John Edwards Affair: MSM, Bob Schieffer and the Schieffer Standard

The "Schieffer Standard"
Lethargy over John Edwards Scandal Returns to MSM




In the John Edwards Scandal, CBS News' Bob Schieffer serves as the poster child for the ADHD Mainstream Media.

After a spike in coverage--largely composed of stories about why the MSM didn't allow their customers news of the John Edwards affair, scandal and cover-up before John Edwards gave the Dinosaur Press his okay--the MSM has 'moved on' to more pleasant topics, leaving the scandal's reporting and investigation to the National Enquirer and the blogosphere.

Bob Schieffer, of CBS, might well one day become a case study in Journalism 101's "Death of the Dinosaurs" chapter. From the beginning, Schieffer has racked his brain for excuses for not bothering his remaining viewers with news of a presidential and vice-presidential contender's affair and cover-up in an election year. The fact that Schieffer "knows" John and Elizabeth Edwards, or that Edwards has the protective "D" after his name probably never blurred Schieffer's news "judgment".

In December, when the National Enquirer published pictures of pregnant mistress, Rielle Hunter, and the news that she'd moved to within five miles of the Edwards 08 for President campaign HQ in Chapel Hill, NC, Bob Schieffer wasn't interested in the story.

[Background information: access over 100 DBKP stories on the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter affair, scandal and cover-up: John Edwards Love Child Scandal Library.]

The Enquirer also published details of the Edwards' cover-up and the fact that Hunter was driving around in a BMW owned by Edwards' operative, Andrew Young. But none of that interested hard-bitten newsman, Bob Schieffer.

Here's what Schieffer had to say in December about why he wouldn't be reporting the John Edwards' affair:

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you know I saw that this morning. I believe that — I believe that's a story that we will be avoiding, because it appears to me that there's absolutely nothing to it. I'm told that another — a man says that the child is his. I'm told that the woman who seems to be pregnant says it's not his. So I guess — I guess we're going to pass on that. Unless you come up with some new information on this, Don.
–When asked about the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter story On the Don Imus show

What sort of "new information" might have changed the news equation for Bob Schieffer?

How about John Edwards getting cornered by Enquirer reporters on July 21 in the Beverly Hilton after visiting Hunter?

Nope.

How about Edwards ducking reporters on July 30 who tried to question him about the Beverly Hilton events, after an Edwards' speech in Washington, DC?

No, again.

Apparently, it took John Edwards appearing on rival ABC's Nightline to confess to the affair--but not to the cover-up or the paternity of Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn Hunter--to get the attention of Bob Schieffer.

Not sure if Bob Schieffer would have reported on it even then.

It took a personal phone call to Schieffer from John Edwards himself to convince steely-eyed journalist Bob Schieffer to comment on the matter at all. On August 8, Schieffer got the the go-ahead to talk about the Edwards-Hunter affair. Readers can decide for themselves if Schieffer sounds like a objective newsman or an Edwards' PR hack trying to soothe CBS' dwindling audience.

SCHIEFFER: Russ, just before we went on the air tonight, John Edwards called me and said he wanted to talk. He said that all this happened back in 2006 before he announced that he was running for president and that he told his wife Elizabeth about it then and that she forgave him. He said because of that he thought it was just between them. I've known John Edwards a long time and I asked him if I could talk to Elizabeth and she came to the phone. She was obviously in tears and didn't say much but she told me that he had told her about then and they had decided to move on.


MITCHELL: Why did he decide to tell it now?


SCHIEFFER: He said he said he just couldn't live with the constant pounding from the tabloids. It wasn't going to stop, I was being dogged and dogged, for the sake of my family I just had to end it, for the sake of my family. So he decided to confirm it and go on, he said, for the sake of his family. He said repeatedly that he took full responsibility for this. He told me he was certain the child was not his, that the affair was over long ago. When I asked him how Elizabeth was doing he said she is just amazing, like she always is.

Edwards' previous denials to the press in October 2007--which Schieffer now knew to be lies was barely remarked upon.

SCHIEFFER: When I asked him why he had denied the story over and over he said because so many of the stories had so much false information. He said what I should have done is confirm the part that was true and then live with it.

