Networks Pounce on Leaked E-mail to Begin Push for Firing Rove --7/12/2005

1. Networks Pounce on Leaked E-mail to Begin Push for Firing Rove
Monday night and Tuesday morning, all three broadcast network newscasts trumpeted a leaked e-mail that indicated that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove told Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper in July 2003 that Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife "apparently works at the agency," meaning the CIA. On World News Tonight, ABC's Terry Moran summoned the image of Watergate, saying White House spokesman Scott McClellan's response yesterday was to "stonewall." This morning, network morning hosts began a "Dump Rove" movement. ABC's Charles Gibson announced at the top of Good Morning America: "The big question, will or should the President fire him?" When a guest pointed out that Rove had apparently revealed neither Valerie Plame's name nor her covert status, Gibson was indignant: "Is that not a Clintonian defense?"

2. White House Reporters Ridicule Scott McClellan at Monday Briefing
NBC's David Gregory and ABC's Terry Moran openly showed their disdain for White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan at Monday's briefing. Gregory admonished McClellan for refusing to comment: "Scott, I mean, just -- I mean, this is ridiculous." At another point, after McClellan pleaded with Gregory to "let me finish," the NBC reporter erupted: "No, you're not finishing -- you're not saying anything." When ABC's Moran got his turn, he charged that Rove had been "caught red-handed" and ridiculed McClellan's argument that he could not properly comment while the prosecutor was still conducting his probe: "All of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation?" with audio

3. New Study Finds No Media Honeymoon in Bush's Second Term Either
A new survey of network evening news coverage confirms that President Bush has received mostly negative attention from ABC, CBS and NBC during the first 100 days of his second term. The non-partisan Center for Media and Public Affairs, which has tracked presidential news coverage since 1989, found that from January 20 through April 29, two-thirds of the President's coverage has been negative, compared to just one-third positive. During the first 100 days of Bush's first term in 2001, a time when new presidents usually receive a "honeymoon" from the press, the coverage was even more hostile: 71 percent bad press, compared with a measly 29 percent good press.

4. Celebrity Journalists Gather to Help Left-Wing Anti-Gun Group
Can you imagine the National Rifle Association hosting a fundraiser that's emceed by PBS's Mark Shields, featuring CBS's Mike Wallace and former Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, supported by Walter Cronkite and current personalities at CNN and NBC News? Probably not. But a liberal group that champions more gun control, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, will be doing just that in hosting an 80th birthday party fundraiser for humorist Art Buchwald in September in Washington at the French embassy.

Networks Pounce on Leaked E-mail to Begin
Push for Firing Rove

Monday night and Tuesday morning, all three broadcast network newscasts trumpeted a leaked e-mail that indicated that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove told Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper in July 2003 that Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife "apparently works at the agency," meaning the CIA. Teasing his upcoming story, CBS's John Roberts last night breathlessly suggested scandal: "The CIA leak investigation: Is the trail leading right to the White House?" On World News Tonight, ABC's Terry Moran summoned the image of Watergate, saying White House spokesman Scott McClellan's response yesterday was to "stonewall," then ran a series of soundbites showing McClellan yesterday saying he couldn't comment on an ongoing investigation.

This morning, network morning hosts began organizing their "Dump Rove" movement. ABC's Charles Gibson announced at the top of Good Morning America: "The big question, will or should the President fire him?" When a guest pointed out that Rove had apparently revealed neither Valerie Plame's name nor her covert status, Gibson was indignant: "Is that not a Clintonian defense?"

Over on CBS, Early Show co-host Hannah Storm suggested to national political correspondent Gloria Borger: "The President has said on more than one occasion that he would fire anyone in the administration who did leak the name of a covert CIA officer. What sort of position does this put the President in now if, indeed, Rove is proven to have leaked a name?"

And on NBC's Today show, Tim Russert argued: "Karl Rove is deeply involved in all the policy and politics of this administration. What effect will this have upon his ability to function in that role? And as one Republican said to me last night, if this was a Democratic White House, we'd have congressional hearings in a second."

