The real problem with American political journalism, I argued in
the September 2003 Harper's magazine, isn't left- or right-wing "bias."
Rather, it's the abandonment of all but the pretense of professional
standards of evidence and elementary intellectual honesty among the
Washington press elite.

   "Claiming the moral authority of a code of professional ethics it
idealizes in the abstract but repudiates in practice," I wrote "today's
Washington press corps has grown as decadent and self-protective as any
politician or interest group whose behavior it purports to monitor. In
theory, the press is supposed to function in a free market of ideas, a
self-regulating and relentlessly competitive quest for what the old
Superman comics called 'truth, justice and the American way.'"

   Alas, in practice only the most flagrant transgressors, such as the
New York Times' Jayson Blair or The New Republic's Stephen Glass
--reporters who faked bylines, made-up imaginary interviews, and wrote
fiction disguised as news--get punished. Driven by cable-TV celebrity,
Washington has developed a star-system rivalling that of Hollywood,
or more aptly, perhaps, the old Soviet Politburo. Politicians come and go,
but the Tim Russerts, George Wills and and William Safires remain forever.

   The ethical effect has been disastrous. "Once a degree of celebrity
is attained," I argued " the star system functions to protect even the
most egregious offenses." Consider, for example, Washington Post
columnist Charles Krauthammer. A former practicing psychiatrist,
Krauthammer's stock in trade has become describing opponents of
President Bush and the Iraq war as crazy.

   It's a tactic beloved of authoritarians everywhere. Under Stalin,
psychiatric hospitals in Moscow and East Berlin bulged with political
dissenters labled mentally ill. So did those in Buenos Aires under the
generals. Hence most mental health professionals find using psychiatric
terms in political contexts at best distasteful. From a strictly medical
viewpoint, Krauthammer's lampooning ideological foes as "delusional"
only increases the casual contempt in American culture toward victims
of genuine brain disorders--a stigma that causes many to resist treatment.
For a doctor, it's unconscionable.

   Krauthammer really crossed the line in a recent column declaring
Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean mentally ill. Granted, he
appears to have been attempting satire, a risky tactic given his leaden
prose style. Dean supposedly suffers from "Bush Derangement Syndrome,"
defined by Krauthammer as "the acute onset of paranoia" in reaction to
President Junior.

   This because Dean told an NPR interviewer some people have "an
interesting theory" that Bush had a reason for censoring sections of a
recent 9/11 report dealing with Saudi Arabia. Namely that the administration
ignored warnings it ought to have heeded. Dean might have spoken more
judiciously. But crazy? Then why has the administration been stonewalling
the bipartisan Kean commission Bush himself appointed to probe 9/11
intelligence failures--refusing to turn over White House briefing documents?

   But it wasn't until Krauthammer brought up "Murdoch Derangement
Syndrome" that he got truly creative. Rupert Murdoch is the Australian
magnate who owns the FoxNews empire. Krauthammer quoted Dean telling
MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews that, as president, he would break
up Fox "on ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but...I don't want to
answer whether I would break up Fox or not... What I'm going to do is
appoint people to the FCC that believe democracy depends on getting
information from all portions of the political spectrum, not just one."

   An American politician shutting down a TV network on ideological
grounds? Alarming, right? Actually, no. Bob Somerby looked up the
"Hardball" transcript, and posted it on his Daily Howler website.

MATTHEWS: Rupert Murdoch has the Weekly Standard. It has got a lot of
other interests. It has got the New York Post. Would you break it up?

DEAN: On ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but-
(LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: No, seriously. As a public policy, would you bring industrial
policy to bear and break up these conglomerations of power?

DEAN: I don't want to answer whether I would break up Fox or not,
because, obviously-

MATTHEWS: Well, how about large media enterprises?

DEAN: Let me--yes, let me get-
(LAUGHTER)

DEAN: The answer to that is yes. I would say that there is too much
penetration by single corporations in media markets all over this
country. We need locally-owned radio stations. There are only two or
three radio stations left in the state of Vermont where you can get
local news anymore. The rest of it is read and ripped from the AP.

MATTHEWS: So what are you going to do about it? You're going to be
president of the United States, what are you going to do?

DEAN: What I'm going to do is appoint people to the FCC that believe
democracy depends on getting information from all portions of the
political spectrum, not just one.

   In short, Dean was unmistakably joking. Krauthammer twisted his words
for ideological purposes, while Washington Post editors evidently slept.

   Physician, heal thyself.

  back to  bartcop.com