Move Over, Janet Malcolm - Ex-Journos Paint Reporters as Artful Liars [New book: Beat the Press]

Press Clips

by Cynthia Cotts

Move Over, Janet Malcolm

Ex-Journos Paint Reporters as Artful Liars

February 19 - 25, 2003

Politicians and executives will want to read Beat The Press for its useful hints on giving effective interviews, but media people will want to burn this book when they discover it's a takedown of their trade. On page after page, authors Al Guyant and Shirley Fulton portray journalists as a cynical and manipulative bunch who ingratiate themselves with their subjects and then trick them into saying something "stupid, guilty, foolish or worse." It is possibly the most unflattering portrait of the press since Janet Malcolm declared every journalist a "confidence man."

These are some of the tricks reporters might use to "coax information" from a source, according to the book: ask for your opinion, banter with you, and put the results in the story—even though they never include their own "snide remarks," "use prolonged silence . . . to get you talking," throw "rumors, accusations and distortions" at you, and repeat things someone has allegedly said, in hopes of making you "lose your cool." "I don't think the book promotes a stereotype," Guyant said in an interview. "I think the book reveals tendencies that are accurate for many reporters, some of the time."

He and his co-author speak from experience—Guyant reported for the Milwaukee Journal and the Janesville Gazette in the 1970s, and Fulton reported for TV stations in Illinois and Wisconsin in the 1980s. They met 15 years ago when they ran training sessions for Wisconsin state employees on how to handle the media in the event of a nuclear power plant disaster. Now they run a Madison-based consulting business.

When the book was published by American Book Business Press last October, the authors mailed copies to more than 100 newspapers and professional book reviewing services. Since then, praise has rolled in from a governor, a mayor, and even a former deputy secretary of defense, but the media have remained conspicuously silent.

"I'm not sure why," Guyant said. "Is it because they don't like this message?" When pressed, he speculated that reviewers are not touching the book because "they don't want to teach people how to evade reporters' questions," or perhaps because "they dismiss our harsh descriptions as not true." Is he saying that journalists are thin-skinned? "The thinnest!"

Though quite funny at times, Beat the Press does not come off as a fair portrayal of the news business, only the worst elements of it. According to the book, media coverage these days is "increasingly negative and sensational." You can expect reporters to be "hostile, biased, relentless or dangerously ignorant" people who "often write their stories while wolfing down a meal" and who will play dirty as often as not. Don't try to hide anything from them, because "whatever interests them is their business."

Chapter three offers snapshots of the personality types that work in the media. For example, the typical TV reporter "craves pressure and attention," "asks leading, loaded, speculative, and fight-provoking questions to confirm his biases," and "vigorously criticizes others but is . . . loath to accept criticism." The average newspaper reporter "fights for underdogs," is "scrappy" and "skilled" at ingratiation, but has "little conception of what it feels like to be the subject of scrutiny." And the Internet reporter is typically a "dangerous loner" who is "not known for writing skills" and "can cause enough rumor or consternation that the traditional [media] feel compelled to report both the allegations and the controversy."

Those damned journalists. According to this book, they say their aim is true, but their only real agenda is to get attention—and to that end, they regularly end up printing stories that are not only not accurate, but "false, petty, mean-spirited, and deliberate character assassinations." OK, not everyone. "Although some journalists attempt to confirm whether there is some basis to the other party's harsh comments, it's also true that criticism is more likely to get coverage than praise."

In addition to an encyclopedia of model answers for pesky interviewers, Beat the Press offers some fairly standard advice. For example, call reporters by their first names, and if you don't want to have your picture taken, "absolutely do not attempt to cover the lens with your hand." But the authors are insightful when explaining why subjects of news coverage need to defend themselves in the court of public opinion. "Saying something careless to a reporter is terribly risky" because, the authors believe, this game has rules. "Plumbers operate under more laws than reporters."

At times, the book paints an extreme picture of an industry run amok. "Some reporters simply don't understand the impact of the immense power of the tools . . . they wield daily. . . . When used carelessly, these become more like weapons than tools, causing severe and irreparable damage to people and institutions." Indeed, reporters "have the power to trash people on a universal scale at the speed of an electronic signal."

Guyant realizes that reporters who abuse their power represent a minority of the profession. But he compares the severity of the potential damage to the 30 minutes he spent under fire during nine months of service in Vietnam. "When reporters only make a few mistakes, it doesn't mean they don't do a lot of harm." The authors view libel suits as a poor recourse for subjects who have been falsely portrayed, because proving actual malice and reckless disregard for the truth is "next to impossible."