But on Monday's Nightly News, NBC's David Gregory, who in the White House press room on Monday scolded McClellan as "ridiculous" (see item #2), pointed out that Rove, may not be the individual who revealed Plame's CIA job: "It's still unclear whether this new information about Rove answers the question at the heart of the leak investigation: Who blew Valerie Plame's cover?" Even CBS's Roberts conceded that he was told by Rove's attorney that "Rove has been assured by prosecutors that he is not the target of the investigation."

Indeed, the Robert Novak column that first named Plame as Wilson's wife cited two administration sources, and the e-mail that so aroused the press corps yesterday seems to show that Rove neither mentioned Plame by name nor seemed to understand that she was an undercover "operative," as she was described by Novak.

And while Rove last week waived his confidentiality agreement with Time's Cooper, allowing him to testify and thus avoid going to jail, ABC's Moran on World News Tonight nevertheless wondered: "Is Rove the source for New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who sits in a prison cell tonight because she wouldn't divulge her source?"

Now, for more on how each network handled the Rove story, both last night and this morning:

# CBS. In a tease at the start of Monday's CBS Evening News, John Roberts announced: "I'm John Roberts. The CIA leak investigation: Is the trail leading right to the White House?" After stories on Hurricane Dennis and the London bombings, anchor Bob Schieffer introduced the full report, which the MRC's Brad Wilmouth transcribed:
"President Bush's top political strategist, Karl Rove, has become the center of attention in the mystery over who blew the cover of an undercover CIA agent. The case has already resulted in the jailing of New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who refused to reveal her sources to a federal prosecutor investigating the leak. But today, the White House just stopped talking about it. Here is John Roberts at the White House."
Roberts began by mocking McClellan for having defended Rove back in 2003: "For nearly two years, the White House has stood firmly behind the President's deputy chief of staff, insisting Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity."
Roberts then showed two clips of McClellan at the White House podium dated September 29, 2003. First: "I made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place." Then: "And I said it is simply not true."

Roberts snidely continued: "But in an e-mail, obtained by Newsweek magazine, Rove told Time reporter Matt Cooper the woman is someone who 'apparently works' at the CIA. When asked about that today, the once forthcoming White House suddenly went silent."
McClellan at Monday's briefing: "We're not going to get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation from this podium."
Roberts: "The change of heart was odd considering the investigation was well under way when the White House came out to defend Rove, and nine months later when the President promised harsh punishment for anyone who leaked Valerie Plame's identity."

In another clip, this one dated June 10, 2004, an unnamed reporter is shown vaguely asking the President: "Do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?"
Bush quickly answered: "Yes, and that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."

Roberts continued: "Democrats today said they hoped the President would make good on that pledge. But Rove's attorney today told me there's nothing in the e-mail that Rove hasn't already told investigators, and that Rove was only trying to steer Cooper away from potentially bad information, not intentionally disclose the identity of a covert agent. He also said Rove has been assured by prosecutors that he is not the target of the investigation."

After another clip of McClellan saying he couldn't discuss the case, Roberts chastised: "It was a bad day at the White House, unable to defend its own on the record statements, unable to explain why what it repeatedly said with such certainty 21 months ago now would appear so demonstrably false."

Back on camera, he told anchor Bob Schieffer: "In the end, this may turn out to be more just an embarrassment for the White House than anything else, and it will be an embarrassment. After all, as you pointed out, Bob, there is a reporter in jail over all of this. Bob?"
Schieffer asked: "Well, have they said anything about that part of it, John? I mean, has anyone expressed sympathy or said she deserves to be there or she ought not to be there? Had they said anything about her being there?"
Roberts said no: "Not from the White House today, Bob. All they would say was that here's an ongoing investigation and we're not going to talk about it even though they've talked about it plenty in the past."

