Covering the prosecutor purge scandal? There’s no Time

Maybe Time managing editor Richard Stengel is trying to make some kind of point. Last weekend, on national television, Stengel explained his perspective on the prosecutor purge scandal. “I am so uninterested in the Democrats wanting Karl Rove, because it is so bad for them. Because it shows business as usual, tit for tat, vengeance,” Stengel said. “That’s not what voters want to see.”

After taking some flak for the comment, Stengel acknowledged that Democrats going after Rove is “interesting” in an “objective way for Time and for journalists in general,” though he didn’t mention whether the substance of the controversy is interesting to him or not.

I think we now know the answer to that one.

Is Time trying to bury the attorney general scandal that’s seized Washington, D.C., for the past three months? In just the last week, new documents emerged contradicting Alberto Gonzales’s account of his role in the firings, a low-level Department of Justice staffer announced her intent to plead the Fifth if asked to testify before Congress, and Justice officials admitted that it had misled Congress when it denied last month that Karl Rove played a role in deciding which U.S. attorneys got the boot. Yet the new issue of Time, on stands today, contains precisely zero stories on the scandal. Nothing. As though it’s not happening.

You could chalk it up to atrocious news judgment, or laziness perhaps, but then there’s the bizarre hostility that Time’s editors have expressed regarding coverage of the firings.

One should be cautious about throwing around phrases like “journalistic malpractice” casually, but for the nation’s leading news-weekly to entirely ignore the nation’s biggest political controversy, just as it’s reaching crisis mode for the White House and the Justice Department, at a minimum raises questions about the magazine’s editorial judgment.

To be fair, Time altered its publishing schedule recently, and the new issue was released today, making it practically impossible to offer any kind of meaningful coverage of yesterday’s Sampson hearings. Also, Time did report on a new poll, which at least mentions the story in passing.

But given the circumstances, it’s hard to fathom why the controversy has been given short shrift.

Indeed, there were plenty of key developments in this story earlier in the week, any and all of which would have made good copy. A senior Justice Department official has taken the 5th, Gonzales gave an unpersuasive interview on national television, Republican lawmakers are increasingly unwilling to defend the DoJ’s decision making, the White House is getting antsy, new questions have arisen every day this week about exactly what happened and why.

But Time magazine, to borrow its editor’s word, finds all of this so “uninteresting” that there’s no need to even mention it to readers.

But, Time’s defenders might say, maybe the magazine wants to be forward-looking. Perhaps the editors don’t want to offer readers details on what’s happened, and would prefer to cover what’s going to happen. OK, then how about a story about the ongoing fight over subpoenas? And suspicious RNC email accounts? And resignations?

All right, Time’s defenders concede, but maybe the magazine devoted so much coverage to this story last week, it toned down coverage (to zero) this week. That might be compelling, except Time offered a total of 300 words to the story in the last issue.

Democrats, in control of both chambers of Congress for the first time in 12 years, are determined to reclaim what they can. And the U.S. Attorneys case gives them powerful new ammunition.

Just getting Karl Rove and other top White House officials to testify could be as important as anything they might say, since it would set a precedent of sorts as Democrats push to investigate internal White House deliberations on everything from Iraq-war contracting to the use of prewar intelligence. Bush is resisting, offering to give only limited interviews with lawmakers with no transcript. Anything more than that, he says, would be an infringement on presidential privilege.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales remains a likely casualty, but the history of past scandals suggests his resignation would not be enough to end the current one. Hearings will be held, subpoenas issued, new investigations launched. And when it’s over, we’ll be hard-pressed to remember how it began.

That’s the whole thing. Two weeks ago was slightly better — Time offered two short stories on the story totaling 800 words — but for the nation’s leading news magazine, it’s awfully weak.

It’s on the front page of every major daily for weeks, but Time can’t bring itself to let readers know it’s unfolding in serious ways in Washington. What’s more, as far as the public is concerned, if Time doesn’t think it’s worth covering, maybe it’s not that big a deal.

C’mon, Time, you can do better than this.

it’s hard to fathom why the controversy has been given short thrift

I think you mean “short shrift”.

And the whole AG politicizing the Justice System story is BORING! I want stories about cute penguins!

  • I don’t think Time wants to embarrass one of their 2006 people of the year, Karl Rove.

    Besides that would be so awful to actually report and analyze the news instead of continuing down that slow death of morphing of Time into People Magazine (home of the puff interview.)

