AL must disclose its newsroom processes

What is going on at the Argus Leader? When a lengthy negative story about John Thune appears in Roll Call, the very next day the AL has a follow-up story on the very front page of the paper (1A). When a lengthy negative story about Tom Daschle appears in Roll Call, the Argus Leader NEVER publishes so much as a paragraph about it. Compare the following four stories that have appeared in Roll Call, two negative stories about Tom Daschle, and two negative stories about John Thune:

Negative stories about Thune in Roll Call
- February 10, 2004 - "State account helped Thune" - 922 words
- January 26, 2004 - "Thune Will Keep Lobbying; Criticism of Daschles May Wane" - 1184 words

Negative stories about Daschle in Roll Call
- February 26, 2004 (yesterday) - "Daschle's Five-Year, $9.5M Spending Spree" - 1463 words
- August 18, 2003 - "Daschle Hit On Tax Break; Wife Claims 'Homestead' Exemption" - 1101 words

Now look at how quickly the Argus Leader followed up the Roll Call stories reflecting negatively on Thune (namely, the very next day):

- February 11, 2004 - "Thune spending questioned" - 1035 words
- January 27, 2004 "Candidate Thune plans to continue lobbyist job" - 753 words

But the AL has yet to write a follow-up to the Roll Call piece on Daschle taking advantage of the homestead exemption, and of course, there is no follow-up at all in today's edition of the AL about the mildly negative story on Tom Daschle that appeared yesterday in Roll Call.

These facts lead one to ask what, exactly, is the follow-up policy at the AL? Apparently, the policy now is that the AL only follows up negative stories about Thune in Roll Call, and ignores negative stories about Daschle in Roll Call. That is grossly unfair, and is just another example in a long line of examples of the AL violating the rules of objective journalism.

It is because of blatantly biased journalism like this that the internal machinations of the AL's editing, reporting and decisionmaking processes need to be exposed. The editors at the AL constantly like to talk about "full disclosure," and have yet another editorial about it today. If the AL's editors are serious about full disclosure, they should start with themselves. Why should full disclosure stop at the newsroom door?

For a glimpse into the internal machinations of the AL, see this piece written by executive editor Randell Beck to his corporate masters at Gannett. In the piece, Beck talks about the "Real Life, Real News principles" his paper tries to follow. What is "Real Life, Real News?" Romenesko has linked to an internal memo regarding the initiative (scroll down to "Memo re Gannett's REAL LIFE, REAL NEWS initiative"). Intriguingly, this initiative is accessible via the web, but is password protected and hidden from public view, accessible only to Gannett newsrooms. Apparently there's even a "best-practices" section, and it would be interesting to know what the "best practice" is for doing follow-up stories.

Fundamentally, though, since the AL continues to pull stunts like the one I document above, there has to be a full airing of the decisionmaking processes at all levels of the AL hierarchy. Since the AL is so gung-ho about "full disclosure" this shouldn't be a big deal.

Buzzflash: 'Daschle can't be minority leader'

Once again, Buzzflash, the liberal version of the Drudge Report, argues that Daschle's re-election priorities conflict with his leadership priorities, and for that reason should step aside as Democratic leader. Buzzflash links to this NYT story and states "Once Again, Buzzflash Says Daschle Cannot be a Red-State Bush-Lite Dem Senator and ALSO Minority Leader; In this Case, he is CO-SPONSORING an NRA Bill to give the Gun Industry Unprecedented Immunity from Lawsuits to Please the NRA Guys in South Dakota." Last night, this statement was at the top of the page; now you can find it on the left column of the Buzzflash website.