This morning on The Early Show, MRC's Brian Boyd noted, CBS aired a story by reporter Bill Plante that echoed much of Roberts' mockery of the White House's no comment stance. Plante concluded by referring to the idea that prosecutors are not targeting Rove, telling co-host Harry Smith that "there are other people involved in this controversy over the outing of the CIA officer, but if Rove is truly not a target of this investigation, the White House, at worse, still looks stupid, Harry."

A few minutes later, co-host Hannah Storm asked CBS's Gloria Borger about Rove: "There are calls for Rove to be investigated, prosecuted, fired. Is this merely an embarrassment for the White House at this point or something more serious?"
Borger: "Well, I think at this point it's a true embarrassment because earlier on White House press secretary Scott McClellan did answer questions about this leak of a CIA agent's identity, not her name, just her identity. And now, yesterday, he was just pounded by reporters in the press room saying you wouldn't talk about it today, but you did talk about it in the past. And what Karl Rove did, according to an email reported by Newsweek, is that he had said to Matt Cooper that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the agency. He did not identify her name. That is not a crime probably, according to many attorneys. But it is an embarrassment for the White House."

Storm followed up, wondering if Rove should be forced out: "Well, the President has said on more than one occasion that he would fire anyone in the administration who did leak the name of a covert CIA officer. What sort of position does this put the President in now if, indeed, Rove is proven to have leaked a name?"
Borger corrected her: "Well, he didn't leak a name. What he said was that his wife worked for the agency. That may be a distinction without a difference for some, but I think legally that probably is a distinction...."

After Borger argued that a more important question would be to find out who told Rove about Wilson's wife, Storm returned to the idea of Rove's firing: "Just a few seconds left. Do you envision any scenario under which the President would be forced to fire his closest advisor?"
Borger let her down: "It's hard to, it's really hard to say at this point. As you know, the President is a very loyal man. He showed that last week when he defended Alberto Gonzales, his attorney general from attacks on the right. He's very loyal to his staff."

# ABC. Substitute anchor Charles Gibson summarized at the top of Monday's World News Tonight: "After years of denial, the revelation that one of President Bush's closest advisors is implicated in the leak of the identity of a CIA agent. What will the President do about Karl Rove?"

After stories on Hurricane Dennis and the London bombings, Gibson introduced Moran's report: "A huge controversy has erupted in Washington involving one of the President's closest advisors, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove. The issue: did Rove play any role in outing a covert CIA operative, Valerie Plame? Newsweek reported yesterday that Rove had at least one conversation with a reporter about the CIA agent before her identity was revealed. Here's our White House correspondent, Terry Moran. Terry?"
MRC's Brad Wilmouth took down how Moran began by disparaging press secretary McClellan's performance: "Charlie, the revelation about Karl Rove really threw the White House on the defensive today. Their response, stonewall. Under fire in the briefing room, the White House press secretary had one basic response."

ABC then ran a quick succession of three clips of McClellan from Monday's briefing: "We're not going to get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation from this podium."
"Again, I've responded to the question"
"You can keep asking them, but you have my response."

Moran complained: "For two years, the White House has insisted that Karl Rove had nothing to do with leaking the classified identity of the CIA operative."
McClellan back on September 29, 2003: "I've made it very clear he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was."
Moran: "Rove himself denied he was the leaker."
Unidentified Female Reporter: "Do you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"
Karl Rove [entering his car]: "No."

Moran: "Now, Newsweek has published an e-mail from a Time magazine reporter to his boss that proves Rove did leak -- if not the name, the identity of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA official, in July 2003. Plame is the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a fierce critic of the President's case for the Iraq War. In the July 11, 2003, e-mail, Time reporter Matthew Cooper wrote that he had spoken with Rove 'on double super-secret background,' and that Rove told Cooper not to get 'too far out on Wilson,' because Wilson's wife 'apparently works at the agency,' an effort to discredit Wilson's claims."

