You’re Fired! The Media Don’t Get to Pick the Democratic Nominee Anymore
The Old Media has thoroughly enjoyed the privilege of guiding the Democratic nomination to the candidate with whom they and the Beltway establishment felt most comfortable, writes Steve Boriss. Unfortunately for them, those days are over - and the 2008 results in Iowa proved it.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
For decades, there has been nothing at all democratic about the way the Democratic Party has chosen its Presidential nominee. But, that all ended permanently the night of the Iowa caucus, not because the Party establishment wanted it to, but because of a force beyond its control.
The prophet who predicted that this day would come was MSNBC’s Howard Fineman, who wrote a column titled “The Media Party is Over” exactly two years ago. He claimed that after a successful run of about 40 years, the “American Mainstream Media Party” (AMMP) was over.
The members of the AMMP were the journalists who worked for national Old Media outlets, but they operated more like their own political party. While they always had a passion to influence the fortunes of both Democrats and Republicans, their center-left views led them to embrace and particularly enjoy seizing a role that came-up every four years — secure the Democratic nomination for the candidate with whom they and the Beltway establishment felt most comfortable.
It all began in the 1960’s, after the Democratic Party’s ideological energy of the New Deal had faded. The LBJ-instigated Vietnam War and various social revolutions were tearing the Democratic Party apart. The Party’s nomination process was thrown into disarray, leading to the disastrous selection of the unelectable George McGovern in 1972.
Mainstream outlets implicitly vowed never to let this happen again. They rushed to fill this power vacuum by applying “objective” journalism techniques to steer Democratic voters to “acceptable” candidates. During the 1976 Democratic Primary season, the mainstream media played Goldilocks, deciding that environmentalist Morris Udall was too Left and hawkish Henry “Scoop” Jackson was too Right, leading them to present “just right” Jimmy Carter as a decent, moderate person of faith.
During the 1980 Democratic Primary, the Press protected incumbent Carter from a challenge by Chappaquiddick-damaged Ted Kennedy, highlighting Kennedy’s fumbling, stuttering, and rambling response to a simple question from CBS’ Roger Mudd, “Why do you want to be President?”
In 1992, the year Bill Clinton won his party’s nomination, the winner of the New Hampshire Primary was Paul Tsongas. But, Tsongas struck an anti-government tone that made the media uncomfortable, marked by interest in reducing the federal deficit. So, they simply accepted and repeated the absurd claim by James Carville, a Clinton operative, that Clinton was “The Comeback Kid,” even though he had finished just about even with Tsongas in the earlier Iowa Caucus, then 8 points below him in New Hampshire. In 2004, they transformed Howard Dean’s innocent, fun, and high-spirited rebel yell into the crazed, blood-curdling scream of a madman, sending unwitting Democrat voters hurtling into the waiting arms of the lackluster, but elitist-pleasing John Kerry.
In 2000, the AMMP almost succeeded in handing the Presidency to Al Gore by hyping the 24-year-old drunk-driving arrest of George W. Bush in a late hit the weekend before the election. In 2004, CBS anchor Dan Rather apparently attempted a similar maneuver to thwart Bush’s reelection by producing allegedly 31-year-old documents critical of Bush’s service in the Texas National Guard. But, thanks to the “blogosphere,” Dan Rather was challenged, and now just about everyone except Rather acknowledges that the documents were forged.
Bush kept his job, but Rather lost his. More significantly, bloggers’ new-found ability to challenge the media meant that the AMMP had lost its job of picking the Democrat’s nominee.
Iowa Caucus results fulfilled Fineman’s prophesy - they proved that the Internet now has the same impact on mainstream media’s nominating powers as kryptonite has on Superman. Their voices will still be heard, but their influence is now on a par with mere mortals.
| Comment | Digg This |
del.icio.us |
![]() |
![]() |
PJM Home |


Digg This
del.icio.us

PJM Home











9 Comments
syn:Would Oprah, Inc be considered Old Media or New Media?
And on either side, other than knowing the candidates made them feel good do Iowans really know what they voted for?
Jan 8, 2008 - 6:43 am jason:I believe Gary Hart was caught in 1987, not 1984.
Jan 8, 2008 - 7:22 am Steve Boriss:Syn, I’d say Oprah is New Media as in “alternative media,” just like talk radio can also be placed in that category. I didn’t speculate on how good the people’s information would now be. Just that there would be more info and that mainstream media won’t be controlling it.
Jan 8, 2008 - 7:30 am MarkD:Where do the so called superdelegates fit into this story? I am unlikely to vote for any of the Democrats left in this race, but isn’t it premature to count Senator Clinton out?
My sense is more “she might not win the nomination” than “she cannot.”
Jan 8, 2008 - 7:45 am Steve Boriss:Jason, You are right, my mistake. He did run in the 1984 primaries, but he ran again in 1988 and that’s when he was caught. I’ll request for that sentence to be dropped. Thanks for pointing that out.
Jan 8, 2008 - 8:25 am John Moore:In 2004, the AMMP still wielded immense power. Vietnam vets fighting Kerry learned this first hand - we had a terrible time breaking through the Iron Curtain of the MSM and getting any facts out. To this day, much information on Kerry has never been published, and the MSM narrative about the Veterans’ movement is so twisted as to be slander.
There is a new book that describes this struggle, and I highly recommend it. It was written by insiders in the vets movement, and details the struggle with AMMP and the shocking behavior of those who presume to enlighten us.
See To Set The Record Straight at http://www.tosettherecordstraight.com/ .
Jan 8, 2008 - 8:41 am huxley:I guess the media’s demotion in Iowa is something to be thankful for.
Nonetheless, I find the rise of Obama disquieting. He has the thinnest resume of any major presidential candidate I can remember. Plus he is a member of a an Afrocentric, black liberation church that in its covenantal statements speaks of America as a captor state that either forces blacks into “concentration camps” or “foster[s] a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.” This is sick stuff, pretty much Louis Farrakhan territory. (See here for a summary with links back to the church website.)
The media gives Romney a regular going-over for being a Mormon, yet gives Obama a pass for his participation in this racist, quasi-Christian church.
Jan 8, 2008 - 10:38 am JP:The media have been pushing Hillary? In what universe? Did you watch Russert and Williams’ hit on her at the October debate? Have you ever seen Chris Matthews? The media hate Hillary - they’re pushing Obama as savior and have given him a free ride so far.
Jan 8, 2008 - 4:41 pm norma:obama hasn’t won yet. Hillary hasn’t lost yet. It’s not over until it’s over. The media does not decide when it’s over. The media does not decide who is the democratic nominee. The media counted mccain down and out and almost had turned him into a joke by reporting him carrying his own luggage to the airports and flying coach. Look at him now.
May 10, 2008 - 8:27 pm