Daschle and "Laci and Connor's Law"

NRO has a transcript of a press conference held today by Sharon Rocha, the mother of Laci Peterson, a pregnant woman who was murdered over a year ago. Rocha is advocating a bill that would treat a crime on a fetus like a crime on any other person, dubbed "Laci and Connor's Law." Earlier today, the House passed "Laci and Connor's Law," and now it moves to the Senate. Excerpt from the statement made by Sharon Rocha:

In the summer of 2003, I wrote Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle a letter urging him to support the bill. Shortly after that, Senator Daschle said publicly that the Senate should consider this issue quickly. Since then, members of his party have been holding up a vote. I ask Senator Daschle, as their leader, to urge them to enact Laci and Conner’s Law as soon as possible.

Will Daschle use his vaunted clout to get the Senate to consider this issue quickly, and stop the members of his party from holding up a vote?

Daschle blows warchest, comes up empty

Today's edition of Roll Call has a story headlined "Daschle’s Five-Year, $9.5M Spending Spree." Excerpt:

From Jan. 1, 1999, to Dec. 31, 2003, Daschle spent $4.6 million from his personal campaign account, the highest total of any of the 34 incumbents up for re-election in November.

He also disbursed roughly $4.9 million during that time period — $870,000 in 2003 — through Dedicated Americans for the Senate and House, his leadership committee. ...

Dick Wadhams, campaign manager for former House Member and current Daschle challenger John Thune (R), however, questioned whether the Senator’s spending has yielded any tangible results.

“It must be embarrassing to have spent $4.6 million even before we got into election year 2004,” said Wadhams. “The poll numbers remain remarkably the same as they have for a couple of years.”

...

Overall, Daschle spent $813,000 on direct mail and phone bank efforts from 1999 through 2003.

Daschle spent another $687,000 on consulting fees to a variety of companies including Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, the campaign pollster; Struble Eichenbaum Communications, Daschle’s media consultant; and Media Strategies, the firm that places television buys for him.

Media Strategies received $350,000 in 2003 and another $78,000 between 2002 and 2001.

Karl Struble, who has handled media strategy for Daschle since 1984, received $218,000 for production costs last year.

Recall that Karl Struble is the author of a piece that appeared in Campaigns & Elections magazine discussing how he manipulated the local media to print negative stories about the opposing candidate and then using the headlines generated as "validators" for their attack ads. It looks like it's going to happen again.

Recall also that Daschle had Greenberg Quinlan do some polling and focus groups in the state a year ago to measure how bad the damage was after his infamous comments on the eve of the Iraq war, as reported in the New York Post.

Anyway, back to today's Roll Call piece:

Details aside, the fundamental question regarding Daschle’s expenditures is whether the nearly $10 million he has spent has significantly changed his standing in the race against Thune.

Daschle spent all of this money in an attempt to bluff John Thune out of running. It didn't work. Now the Daschle campaign is reeling and casting about for a new strategy in light of the latest polling. Watch for them to go viciously negative very soon.

The two Tom Daschles

To better understand the stark contrast between the Washington Tom Daschle and the South Dakota Tom Daschle, click on the links to the following photos:

The Washington Tom Daschle seen here yukking it up with Kofi Annan.

The South Dakota Tom Daschle, trying not to look out of place amidst a group of good ol' boys.

Daschle opposes constitutional amendments

The AP is reporting that Tom Daschle opposes a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, under the headline "South Dakota political leaders split on gay marriage ban." Interestingly, last week, the AP reported Tom Daschle's incoherent position on a constitutional amendment prohibiting flag burning under the headline "Daschle: Flag amendment not necessary." Apparently, Daschle believes that a constitutional amendment prohibiting desecration of the flag would "interfere" with the First Amendment, but somehow a mere law prohibiting the desecration of the flag would not:

Sen. Tom Daschle says he would support a law prohibiting desecration of the American flag, but he doesn't think a constitutional amendment is needed to protect it....

Daschle, a Democrat, told the group of mostly veterans he has two concerns: An amendment would interfere with freedom of speech allowed in the First Amendment, and desecration of the flag could be hard to define.

Huh?

