MediaWatch: January 1988
Table of Contents:
- MediaWatch: January 1988
- Study: Gorbymania With A Twist
- Summitbites
- NewsBites: It's All In Who Says It
- Revolving Door
- Janet Cooke Award: Bill Moyers and His PBS Series
Study: Gorbymania With A Twist
If you tuned in news coverage of the December Reagan-Gorbachev summit expecting to hear the Soviet line on detente, glasnost, Afghanistan, and the moral equivalence of the two powers, the networks certainly did not let you down.
But if you also expected that same line on the Strategic Defense Initiatives (SDI) and Soviet human rights violations, ABC, CBS, and NBC offered a pleasant surprise. So proves a Media Research Center (MRC) study of 47 evening newscasts between November 23, two weeks before the Soviet chieftain's arrival, and December 10 the night of his departure.
The most surprising discoveries: First, even after eight years after a brutal and bloody Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and repeated false claims they intend to withdraw, the media still viewed the Soviet line as credible, giving it as much time and legitimacy as the U.S. view and second, in a turn around from Geneva and Reykjavik, MRC analysts found summit news reports firmly supportive of SDI.
MRC researchers viewed and timed every story on the summit that appeared on ABC's World News Tonight, the CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News for the two and a half week period. All ideas expressed, including reporters' statements and comments from political leaders and experts, were placed into one of nine "issues" categories totaling 285 minutes or 74.9 percent of summit air time.
A tenth category, "non-issue/fluff," contained all parts of stories that were largely non-political in nature (i.e. summit schedule, Washington hotels and police preparing for the summit, the Raisa Gorbachev-Nancy Reagan meetings, summary montages, etc.) and amounted to 95 minutes and 51 seconds or 25.1 percent of the entire coverage. Of all summit coverage, 37.1 percent concerned arms issues: INF START, SDI, or past treaty violations. Another 25.5 percent of the coverage concerned detente, glasnost, or the moral equivalence of the superpowers. Only 12.2 percent focused on human rights in the Soviet Union or regional conflicts around the world.
INF (93:36; 24.6%) and START (27:20; 7.2%). Overall, 39.4% promoted the INF treaty, while 24.8% opposed the agreement. Analysts considered the other 35.9% to be informational. A diverse selection of people were featured promoting the treaty, including substantial time given to Reagan and Gorbachev. Those usually featured opposing the treaty were Republican presidential candidates. CBS anchor Dan Rather was one of the few newsmen who exhibited a healthy bit of skepticism toward the agreement, noting on Nov. 30: "Both sides are trying to accentuate the positive, but negotiators from both sides know that the enormous Russian army may well benefit plenty."
Despite decades of Soviet cheating on previous accords, only 4.5 minutes of the INF coverage, (1.2% of total summit news), concerned past Soviet treaty violations. Incredibly, 51% of treaty story time excused past treaty infringements and believed they should have no bearing on signing the INF treaty. ABC's Sam Donaldson made his opinion known on Dec. 2, complaining: "The White House deliberately threw a damper on things by sending Congress a report on Soviet of past treaties, a report which could have been delayed." Only 14% of the coverage viewed past violations as consequential to INF. Cover-critics opposing a strategic agreement by more than five to one.
Are the Powers Morally Equal? (46:46; 12.3%). Yes, according to the networks since over 59% portrayed the Soviet leader or his regime as morally equal to the U.S. in world affairs. Only 21.6% portrayed Gorbachev and his system as less credible or moral than Reagan and the U.S. As part of their campaign to promote moral equality, the media spent an exorbitant amount of time praising the sincerity of Gorbachev. On Nov. 27, NBC's Sandy Gilmour delivered this glowing portrait: "Unlike his stone-faced predecessors, Mikhail Gorbachev is congenial, confident, charismatic -- a gifted politician, tough infighter, a superb salesman, who wants to change his country's dark and gloomy image ...Gorbachev seems to be genuinely liked here." ABC's Walter Rodgers offered the most fervent endorsement of moral equivalence. In a Dec. 9 story, summed up Gorbachev's view: "Gorbachev revealed another basic difference he has with President Reagan and many Americans on human rights." Rodgers then put on Gorbachev to say that the United States has no moral right to pressure the Soviets on the issue. Apparently Rodgers agreed since he offered no criticism of Gorbachev's assertion.
