Help Me Interview Media Critic Howard Kurtz

News Type: Other — Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:52 AM EDT

Ok, I'd like some help. Well, I can do this on my own but I thought it'd be more interesting if others make suggestions. Plus it'd make it more like citizen journalisms if other citizens participated

I've managed to arrange an interview via email with Howard Kurtz about his new book, Reality Show: Inside The Last Great Television News War.

Now I know some here really don't like Kurtz. That's ok. I want to ask him some questions that are softballs and some that are hardballs so I'm counting on you to help with the hardballs. Keep in mind, though, that this is a two-part interview and if I'm too mean and nasty on part 1 there may be no part 2 or he may not even answer the questions to part 1.

I told his publicist that what I usually do is focus in part 1 on the author and the general topic. So this is the chance to ask questions about how he feels about being both part of the media and a critic of the media as well as conflict of interest type questions.

For part 2 - which I told her would come in about two weeks - I'll focus my questions more specifically on the book having read it by that time. I'm starting it later today and I expect many of my questions for part 1 will come to me while reading the first 50 pages or so.

Anyway if you want to help by suggesting some questions (provided they are not libelous) sock it to me or him.

1 Vote
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

Scott (Scoop) Butki's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: Anti-War, Book Discussion Group, Journalism on Newsvine, Media Watch, MSM Incinerator, Open Mic, TV Lounge, Writers
Regions: none

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

2.7

{"commentId":1113249,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

On and here is an excerpt I seeded from the book to give you an idea of the topics he's talking about.

Also, he was on Jon Stewart recently and took a pounding.

Sorry I don't have a link for the latter.

{"commentId":1113249,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#1 - Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:53 AM EDT

{"commentId":1113312,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

I'll need the questions for part 1 by Sunday when I'll email my 10 favorites.

{"commentId":1113312,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#2 - Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:10 PM EDT

{"commentId":1114850,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

Two questions were suggested by an online friend and colleague: 1) How did Kurtz think he did on The Daily Show? I'll then post a link so readers of the interview can judge for themselves. I sort of gave away my
opinion over in Killfile's seed about Jon Stewart.

2) What does he say to those - including Stewart, I believe - who ask why he focuses on the tv news covering the war and not also on the role tv news and newspapers played in drumming up support for the war in the first place?

{"commentId":1114850,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#3 - Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:18 PM EDT

{"commentId":1114869,"authorDomain":"ignoblus"}

ignoblus

I can't come up with much in the way of questions, but:

In a time when Christopher Hitchens and Henry Kissinger are on one side against Noam Chomsky and Pat Buchanan on the other side (Michael Berube pointed out that particular arrangement) of the fiercest political debate of the day, are the labels of left/right and the idea of left/right bias meaningful? Or should we be looking for different ways to characterize the debate? In other words, are the media doing a good job of covering the divide?

Or some such.

Actually, I'd be kind of interested how familiar he is with Marshall McLuhan and Jean Baudrillard. How well he thinks they predicted this. But that's kind of an oddball question that might fail miserably.

Hopefully, these ideas will give you ideas, cause I have no idea if they'd be appropriate.

{"commentId":1114869,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"ignoblus"}

1 vote

#4 - Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:31 PM EDT

{"commentId":1114895,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

No, those are good. I need to read part of the book to see if he talks about how he got into being a media critic. If he doesn't address it there clearly I want to ask if it was by way of Chomksky and Marshall McLuhan and what he thinks about them. Most journalists I know scoff at some of the conspiracy theories of Chomsky, Howard Zinn, et al

So I'll ask him about some of those guys.

And you're right that maybe its time for new labels. I mean if the book is about, say, the war should it be about hawks and doves instead of repubs and dems?

And I definitely want to ask him about one of my media pet peeves (potential new topic): interviewing extremists from both sides and then saying "look, we talked to both sides so we're good and balanced
and objective." Or the reverse problem of having people on tv who are the token liberal or token conservative who are both pretty moderate.

So what to do with all of that - i'll sort if all out soon.

{"commentId":1114895,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#5 - Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:43 PM EDT

{"commentId":1117567,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

Here is what I have planned right now for the first part of this interview Mr. Kurtz, thanks for agreeing to this interview. This first part of the interview will be about the book and you in general and the second part, after I finish the book, will be about more specifics in the book. Incidentally I was a newspaper reporter for 10 years before making a career change and I still do some media criticism so I can relate to one problem you inevitably encounter namely being both a media critic yet being part of the media itself. What did you hope to achieve with this book? Judging by reviews, flak from bloggers and reviewers (positive and negative) do you think you accomplished your goals with this book?

What is your response to those questioning why you frame this book around the media starting to speak against the war as opposed to the media playing an important role in gaining popular support for the war?

I saw you recently on the Daily Show and was curious: How do you think you did? Jon Stewart, in the interview and in the graphics shown preceding the interview, asked some tough but valid questions about the media. You seem to often be the target of criticism from bloggers. Why do you think that is? Is part of it that you're both part of the same media you're covering?

I'd like to get your reaction to one particular recent charge by a poster at Kos http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/10/20/162158/92

Digby said something true: Republicans pass out petty smears to distract from issues on which their idiot-ology has them up against the wall, and the media love to take the bait because it's easier than reporting. Howard Kurtz responded by saying something false: that is, there's no evidence that his "Democrats do it too" examples were actually perpetrated by Democrats.

But he just asserts that they were. Because that way, he achieves the "balance" so crucial to The Culture of The Village. A Republican has done this. A Democrat has done that. Therefore it's all equal. (Though it requires you to ignore that "this" is planting stories about John Edwards' hair, while "that" is the soul-wrenching shame of Abu Ghraib. But the important thing is that the story has one R and one D in it.)

Why does this stand?

A related question: I often see journalists, under the guise of balance or providing two sides to a story, talking to extremists on one or both sides. Do you think this is a good way to do journalism? Is it really presenting what's going on?

{"commentId":1117567,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#6 - Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:27 AM EDT

{"commentId":1123240,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

The Washington Post's review of the book ran Sunday.

{"commentId":1123240,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#7 - Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT

{"commentId":1148572,"authorDomain":"sbutki"}

Scott (Scoop) Butki

Here is the first part of the interview

{"commentId":1148572,"threadId":"164230","contentId":"1036009","authorDomain":"sbutki"}

#8 - Thu Nov 1, 2007 2:05 PM EDT