Diedrich raises $300,000 in 3 weeks

The Hill is reporting that Larry Diedrich, Republican House candidate for the special election in South Dakota on June 1, says he has raised a cool $300,000 in three weeks, under the headline "Post-Ky., S.D. takes GOP’s center stage." Excerpt:

Diedrich said he has raised nearly $300,000 in the three weeks since the state Republican Party chose him as the candidate. Some of this money has come from the NRCC and Hill lawmakers. He said he does not know who has given the money, or exactly how much. With the Kentucky race over, House members and the national committee would now focus more on his race, he said.

Last week, Diedrich traveled to Washington to meet Republican members and garner additional support. He was pleased with his reception, saying, “The commitment has been, ‘You tell us what you want.’”

He intends to return to Washington this month to continue campaigning and raising money.

For some interesting discussion of this story, click HERE. (Thanks to Cory Skluzak for pointing this out.)

Daschle cool to new energy bill

It looks like Tom Daschle is once again not completely exercising his vaunted clout to get the new, slimmed down energy bill passed. This also happened last fall. According to a Washington Post report this past Sunday, Daschle spokesman Todd Webster had the following to say about the new Republican approach to slim down the energy bill (which was done at Daschle's demand!) among others:

The new approach "just means the special interests they are rewarding are fewer and more narrowly focused, and they'll look even more irrelevant to ordinary Americans who are concerned about jobs, health care and education," said Todd Webster, communications director for Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.).

Sen. Johnson to undergo surgery

The AP is reporting that Senator Johnson has been diagnosed with prostate cancer and will undergo surgery next week, under the headline "S.D. Sen. Johnson Diagnosed With Cancer." Fortunately, a complete recovery is expected. Best wishes to the senator and his family.

Daschle delivers -- for the special interests

Tom Daschle led his party in blocking a bill curbing medical malpractice lawsuits today, delivering another victory to his trial lawyer contributors. The AP has the story under the headline "Democrats Block GOP Bill on Malpractice." Trial lawyers are at the very top of the list of contributors to Tom Daschle's campaign.

The White House takes notice

The White House has taken notice of the fact that Tom Daschle is trying to have it both ways on the Iraq war. Jeff Gannon, resident DC expert on South Dakota politics, asked White House press secretary Scott McClellan about it during a press conference yesterday:

Q This is on Iraq. Last week, Senator Tom Daschle told an audience in South Dakota, "I give the overall effort real credit," in talking about the war in Iraq.

MR. McCLELLAN: Right, I saw those remarks.

Q Would you interpret his statement as a significant endorsement of administration policy, considering his own party and most of the media coverage says that the war in Iraq is going so badly?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think there is a growing recognition that a free and peaceful Iraq is vital to our nation's interests. A free and peaceful Iraq will help bring about stability and peace in a very volatile region of the world. This is a generational commitment the President is making to the Middle East, and Iraq can be an important step in moving toward freedom and democracy throughout the greater Middle East. And the President is strongly committed to making sure that we stay the course and finish the job in Iraq, for that very reason.

Q Don't you think Daschle's breaking ranks with his own party to essentially praise the war effort in Iraq is significant?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I don't want to interpret everybody's remarks, but I did see those remarks. We are making important progress in Iraq. It's very work that we are -- have undertaken. We are working closely with the Iraqi people and leaders in Iraq to bring about a peaceful, democratic and free Iraq.

Also, George W. Bush's official blog comments on the story.

Charlie Cook in South Dakota

Charlie Cook, arguably the premier political analyst in the country, has a piece today headlined "Power Struggle," in which he briefly discusses the U.S. Senate race in South Dakota. Relevant graf:

The lone vulnerable Democratic incumbent is Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. In January, Republican former Rep. John Thune announced that he will challenge Daschle. Thune lost his state's 2002 Senate contest by 524 votes. He was considered the only Republican who could give Daschle a very competitive race.

