MediaWatch: January 1995
Table of Contents:
- MediaWatch: January 1995
- Revolving Door Spins More for Clinton Administration that Bush's
- NewsBites: Scrooged
- Magazine's Unrelenting Attacks
- CBS Star Far Nicer to Bill Clinton's Mother in 1993 Interview
- Double, Triple the Spending
- Martin's Unmatched
- Abramson-Mayer Book Eviscerated--"Impeccable research"?
- Janet Cooke Award: The "Nonpartisan" Take on Reaganomics
Abramson-Mayer Book Eviscerated--"Impeccable research"?
Despite embarrassing obstacles, liberal journalists continue to defend Strange Justice, the book-length attack on Justice Clarence Thomas by Wall Street Journal reporters Jill Abramson and Jane Mayer.
The Los Angeles Times picked the very self-interested NPR reporter Nina Totenberg, who broke Hill's unproven sexual harassment charges, to review the pro-Hill book. On November 13, she declared David Brock's "factually flawed" book The Real Anita Hill "is not viewed seriously in either the academic or journalistic communities." But Abramson and Mayer are "both highly regarded for their journalistic and investigative skills" and their book was "far more comprehensive, investigative, and probing."
On C-SPAN's Journalists Roundtable December 30, Wall Street Journal Washington Bureau Chief Alan Murray agreed: "I think anyone who reads both books would have to say without question that Strange Justice is fully, fully documented. All the quotes are on the record. Everything is clearly sourced. It's an impeccable piece of research."
But David Brock took an axe to Strange Justice in the January American Spectator, declaring it "one of the most outrageous journalistic hoaxes in recent memory." Brock detailed numerous examples of misquotation, fabrication, and factual errors. But the same media which booked Abramson and Mayer all over television without any critics continued to ignore Brock.
Among their errors: Andy Rothschild, who worked with Thomas when John Danforth was Attorney General of Missouri, denied that he told Jill Abramson that Thomas made "gross and at times off-color remarks," only that Thomas had a great sense of humor. Brock noted it was unlikely Abramson asked Rothschild about off-color remarks in their only interview in July 1991, three months before Hill's charges came out.
Abramson and Mayer claim Frederick Cooke "saw Thomas...standing with a triple X videotape entitled The Adventures of Bad Mama Jama." But later in the book, a note on page 330 read: "Reached on two separate occasions, Cooke would neither confirm nor deny the account." Brock even noted that Nina Totenberg told him "Cooke wouldn't talk to me, so it wasn't a story," and also that the owner of the video store supposedly supplying Thomas with porn videos was "scuzzy, not reliable." So why did Totenberg praise Strange Justice, full of stories she felt didn't meet her standards, such as they are?
Despite Brock's 22-page refutation, New York Times columnist Frank Rich renewed his attack on Brock December 29, claiming wrongly that Brock was "unable to find mistakes larger than a few mangled job titles."