Moran then channeled Democratic desires to have Rove removed: "Today, Democrats pounced, demanding Rove have his security clearance revoked, or resign, or face a congressional inquiry."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA): "It seems to me that this is such an abuse of power and such a betrayal of our national trust that the Congress should be holding hearings."
Moran: "It is a federal crime to identify an undercover agent. There is no proof so far that Rove knew Plame was undercover."
Victoria Toensing, Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General: "Basically, the prosecutor has to prove that the person intentionally revealed the name of the CIA undercover person with the knowledge that the government was taking affirmative measures to keep that person's identity secret."

Moran concluded by suggesting Rove was somehow responsible for the imprisonment of Judith Miller and that Bush, if he were consistent, would fire Rove:
"There are still plenty of questions: Who told Rove? Is Rove the source for New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who sits in a prison cell tonight because she wouldn't divulge her source? And most important, Charlie, what will President Bush, who has pledged to fire anyone caught leaking classified information, what will he do about Rove now?"

On Tuesday's Good Morning America, Gibson began the show by wondering whether Rove would be fired: "Damage control, President Bush's powerful advisor Karl Rove under fire over a leak to a reporter. Now the big question, will or should the President fire him?"

Later in the first half-hour, the MRC's Jessica Barnes caught how Gibson introduced a debate segment between ex-Clinton aide Paul Begala and Republican consultant Joe Watkins by showing excerpts from Monday's tumultuous White House briefing, followed by clips from previous denials that Rove had anything to do with Plame's naming.
Gibson introducing clips from 2003: "For nearly two years, the White House has repeatedly called the notion that Karl Rove was involved in the leak--"
McClellan: "Totally ridiculous."
Reporter: "But did Karl Rove do it?"
McClellan: "I said it's totally ridiculous."
Gibson: "The President even vowed any leaker would be kicked out."
President Bush: "If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."
Gibson: "Rove himself denied he had anything to do with the leak."
Reporter, yelling to Rove who's getting into his car: "Do you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"
Rove: "No. Good morning."
Gibson: "But now it's been revealed that Karl Rove did leak to the media that the wife of an administration critic, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, worked for the CIA, part of an apparent effort to discredit his claims. Top Democrats jumping on the issue are using words like 'treason.' Senator John Kerry says Rove has to go. But the big question now, what will the President do with the leaker who happens to be his closest political advisor?"

Gibson only then got around to his guests, turning first to the liberal Begala: "So, how deep is the water in which Karl Rove now resides?"
Begala cut loose: "Pretty deep. He's got two big problems. There's the legal problem, and we'll leave that for the grand jury -- we don't know what kind of evidence they've got and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence. But there's the political problem where we know the White House is guilty and that is of misleading us. We saw that tape. Karl said no, the White House press secretary said it was ridiculous, and now it seems to be true, and the problem they've got is people are going to look at this crowd and say, 'Gee, we can't trust a thing they say, after WMDs and now this.' It's a credibility problem."

Gibson then turned to Watkins, suggesting that anyone defending Rove would be guilty of hypocrisy: "Joe, if this had happened in the Clinton administration, the Republicans would be going nuts."
Watkins tried to calm Gibson down: "Well, there's no doubt in this case. First of all, Karl Rove is not necessarily the target of this investigation. We don't know that he is and certainly he hasn't done anything wrong. He's done nothing illegal, and we know that from his lawyer, as well as from what he said."
Gibson retorted: "Is that not a Clintonian defense?"
Watkins: "No, not at all."
Gibson sounded like a prosecutor: "Yes, Karl Rove didn't specifically named this person. He just talked about Wilson's wife and he didn't actually say she was undercover, and so therefore he didn't technically break the law."
Later, after Watkins and Begala had exchanged barbs, Gibson returned to the idea that the White House had been caught in a lie: "They had denied it and denied it and denied it that Rove was the person who leaked information about Wilson's wife."