I have to admit I'm a bit red-faced about the fact that Charlie Cook himself was in Pierre, South Dakota last week, and I didn't find out about it until I read Rapid City Journal political reporter Denise Ross' latest column this morning, headlined "Major political players descend on Pierre." And what a column it is! Excerpt:

There will be differences this time, [Charlie Cook] said, and two on which Cook dwelled are likely to Thune's benefit.

First, Thune's campaign team will be better this time around, Cook said.

"The Thune campaign, technically speaking, will be a lot better than it was two years ago," Cook said.

Thune has hired political warrior Dick Wadhams as campaign manager, a choice the Capitol Hill press has described as a nice matchup with the equally extolled Hildebrand.

Second, Daschle is no longer Senate majority leader, and, perhaps worse, the Democrats are expected to lose Senate seats in 2004.

"Last time, they said a vote for Tim Johnson was a vote to keep Tom Daschle as majority leader. The choice was, do you want the majority leader or do you want a Republican senator," Cook said.

In 2002, GOP momentum tipped the balance of power to Republicans but left Daschle a strong minority leader with 48 of 100 seats in the Democratic caucus plus one independent who associates with that caucus.

In 2004, Democrats are expected to slide further in the Senate, Cook said. Republicans are losing two of their incumbent senators compared to five incumbent Democratic senators who are retiring. And four of the Democrats are from what Cook calls the "real South." The other is from Florida.

Cook expects most, if not all, of those Democratic seats to flip to Republicans due to the GOP's advantage in that region.

"Those are very, very hard places for Democrats to defend," Cook said.

With the Daschle-as-power-broker argument diminished, South Dakota voters might make different choices than they did two years ago, Cook said.

"That takes a pretty strong arrow out of the Democratic quiver," Cook said.

(Emphasis added.) I find it incredible that David Kranz, the so-called dean of South Dakota political reporters, despite the presence of so many political players in one place, did not report these events that took place in Pierre last week in his Sunday column, particularly the fact that Charlie Cook himself was in South Dakota. Kranz normally loves to quote the Cook Political Report and often quotes its writers in his pieces.

On January 5, 2004, the day Thune announced his candidacy for the Senate, Kranz quoted the Cook Political Report's Jennifer Duffy in his report on the event. On January 4, 2004, Kranz also quoted Duffy regarding the prospective Thune v. Daschle race. On December 10, 2003, Kranz quoted the Cook Political Report's Amy Walters in a story regarding whether Thune would run for the vacant House seat. On September 21, 2003, Kranz again quoted Walters. On September 14, 2003, Kranz cites the "Cook Report analysis" of a "handful of potentially close Senate races next year." On September 7, 2003, in one of his Sunday columns, Kranz wrote the following:

Senate analysis

Charles Cook, a well-respected national political analyst, assessed the South Dakota Senate race last week and said there are two ways to describe Sen. Tom Daschle:

"He is a tireless advocate for his state, has the kind of seniority in the Senate important to a small state and keeps in close touch with constituents, visiting each of the 66 counties every year.

"Or, he is a liberal Democrat and national spokesman for his party who works to obstruct President Bush's agenda in the Senate, opposed the war with Iraq, and is fundamentally out of step with the state's voters."

But when Charlie Cook himself is IN SOUTH DAKOTA to assess the South Dakota U.S. Senate race, we have yet to hear anything from the dean of South Dakota political reporters about it, or for that matter from any reporter at the Argus Leader. Why is that do you suppose? Could it be because what Cook had to say is damaging to the "Daschle as power-broker" message that is the very foundation of Tom Daschle's campaign? Just asking.

Rush discovers the latest Daschle flip-flop

Rush Limbaugh has a piece on his website headlined "Daschle Praises Bush on War" with his take on Tom Daschle's dissonant comments on the Iraq war, as reported in the Rapid City Journal.

