Here's a Test of Balance

I know it's Saturday, and there is not much else going on in the world (except for a little pesky storm in Florida). But the three major cable networks are wall-to-wall on the Biden story. That's fine, although I was not impressed with O.J Simpson-esque motorcade media chase as Biden rode to the Wilmington airport.

The media has been camped out at a number of potential picks' homes for days. In that time, the smart money has moved from Kaine, then Bayh, to an unknown Edwards. The media freeding frenzy has been so intense that Joe Biden had to hand out bagels to reporters at his doorstep a couple days ago:



Even for a "news-politics geek" like me, the coverage has been a bit overkill. Stories based on sources, speculation and paid pundits usually end up biting you in the you-know-where. Just ask Matt Drudge, who was pretty confident that he had the Bayh story nailed down not 24 hours ago. We should keep some prespective in these events. One thing to keep in mind, Biden is, after all, just the No. 2 guy. Nobody in their right mind chooses who they are going to vote for based on the No. 2 guy.

It will be interesting to see if McCain gets the same blanket coverage next week. Will CNN camp out at Mike Huckabee's home? Is MSNBC going to chase Mitt Romney's motorcade? Will Tim Pawlenty have to hand out lunch to reporters from FOX?

The presidential candidates haven't received even play from the large news organizations this year. For example, The Washington Post and Time magazine have admitted running many more prominent stories about Obama than McCain. It is a disturbing trend. As we enter the election prime time, when most Americans will start to pay attention, will we start to see more balanced play?

Biden Choice: Brilliant or Bland?

Here is a brief rundown of reaction to today's selection by Barack Obama of Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware as his running mate.

Ron Fournier says it's a dash to the political status quo:

The picks say something profound about Obama: For all his self-confidence, the 47-year-old Illinois senator worried that he couldn't beat Republican John McCain without help from a seasoned politician willing to attack. The Biden selection is the next logistical step in an Obama campaign that has become more negative - a strategic decision that may be necessary but threatens to run counter to his image.

A few days ago, Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos wasn't very thrilled with the prospect of Obama-Biden:

Judgment? Biden voted for the Iraq war. But beyond that, even if we stipulate that he has foreign policy chops, how does that make him a good veep choice? It strikes me that any pick designed to cover up a "flaw" in Obama (i.e. "lack of foreign policy credentials") only accentuates those flaws. Make him secretary of state.

Sure, compared to Bayh and Kaine, Biden looks almost passable, but that's a low hurdle to pass. I'd rather not have to choose my poison. I'd rather have candy.

Sen. Hillary Clinton's statement (he's purposeful):

"In naming my colleague and friend Senator Joe Biden to be the vice presidential nominee, Senator Obama has continued in the best traditions for the vice presidency by selecting an exceptionally strong, experienced leader and devoted public servant. Senator Biden will be a purposeful and dynamic vice president who will help Senator Obama both win the presidency and govern this great country."

Politico says Hillary's backers, who first went through anger, then denial, will now come to terms with the ticket:

Only about half of former Clinton voters say they’ll back the Illinois senator — and it’s not clear if the Biden choice will attract or alienate those who have yet to embrace Obama. Former Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson predicted her troops would eventually fall in line but suggested that Biden needed to project toughness — as Clinton did — to win over voters.

But it's going to be a tough sell:

Hillary supporter Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) predicted the move would further anger many of the New York senator’s most hardcore supporters.

"I never thought he would pick Hillary," she said. "I know politics. Things just don't happen that way. Hillary knew that. Anyone who thought he would put her on the ticket is just clueless."

Sanchez said that she had a friend, a staunch Democrat, who is voting for John McCain because "he is so unhappy about what's happened," adding that Clinton supporters have encountered a "disconnect" with the Obama campaign.

The Chicago Tribune reports that Sen. Carl Levin of the swing state of Michigan is on board:

"This is a terrific choice. Joe Biden understands the challenges facing our country at home and abroad, and his long history of bipartisanship in the Senate will be a welcome asset. He will be a tireless and enthusiastic partner for Senator Obama in the campaign and in the White House."

Biden in 2004 Urged Kerry to Pick McCain as VP

Appearing on "Meet the Press" back in 2004, Sen. Joe Biden had urged Sen. John Kerry to select McCain as his running mate. Here is a story that ran on MSNBC's web site:

WASHINGTON - Sen. Joseph Biden, a senior Democrat, on Sunday urged Republican Sen. John McCain to run for vice president with the Democratic hopeful, Sen. John Kerry, in order to heal the “vicious rift” dividing America.

McCain, of Arizona, “categorically” ruled out standing with Kerry, but Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he had no second choice.

“I’m sticking with McCain,” Biden said.

“I think John McCain would be a great candidate for vice president,” Biden, from Delaware, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” where the two senators appeared together to take questions on Iraq and other subjects.

