Networks Hype Vague Cain Charges, Ignored Sexual Harassment Claims Against Clinton
By Scott Whitlock | November 01, 2011 | 11:49
Since the Herman Cain sexual harassment story broke late Sunday night, the broadcast networks have covered it extensively: full stories on Monday's morning news shows (ABC's Good Morning America led off their broadcast); full stories on Monday's evening news shows (the CBS Evening News made it their top item) and ABC's Nightline; and the top story on all three Tuesday morning shows.
Cain's accusers are still anonymous. Three women publicly accused Bill Clinton of far more serious instances of sexual harassment in the 1990s, but the networks all but ignored them. The coverage that did exist was often skeptical, insulting and hostile, an astonishing double standard.
- Paula Jones, who accused Bill Clinton of exposing himself to her in a hotel room when she was a state employee in Arkansas, held a public press conference in February 1994, CBS and NBC ignored those charges, while ABC devoted just 16 seconds to Jones' press conference.
As a January 29, 1998 Media Reality Check pointed out, "The rest of the media waited three months, until Jones filed suit, and the networks then did just 21 stories in that month."
Appearing on the late Tim Russert's CNBC program, then-Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw dismissed, "It didn't seem to most people, entirely relevant to what was going on at the time. These are the kind of charges raised about the President before."
In the Jones case, the networks were openly disdainful of covering her accusations. "It's a little tough to figure out who's being harassed," NBC Today host Bryant Gumbel smugly asserted (May 10, 1994).
After ABC's Sam Donaldson interviewed Jones for Prime Time Live in June 1994, anchor Charles Gibson wanted to know: "Why does anyone care what this woman has to say?"
Gibson continued to pile on, adding, "Bottom line, Sam: Is she not trying to capitalize on this, in effect to profit from impugning the President?"
Newsweek editor Evan Thomas, who sometimes appears on the networks to offer analysis, derided Jones as "some sleazy woman with big hair." (This was on the May 7, 1994 Inside Washington.)
- In the case of Kathleen Willey, who said Bill Clinton groped her in the Oval Office while President, the networks gave minimal coverage to that story when it was broke by Newsweek magazine in late July 1997.
On July 30, 1997, the CBS Evening News aired a story, but managed not to mention Willey by name. Reporter Bill Plante warned, "But unless and until this case is settled, this is only the beginning of attempts by attorneys on both sides to damage the reputations and credibility of everyone involved."
A March 20, 1998 Media Reality Check explained how ABC delicately approached the subject:
In an August 8, 1997 presidential press conference, ABC reporter John Donvan asked about Willey without naming her. Donvan confessed: "Even for those of us who don't have much appetite for this entire subject, this particular answer in this particular category seems needlessly evasive. My question to you is: Is it your wish that it be answered this way, and is it consistent with your intention to run an open White House?" But ABC continued to avoid the story despite the question.
CBS gave it one minute on the July 30 Evening News, with brief items on the July 31 CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News. Willey eventually became a big news story when CBS's 60 Minutes interviewed her in March 1998, during the Lewinsky scandal.
"Wow! That was something," Today co-host Matt Lauer exclaimed on March 16, 1998, reacting to the 60 Minutes story. There was no introspection as to why it took Today and other outlets so long to cover the charges.
- In the case of Juanita Broaddrick, who publicly came forward to say Bill Clinton raped her while he was the Arkansas Attorney General and a candidate for Governor, the networks offered weekend coverage in March 1998, when the charge surfaced in a court filing by Paula Jones' attorneys. NBC interviewed Broaddrick for a Dateline special in January 1999, but the airing was delayed until February 24, 1999, after the end of Clinton's impeachment trial.
The March 1999 Media Watch pointed out the disparity of coverage of Broaddrick versus Anita Hill:
In the first five days of Hill’s charges (October 6-10,1991), the network evening shows (on ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, and PBS’s NewsHour) aired 67 stories. (If a count began with Jones’ February press conference, the networks supplied just a single 16-second anchor brief; if the count began with her sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton in May, the number was 15.)
But in the first five days after Juanita Broaddrick...charged the President with rape in The Wall Street Journal (February 19-23), the number of evening news stories was two. That’s a ratio of 67 to 2.
During the period of February 19-28, as NBC prepared to finally air its Dateline special, ABC virtually ignored the controversy. World News and Nightline skipped it. Good Morning America allowed two brief mentions. This Week briefly discussed it.
CBS allowed just one story on the February 20th Evening News.