Kranz Watch

Jay Rosen has an interesting piece about the "Adopt a Campaign Journalist" method of blogging, where a blog is devoted to watching the work of a political journalist. Excerpt:

Adopting a campaign reporter, and writing a weblog about the work that reporter does, is involving yourself in the press. And you can never predict how involving things will evolve. But that's not why I love it. I love it because it's one-to-one. That cosmic abstraction, The Media, which has no earthly address, is reckoned with by reduction to a single journalist, somebody who, far from the news wars, might be eating a sandwich when you are eating your sandwich. This gives the activity human scale, even if it's antagonistic. Our expanding culture of complaint about Big Media could use more of that-- a human scale.

Here at SDP, I've been monitoring the writing of David Kranz, the dean of South Dakota political reporters, for over a year. I've documented many of the more egregiously biased reports of his, but it may come as a surpise to some that I've frequently pulled my punches (I've sometimes ignored pieces of his that deserved analysis). The reason I've sometimes pulled my punches is because my blog is not dedicated solely to keeping an eye on David Kranz's reportage. I also try to make my blog a place where South Dakotans can get news about Tom Daschle that they're unlikely to see elsewhere in the local media, and conversely, for those outside South Dakota to get news that otherwise doesn't travel beyond the borders of South Dakota. It's no secret that my agenda is to help Republicans get elected in South Dakota, and to expose fake Republicans like Tom Daschle and Stephanie Herseth. By contrast, Dave Kranz's agenda is to help Tom Daschle and Stephanie Herseth get elected. The problem is, he holds himself out to be an objective observer of the South Dakota political scene. I don't pretend to be objective.

I dedicate many hours of the day to blogging about South Dakota politics in part because many South Dakotans appreciate what I'm doing. But the bottom line is that I operate this blog because I want to make a difference, and I believe that I am making a difference.

Ed Schultz Watch

Drudge links to the latest AP story on Ed Schultz, headlined "North Dakota 'Liberal' Starts Radio Show."

Robert Moran on Tom Daschle

National Review Online has a piece analyzing Tom Daschle's motivations in trying to have it both ways on controversial issues headlined "About Face! Forward March!" Excerpt:

The strategy is clear. Daschle knows that he's in a conservative state. He knows, given party-registration numbers, that he has to peel away at least some Republicans. His team has already done the math and realized that if Bush wins 60 percent of the vote in South Dakota again, Daschle will need to get 17 percent of these Bush voters to vote for him and not Thune in order to win. That's some tough math.

BOMBSHELL

The political fallout from Senator Daschle's dissonant comments regarding the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (in Washington, Daschle says Bush has a "credibility chasm" on WMD; in South Dakota, Daschle says he has no serious concerns about the lack of weapons of mass destruction) has begun. Now former Daschle staffer Amy Sullivan is blogging under a post headlined "CAN DASCHLE STILL LEAD THE DEMOCRATS?" that Daschle "may need to decide whether he can defend his seat and work to defeat Bush at the same time."

Liberal blogger Matthew Yglesias also questions Tom Daschle's viability as Democratic Leader.

Elsewhere on her blog, Sullivan has a fascinating behind-the-scenes account of Tom Daschle having it both ways on the partial birth abortion ban:

We had worked for almost a year to craft a piece of abortion legislation that would thread the needle of reducing abortions while providing protections for women's health and provide an alternative to the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban" clogging up the abortion debate. One week after our bill's ignoble failure in a Senate floor vote, although Daschle had previously voted to oppose the so-called PBA bill, he felt he had to change his position and cast a vote in favor of the ban. Exhausted from months of doing nothing but thinking about abortion during waking and sleeping hours, we staffers sat at the back of the Senate chamber as our boss voted to support a sham of a bill.

(Emphasis added.) But hey, Tom's still a great guy in Sullivan's view, even if he did cut her off at the knees.

More fascinating yet is the fact that Sullivan seems to be approached quite frequently by the press, wondering what Daschle's motivations are in having it both ways on a series of controversial issues. And that she's been emphatically told by the Daschle camp to quit talking about him.