Herman Cain & Politico’s Irresponsible Journalism

Herman Cain now gets to field his first scandal. Welcome to the majors Mr. Cain. Much of the commentary has focused on how well the Cain Campaign responded to the story broken by Politico. Not so well, everyone seems to agree. The trick in dealing with an embarrassment is to get ahead of it. Get your story straight and then get it out all at once. Cain had plenty of warning that this was coming and still seemed flatfooted when it broke.

Politico was surely right to break the story now and they may have done Cain a favor. This is the kind of thing that should be vetted well the snow becomes general over Iowa. Still, the Politico story is a textbook case of irresponsible journalism.

Here the opening:

During Herman Cain's tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

In a series of comments over the past 10 days, Cain and his campaign repeatedly declined to respond directly about whether he ever faced allegations of sexual harassment at the restaurant association.

Consider the words "at least" in the first paragraph. That suggests that there may have been more women who brought complaints against Cain. If there is any evidence of that, Politico does not provide it. Now consider the words "allegations of sexual harassment". Sexual harassment is a legally defined term:

unwelcome verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is severe or pervasive and affects working conditions or creates a hostile work environment.

If you are going to suggest that Cain was guilty of that, you had better have some very specific facts to back it up. Does Politico have such facts? Here is what Politico says it has concerning Cain's misconduct.

On the details of Cain's allegedly inappropriate behavior with the two women, POLITICO has a half-dozen sources shedding light on different aspects of the complaints. The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association's offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

So the complaints were made by two women who remain anonymous, Politico tells us, "for privacy concerns." Facts about the nature of their complaints rely on "a half-dozen" anonymous sources, "— including the recollections of [anonymous] close associates and other [unspecified] documentation."

As for what the complaints actually were, we get only the vaguest clues. Conversations involving who, exactly? What were the personal, sexually suggestive questions? At whom was the innuendo directed? What were the physical gestures that were "not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable"? I have to confess, I am at a loss on that one. Arm farts? The reader has no idea what the alleged transgressions amounted to, let alone whether they actually occurred. To put it mildly, there is no evidence here of anything amounting to sexual harassment.

The closest Politico gets to something specific is this:

A second source with close ties to the restaurant association from that period said the woman revealed at the time that she had suffered what the source described as "an unwanted sexual advance" from Cain at a hotel where an event involving the group was taking place.

So we have an anonymous source claiming that he heard from another anonymous source that she suffered what the first anonymous source describes as "an unwanted sexual advance". This is stuff of the Politico story.

Information about the incidents was apparently closely held, even among association board members. But one woman's complaint apparently did make its way to at least some figures on the governing board when, at an association event, one board member got word that a female employee had complained about Cain's advances, according to a source who was at the event.

So the National Restaurant Association board kept information about the alleged incidents "closely held". How do we know this? We learn that the allegations made their way to "at least some figures on the governing board" because one unnamed board member got word of it. We learn this from another unnamed source.

I can easily believe that Herman Cain, despite his marriage of 43 years, propositioned an employee. It may turn out that that is what happened. It is the kind of thing that powerful men frequently do.

I also know that there is a very good reason why anonymous accusers and hearsay are not creditable, in the absence of confirmation. Whatever actually happened we cannot guess from anything that Politico provides. What we can tell is that this story was an atrocious piece of journalism. If this is the standard, then no one is safe from the vaguest allegations from any army of anonymous sources.

Comments

[larry kurtz]

You are the master, Ken. Read: snowball's chance in Hell.

[Mike Cooper]

At least we now know Cain is a serious contender, and that the Democrats are fearful of running against him.

[Dave]

Oh the HUMANITY! Won't somebody please think about the CHILDREN!

[KB]

Larry: Do you have any spare drugs? There are days we could all use some of whatever you are on.

Dave: you would be singing a different tune (equally off key, no doubt) if this were about Obama.

[Stan Gibilisco]

If Cain were a Democrat, the race cards would be flying like leaves in a Halloween gale.

[Donald Pay]

Not only wasn't this irresponsible journalism, it was excellent journalism. These are not anonymous accusers. Their identities are known to the journalists. The fact that there are a half dozen people corroborating the story is far more than any journalist needs to go to print.

The lede indicates that "multiple sources" confirmed that two females were harassed by Cain. The "at least" implies that the multiple sources may disagree about the total number of females harassed by Cain or may be confused about the identities of those who were harassed, leading to a bit of confusion about whether more than two were harassed. The reporters asked Cain for clarifications, and he didn't provide any. The fact is Cain was asked for comment and could have told the reporters how many allegations there were without breaching any confidentiality agreement. That one is on Cain.

Journalists regularly report on allegations of wrongdoing. Are you saying we don't need to hear about alleged problems with the ATF Mexican gun tracking operation because we don't have every fact down pat? Nonsense.

[duggersd]

KB, you really do not want to have Larry's drugs. Do you REALLY want to see the world that way?

[larry kurtz]

You're right, Ken, my first post was off the mark. How about: an Oreo's chance in Hell.

