MediaWatch: November 1994

Vol. Eight No. 11

Reporters Believed Clinton's Sex Tales

The Sultans of So What?

The media continue to snub allegations of Bill Clinton's sexual impropriety, documents a new book from the Center for Media and Public Affairs. In When Should the Watchdogs Bark? authors Larry Sabato and Robert Lichter found the allegations by Paula Jones and the Arkansas state troopers were "barely touched by most media outlets." From November 1993 to August 1994, CMPA found the network evening news shows broadcast 34 stories about Paula Jones and the troopers, compared to 277 stories about Whitewater. Still, scandal news accounted for only five percent of Clinton's network coverage.

Why the disparities? Many reporters were embarrassed by the allegations. Even after 10 hours of interviewing the troopers for a never-aired story, CBS reporter Scott Pelley told the authors: "'We just felt, not to sound pompous in any way, but it didn't rise to the level of something that we wanted to put on the Evening News." Many reporters who talked to the troopers believed them. The Los Angeles Times' Bill Rempel said, "When we were done reporting, we didn't have any doubt that the stories we heard were true in substance." ABC's Jim Wooten told the authors, "Yeah, I think [the troopers] were telling the truth," but "I don't have any interest in who he was sleeping with then or who he's screwing now."

Lichter and Sabato noted that while most believed the troopers, 77 percent of stories on them were negative. At the same time, "Almost half (49 percent) of all evaluations of Mr. Clinton's behavior in scandal-related news stories supported the President." Almost twice as many stories were broadcast about Jones' credibility than her accusations and her coverage was 67 percent negative. Compare that to a previous CMPA study which found Anita Hill received 66 percent positive coverage during the Thomas battle. The snubbing continues: Jones' October 25 press conference received only a brief mention on the NBC Nightly News.