That explanation reveals why the story of the Edwards' coverup--in Bob Schiffer's mind--is a settle matter.

So, nineteen days after that phone call, how does Bob Schieffer feel about reporting on the man who lied to the press and the nation while running for president, vice-president and away from reporters?

Howard Kurtz reports Bob's current take, as told to those in Denver:

CBS's Bob Schieffer defended the media's reluctance to cover John Edwards's extramarital affair, saying Edwards's candidacy was over and "I don't see that we have time to be fooling with this."

Bob Schieffer kicks it into high gear

Bob Schieffer is leaving the investigative work to others, while he tackles weightier issues, like Paris Hilton.

Two days after Edwards called him on August 8, Schieffer was "standing up for old, white-haired dudes":

For example, if forced, we can drink coffee straight from a mug. We don't need to sip it through a little hole in a plastic top in a cardboard container to make it taste good.

Bob also allowed in that piece that "our memory sometimes fails us".

Apparently, one blogger thought Bob's memory failed him a couple days before the December 18 revelations in the Enquirer. "Face it! Bob Schieffer is an Idiot." critiques Schieffer's interview on December 16 with--surprise!--John Edwards.

Bob Schieffer blows my mind. He’s the CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, yet he still doesn’t seem to have a clue about the basics of United States government. Bob… the U.S. has three branches of government, not four. Big corporations are not a branch of the U.S. government. I know it’s confusing, but no matter how many politicians they buy or lobbyists they have writing laws, they are not a branch of government. We don’t have to sit down to the table and negotiate with corporations. The actual government’s job is to make laws to protect citizens and regulate corporations.

On this December 16, 2007 broadcast, he asked John Edwards why he was taking such an aggressive stance against corporate interests instead of sitting down with them to negotiate.

Bob continues to leave the heavy lifting in the story to the Enquirer and the blogosphere. He seems to echo all of those ex-MSM guys who've had the sense to leave Big Media and seek employment in academia.

One such Nutty Journalism Prof is DAVID HAZINSKI, ex-NBC/MSM-turned-"Mad Professor of Media" at UGA who, in December coincidently, railed against the "dangers" of citizen journalists and offered remedies; one of which was:

"Major news organizations must create standards to substantiate citizen-contributed information and video, and ensure its accuracy and authenticity."
--From Citizen Journalism: "911, I'd Like to Report an Unregulated Blogger"


Here's Hazinski's chance: he could create the "Schieffer Standard" of news reporting to bring citizen journalists to the same standard employed by Bob Scheiffer at CBS News!

From December 23, "The Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere":

"I said I need back-up!! NOW!!
I got Bob Schieffer's sense of curiosity here!"

A presidential candidate and his campaign's mysterious video: one that was produced with the high hopes of making the candidate better-known, only to have that hope fulfilled when it disappeared from public view.

That doesn't excite Bob Schieffer.

A presidential candidate who isn't asked by the press if he denies being in phone contact with his alleged mistress since she discovered she's pregnant. Indeed, the Mainstream press didn't go postal: they went Emily Post-al, as in, "let's not make any waves, that's not polite; might get us thrown out of the candidate's press tent."

That doesn't excite Bob Schieffer.

A presidential candidate's alleged mistress moving close to campaign headquarters, driving around in a BMW owned by the campaign's former Director of Operations, living in a house owned by the campaign's backer, having her bills and living expenses paid for–well, who is paying them?

Doesn't matter.

That wouldn't likely excite Bob Schieffer, either.

What would excite cynical, seasoned, experienced CBS newsman, Bob Schieffer?

Bob Schieffer: Star Light, Star Bright…

The other question is if it all gets settled, and may well be by mid-February, what are we going to do after that? I would love it if the two parties have a special meeting (instead of conventions) and certify them as candidates. Wouldn't it be great to have them fly around the country on the same airplane and have debates?

Maybe Bob will get to fly on the plane!

Maybe Bob Schieffer will actually get to fly on the plane with John Edwards!

Goodie!