[larry kurtz]

Fact is, Barnes: I called this Cain story back in August. http://interested-party.blogspot.com/2011/08/earth-haters-debate.html

[duggersd]

Not that I normally respond to you or read your blog, but you called it that Cain had an affair. This does not appear to be the case in the story. Some people are making accusations about some things he may or may not have said or done, but nobody in the story is claiming he had an affair. This would be wishful thinking on your part, and also irresponsible reporting on your part. Now I can go back to ignoring you and your blog.

[larry kurtz]

Watch and learn, Barnes. I am a man who has slept with more women than all the rest of the contributors on Ken's blog combined and can spot a cheater like a buzzard spots a corpse.

[Donald Pay]

Given the campaign donation scandals starting to surround Cain, you have to wonder whether the sexual harassment story might not be a good thing for him at this point. Sex trumps money in the media. If they weren't looking for these two women, they might be asking why people associated with a Koch front group who are now running Cain's campaign may have been involved in illegal campaign activities.

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/state-firms-cash-to-herman-cain-may-breach-federal-campaign-tax-laws-132898423.html

[larry kurtz]

Gingrich could be the beneficiary of Cain's pending implosion: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/pollster-potential-cain-downfall-could-helpnewt.php

[Ken Blanchard]

Donald: The CBS story on the gunrunner scandal that I referenced earlier relies on anonymous testimony. It also produces named witnesses and a list of very specific facts. CBS tells us exactly what the ATF was doing. It gives us the caliber of the weapons. It names persons involved and a very important victim. It identifies specific documents.

The Politico story, by contrast, was built entirely on anonymous witnesses and rumor and never produces anything else. All it manages to establish is a set of allegations so vague as to be meaningless. Nothing in the story would enable another reporter to check it out. Calling this excellent journalism is idiotic.

[Stan Gibilisco]

Last night (Tuesday) on The O'Reilly Factor, Herman Cain got the "no-spin-zone treatment." His responses in regards to this issue seemed fairly good to me. However, his responses to Bill's questions concerning foreign policy made it clear: Herman Cain does not have what it takes to serve as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. Commerce secretary, maybe. President, no way.

[Ken Blanchard]

Stan: I have enjoyed your posts of late, a lot! I want to make one thing very clear. I am not defending Herman Cain here. Larry Kurtz may be challenged by distinctions, but you and I are not. I have said many times that I do not think Cain will be the nominee and that I do not think he is ready for prime time. I only argue that the Politico piece was very bad journalism, as even Donald would be able to see if it had come at the expense of someone or something he favors.

[Bill Fleming]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20128570-503544/is-herman-cain-taking-scandal-from-bad-to-worse/

KB. Don't bet the farm on your position here, my friend. I'm just sayin'.

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: are you tripping with Kurtz? I acknowledged that Cain was not handling the story well. My post was not about Cain, it was about irresponsible journalism. If you traffic in rumors and innuendo, that's journalistic malpractice regardless of what the facts turn out to be.

[Bill Fleming]

Nope, not tripping, KB. At least not artificially. ;^)
So far, the Politico story seems to be panning out pretty much as they outlined it, don't you think?

[Bill Fleming]

Reporters have to be careful to use words like "alleged" and "apparently," and "according to a source"etc. when they release a story. That's the craft. There is nothing irresponsible about it. It would be irresponsible if they didn't use those words. Ask a real journalist.

[Bill Fleming]

I think the more interesting angle here is finding out who gave Politico the original tip. There is some speculation that it came from the Karl Rove group or the Romney camp. Cain sounds like he'd like to blame it on the Democrats (big surprise.) I wonder if we'll ever find that out?

[Mike Cooper]

The publicity is good for Cain. Republicans will rally around him, whether Romney or the Democrats are responsible. While some will look a bit askance at this, when faced with a choice between Obama and Cain, Cain will win hands down. Thanks to Bill Clinton, our country is pretty much inured to this sort of thing. The ones who claim to be bothered were going to vote for Obama/Romney anyway. I am not yet ready to say Cain will get the nomination. but this makes it more likely, not less.

[duggersd]

Polling is interesting, but mostly just a snapshot. I have been hearing that in head-to-head with Obama, Cain has been rising rather quickly, especially with Democrats. It seems Democrats consider this type of story a resume enhancer.

[tedp]

An "Oreo" Mr. Kurtz? Really. When are liberal Democrats going to let black people off the plantation? The stereotype is insulting.

I'm new to the blog, and I must say that you liberal jackals nipping at Ken's heels is quite amusing.

[larry kurtz]

You're a dweeb, Barnes. Thomas Jefferson routinely raped his slaves and fathered at least one child as a result. Subsequent US presidents held mistresses as a matter of course.

tedp: you are barking up the wrong tree. Ken is a tool of the South Dakota Republican Party whose heels are soiled with 122 years of violent racism.

[duggersd]

tedp, you are best off ignoring the person who I do not normally respond to. He is often off topic and makes one wonder what kind of damage has happened to his brain.
BTW, I just read another accomplishment of President Obama. In the past year, the number of food stamp recipients has increased by 8% to about 46,000,000 Americans.