Watkins again tried to focus on the key details: "Well, first of all, he had to know, it's only illegal if he knew that she was a covert operative of the CIA and he knew that he was blowing her cover and he knew that the CIA wanted her to remain covert, and that hasn't been the case and that's not been proven."

But Gibson again rejected Watkin's arguments: "Aren't you technically, though, burying yourself in a defense on words -- technically didn't know she was undercover, didn't actually say her name?"

Gibson asked Begala: "Do you think there's a chance in the world that the President will ask his chief political advisor to step down?"
Begala argued that Bush was the real villain: "They're awfully close. You know, after George W. Bush lost New Hampshire by 19 points -- Karl told him he was going to win, he lost by 19 -- he didn't fire Karl then and that was Karl's job, was to win New Hampshire. Bush is desperately loyal, but the President should be the one responsible here. I always say focus on the organ grinder not the monkey. Guys like Karl, guys like me, staff guys, we're the monkeys. The President's the organ grinder and he's the one who ought to be accountable here."
Gibson then asked Begala: "When the President says, 'I want to find out who leaked,' do you think the President knew?"
Begala said he had no idea, but that "a guy like Karl doesn't go out there and do something like this unless he really thinks the President wants him to."

Gibson saved his last question for Watkins: "Do you think there's a chance in the world he'll let Rove go?" Watkins said absolutely not.

# NBC. Monday's NBC Nightly News also included the Rove story in their top of the broadcast tease, with anchor Brian Williams wondering: "The CIA leak: Did the President's top political advisor leak the identity of a CIA operative? New details tonight on what role Karl Rove played."

Unlike CBS's Roberts and ABC's Moran, reporter David Gregory began by describing the contents of the leaked e-mail from 2003, and only then got around to McClellan's refusal to comment:
"At the time, the White House repeatedly insisted Rove was not involved. Today, Press Secretary Scott McClellan refused to stand by his defense of Rove, claiming he would no longer comment on an ongoing investigation."

He then showed a clip of himself at Monday's briefing, questioning McClellan about Rove: "Was he involved or was he not? Because, contrary to what you told the American people, he did, indeed, talk about his wife, didn't he?"
He showed McClellans's response: "David, there will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it."

Gregory got back to the case: "The real question is whether Rove committed a crime. No, his lawyer says, insisting Rove never revealed classified information, nor did he reveal that Plame was a secret agent. Experts say the legal hurdles are high."
Randall Eliason, former Federal Prosecutor: "You have to prove that the person who's disclosing the agent's identity knew that they were, in fact, a covert agent, that the CIA was trying to protect their identity, to keep it confidential."

Gregory downplayed the idea that Rove is the secret source that prosecutors are looking for: "Robert Novak's column, however, based on two administration sources, identifies Plame as, quote, 'an operative.'"
After showing a clip of President Bush in 2003 promising to "take care of" any subordinate found guilty, Gregory concluded: "It's still unclear whether this new information about Rove answers the question at the heart of the leak investigation: Who blew Valerie Plame's cover? David Gregory, NBC News, the White House."

Tuesday morning on Today, Matt Lauer showed a lengthy excerpt of Monday's briefing, including a diatribe against McClellan by Gregory, before turning to Tim Russert.

MRC's Megan McCormack took down Gregory's hectoring comments: "This is ridiculous, the notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail." He continued scolding McClellan: "You're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation? Was he involved, or was he not?"

Then Today ran a short bite from ABC's Moran telling McClellan: "You're in a bad spot here, Scott."

Lauer then turned to Russert: "When's the last time you heard an exchange like that, Tim?"
Russert gravely replied: "It's been some time, Matt. And this is obviously dead serious for three different reasons. One, was a crime committed, in terms of revealing the identity of an undercover CIA agent? That's a very technical crime, technical statute, difficult to prove, but it will be examined.
"Secondly, Matt, the grand jury testimony. Did Karl Rove say something before the grand jury that is in any way conflicted, or contradicted by this e-mail from Time Magazine? We simply do not know.
"Thirdly, Matt, the political fallout. Karl Rove is deeply involved in all the policy and politics of this administration. What effect will this have upon his ability to function in that role? And as one Republican said to me last night, if this was a Democratic White House, we'd have congressional hearings in a second."