Wouldn't do to have that whole unpleasant business about mistresses and hiding campaign videos produced by her and her living arrangements come up, would it, Bob?

As we also stated in December: "But DBKP’s doesn’t mean to be picking on Bob Schieffer. We like Bob and always enjoyed watching “Face the Nation”.

Bob’s is shorthand for the attitude of the Mainstream Media."

He continues to play that role to this day.

One question, we suppose, Bob Schieffer will never get asked--and therefore, will never receive an answer--is "When would have been the best time to report on the John Edwards scandal?"

The answer might provide some insight for future journalism students into the "Schieffer Standard".


by Mondoreb
images:
* image of Schieffer on a segway: newsday
* dbkp file

John Edwards Love Child: Mainstream Press were "Good Little Reporters"

"The job of the newspaper is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable."

The famous quote is about a hundred years old and can be traced to the work of Finley Peter Dunne, one of the great journalists of the day, who wrote about politics and culture in the voice and persona of an Irishman named "Mr. Dooley."

Most of today's MSM reporters seem to have that quote backwards, however--at least where John Edwards and the story of his affair with Rielle Hunter, the cover-up and an approving MSM media.

It wasn't that MSM reporters were ignorant of the story and chose not to pursue it--although that was the template that every single MSM outlet followed religiously--it was their antagonism toward any who did pursue it.

They became, in the words of one DBKP staffer, "good little reporters, looking for a Scooby snack".

Some thought that that was being generous: diplomatic-speak for "lap dogs".

MSM reporters perhaps kidded themselves into silence on the Love Child story by 'not wanting to affect the election'.

John Edwards is now dropping his campaign for president, 2008 version. But one has to believe, based on past experiences, that the MSM press will find other excuses not to ask Edwards any tough questions.

Bob Schieffer's famous "two deny rule"--two people in the Edwards campaign denied the story by the National Enquirer, so it's not a valid story--would have damned any Watergate coverage in the 1970s.

But one wonders what the amount of coverage the story would have received had Edwards had an identifying "Rep" after his name.

The Dan Rather revelation on CBS Evening News of forged, fake documents concerning President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard comes to mind.

The stonewalling of CBS in the face of indisputable evidence the documents were forged also comes to mind.

All that occurred on the eve of a national presidential election.

Thank goodness Edwards had the anointed "Dem" by his name: it usually proves to be the 'mark of indulgence' by the mainstream press. In effect, it's a free pass for behavior, criminal and otherwise.

True to form, the MSM press didn't deviate on the Edwards-Hunter story, either.

The reporters following Edwards on the campaign beat were good little reporters: never rocking the boat, not wishing to write a discouraging word. Eating and traveling with the candidate they became the press equivalent of bodyguards.

Meanwhile, the millions of people who might have been interested in watching a CBS, NBC, ABC or CNN news show reliably stayed away from those "news shows", as they were as usual, devoid of news.

They were busying scouring the Internet for information on Rielle Hunter, the woman who worked with and for Edwards and then mysteriously was taken under the campaign's wing when she became pregnant.

"Reille Hunter" continued to attract millions of searches a day by people seeking to twart the MSM media blackout on the story.



From Wonkette, last month:

Last month’s National Enquirer story on John Edwards and his alleged affair with campaign staffer Rielle Hunter may or may not be total bullshit. One insider said “there’s a lot of smoke… no smoking gun,” while another said the tab has plans to publish e-mails containing damning details of the reported affair.

Enquirer editor David Perel wouldn’t comment on the recent speculation, telling Rush & Malloy “I never like to talk about what’s not published, but we are still doing the story. The original story was 100% accurate.” Meanwhile, Edwards says “the story disappeared because it’s made up.”

To which Wonkette replied, "Umm, yeah..."

The only instance of the Mainstream Media "looking into the John Edwards scandal" was an ABC 20/20 story which claimed this was shaping up as possibly the dirtiest campaign in history.

The 20/20 "report" was, in actuality, a good example of the press playing bodyguard for John Edwards and wasn't interested in determining the truth of the allegations: most easily checked, if any reporter had the desire to rock the boat.