[larry kurtz]

to whom I normally not respond, Barnes; you poor sot. Hey, food stamps are part of the farm bill; end farm subsidies and put the program into HHS.

[tedp]

Ah yes, duggersd, I visited his web site and see what you mean. Seething ignorance and hate...

[larry kurtz]

Bismarck is hardly a bastion of enlightenment, Ted.

ISP Midcontinent Communications
Location
Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : North Dakota
City : Bismarck

[larry kurtz]

IP Address 24.220.245.# (Midcontinent Communications)

Let me guess: Jack Dalrymple's lover?

[larry kurtz]

you didn't vote on my poll, Ted; go back and vote.

[larry kurtz]

Bill, I thought the same thing about your insight into one of the other earth haters turning on Cain. Here's a little ammo for your premise:

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/gop-consultant-i-saw-herman-cain-harass-women.php

[Bill Fleming]

Mmm hmmm. So Perry maybe? Meanwhile the guy goes on Fox News and doesn't seem to know that China has had nukes for 50 years. I don't know. Maybe he should go back to the food biz.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20128920-503544/herman-cain-incorrectly-suggests-china-doesnt-have-nuclear-capability/

[MikeH]

I think her name is Anita Hill.

[Donald Pay]

It's looking more and more that KB just dittoed the right wing line on the media, rather than doing the hard journalistic work of the reporters breaking this story. The sort of reflexive anti-journalism of KB is far, far more dangerous for our society, than proper journalistic vetting of multiple sources.

[Bill Fleming]

It's not the first time we've seen KB try to polish a turd, Donald. I'm just sayin'.

[KB]

Okay, Bill. If Fox publishes a story about a scandal involving Obama and the story contains NOTHING but anonymous sources, unspecified documents, and hearsay evidence, you will have to admit that its good journalism. Of course you won't. You'll cry like a baby. I will say the same thing about such a story that I say about this.

[Bill Fleming]

I always love when other people tell me with such certainty how I will think,
and what I will do on some hypothetical future issue... also how some people
consider Fox to be an actual news organization.

[Anthony Renli]

The problem the Cain campaign faces with the article has less to do with the article itself, but the amateur hour way he dealt with it. First he denied it, then said he didn’t recall, then said well, he recalled, but didn’t think they paid off a person, then said well maybe there was a cash settlement but… His camp has blamed Obama, Perry, and Romney at various points about the leak – and walked them all back. If this is how they deal with what should have been a minor hiccough in the news cycle, how would he deal with actually campaigning against Obama or actually being president?

Will this kill his campaign, no, but it has already weakened it. Combine this with the campaign finance problems that have been ignored because of the much sexier harassment claims it is probably good he imploded early.

(for his campaign finance problems see the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/state-firms-cash-to-herman-cain-may-breach-federal-campaign-tax-laws-132898423.html )

[Bill Fleming]

Okay, KB, here's your Fox "News" report. Still pretty vague on some things. Better bust their chops, brother.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/03/cain-accusers-both-work-in-government-related-jobs/

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: I love it when someone objects to something I say about them and then immediately confirms it.

The Fox article you cite provides plenty of details, including actual people's names. It tells us more about the unnamed alleged accusers than Politico did, including where one of them works. It doesn't advance the story very much, but it doesn't pretend to do otherwise.

Anthony: I agree completely. The Cain campaign's response was amateurish, and that includes their accusations against the Perry campaign. Since Cain's greatest asset was his "plain talking", I think this has damaged him.

[Donald Pay]

See, KB has never been in the journalism biz, and apparently doesn't know the difference between breaking a story, and follow up reporting on a story. It's so nice to be blissfully ignorant, but it doesn't make you right, KB.

[Ken Blanchard]

Donald: at least I know what a STORY is, something of which you are apparently ignorant, blissfully or otherwise.

You are wrong to say that I have never been in the journalism biz. I have a regular column in the Aberdeen American News. A modest venue, I will grant, but a real newspaper nonetheless. I know what it is like to deal with responsible editors. I know for a fact that they would not have published anything I wrote that was as empty and vague and full of innuendo as the Politico piece.

[Bill Fleming]

KB, the real reporters will be quick to tell you that there is "news" and "editorial" in a newspaper, and never the twain shall meet. Your columns in a newspaper are no more news reporting than my ads are. In fact, sometimes my ads have more actual news in them.

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: you are altogether wrong. To be sure, there are differences between editorials and reporting, but that doesn't mean that columnists can say anything they damn well please. I have to support factual claims made in my column, at least to my editor's satisfaction. On a couple of occasions I made errors that necessitated retractions. On other occasions, a column was delayed until I convinced my editors that my claims were supported.

If I accused President Obama or you of something in one of my essays, but didn't say exactly what it was and based my accusation on anonymous witnesses and hearsay evidence, that column would not appear as scheduled. That is how responsible journalism works.

[Bill Fleming]

Okay, now we might be getting somewhere. Do you have to support your claims in the text of your column? Or just to your editor's satisfaction? i.e. is there a backstory?