Kurtz criticizes media’s fascination with Rove.
Kurtz criticizes media’s fascination with Rove.
In his column in today’s Washington Post, Howard Kurtz writes that the media have baselessly gushed over Karl Rove in order to create a “better narrative“:
But what if journalists are part of an unspoken conspiracy to inflate Rove’s importance — not for ideological reasons but because it makes for a better narrative? What if they are the architects, using well-placed aides to build a stage for inside-dope stories involving Rove and his colleagues?
Or perhaps there’s a cruder explanation: that some journalists believe Bush lacks the intellectual heft to achieve big things on his own, so they attribute his most consequential decisions to a powerful Svengali at his side.
This is not to play down Rove’s crucial role as the president’s longtime confidant and chief strategist, who indeed helped engineer his election triumphs and map a governing approach that emphasized the care and feeding of Bush’s conservative base. But was Rove’s decision to quit, 17 months before the end of Bush’s term, truly deserving of lead-story status in the New York Times, The Washington Post and the three nightly newscasts?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
jail time for you turd blossom
August 20th, 2007 at 11:21 amWhat if….?
August 20th, 2007 at 11:22 amBut was Rove’s decision to quit, 17 months before the end of Bush’s term, truly deserving of lead-story status in the New York Times, The Washington Post and the three nightly newscasts?
Yes. Yes it was.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:25 amKarl Rove is a rock star, how could the media ignore him.
Besides, all media outlets were trying to get him to talk about Valerie Plame and attorney firings, so they were still carrying your water.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:26 amCaption:
“Ooooh, dead bugs on the windshield, can I have them please?
August 20th, 2007 at 11:29 amWhat instrument does Rove play Mr. Hendler? Or does he lead sing on any chart toppers.
Rove is no more of a Rock star than you are. Rove is an immoral Neocon that has a history of winning at all costs.
Great moral example, for the immoral that is.
Rove is wise not to speak of the Plame issue. Primarily is because it’s far from resolved.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:31 amThey would cover ASSteroids if they were falling to earth, why not Karl Rove(r).
August 20th, 2007 at 11:31 amWhen someone screws the country over as badly as Rove, you bet your ass it’s front-page news.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:35 amWhatever, Howie. Maybe it will be a big news story when the indictments come down. Or maybe when Rove passes through the prison gates.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:36 amRove jumps ship 17 months before the end of an error. Up until now that was a treasonous act. To cut and run, to leave before the job is done. Sad how the followers of this administration don’t see the “do as I say, not as I do” BS that Rove is showing.
Tours of Duty have been extended and time out of theater have been diminished and the far right thinks this will help the cause. But they see no problem in the Turd leaving.
The only consistency with Bush is his inconsistency.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:40 amKarl deserves to be hounded to his grave.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:42 amThe press will fall all over itself to condemn him when the indictments and convictions come ’round.
Rove will never serve any jail time. He will shortly reappear in the Fred Thompson campaign, just in time to launch the attacks on Guiliani and Romney. Then, he will turn his sights on Hillary. After Fred is inaugurated, it’s off to Dubai to share a drink with George and Dick. And to share a smoke with Laura. And to cuddle with Jeff.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:43 am“Or perhaps there’s a cruder explanation: that some journalists believe Bush lacks the intellectual heft to achieve big things on his own, so they attribute his most consequential decisions to a powerful Svengali at his side.”
Oftentimes the “crudest”, or shall we say simplest, explanation
August 20th, 2007 at 11:44 amtends to be the most accurate.
I understand Kurtz is a media critic…but can we start talking about how awful his Reliable Sources program on CNN has become lately? Oh, and he made a big deal about the Rove story (that was the time that I turned it off)
August 20th, 2007 at 11:52 amRove’s plan has completely backfired. The 2006 sweep by the Democrats was the first phase. The fact that not a single Republican presidential candidate wants to be seen with W. is another sign. Rove’s legacy will be that of crippling the Republican party for the next 15+ years.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:55 amIs Kurtz complaining about the lousy coverage (no doubt some coverage was sycophantic inside-the-beltway bunk), or the fact this was regarded as a story at all?
Of all the news media sins, covering the departure of Karl Rove hardly seems controversial. And treating him as important, by virtue of his closeness to the President, seems…erm…obvious?