One of the stories cited by the news network―the National Enquirer account of Democratic candidate John Edwards allegedly fathering a “love child” out of wedlock―was denied but not disproven. Despite its reputation as a supermarket tabloid, the National Enquirer is the paper that broke the story, which was confirmed, of Jesse Jackson having an illegitimate child. Hence, the paper’s exclusives cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Until this ABC report, the mainstream media had not touched the Edwards story. However, the British newspaper The Daily Mail media ran a story citing Edwards’ denial of the affair.

ABC sniffed at the reporting of the Enquirer, which has spent time, money and resources on the John Edwards affair, without devoting one minute reporting or checking to determine the truth of any of the allegations.

John Edwards never had to answer any questions concerning the affair, the cover-up or the possible use of campaign funds for Rielle Hunter's upkeep.

Not one.

No questions about whether he had been in telephone contact with Ms. Hunter since she learned she was pregnant.

Not one.

No inconvenient questions about the campaign videos, paid for by the Edwards campaign and produced by Hunter, which disappeared for awhile--until the National Enquirer broke the Love Child scandal.

Not one.

This non-reporting has been a trademark of network "journalism" is recent years and is one of the reasons that the Network News shows continue their death spiral into oblivion.

NOT ONE reporter of a major news organization has put the question to Edwards: "Do you deny that you have been in telephone contact with Rielle Hunter since she found out she was pregnant?"

Not one.

Whether you thought the story was true or false, it has to be admitted that the breadth and width of the "good little reporter" syndrome was breathtaking.

"If a story happens in the woods and the MSM doesn't report it, is it still news?"

Of course, the answer is increasingly: "Who cares?"

The destiny of ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN seems to be to join MS-NBC as sort of a carnival freak sideshow of news--trusted by few, watched by less.

The MSM nightly newscasts and shows are watched by a very small, isolated, cult-like band of loyal viewers: derided by their erstwhile viewers in the same way that the Mainstream press deride the National Enquirer.

Reports that Hunter is being tended to by an Edwards campaign operative, living in the house of an Edwards campaign donor and driving a vehicle owned by former Edwards campaign finance director excited no interest in the MSM.

MSM reporters--timid at best, scared of losing access to Edwards at worst--were the worst kind of reporters: supplying a steady stream of puff pieces in lieu of asking hard questions; supplying real news.

It is true that the worst journalism comforts the comfortable and afflicts the afflicted. That is a breach of duty.

We need journalists to get at the truth and to keep watch against abuses of power. They have a hard enough time getting that right.

In the John Edwards affair and it's subsequent cover-up, the Mainstream press has been most effective in its new role of "comforting the comfortable."

And for a few lucky reporters covering the Edwards campaign, it's sure to pay off: they most likely will get a seat on the Edwards campaign plane during his next run for the presidency in 2012.

They'll still be writing puff pieces and refusing to follow up good work done by outcasts like the National Enquirer--and increasingly, the blogs they never tire of disparaging.

Four predictions--one needn't be a Nostradamus--concerning the MSM press.

1 They will continue to be good little campaign reporters and eagerly await their 'grades' (read: access) bestowed by the campaign.

2 People will continue to ignore them and their manufactured news: puff pieces for the favored; 'scandals' and hard questions for those who disagree with them.

3 People will continue to mistrust the MSM, with good reason. That includes every arrogant pronouncement on those doing stories the MSM press sniffs at.

4 Would-be viewers will continue to gravitate toward those working at journalism, whether it's practiced by blogs or the National Enquirer.

By 2012, people will sign onto the Internet for their news and the only ones getting their information from TV news shows will be that small group of viewers the MSM press despises: those with little education and critical reasoning skills.

In other words, the Jerry Springer faithful.

John Edwards-Rielle Hunter LOVE CHILD LIBRARY Over 28 DBKP stories and videos since the story first broke on November 19, 2007 by the National Enquirer.

by Mondoreb
image: dnc, national enquirer
Sources:
* Emails may Reveal John Edwards Had Affair
* DBKP John Edwards Love Child Scandal Library
* Who's Guilty of Campaign Dirty Tricks
* Comfort the Afflicted...



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.