Of course, reporters have no lock on bad behavior. Guyant acknowledges that PR techniques can also be used for telling lies, such as "making it sound like they're going to make power plants cleaner, when they're going to get dirtier." Nevertheless, he says, being given a chance to get your point across effectively is an "inalienable right" when reporters wield the combined power of prosecutor, judge, and jury. "If you believe a person has a right to counsel and to defend himself in the court of law," he says, "then you should believe a person has the same rights in the court of public opinion."

Guyant does not want to sound sanctimonious. "There are some tricks I used to employ when I was an investigative reporter that I'm not proud of now," he explains. For example, when he was working for the Milwaukee Journal in 1970, he was assigned to cover a public high school where white and black gangs were fighting in the halls. He needed information, he says, so he lied to the principal. "I told him, 'I'm just about to file a story about a multiple rape and stabbing and I want to get your view.' There was no such story, but I lied and got an accurate story that no one else in the city got." When Guyant quit journalism to work for the state of Wisconsin in 1976, he was still idealistic about the profession. But he remembers that at the time, a colleague who had made the same move told him, "You'll be surprised how you see the media when you're looking back at it." Looking back, Guyant says, "He was so right."

When Guyant quit journalism to work for the state of Wisconsin in 1976, he was still idealistic about the profession. But he remembers that at the time, a colleague who had made the same move told him, "You'll be surprised how you see the media when you're looking back at it." Looking back, Guyant says, "He was so right."

Interesting article. It reminds me of all the negative comments about journalists that people say here on FR.

Journalists want to be as successful as business people and engineers, but don't have nearly the brains required. They resent the lack of success and project this resentment onto others. They're like teachers, except a lot less honest.

Lots of them are gay.

They laid off 1/2 the staff of the San Francisco Examiner yesterday -- whoopee!

Journalists want to be as successful as business people and engineers, but don't have nearly the brains required.

That's for sure. I have had personal experience with newspaper journalists about a business/political subject. I came away from this encounter with an opinion of journalists akin to Civil War General Wm. T. Sherman:

"They're all spies and I would personally shot them all before sundown! However, they would still be posting their stories to their papers from H*ll, before next breakfast.*

*(I often wonder if the 4th. Estates timidity in defending the 2nd Amendment can be traced to this comment.)

In any case, I now refuse to talk to them at all.

They're like teachers, except a lot less honest.

LOL...well, I'm a [2nd career] teacher and while it is true some teachers probably couldn't do anything else, other teachers enter teaching as a 2nd career -- after successfully having a different career. :)

Journalists aren't some unique breed of human being. They are simply charged with a particular mission: Find the truth. To do that successfully requires working with human nature. Tactics such as using a "prolonged silence" in conversation, asking "leading questions," etc., are simply ways to get those with information to divulge it. They are the same things ANY human being would do to get truth from OTHER human beings.

There is bad journalism out there, no doubt. The rare reporter who lies or misrepresents himself is worthy of scorn. But that's the whole point: There are people in the world who lie and misrepresent things. The goal of journalism is to bust through those lies and misrepresentations to get to the truth. If that means using "leading questions," then so what?

"Beat the Press" is a manual that teaches ways to keep information secret and hidden. Gee, what a commendable goal.

I'll never forget when that editor said to Dan Burton, "So, you think Clinton is a scumbag", and Burton said "yeah", and the story was then broken that Burton had called the President of the United States a "scumbag", LOL.

Fortunately, there are two sides to the duplicity - - good politicians know how to play the press like a fiddle. For Democrats it is easy because they have such willing lapdogs. But when Republicans can pull it off, it is an art form. The Bush Administration is magnificent. The press won't know what to do with themselves when they realize they have been baited-and-switched and they discover that the US has orchestrated a regime change in the heart and soul of Islamic terrorism, Iran.

Journalists aren't some unique breed of human being. They are simply charged with a particular mission: Find the truth.

Man, what college do you go to?

Journalists aren't some unique breed of human being. They are simply charged with a particular mission: Find the truth.

I can't help but recall that of all the journalists out therer who wrote about Enron, for example, only one was able to read their actual financial reports, and conclude something was very amiss, and about to burst. In short, in addition, to "finding the truth" -- if that is in fact their mission -- a journalist needs to know how to think, and far too many of them don't do that. They simply republish whatever press release they are handed, and call it "news."

As I said, there's bad journalism out there, and there's lazy journalism too. Just as there are bad shoe salesmen and lazy shoe salesmen. But the inherent goal of good reporting is to gather accurate information -- that's its very definition. And that's what the writers of "Beat the Press" are trying to help circumvent.

By teaching ways to hide and distort reality, they are doing a disservice to the quest for accuracy and truth. When public servants and corporate executives wiggle and weasel, they aren't hurting the reporter sitting in front of them. They're hurting the public.

It's funny (well, not really) how people on this thread are lambasting reporters, when the Free Republic forum itself exists because of their efforts.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.