Considering that NBC had the scoop, it's not surprising that the network offered more coverage. While Nightly News ignored it,
Today aired only a brief until the Myers interview. The morning after the interview, it carried a report by Claire Shipman and a Katie Couric interview with Clinton ally Alan Dershowitz and Dorothy Rabinowitz, who wrote the Wall Street Journal story. On the 26th, Matt Lauer asked NOW’s Patricia Ireland tough questions, including whether she’d ask Clinton to resign, since that’s what she demanded of Sen. Bob Packwood. On the 28th, most of Meet the Press focused the Broaddrick story.
When one contrasts the sexual harassment scandals of Democrat Bill Clinton, which included on the record accusers, with the hazy allegations against Republican Herman Cain, it becomes clear that the networks have enthusiasm for one and ignored the other.
- Scott Whitlock's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
I was a senior in high school
Submitted by ljacone on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 12:46pm.
I was a senior in high school and then a freshman in college when all this was going down (that alone is scary enough for me), and I recall at the time wondering why the heck no one was seeming to making a big deal out of the POTUS being a serial pervert. Of course, this was the stone age of social networking and the like so I did not have as many options for information as I do now, but I'll always remember thinking that if someone had accused Reagan (who was an idol of mine even at that age) of something so vile, it would have been screamed from the mountain tops.
Looks like some things never change. At least now we have other outlets who are not cowed, bullied, or otherwise unwilling to report the truth.
With Clinton, the many accusations were just "bimbo eruptions"
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 12:47pm.
.
Broaddrick's rape accusation worried the MSM because . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 1:25pm.
. . . after the Flowers, Jones, and Lewinsky vignettes, Broaddrick's charges had the aire of credibility about it -- we could believe it.
They avoided giving it the treatment that the current Cain story is getting because Clinton had already been damaged, but more importantly, they were shielding Hillary Clinton from press questions about what she knew.
The MSM also buried Lewinsky's sworn testimony to Ken Starr's team regarding an episode in the Oval Office. According to Lewinsky, Clinton was on the phone with a Congressman whom she could only identify by the nickname Clinton referred to him by; the conversation was about US troop commitment to the Balkans (or some such place). While on the phone, Clinton opened his fly and motion to Lewinsky to fellate him, which she did. The White House telephone records confirmed that the President did speak to that Congressman a that date/time.
The very image of the Commander in Chief being sexually gratified while he discussed the fate of American service members was so despicable, that the stunned MSM ignored it.
clinton
Submitted by grammajane on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 1:26pm.
is/was the most immoral pres. this country ever had as a leader. His actions and lies set a very low, in the gutter, standards and he to this day, continues to get praise as the best ever. No other politician, except Edwards, in history have been such complete loosers and examples of gutter filth. Seeing their faces on tv shows what liberals are all about.
That was Brokaw's excuse??
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 2:06pm.
"It didn't seem to most people, entirely relevant to what was going on at the time. These are the kind of charges raised about the President before."
That's his excuse for dismissing them? That everyone knew Clinton was a horndog so even a rape accusation was ho-hum?
In the 1990's, while in the midst of the "Clinton boom" was no time to be whining about the president's "peccadilloes," (I believe they were called) but now, with the economy circling the drain and and incompetent in the White House, is the time to be obsessing about a hand gesture that was not overtly sexual but made someone uncomfortable 15 years ago?
These people have a warped sense of priorities.
Outstanding Scott errrrr GREAT Scott!!!!!!!!
Submitted by Tomorama on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 2:21pm.
Scott, thank you for publishing this incredibly accurate timeline and I admit I used it to errrrrrr - explain how the media handled one case and how they handled 3 Clinton cases.
All I saw this morning on the blogs is "The media was all over Clinton tooooooooo, nah, nah, nah, nah"....
Just like they quickly reported on Rev Wright................
MSM "Yeah, well we made a
Submitted by FishFace222 on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 9:00pm.
MSM "Yeah, well we made a mistake in not covering all the Clintoon issues right away but we are making up for it now with Cain--blah blah blah blah BLAH blah BLAH BLAH blah
Only the latest Example
Submitted by scottyusmc on Wed, 11/02/2011 - 4:52am.
Folks, we better get use to this since this will be normal operating procedure for the slanted MSM from now until the elections in Nov 2012. We know now what the MSM will say and how they will handle every story regarding a Republican issue and how they will cover up or smooth over any hint of problems with their liberal Democratic masters... "Endure We Much!!!"