Caught Outside Of The Crossfire
Are we as a culture so caught up in a "Crossfire" mentality that anything other than a knock-down, drag-out screaming match garners criticism in political programming? After Sunday's "Face the Nation," complaints started circulating about the fact that the show aired a segment featuring three Republican members of Congress and no Democrats. The three guests: Rep. David Drier (R-CA), Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA). Here's what Media Matters thought about it and host Bob Schieffer's performance:
Schieffer's failure to provide balance or critical questioning allowed the Republican guests to make unchallenged claims about the motivations of the prosecutor in the conspiracy charges against former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), attack congressional Democrats, and provide partisan analysis in areas unrelated to recent GOP ethics problems, such as President Bush's tax cuts.As Media Matters points out, Schieffer did address the segment's make-up during the broadcast, noting: "Let me just point out, I didn't invite any Democrats to be on this morning because I thought this was a Republican problem and wanted to give you a chance to talk about it." The group also notes that Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz, who was asked about it in an online chat, concluded it was "not unreasonable" given the issues surrounding the Republican Party. But that was clearly not enough for critics.
PE spoke with "Face the Nation" Executive Producer Carin Pratt, who explained the thinking behind the segment. Pratt said that, given the events of the past weeks, she "didn't want it to get into a partisan fight" over the character, vices or virtues of DeLay or Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle. "The fact of the matter," Pratt said is that DeLay "had already been indicted."
What the show was more interested in, according to Pratt, is how Republicans were going to "deal" with a host of issues, including losing their leader in the House (at least temporarily), the fallout from the federal response to Hurricane Katrina , federal spending and other problems. And, she notes, the show invited three Republicans from different perspectives of the party (as much as either party has any ideological diversity these days).
I have no problem with the premise of the segment. Had all three been on for the entire show, critics may have had a more legitimate beef, but one ten-minute segment? Relax. It is not uncommon for a high-ranking administration official to appear on multiple shows for large blocks of time to get their message out, so three congressmen for ten minutes seems in-bounds. Perhaps the guests themselves could have been a little more interesting but I've learned that they call these shows "public affairs programs" for a reason.
In fact, if critics stopped to think about it for a moment, they may want to see more of such segments. Yes, all three were pretty much on party message but there were a couple of areas that showed some discomfort and cracks in that wall. Drier was rather pointed in responding to DeLay's comments on "Fox News Sunday" that morning, where he said, "I am going to continue doing my job. I can do this with or without the title." Now DeLay must have been alluding to his job as one member of the House, because he does have that job. But Drier made it clear that he wouldn't be doing the work of Majority Leader for the time being, saying, "he's not going to still run things. He knows he's not going to run things, but he's clearly a member of Congress, and he's a very important part of the team."
Media Matters also complains that "the unbalanced format allowed Dreier and Shadegg the opportunity to promote Bush's tax cuts without any Democratic response." Why did the Democrats need a response when Leach served to highlight differences within the party on the issue by saying, "It's pretty hard to have a fiscal balance when you have a war, you have a natural disaster and you have spectacular tax cuts. … I think we have to be very cautious or we're going to have our fiscal house become an embarrassment."
Sometimes it's best to stay out of the way when your opponent is suffering self-inflicted wounds.
As for Schieffer's "failure" to "provide critical questioning," that's a call for anyone who saw the show or read> the transcript to make. I would just add a couple thoughts. First, the opening segment of the show focused on Iraq with General John Abizaid, not really a topic working in favor of the Republican Party these days. Second, Schieffer closed with a rather scathing take on the Bush administration vis a vis the Judy Miller saga, concluding with this line: "If these past weeks have taught us anything, it is we need to know a lot more than the government seems willing to tell us about any number of things."
And critics see Republican advantage in all this?