Lauer wondered: "Well, let me just mention, there is no evidence, at the moment, that Karl Rove committed a crime, but could he become a political liability for the White House nonetheless?"
Russert used a word made famous during Watergate: "That's the unanswered question. The White House position now is to say, what we said two years ago in terms of no involvement is, in effect, inoperative. We're simply not going to comment anymore until this investigation is concluded. 'Inoperative,' my word, not theirs, but that was the impression left yesterday."

White House Reporters Ridicule Scott
McClellan at Monday Briefing

NBC's David Gregory and ABC's Terry Moran openly showed their disdain for White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan at Monday's briefing. Gregory admonished McClellan for refusing to comment: "Scott, I mean, just -- I mean, this is ridiculous." At another point, after McClellan pleaded with Gregory to "let me finish," the NBC reporter erupted: "No, you're not finishing -- you're not saying anything."

Listen to MP3 audio clip Text of clip + audio archive

When ABC's Moran got his turn, he charged that Rove had been "caught red-handed" and ridiculed McClellan's argument that he could not properly comment while the prosecutor was still conducting his probe: "All of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation?"

Ironically, NBC's Gregory took the most balanced tone in his story on Monday's Nightly News (see Item #1 above), but Moran and CBS's John Roberts also used their evening news stories as vehicles to continue lampooning McClellan.

MRC's Ken Shepherd reviewed the entire White House briefing that was shown on C-SPAN early on Tuesday morning and drafted this item documenting the White House reporters' scolding tone.

CBS's Roberts was the first of the big three network reporters to confront McClellan, and his question previewed the spin he would deliver later on the CBS Evening News:
"Scott, if I could -- if I could point out, contradictory to that statement, on September 29, 2003, while the investigation was ongoing, you clearly commented on it. You were the first one who said, if anybody from the White House was involved, they would be fired. And then on June 10 of 2004, at Sea Island Plantation, in the midst of this investigation, when the President made his comment that, yes, he would fire anybody from the White House who was involved. So why have you commented on this during the process of the investigation in the past, but now you've suddenly drawn a curtain around it under the statement of, 'We're not going to comment on an ongoing investigation'?"

When it was David Gregory's turn, he wanted to know: "Did Karl Rove commit a crime?" He then erupted with dissatisfaction at McClellan's answers:

# "Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003 when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliott Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, 'I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this' -- do you stand by that statement?"

# "Scott, I mean, just -- I mean, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell people watching this that somehow you decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium, or not?"

# At one point Gregory demanded to know: "Why are you choosing when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate [to comment on the case]?"
McClellan pleaded: "If you'll let me finish-"
Gregory cut him off: "No, you're not finishing -- you're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke out about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation? Was he involved, or was he not? Because, contrary to what you told the American people, he did, indeed, talk about his wife, didn't he?"

When ABC's Terry Moran got his chance, he charged that Rove had been "caught red-handed" and scoffed at McClellan's argument that he could not properly comment while the prosecutor was still conducting his probe:
"Well, you're in a bad spot here, Scott, because after the investigation began, after the criminal investigation was underway, you said -- October 10, 2003, 'I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby, as I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.' From that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began. Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation?"

Moran disdainfully followed up: "Wait, wait -- so you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore, and since then, you haven't?"

Much like CBS's Roberts, Moran maintained his disdainful tone when he appeared on ABC's World News Tonight.