The Validity of Glasnost and Perestroika (33:14; 8.7%). The study confirmed most in the media have little doubt that Gorbachev is sincere is his campaign to "reform" Soviet social and economic life. Of air time devoted to glasnost and Perestroika, researchers identified 56.4% as promoting the policies as genuine. NBC was clearly the most enthusiastic, promoting glasnost as legitimate 80% of the time. CBS was far more skeptical, promoting the policy only 15.3% of the time. NBC's Gilmour gleefully pushed Gorbachev's programs, calling Perestroika "the most radical economic and social reforms in Soviet history." Gilmour's Nov. 27 report continued: "All that and more openness are the drastic changes sought by this life-long communist...Gorbachev may be the right man at the right time." Only 12% of the views aired by the networks characterized glasnost as superficial or ungenuine.
Calls for Detente (17:24; 4.6%). When it came to future relations with the Soviet Union, 13 minutes or 75% of the time was devoted to offering the views of people encouraging a new detente frame-work similar to the 1970s. 14.7% saw a return to detente as a threat to U.S. national security. Promotion of detente ranged from a high of 93% for ABC to a low of 49% for CBS, with NBC at 89%.
Human Rights (26:50; 7.0%). Almost 75% of air time devoted to human rights called to mind Soviet evils like restrictions on Jewish emigration. Only 21% could be described as excusing Soviet behavior, characterizing the situation as improving day by day. In contrast, coverage during the Geneva summit was evenly split on the issue. ABC's Rodgers was one of the few willing to give the Soviets credit. On the occasion of the reunification of some Soviet families, Rodgers gushed on Nov. 25: "For these Soviets, Mr. Gorbachev's policy of glasnost translates into a homecoming." But Wyatt Andrews of CBS saw through the charade of pre-summit releases, explaining on Dec. 3: "By now, this is all a predictable pre-summit process. Joyful reunions one day, little rejections the next. And no fundamental change on the Soviet side that would make international travel and both of these emotional scenes unnecessary."
SDI: A Media Turnaround (20:37; 5.4%). In another reversal from the Reykjavik and Geneva summits, 39.7% of SDI news coverage promoted deployment, research, or funding. Only 15.1% of coverage was anti-SDI. At the 1985 Geneva summit, MediaWatch editors found that only 10.7% of the coverage was pro-SDI, while 38.4% was anti-SDI. The only difference between the two summits: Gorbachev decided not to make SDI an issue this time.
Afghanistan (17:53; 4.7%). Despite the ongoing Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the American media still gives an amazing level of credibility to the Soviet propaganda line. 40% of the coverage endorsed the Soviet position that the Red Army must remain until a "political" solution is reached. Not once did the networks portray the Soviets as the aggressors or recount their 1979 invasion. Sadly, the Free World's position that there is no excuse for continued occupation only received 40% of the time.
ABC News failed to air any reports from the frontlines of the war while NBC aired just one and CBS three. When asked why the situation in Afghanistan was not deemed important enough for at least one feature story, ABC press representative Karen Reynolds dismissed the concern: "It was just an editorial judgement."
The few lengthy stories by Mark Phillips of CBS and NBC's Peter Kent avoided the most fundamental issues. Instead of asking why the Soviets have made no effort to scale down their occupation and pull out, both correspondents preferred to paint the Soviets as more victim than villain. As Kent reported on Dec. 9: "The Soviets seem to be hunkering down, in effect, until they can work a deal to extract themselves from their own Vietnam." Phillips assessed the situation from the Soviet angle. On Dec. 3 he reported: "A Soviet withdrawal, [the Afghan President] now says, can take place in a 12 month period once the mujahideen stop fighting and the United States stops supporting them."
Other Regional Conflicts (1:51; 0.5%). Except for vague, passing references to Nicaragua, Cambodia and Angola, totaling a piddling 0.5% of all coverage, the networks ignored Soviet aggression in other parts of the world.