“Do I think it’s going to happen? No,” he said. “But I think it is a reflection of the desire of this country and the desire of people in both parties to want to see this God-awful, vicious rift that exists in the nation healed, and John and John could go a long way to heal in that rift.”

Two months earler, Biden appeared on Chris Matthews' Hardball and made the same pitch.

CNN: Obama Picks Biden for VP Slot

It wasn't the best kept secret, but CNN reported at 1 a.m. today that Obama is officially picking Sen. Joe Biden of Delware as his running mate.

John King, CNN chief national correspondent, reported that Obama had come to the decision during his Hawaiian vacation.

Earlier in the night, ABC News had reported that Secret Service agents had been dispatched to Biden's home.

King said on air that Hillary Clinton was never really considered. He said Obama did not think Clinton was a good match on the ticket.

Biden will speak on the third night of the Democratic Convention in Denver, CNN said. That is the night of Aug. 27.

Check Your Text Messages at 10 a.m. or So!

UPDATE: The text message went out early Saturday morning. It read "Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee."

Cable news folks are reporting that the most anticipated text message in the history of, well, test messaging, will go out sometime between 10 a.m. and noon tomorrow morning. I'm betting Biden.

So, Why Would Obama Pick Biden?

The cable networks are juicing up the anticipation that Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware will be Obama's running mate. Let's look at some of the plus and minues of such a pick.

Traditionally, a vice president doesn't have much power. His official job description is as president of the Senate, he is there primarily to break tie votes, which should not happen that often in the next two years as the Democrats should have a substantial majority. The vice president is often assigned special duties by the president, but has not executive powers whatsoever.

We all know that Biden offers the foreign policy experience. But is that what you need from a vice president? Isn't that what you need from the president?

Then there's his speaking ability. One thing about Biden, he does speak his mind. And because of that, there is plenty of ammo for McCain. Care for a doughnut?



One of the main positives about Biden would be his ability to go on the offensive. Here he is at a primary debate, hitting almost every opponent with a touch of humor in a matter of minutes. Can you imagine him in a national debate?



He has a little dance to do on his war votes. Here he is defending funding the troops in a vote where he was on the opposite side of the fence from Obama.



And there is always the famous "clean" remark:



Ironically, in a year where "change" and being a "maverick" have been a keystone of campaigns from both parties, we may have the choice of looking at names for four U.S. senators on the November ballot for president. Not much in the change department there, especially considering that the approval ratings on Capitol Hill are actually lower than those of the current president.

Here is Sen. Joe Biden on the issues. Here is his official Senate web page. He has a 75 percent rating from NARAL in 2007.

NBC: Bayh and Kaine Are Not the Choice

MSNBC is pretty sure, at least on Keith Olbermann's show, that it's not Bayh and Kaine. So at least at this hour the most liberal network on television is leaning toward Biden.

Olbermann and Richard Wolffe are both confidant that there will be no text message tonight.

Drudge: It's Bayh; MSNBC: Bet on Biden

UPDATE4: Most every news organization by 11 p.m. Eastern has discredited the reports on Bayh, saying high-level sources in the Obama campaign have information that the senator from Indiana has been told that he is not the vice presidential selection.


The Drudge Report said this afternoon that:

KMBC's Micheal Mahoney reports a company in Kansas City, which specializes in political literature, has been printing Obama-Bayh material... MORE... Gill Studios, would not confirm information about the material. They would not deny it either. At least three sources close to the plant's operations reported the Obama-Bayh material was being produced.

KMBC's site is here. Sen. Evan Bayh's Senate page is here.

UPDATE2: Here is Bayh's Oct. 8, 2002 speech on the Senate floor strongly supporting the war resolution. Ironically, Sen. John McCain questions him during the debate:



UPDATE3: Here is a rundown of Bayh's stances on the issues. NARAL gave him a 100 percent rating in 2007. And Carl Hulse of The New York Times earlier this month gave him a moderate-to-conservative rating in a story headlined: Indiana Senator Offers Obama Risks and Rewards

UPDATE: Bob Shrum, Pat Buchanan and Andrea Mitchell, while all three appeared on Chris Matthews' Hardball just minutes ago, all said the smart money is on Sen. Joe Biden. Biden's offical site is here. Here is a rundown of Biden's stances on the issues.

Olbermann's Verdict: Maddow In, Abrams Out

Rachel Sklar originally wrote this post for the Huffington Post, but it was determined that it was not suitable for that site. So now Poynter is publishing it.

In it, Sklar dissects the removal of Dan Abrams from MSNBC's 9 p.m. slot and inserting Rachel Maddow's new show. The post does a critique of Keith Olbermann's role in all of this, and how his internal political strength at the network is growing.

