Customer Reviews

Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media (American Political Challenges)

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Once I picked it up I didn't want to put it down again. Craig Crawford has provided compelling and insightful criticism of the role of politicians and the press in the erosion of public trust in the media. A sobering look at the intersection of politics and media as it exists today. A must read for consumers of news and information, but should be of particular interest to students of Journalism, Public Policy and Political Science.

Craig offers much needed historical context for the breakdown in trust between the politicians, the press and the public. He makes an eloquent case for the importance of a free press to a healthy democracy. We all benefit when the press is free to serve its ultimate purpose of watchdog and informant for the public, and we all suffer when that process is eroded. Everyone should read this book.

Buy this book! Buy this book! Seriously, you'll be glad you did.

Crawford brings to the mainstream a debate that's been taking place among journalists for years. As citizen journalism grows, the power of the "MSM" will only grow as someone will always be looked to, to call "balls and strikes." This means the strategy of politicians (no matter their party) attacking the media will continue. (The Clintons were just as bad about attacking the media, er, messenger, as the Bushes) And this book details just how harmful the discrediting of journalism is to the Republic.

Crawford has a unique ability to see things with a vision most in DC don't have. It helps that Crawford never forgets his roots, something that's always refreshing during his must listen to appearances on "Imus." He's never a "conventional wisdom" rehasher.

Crawford also brings to light the debate about "bias." He correctly reminds readers that all journalists have bias. Sometimes the bias is for an ideology, sometimes for a person and sometimes for an issue. A good journalist is "Fair and Biased."

Bottom line, whether you are a casual follower of politics or an up-and-coming journalist/blogger, this is a must read book. You won't be disappointed.

Mr. Crawford's pulling back the curtain that surrounds the media/political world that is Washington DC is both compelling and more then a little scary.

His examples of how the First Amendment is damaged by the constant battling between the press and polaticans are troubling for all that believe that a free press is the only tool Americans have to protect our freedoms.

Crawford's insights are sharp and unique and therefore a must read for anyone that's interested in the present art of "the spin" and how it's used for both good and evil.

With a sardonic wit rarely heard in today's vacuous media echo chamber, MSNBC-CBS-Imus-CQ political pundit Craig Crawford provides an erudite treatise on why political journalism is in such turmoil. His analysis is as clear as Ketel One vodka on the rocks; his interpretation of the new media's impact on political coverage is as meaty as a triple-decker club sandwich. In this era of gotchya journalism and the politicians who hate it, Crawford provides a scholarly take on the hows and whys on the modern blabbocracy.

Crawford tells it like it is - even if it exposes George W. Bush for railroading the country into war or Bill Clinton for lying about a more personal faux pas. He even shares his own hate mail, being upfront about what some of his critics are thinking. But in the end, we get a fair look at how it is from the media's point of view...why what looks like a rude follow-up question from a reporter was actually necessary to avoid a politician's attempt to dodge and spin. Crawford's examples from recent history tie it all together.

I'm going to buy Christmas copies of "Attack the Messenger" for several friends on both sides of the political aisle. It's a no nonsense, non-partisan examination of how the public has been being sold anti-media Kool-Aid for decades. Because I haven't always agreed with Mr. Crawford, I always figured he was a fair-minded journalist whose only agenda was the truth. And I appreciate the fact that he points out this glaring truth: it's not "spin" -- it's propaganda. Unless we Americans stop allowing ourselves to be dumbed down, whether it is through the damning of the media, of intellectualism or of diversity, we will find ourselves in a world we neither recognize nor respect. But one that we may deserve. As Crawford points out, "It is time for the bewildered herd to get a clue."

This book analyzes in detail how politicians manipulate the media by attacking journalists who ask tough questions. It traces this technique back to the first Bush administration which adopted it as its primary means of dealing with the media.

Craig Crawford is both a journalist and a lawyer and he makes his argument by citing specific evidence at each step. The book is concise and focused and the topic is an important one. If we are to preserve democracy we must not allow politicans to escape scrutiny by shifting the debate to the alleged bias of the press.

This book should be recommended reading for all political science and journalism students and anyone else who cares deeply about a free press.

I agree with the other reviewers who praised Craig Crawford for his views but felt they could have been summed up in a magazine piece rather than a book.

Crawford's last two chapters stretched out what was solid analysis on how politicians have handcuffed the media into being nothing more than lapdogs.

The first 75 pages are worth picking up and reading. Crawford reports how the media lost America's trust as politicians scream that the press is either biased, unfair or mean.

I always get a chuckle out of the Bush administration's treatment of Helen Thomas and other reporters. Whenever criticism strikes, to use an expression heard on Rush Limbaugh, the Bushies embrace "victimhood." And the public buys it. Rather than wanting to know the truth or get to the crux of the story, politicians frame the debate based on proxy issues like media bias.

I agree wholeheartedly with Crawford's take that reporters should remove this obsurd "objectivity" from their vernacular and lay it all out there as far as what they believe. When they go to a war zone, report what you see and make an educated assessment. That's the purpose of the press. They are not only the public's eyes and ears, but are supposedly intelligent enough to make educated assessments of what they see and hear.

Many less informed viewers need that. There is a difference between opinion and bias, but the politicians have embedded this idea in the public's mind that dissent is unpatriotic and combativeness is simply being rude.

We need more Helen Thomases and less lapdogs like Brit Hume.

This is a well written and extremely important book. If I had to summarize it in a few words, it would be, in Craig Crawford's own words:

"Today's media is as bullied as ever. Politicians don't have to dodge the tough questions anymore. They seldom even get them. Right or wrong, it is important and healthy for our politicians to be tested..... Only the free press can make politicians accountable. The founders of our nation understood this.... a free and fair press is our only real chance at getting the truth."

"Politicians often lie because we don't want to hear the truth ... Presidents who pay attention to history find that telling the truth got their predecessors into trouble."

Advertisers and large corporate owners of major media outlets are not interested in getting at the truth either, when it conflicts with their economic interests, and journalists ignore them at their peril. "Fear has increased in every newsroom in America," said Dan Rather in July, 2003.

You can still find the hard truth out there (C-SPAN, AP, Reuters), but most Americans don't go searching for it, only for "news" that seems consistent with their preconceived notions.

In view of all this (and lots more), I'm very worried about our democracy.

Crawford has several constructive suggestions. For example, reporters and journalists should reveal their biases and be rewarded for searching for the truth, wherever it may lead. The only way to rid the realm of lying is to expose it. People should search out views different from their own, either to help confirm their own views or to reveal their weaknesses.

I was drawn to this book by Crawford's unbottled on-air personality -- he's one of only two political commentators (Howard Fineman is the other) I'll always stop and listen to while I'm channel surfing.

Crawford's premise here? The media are easily duped by politicians, sometimes willingly so. Crawford doesn't spare himself from his criticisms, either. He notes, for example, that he hasn't voted since he started covering politics almost 20 years ago (but adds that this isn't necessarily a smart policy).

What sets this book apart is the research and attention to detail. There are more footnotes than you'd expect, and Crawford uses good examples -- about both Democrats and Republicans -- to support his case. My favorite story: George H.W. Bush's very scripted and clever turn-the tables rant against Dan Rather on live television, and CBS's lack of guts to stand up for itself during the aftermath.

You have to love Crawford's candor. The guy even includes a sampling of some of the hate mail he's received over the years.