New Study Finds No Media Honeymoon in
Bush's Second Term Either

A new survey of network evening news coverage confirms that President Bush has received mostly negative attention from ABC, CBS and NBC during the first 100 days of his second term. The non-partisan Center for Media and Public Affairs, which has tracked presidential news coverage since 1989, found that from January 20 through April 29, two-thirds of the President's coverage has been negative, compared to just one-third positive. During the first 100 days of Bush's first term in 2001, a time when new presidents usually receive a "honeymoon" from the press, the coverage was even more hostile: 71 percent bad press, compared with a measly 29 percent good press.

CMPA's methodology consists of tallying every explicitly positive and negative statement, either by a reporter or in a soundbite from a news source, "that evaluated the President's policies, political skills and personal traits." In 1993, new President Bill Clinton received more balanced coverage, according to CMPA: 41 percent good press/59 percent bad press. In 1989, CMPA found that then-President George H. W. Bush actually received mostly good press, with 61 percent positive evaluations compared to 39 percent negative during his first 50 days in office.

An article in Monday's Washington Times by media reporter Jennifer Harper summarized the key findings of CMPA's latest report. An excerpt:

President Bush just can't win with the broadcast networks.

More than two-thirds of the news stories on ABC, NBC and CBS covering the first 100 days of Mr. Bush's second term were negative, according to an analysis released today by the District-based Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA)....

ABC was the most critical -- 78 percent of the coverage of the president on "ABC World News Tonight" was negative. On CBS, the coverage was 71 percent negative. The study called NBC "more balanced" at 57 percent negative.

The analysis also flagged comments deemed judgmental or overtly negative.

"Without comment about how he felt taking the nation to war on such flawed assumptions, President Bush agreed it's time to go to work," said CBS correspondent John Roberts on March 31.

NBC, meanwhile, showcased one Georgia voter saying in early February, "I'm in the working world, trying to make a living. Seems like [Bush is] screwing it all up."

The three networks also had pet targets. Seventy-eight percent of stories about Mr. Bush's Social Security reforms were negative, along with 77 percent of stories on his domestic policy and 71 percent of stories on Iraq policy.

The president got an easier ride on his foreign policies. The study found that those stories were 58 percent negative....

END of excerpt.

For the full Washington Times article, headlined "Bush finds no friends at networks," go to: www.washtimes.com

To see a PDF image of CMPA's press release on the study: www.cmpa.com

Celebrity Journalists Gather to Help
Left-Wing Anti-Gun Group

Can you imagine the National Rifle Association hosting a fundraiser that's emceed by PBS's Mark Shields, featuring CBS's Mike Wallace and former Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, supported by Walter Cronkite and current personalities at CNN and NBC News? Probably not. But a liberal group opposed to the NRA, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, will be doing just that in hosting an 80th birthday party fundraiser for humorist Art Buchwald in September in Washington at the French embassy.

[The MRC's Tim Graham wrote and submitted this article to CyberAlert.]

NRANews.com's Cam Edwards passed along the Internet link for the invitation. It says: "The Brady Center for Prevent Gun Violence is Proud to Present Art Buchwald's 80th Birthday Party and Celebration" scheduled for September 28 at the Embassy of France. The web page for the black-tie dinner says sponsorships will cost from $1,000 to $50,000 and regular tickets are $250.

It promises "Emcee Mark Shields, with Ben Bradlee, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, and Mike Wallace." So guaranteed to be on stage for the liberal fundraiser are a Kennedy, a PBS "NewsHour" pundit, a former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, and the best-known face of CBS's "60 Minutes."

The event's "Honorary Birthday Committee" is also studded with media names: NBC News health analyst Dr. Sue Bailey, former New York Times columnist Russell Baker, humor columnist Dave Barry, Bradlee, former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite, Playboy Publisher Christie Hefner, CNN anchor Kyra Phillips, former New York Times columnist William Safire, Shields, Wallace, and Time magazine photographer Diana Walker. For the observant spouse-watchers, the committee list also includes Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau (husband of talk show host and former NBC anchor Jane Pauley) and super-agent Bob Barnett (husband of CBS reporter Rita Braver).

See the invitation at www.bradycenter.org/birthday.

-- Rich Noyes