Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

The long form

by Paul Wells on Wednesday, November 5, 2008 4:06pm - 38 Comments

This corner has developed a special interest in long-form political journalism, produced hard on the heels of major political events. Here are the day’s main examples of the form.

1. The New York Times comes out of the gates with a dainty amuse-bouche of 4,500 words. Highlights:

• Everything changed when John McCain said “the fundamentals of the economy are strong,” several hours before another leader in another national election said the “fundamentals of the economy are strong” and nothing much changed. Context, we see, is everything.

• The Obama campaign was flawless in every way, a message the Times reporters deliver a dozen different ways. “Ice-cold disciplined about the execution of his campaign message,” McCain’s campaign manager says mournfully.

• But it wasn’t that perfect, and the Reverend Wright business caught the Obama troops by surprise. Which it probably shouldn’t have.

• The whole Muslim thing was super-scary to the Obama campaign. “I spoke up and joked, ‘Well, yeah, he’s a Sunni,’ one campaign guy says. “Nobody laughed; I mean, nobody. It was incredibly instructive to me, ‘Hey, they’re really worried.’ ”

• Obama indulged heartily in the media-buy trick of rolling out sunshiny, positive messages to the national press corps, while buying “bruising, sometimes misleading” ads in local markets.

2. But there is nothing anywhere that compares to Newsweek‘s issue-long post mortem, which the magazine has done in every presidential cycle since 1984. The Newsweek packages — written by Evan Thomas with contributions from a team of reporters who follow the campaign for more than a year and are offered exclusive access on the condition that their work will not be published until after Election Day — are, obviously, the model for the slightly-more-modest thumpers Maclean’s has run after the 2006 and 2008 elections and the last Liberal leadership race. Chapters 1 and 2 (of 7) of the Newsweek opus are already up; a teaser piece offers highlights from the entire thing, including:

• Both campaigns’ computers were expertly hacked by a “foreign entity” seeking information that could compromise a new president;

• Sarah Palin was an even bigger spender than anyone has heard before now;

• Threats against Obama’s safety spiked in late September and early October;

• McCain’s team debated telling him before the last televised debate that he already had no more chance to win. They decided against it;

• The McCain campaign was terrified of facing Hillary Clinton as Obama’s running mate;

• Obama’s private answers to Brian Williams’ debate questions were a lot funnier than the ones he permitted himself to deliver on teevee.

There is a constant debate in newsrooms about whether readers have any patience for long discussions of politics. And of course, a hell of a lot of readers don’t. What we’ve found at Maclean’s since we started giving it a try, however, is that there are always enough readers who will follow us as far as we want to go in such discussions.

Bookmark and Share
  • Jack Mitchell

    Why is everybody so biased against bias?

    FWIW, I find the media is consistently anti-Trotstyist and anti-Legitimist. I’ve tried writing letters to the editor about it – let alone the seemingly endless stream of blog comments I’ve left to that effect. And I don’t intend to stop. But each day brings fresh proof of the conspiracy to keep the Bourbons off the throne. Go ahead and do a google search for “Louis XX, rightful king” and see what you get: nothing on CNN, nothing from Margaret Wente. It just bugs me that they won’t admit it.

  • Terry86

    The media shows how it is biased not only by what it reports but why what it doesn’t report. In the most recent Scientific American there is a story on attempts to quantify bias. For example when Clinton was President, falls in his approval rating were unlikely to be reported, but increases in approval were. The opposite occurred with George Bush.

    I guess what irks me is when the media trys to maintain the facade of balance.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Terry86, I couldn’t agree more! Look at the Bourbons! They’re basically never mentioned in the media at all. And why? Three words, my friend: House of Hapsburg.

  • http://demosthenes.blogspot.com Demosthenes

    I think the long form/short form thing partially depends on medium. Long, long columns you have to scroll down to read on a screen get wearisome after a while. And PDFs are even worse, which is what a lot of long-form stuff gets presented with when it comes from an academic setting.

    But long-form political journalism as ink-on-paper remains an excellent read.

  • http://demosthenes.blogspot.com Demosthenes

    And, no, the media is not biased against conservatives. Far from it.

    It’s not biased against liberals necessarily either, though; it’s more that reporters, editors, and owners tend towards a certain set of biases and viewpoints informed by their common experiences and common interests. And those tend to be somewhat center-right, since the guys with the most influence tend to have enough money to be quite interested in “conserving” the status quo.

    (That, and most are lazy as hell and scared mindless of policy, so they write as much ridiculous horserace nonsense as they can get away with. Our host is a rare exception on that front.)

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    Demosthenes

    Of course the Canadian msm is heavily slanted liberal, to believe otherwise is naive. Even our Conservative party is Liberal in all but name.

    If there were more than a few con writers/ reporters, there would be more discussion about reducing Fed spending, dismantling our health care system, abortion, gun control … etc.

  • T. Thwim

    Except, as the Western Standard and National Post increasingly demonstrate, those kind of stories don’t interest the Canadian public.

    Capitalism in action, jwl. Thought you’d be appreciative.

  • Sisyphus

    Of course, jwl. The Asper boys should dump all those squishy wet typists that Selley and NNW keep forcing on us and devote their “opinion” pages to Fraser Institute “research” pressies.

    The world would be a far, far better place.

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    T Thwim

    I don’t disagree at all. Had similar conversation with Mike Moffat a few weeks ago about how many conservatives like to bitch and whine about liberal msm but do nothing to help support con publications. It is infuriating.

  • T. Thwim

    Excellent. So now that we agree that a paper with a conservative viewpoint is not we;; supported in Canada, we must therefore suggest that the mainstream in Canada is more to the left of that.

    Since the centre is, by definition, what the mainstream wants, we are left with the conclusion that the media is not liberal at all, but rather, is centrist.

    Just not *your* centre.

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    Sisyphus

    I believe arguments are the only way to achieve good policies but the overwhelming focus of msm is liberal shibboleths. I think UK has a much healthier media environment because the various left/centre/right views are represented by respectable papers and proper arguments can be had.

    We got nothing like that here in Canada. Why are there no columnists arguing for the nationalization of the oil or auto industries, or eliminating single payer health care in favour of everyone for themselves. It is anti-intellectualism at its worst.

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    “we must therefore suggest that the mainstream in Canada is more to the left of that.”

    Don’t agree entirely with this. Media not doing well recently so they are not representing the mainstream very well or else their financial results would be much better than they are.

    And I know the mainstream is well to the left of me but there are millions of people out there whose beliefs are not being represented. If you are liberal in Canada, than you have a nice selection of news sources that you will enjoy. If you are con or dipper, you get to suck lemons.

  • Pingback: Count em up: The mainstream media loses in a landslide : Foreign Correspondence

From Macleans