  • Whatever your opinion of Time, it’s actually kind of staggering that there isn’t any story on this. It is literally the biggest topic in Washington – the vote on the war is a close second, but I believe second nonetheless.

    It almost makes me want to buy the damn thing just to figure out what the hell they are talking about. Almost.

  • Someone is surprised that a gaggle of corporate public relations hacks, masquerading as ‘reporters” fail to take a whack at the political administration and political party that butters their bread for them?

    Corporations are Republican. Corporations own the major news media. You don’t bite the hand that gives you power and tax breaks.

  • “I am so uninterested in the Democrats wanting Karl Rove, because it is so bad for them. Because it shows business as usual, tit for tat, vengeance,” Stengel said. “That’s not what voters want to see.”

    I just heard that Rove’s assistant resigned. This raises the question of whether the person is going to be made a scapegoat, that is, whether he’s tasked with taking one for Rove.

    I recall way before Fitzgerald indicted anybody, I suggested in a comment on some blog that Rove wasn’t going to get in trouble. I think this is because it’s evident to powerful people that can use him that he’s such a nasty enforcer that they’ll always make sure to keep him out of trouble- Rove is useful, so he won’t get in trouble, and people will try to keep him from making mistakes. Maybe this is the first time he crossed the line and won’t be able to stay out of trouble.

  • C’mon, Time, you can do better than this.

    I do not believe that is possible. The sea change was the Coulter cover – since then its as though Time fell asleep and woke up as a pod-person.

    -GFO

  • If there were anything left to the rotted right-wing corpse of Henry Luce, I’m sure its lips would be curled in a satisfied smile.

  • Time may not want to cover this story, but if it’s readers want to read about it, Time is essentially telling them to go to someone else’s news product to read about the news they are interested in. Stengel may think this is cunning media manipulation, but I can’t imagine his readership will stay on board with such obvious self-censorship. The market may have the last laugh when Stengel’s product no longer satisfies the public’s hunger for news about the biggest scandal in the land. Who wants to pay for a news magazine that doesn’t cover what’s news?

  • Maybe the absence of info in Time about Purgegate is the magazine equivalent of 122 “I don’t remember”s.

  • letters@time.com

    Hey Guys and Girls!

    Happy Feet Time! Thanks! So happy we didn’t have to hear “LALALALALALALALALALA” about those nasty ol’ Dems chasing down our cocktail weenie buddys. After all they were only attempting to subvert the entire federal prosecution system for political gain through obstruction of justice and secretly amending the Patriot Act to eliminate any oversight by the Senate!

    Oh, I see, the penguin is Rove? The walrus is Paul? The wanker is Stengle?

    For all those left at time (LC), with any integrity, go home, shower, rinse, repeat… You work for a slime of an organization.

    I have purposely avoided any cursing or swearing to avoid having you call for a bloggers ethic’s conference – has Anne Marie made any regular references to anal sex recently under your swamp moniker, or is joke line going to take that function over.

    PS – Don’t send any mail to them, their box is full – 707

  • Does anyone remember who refused to cover Watergate initially? People are sheep and eat whatever pap they are fed. Time will get on board when the story has full momentum, and no one but us die hards in the blogosphere will remember what idiots the editors of Time are.

  • Tom Cleaver (#4) is correct. Time is rapidly becoming a corporate tabloid. To hell with “news.”

  • Time heels, all wounds.

    I had been a long time subscriber of Time and cancelled my subscription with the Coulter cover. But long before then, Time had been overlooking the important stories about this sAdministration or relegating the most egregious to a peppy blurb on a “stories in the news” page. They are the quintessential corporate media hack mag. So yes, petorado is right. But most readers who care about the issues of day beyond Britney have left already.

  • Ana Marie Cox criticized Stengel on Swampland for his dismissal of this story on Chris Matthews, and Stengel responded that he was just wearing his “citizen” cap when he said what he said. As a citizen, Stengel said, he was rilly bored by all this; as an editor, Stengel implied, he certainly understood the import of the story.

    Except, no, he doesn’t. He obviously doesn’t at all.

  • Interesting to weigh the amount of coverage that Time gave for stealing a quickie, versus stealing the American justice system.

  • It reminds me of a movie about the right-wing attempt at overthrowing Chavez in Venezuela. The title, “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” was cliched but it was definitely an accurate summation of one of the more interesting aspects of the 72-hour coup. The right-wingers that tried to overthrow Chavez owned all the private media in the country. The government had one television station that was attacked and shut off in a rogue military action supporting the coup, and thereafter there was a complete media blackout. The blackout was interesting because it was a virtual admission that what they were doing was illegal and unpopular and wrong – and they knew it.

