Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
02.21.2008 12:26 pm

McCain and the lobbyist

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

I got a call last night from Ron Wade, our Sunday editor who was sitting in as night news editor yesterday. Ron wanted to discuss a story about John McCain and his ties to a lobbyist in 1999. The story, written by the Washington Post, appeared in this morning’s Post-Dispatch on Page A3.

(The text appears below. Already on STLtoday and other media, the version we ran has been overtaken by stories about McCain’s denial of any sort of romantic relationship with the lobbyist.)

The New York Times ran a much longer — about 100 inches — version on its front-page and web site that quickly alluded to romance. Despite denials from McCain and the lobbyist, the Times’ story mentioned romance in the third sentence.

Ron and I discussed the Times story and decided that we should publish a more politically-oriented version — with on-the-record sourcing — from the Washington Post.

We knew we couldn’t ignore the story. It was certain to create a national buzz, and it has.  But we also didn’t feel comfortable in using the Times story. It purports to be about ethics, but anonymous aides’ references to romance are liberally sprinkled within it.

Today, of course, comes the denial from McCain. And the story takes on a whole new life, fairly or unfairly.  And the discussion Wade and I had last night now seems so outdated and futile.

Here’s the sanitized story we published today:

By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
and Michael D. Shear
Washington Post
WASHINGTON • Aides to Sen. John McCain confronted a female telecommunications lobbyist in late 1999 and asked her to distance herself from the senator during the presidential campaign he was about to launch, according to one of McCain’s longest-serving political strategists.
John Weaver, who served as McCain’s closest confidant until leaving his current campaign last year, said he met with the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, and urged her to stay away from McCain. Association with a lobbyist would undermine his image as an opponent of special interests, aides had concluded.
Members of the senator’s small circle of advisers also confronted McCain directly, according to sources, warning him that his continued relationship with a lobbyist who had business before the powerful Commerce Committee he chaired threatened to derail his presidential ambitions.
The New York Times published a lengthy story on its website Wednesday night detailing McCain’s ties to Iseman.
“It’s a shame that the New York Times has chosen to smear John McCain like this,” said Charles R. Black Jr., a top adviser to McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign and the head of a Washington lobbying firm called BKSH & Associates. “Neither Senator McCain nor the campaign will dignify false rumors and gossip by responding to them. John McCain has never done favors for anyone, not lobbyists or any special interest. That’s a clear 24-year record.”
The McCain campaign put out a statement Wednesday night decrying “gutter politics” and saying the story — which had been reported on the Drudge Report website in December — was “a hit-and-run smear campaign.”
Iseman, 40, who joined the firm of Alcalde & Fay, based in Arlington, Va., as a secretary and rose to partner within a few years, often touted her access to the Senate Commerce chairman as she worked on behalf of clients such as Cablevision, Echostar, Tribune Broadcasting and Paxson Communications, according to several other lobbyists who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
McCain’s reputation as a crusader for Washington reform — forged during almost 30 years in the Senate — is largely based on his stinging critiques of the role played by lobbyists. He routinely decries earmarks or special projects inserted into legislation. He has claimed repeatedly that he has “never, ever” done a favor for anyone. It was this reputation that McCain’s closest aides sought to protect.
“We were running a campaign about reforming Washington, and her showing up at events and saying she had close ties to McCain was harmful,” said one aide.
The Times reported that Iseman said she never received special treatment from McCain or his office.
Three telecom lobbyists and a former McCain aide, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that Iseman spoke up regularly at meetings of telecom lobbyists in Washington, extolling her connections to McCain and his office. She would regularly volunteer at those meetings to be the point person for the telecom industry in dealing with McCain’s office.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...
4 comments

Comments are closed.

Kelly McBride of the Poynter Institute has an interesting ethics post on the journalism site Poynter.org. It’s titled “Next Steps on McCain Story: Repeating What You Don’t Report”

Here are her words:

Most Americans will not learn about The New York Times’ allegations that John McCain had an inappropriate relationship with a lobbyist from The New York Times. They’ll hear it from cable television or talk radio or their local newspaper.

The rest of the world of journalism has as much credibility at stake today as The New York Times does. Here’s why:

If you start with McCain’s denial of wrong-doing, he looks guilty.
If you start with a statement that the McCain campaign was thrown into turmoil today, he looks guilty.
If you start with the allegation that McCain’s staffers were worried that he was having an affair, you make him look guilty.
Our formulas for repeating news could work against us if we don’t take some care and caution.

Here’s an alternative structure: Give your audience the big picture. Tell them that the nation’s largest and most prestigious paper published a long, complex story today, calling into question McCain’s judgment on many issues. As part of that story, the newspaper revealed that eight years ago the senator’s staffers feared he was having an affair with a lobbyist, who seemed to show up at unexpected times. Explain how news is originated and then repeated. Explain that many people have questions about The New York Times’ approach. Examine the entangled relationship between journalism and politics.

The Times’ decision to lead and end their story with McCain’s relationship with Vicki Iseman is potentially distorting. The rest of the journalism world bears responsibility for minimizing or magnifying that distortion.

— Steve Parker
2:14 pm February 21st, 2008

I was a investigative reporter for a small TV station in Michigan eon’s ago. When the story was written I would call anyone who was adversely affected. I would read the story, and ask him/her to comment. Their replies made the story. When I was promoted to news anchor, we signed off with me saying: “We may not get a story first, but we get it Right.”

Our ratings soared. They were above the network stations.
.
Speculations are not facts. Viz the Global warming fiasco.

— johnh
5:27 am February 22nd, 2008

Steve - the story used unnamed sources - a journalistic no-no, but that didn’t stop anyone now did it? Why was this story reported and not the Edwards story about getting a staffer pregnant or the Obama story about the Sinclair lawsuit that he had gay sex and used cocaine with the senator in 1999. Those stories have actually people. You will say they weren’t run by the AP wire - so you can’t use them. So who makes the AP the news “god?” Shame on the media for the biased approach to all news stories. If it hits a Republican - run with it even without sources and be sure to mention their political party. If it’s a Democrat - bury it, but if we must run it - NEVER mention the political party affiliation.

— A CENTRIST
4:02 pm February 22nd, 2008

CENTRIST - I’m with you on this one for not naming sources. Although the allegations may eventually prove to be true, the accusations should not have been published until the NYTimes was willing to cite sources. In fact, after the the brutal embarassment of the Judith Miller fiasco, the Times tightened their reporting policies. Problem is, they’re not following them.

— mogoid
7:26 pm February 22nd, 2008