Ed Morrissey spots this story over at the NYT about John McCain's foreign policy advisers. The Times fulminates over a supposed battle for McCain's soul between competing camps comprised of realists on one side and neo-conservatives on the other. I don't know about the merits of this story, but this observation from Morrissey caught my eye:
Life on the road covering a confirmed presidential nominee apparently bores reporters to tears. Instead of covering news, they literally make up controversy to keep themselves from falling asleep.
Folks should not dismiss Morrissey's claim out of hand. In his book Ambling Into History, former NYT reporter Frank Bruni, who covered George Bush for the Times in the 2000 election, supports this notion that campaign reporters get bored by the road. Bruni suggests that one reason why "Bush commits another malaprop" stories were so prevalent is that the press became so bored covering essentially the same speech every day that the only real "news" was when Bush fumbled a word. Also, the reporters on the press bus would often talk to each other about the state of the campaign and then quote each other as "sources close to the campaign."
We should be skeptical about press coverage of our presidential candidates.
Recent Comments