Checks & Balances system do not exist: an independent non profit motivated MSM and a House of Representatives that read their employee manual The Constitution and hold the White House accountable.

Take the Constitution to the People with a little help from Oprah. I believe the best way to jumpstart the education of Congress, Senate and Americans-at-large on the Constitution and the violations against our Constitutional rights is to get Oprah engaged in this process. Having an audience of American women reading the Constitution with Oprah on national TV would definitely encourage members of Congress to read their Employee Handbook. The over-reaching Executive Powers given to this administration will NOT go away to the next President on January 20, 2009 unless changes are made. It really is that simple.; Reply to this comment


by Labadorable September 18, 2007 5:00 PM EDT: Thank you for giving me hope that the MSM has gotten some guts & skepticism back. Skepticism a key ingredient for a good journalist %u2013 compliments from Helen Thomas.

The Democrats and the Republicans are playing %u201Cpin the tail on the donkey%u201D and our Representative Democracy, citizens of Iraq and our military are the victims of this game. The Democratic leadership is concerned with 08 %u2013 they are so obsessed with this that they are ignoring reality and the abuses that is happening today such as holding a full house vote on Criminal Contempt charges for Miers & Bolton. Two key components for a functioning Checks & Balances system do not exist: an independent non profit motivated MSM and a House of Representatives that read their employee manual The Constitution and hold the White House accountable.

Take the Constitution to the People with a little help from Oprah. I believe the best way to jumpstart the education of Congress, Senate and Americans-at-large on the Constitution and the violations against our Constitutional rights is to get Oprah engaged in this process. Having an audience of American women reading the Constitution with Oprah on national TV would definitely encourage members of Congress to read their Employee Handbook. The over-reaching Executive Powers given to this administration will NOT go away to the next President on January 20, 2009 unless changes are made. It really is that simple.; Reply to this comment


by Labadorable September 18, 2007 4:58 PM EDT: Thank you for giving me hope that the MSM has gotten some guts & skepticism back. Skepticism a key ingredient for a good journalist %u2013 compliments from Helen Thomas.

The Democrats and the Republicans are playing %u201Cpin the tail on the donkey%u201D and our Representative Democracy, citizens of Iraq and our military are the victims of this game. The Democratic leadership is concerned with 08 %u2013 they are so obsessed with this that they are ignoring reality and the abuses that is happening today such as holding a full house vote on Criminal Contempt charges for Miers & Bolton. Two key components for a functioning Checks & Balances system do not exist: an independent non profit motivated MSM and a House of Representatives that read their employee manual The Constitution and hold the White House accountable.

Take the Constitution to the People with a little help from Oprah. I believe the best way to jumpstart the education of Congress, Senate and Americans-at-large on the Constitution and the violations against our Constitutional rights is to get Oprah engaged in this process. Having an audience of American women reading the Constitution with Oprah on national TV would definitely encourage members of Congress to read their Employee Handbook. The over-reaching Executive Powers given to this administration will NOT go away to the next President on January 20, 2009 unless changes are made. It really is that simple.; Reply to this comment


by mattcat25 September 18, 2007 1:20 PM EDT: It%u2019s been one week since George Bush%u2019s latest General David Patraeus (betrayed us) on the progress and future involvement with our occupation of Iraq.

Has the good General alleviated the Al-Quiada threat? Has there been improvement (in the last week) of the sectarian genocide of Shiites against Sunnis? Are attacks on Americans (and, private mercenary contractors) been eradicated? Has the Iraqis Police and Security Forces taken more responsibility in sheltering the Iraqi public? Is the infrastructure working? Are there continuous Water, Gas, and Electricity for Iraq?

The Patraeus dog and pony show should be held accountable to the American People each and every week until there is a distinguished resolve in our involvement with Iraq. The American People are paying the bills and need more then a one time report from the General responsible in the field.; Reply to this comment


by shingles1 September 18, 2007 12:46 PM EDT: romperroom2, I know you think you''re describing "lefties", but you''ve just described a pretty good percentage of the right wing, in which anything (whether a simple question or simply reality itself) that doesn''t correspond to their kool aid fueled world view is "biased". These blind partisans like to toss in the word "traitor" too, for good measure.

FYI, I don''t think Axelrod''s question was biased at all. After all, the Democrats talk and talk and talk and talk about the President''s failing policy in Iraq but never actually DO anything about it. Some people, on both the left and right, would call that a failure - so it''s perfectly legit.; Reply to this comment


by romperroom2 September 18, 2007 2:24 AM EDT: Brutal and persnickety questioning of Nancy Pelosi? Oh, my goodness. She best go back to baking cookies and washing diapers for the grandkids if she can''t stand that kind of heat from reporters.

It''s always hilarious to hear lefties demand that journalists throw hardball questions at conservative politicians but only lob softballs at liberal politicians. What''s the point -- and the good -- of that? Seems to me we need journalists who ask tough questions of them all.; Reply to this comment


by shingles1 September 18, 2007 1:43 AM EDT: "And the blog world exploded"

You know, I clicked on that link and most of the 1,000+ results in that google search had absolutely nothing to do with this story. In fact, if you refine the search even further you end up with less than 100 items, most of which STILL have nothing to do with this story.

Matthew, I think you''re stretching the meaning of the word "explosion" here.

Unless you''re being funny.

In which case, BRAVO!! Matthew Felling, BRAVO!!; Reply to this comment


by phoenixandy September 17, 2007 11:41 PM EDT: Jim Axelrod, the fact that you''ve been criticized by both Tony Snow and Nancy Pelosi doesn''t make you an impartial news reporter and that being criticized by both sides isn''t really something to be proud of either.

The harsh fact is that the MSM is much more right-wing than left-wing. Your honest questioning of Tony Snow was an exception. Your brutal questioning of Nancy Pelosi sadly is more the rule and more routine than conservatives would like to admit.

Your persnickety questioning of the Democrats'' inability to end this stupid Iraq war was out of line and uncalled for. You seem to forget that Bush still runs the White House, he has final say on lots of things and there are only so many things this Congress can do up against an extreme right-wing partisan.

Nancy Pelosi should have slapped you Jim. You would have deserved it.; Reply to this comment


by memekiller September 17, 2007 3:46 PM EDT: Putting the whole "bias" bit aside, I''m not too upset about this, though it is another example of using the CW frame, which tends to be conesrvative.

Though, I wish the Dems would go to the matt -- if you can''t do it with 60% of the country on your side, when can you? -- I also knew putting Dems in power would not make Bush change course. If babysitting a civil war and ethnic cleansing doesn''t get him to pull out, a Democratic Congress won''t change the calculus much. Plus, this is a President who does not recognize the separations of powers. Say it''s a Constitutional crisis, and Bush shrugs and say, "Okay, it''s a Constitutional crisis. Whatcha gonna do about it?"

You can''t throw him in jail. The response is typically, "There would be such a huge public outcry, a President would back down." But the press is more offended at criticism of Petreaus than Bush issuing signing statements proclaiming his signature should not in anyway be construed as any indication he''ll follow that law.

The problem with Democrats and the Press is the same: they both want to triangulate each other for the middle ground flanking the other to the right. Both are feckless, cowed, and terrified of stating the obvious, even now, because the obvious is just too extreme to admit.; Reply to this comment