August 20th, 2007 at 12:03 pmThis move (resigning from the WH) just provides this weasel less scrutiny by prying eyes. He was already using RNC email accounts for cover, as are half the staffers there, and now he can operate unhindered…Kurtz is a classic fair weather fan.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:04 pmBut what if journalists are part of an unspoken conspiracy to inflate Rove’s importance — not for ideological reasons but because it makes for a better narrative?
You mean like, “What if the Washington press corps is a bunch of lazy hack writers that are incapable of actual journalism?”
I’d buy that. They’ve been puffing up Rove’s c.v. for years. If they were really covering the story, they’d have been paying attention to what a horrific job Rove has done generating policy in the White House.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:06 pmJust flush and forget it.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:09 pmRove retired to spend more time with his family so he could spread rumors about them. (Jon Stewart)
August 20th, 2007 at 12:09 pmRove will get lots of media attention when the trails start.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:09 pmHold on folks, Karl has “flesh colored hair, doesn’t that count for anything?”
August 20th, 2007 at 12:31 pmI think KKKarl Rove resigned to spend more time listening to Democrats’ phone calls in the months leading up to the elections in 2008….
August 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pmHe may have flesh colored hair, but he leaves a smelly brown stain behind him everywhere he’s been.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pmPayback WILL be hell for Karl, the damage his Machiavellian advice caused will be damaging this nation for decades.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:39 pm“…some journalists believe Bush lacks the intellectual heft to achieve big things on his own, so they attribute his most consequential decisions to a powerful Svengali at his side…”
So some of Bush’s “consequential” decisions have shown “intellectual heft”, so they are attributed to Rove? I wonder what intellectually hefty, consequential decisions of Bush they are referring to. I can’t think of any.
August 20th, 2007 at 1:15 pmWow…interesting complaint from Kurtz. At first read I thought he was right, the media has been gushing over Rove and are working hard to push him as the boy genius when in reality Rove is responsible for everything that has gone wrong in this country.
But upon a second read, Kurtz seems to be saying that problem isn’t that the media is ignoring Rove’s record, it’s that the media isn’t giving that credit to Bush. Kurtz seems upset that the media isn’t praising Bush enough.
While I agree that Rove does NOT deserve all the praise the media has been giving him, neither does Bush. Both should be called out for the harm they have inflicted on America. Harm that will last longer than Bush’s term. Meanwhile Rove needs to be called out for being the epitomy of everything that people hate about PR professionals and the personification of what people mistrust about PR. The only legacy he will truly leave is for lowering the bar for what is considered acceptable behaviour to win elections.
August 20th, 2007 at 1:31 pmKurtz seems upset that the media isn’t praising Bush enough.
Comment by Rosencrantz — August 20, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
Conversely, it could be argued that the media is laying the ground work to give Bush a free pass. If Rove is the mastermind behind any decision of importance in this administration, then all the blame for all the wrong, pigheaded decisions would fall squarely on Rove’s shoulders.
Of course, by excusing Bush so, they are using the “incompetence defence” -but I guess it’s better than admitting that Bush himself was leading the charge (in smearing political opponents, trying to rationalise torture, etc.) and left the details to his minions and assorted cronies like Rove and Gonzales.
August 20th, 2007 at 2:07 pm“But was Rove’s decision to quit, 17 months before the end of Bush’s term, truly deserving of lead-story status in the New York Times, The Washington Post and the three nightly newscasts?”
Yes, it was.
August 20th, 2007 at 2:34 pmGotta love the juxtaposition of this thread with the aluminum bat thread. I have always imagined having a go at Rove with either wood or aluminum. Maybe both.
August 20th, 2007 at 3:53 pmWhen historians write the history of this sorry administration, it’ll all come out in the open. Bush and his advisors will be remembered as the men who let 9/11 happen. Any way you look at it, they carry the guilt because, at the very least, they were too incompetent to protect our country. Combined with his many other catastrophes (Katrina, insecure borders) he’ll be toasted.
August 20th, 2007 at 3:54 pmWell, Mr Kurtz, it’s better the media cover Rove and his machinations than the latest on the Britney/K-Fed front or giving Paris Hilton yet another fifteen seconds of coverage.
August 20th, 2007 at 5:02 pmRove is given importance by the MSM simply because Rove and Bush have been favored by the press core for the past 6 years. They never questioned Bush claims about non-existent WMDs and were only too eager to out a covert CIA agent so Rove, Libby and others could hurt Wilson for telling the truth.
August 20th, 2007 at 5:15 pm