That network anchors might not be best buddies isn't exactly groundbreaking, but putting all of this together suggests something lopsided at MSNBC. It's not particularly opaque, either; here's Jossip's headline, "Rachel Maddow's New Show: The Most Solid Evidence Yet That Keith Olbermann Runs MSNBC"; here is New York's Daily Intel: "With Appointment of Rachel Maddow to Prime-Time Host, Keith Olbermann Appears to Officially Run MSNBC." Maddow obviously was a rising star at MSNBC anyway, but this isn't about why she was hired, this is about who she replaced, and why -- and, behind the scenes, by whom.

Also, Rush Limbaugh got the coveted Silver the other night as Worser Person in the World for daring to make a comment:



All this back and forth aside, it's clear that Olbermann has not only become the face (and voice) of MSNBC, but he has indeed started to shape its editorial content. Is that good? well, ultimately viewers will decide. People who make a living through political commentary should, in fact, by the nature of the job be forceful. But Olbermann always dishes up a main course of attacks on conservatives, often getting personal. (Would he mock a liberal he disagreed with by bringing up a previous drug problem? I doubt it.) And is it wise for any network to allow the talent to make programming decisions?

It is clear that FOX has it voice, and MSNBC-Keith is developing its own. Whether it results in ratings and advertisment revenues remains to be seen. What's truly important is that viewers understand they are watching commentary. Occasionally, the line between opinion and straight news gets blurry. Newspapers have it easy. They have "news" pages and "editorial" pages. Television is different, and the mixing of the two is growing.

McCain Protests NBC's Andrea Mitchell's Remark

Mike Allen of Politico.com

writes this morning that Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager has sent a letter to the president of NBC news, Steve Capus complaining about Andrea Mitchell and her remark concerning whether the senator had an unfair advantage at Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback presidential forum.

In the letter, Davis charges that Mitchell said: "The Obama people must feel that he didn't do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because what they are putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama. He seemed so well-prepared." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 8/17/08)

He goes on to say:

Make no mistake: This is a serious charge. Andrea Mitchell is repeating, uncritically, a completely unsubstantiated Obama campaign claim that John McCain somehow cheated in last night's forum at Saddleback Church. Instead of trying to substantiate this blatant falsehood in any way, Andrea Mitchell felt that she needed to repeat it on air to millions of "Meet the Press" viewers with no indication that 1.) There's not one shred of evidence that it's true; 2.) In his official correspondence to both campaigns, Pastor Rick Warren provided both candidates with information regarding the topic areas to be covered, which Barack Obama acknowledged during the forum when asked about Pastor Warren's idea of an emergency plan for orphans and Obama said, "I cheated a little bit. I actually looked at this idea ahead of time, and I think it is a great idea;" 3.) John McCain actually requested that he and Barack Obama do the forum together on stage at the same time, making these kinds of after-the-fact complaints moot.

Mitchell responds by saying: "I wasn't expressing an opinion. ... I was reporting what they were saying."

Obama Leads Washington Post Page 1 Coverage by 3-1

Deborah Howell, The Washington Post ombudsman, reported this morning that Obama has had a 3-to-1 advantage in front page coverage in the Post since became the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee on June 4.

In overall political stories from June 4 to Friday, Obama dominated by 142 to 96. Obama has been featured in 35 stories on Page 1; McCain has been featured in 13, with three Page 1 references with photos to stories on inside pages. Fifteen stories featured both candidates and were about polls or issues such as terrorism, Social Security and the candidates' agreement on what should be done in Afghanistan.

This dovetails with Obama's dominance in photos, which I pointed out two weeks ago. At that time, it was 122 for Obama and 78 for McCain. Two weeks later, it's 143 to 100, almost the same gap, because editors have run almost the same number of photos -- 21 of Obama and 22 of McCain -- since they realized the disparity. McCain is almost even with Obama in Page 1 photos -- 10 to 9.

This is not just a Post phenomenon. The Project for Excellence in Journalism has been monitoring campaign coverage at an assortment of large and medium-circulation newspapers, broadcast evening and morning news shows, five news Web sites, three major cable news networks, and public radio and other radio outlets. Its latest report, for the week of Aug. 4-10, shows that for the eighth time in nine weeks, Obama received significantly more coverage than McCain.

I'm not surprised. But once again, most of this is not because of an overt bias in the media to promote an agenda. Rather a symptom of reporters and editors, especially in New York and Washington, looking at stories through the same prism because they mostly have the same backgrounds, same education, and same political point of view. By in large, the East Coast journalists I have worked with for decades work hard at trying to maintain a balance in their coverage. The problem occurs when there is a lack of ideological diversity in the newsroom. Too often, journalists who think the same way as their colleagues will not challenge themselves when coverage gets out of whack because they can't see it, not because they are promoting an agenda.