    While South American politics have often been more extreme than here it sounds startlingly familiar. How many times have we lamented the important stories that can only be found published in the blogosphere and nowhere in the national media or major newspapers?

  • I not as old as Ed Stephan is, but I remember Time flip-flopping on Nixon. It was shameless because it was obviously that the people who ran Time lacked a moral compass–they were expedient.

    Bottom line: I’ve known that Time was “a rag” for thirty-some years. To quote The Who: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” Too many people have been fooled for too many years. Perhaps, the veneer of journalism for Time is finally gone.

  • Joan Baez had those ass-holes pegged long ago, when she wrote a song about Time mag being a rag rag.

  • Rian Mueller, @19:

    I was already in US when the Polish clamp-down (aka martial law) happened on Dec 13, 1981, but, from what I’ve heard from my friends, it was very much like what you’re describing vis Chavez coup. A Sunday morning, people woke up to no newspapers, to TV and radio which played folk music non-stop, and to dead telephones. And army and police patrolling the streets. All over the country, not just Warsaw.

    When the news finally leaked out, it leaked out via ‘puters (some physics geeks in the National Academy of Science, who’d worked overnight) and some amateur shortwave operators. It was similiar to the (later) disintegration of USSR (when Yeltsin took over) — only the scientists with access to e-waves could get anything out (in USSR, they confiscated the radios first )

  • I abandoned Time about 20 years ago. It has always claimed to be clear, concise and cogent.But accurate? Naaahh! Today, Time can’t even claim to be present and accounted for. It’s the administration’s brag rag.

    I loved it when Luce was hollering and lamenting how “we’ve lost China!” There’s another powerful American ignoramus. You can’t lose what you never had.

  • So is Stengel just being a rapid Republican, or is he trying to keep a lid on this for a (personal) reason?

  • Back in 1978 Carter fired David Marston, US Attorney, Pennsylvania.
    He was asked to do this by Democratic Congressman Joshua Eilberg, who was being investigated by Marston at the time.
    The unusal thing here was that Marston was a Republican US Attorney.

    As President Carter recounted it, Eilberg offered no reason and Carter did not ask; the ‘System’ was at work. Carter thought so little of the matter that days passed before he got around to calling Attorney General Griffin Bell about it.
    Carter’s credibility troubles began when he professed to remember none of this, or of Eilberg’s ‘problems’.

    Tip O’Neill (house Speaker) described Marston as “a Republican political animal” who took office “with viciousness in his heart and for only one reason—to get Democrats.”
    However, GOP Congressman Thomas Evans pointed out that Marston had nailed two Republicans along with several Democrats.

    Due to the Carter Administration’s ineptness, a martyr’s image was created for Marston, who was an outright political appointee who hunted headlines as vigorously as he hunted official corruption in both parties.

    The Justice Department announced that Bell and Carter were cleared of any charge of obstruction of justice in the affair.

  • When has TIME Magazine ever not had a conservative slant? Have you seen the most recent two issues? Last cover: “Why the bible should be taught in schools”! Today’s cover: “Einstein and God – A Spiritual Journey”. How long have they been letting Krauthammer publish all kinds of lying tripe in their columns? And Joe Klein is hardly the evenhanded moderate he pretends to be.

    If you look at the letters section, they overrepresent conservative viewpoints there as well, no matter how ignorant they are, all in the name of “balance”. If you have two points of view and one is factually in error, giving them equal weight is not “balance” or “journalism” at all. It’s implicit propaganda.

  • Charles Krauthammer and Bill Kristol both of Fox “News” and Krauthammer of the Weekly Standard are signers to the PNAC Project for the New American Century policy letters. They advocate that Israel via their Neo-Zionists/Cons infiltrate the U.S. government and use the U.S. military to take over the planet and its’ resources…Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfiwitz, Richard Perle, Jeb Bush, Douglas Feith, John Bolton and other Bu$hco members are also members and signers.

    So far they have managed to inflitrate Congress and the White house, and they have been instrumental in starting/selling the Iraq war and the take over of the middle east for Israel.

    The interesting part is that they do not even try to hide their agenda, it is all spelled out clearly in their policy papers and letters.

  • Comments are closed.