11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Set the Standard, July 31, 2001
This book is an account of the 1972 presidential campaign. Crouse's account set the standard for books about presidential campaigns; a standard that has not yet been beaten.
The 1972 campaign involved the first real attempt by campaigns to spin-doctor the press and American people during a campaign. Previously, we left that to the already elected.
The 1972 campaign also marked the first real attempt by networks to create stars out of reporters. This network tactic has continued unabated until the present. In fact, recent studies have reported that reporters now receive much more air time than the actual candidates.
Crouse's book is essential reading for political junkies as well as history buffs. The 1972 election was truly a watershed event which continued through the Watergate era.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The scoop on those who provide the scoop, May 11, 2000
Crouse's groundbreaking book on the 1972 Presidential campaign was reveolutionary in the way it covered the reporters who covered the election. This was the first step in to turning these reporters into "stars" in their own right. Who can doubt today that the visibility one gets from being a reporter on a successful Presidential campaign can transform you into a highly paid and visible "talking head." Crouse's book is well written, informative and quite amusing, which is appropriate since he spent the campaign hanging out with the immortal Hunter S. Thompson. A must for political junkies.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Classic reveals the press as they were, May 29, 2005
This review is from: The Boys on the Bus (Paperback)
This brilliantly conceived and executed book pulled back the curtain on the culture of covering presidential campaigns much like Theodore White's The Making of the President before it. Smooth and seemless prose is marred only slightly by the contrived tactic of attempting one line physical descriptions of principals "a bull of a man," "a lovely and smart woman," etc.
Structurally, the book proceeds from the failed Muskie campaign and an introduction of some of the icons of the industry at the time (two, David Broder and Robert Novak, must be packed in ice every night and only thawed out to give television appearences, such is their longevity) to Nixon's campaign, the not yet completed Watergate investigation of Woodward and Bernstein, and then finally the doomed McGovern campaign once again. The technique is man on the scene, interspersed with set interviews in which the interviewer is an actor.
Crouse's classic is entertaining and informative. It is entertaining because of the colorful portraits of a gang of mostly fun loving guys and a few jerks, and informative because it shows that the true bias of the press is an establishment bias, much more complicated than a simple left-right dichotomy, it's the institutional pressures of the job that leads to the press's often distorted views. Yes, the reporters trend liberal, but the editors and publishers trend conservative, and in recent years the line has blurred between the interests of the publishers and their employees. These guys are not scrappily taking in about the same salary as a bus driver or construction worker anymore, their vibe is much more movie star. Yet now as then, the real distortion is the pack mentality and fear of being the outlier in coverage, suspect by editors with no other framework for evaluation. We've become much more aware of this in recent years, with discussion of the press's "meta-narrative," an overarching theme like "Bush dumb" or "Kerry flip-flops," or yet more infamously, the fiasco of weapons of mass destruction, but it is still instructive to see a character study into the precise details of how it happens.
Hunter Thompson's book on the same campaign "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72" provides a good contrast to this book, as does Norman Mailer's "Miami and the Siege of Chicago : An Informal History of the Republican and Democratic Conventions of 1968." Both are worth examining if you are interested in politics and the period.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
