Horse-race junkies of the world, unite!
Wherever there's a smoke-filled room, a spin doctor or a poll, CNN's "Inside Politics" will be there
By DAN KENNEDY
It's been a lean spring for CNN's "Inside Politics." So when there's even a hint of political drama, the show pounces on it like Rottweilers on raw porterhouse.
This week it's the guilty verdicts in the Whitewater saga, which should give Bernard Shaw, Judy Woodruff and company plenty of gristle to chew on right through the weekend.
Two weeks ago it was Bob Dole's tearful resignation from the Senate. The Kansan's unexpected move injected some excitement into the moribund Presidential race -- and sent the pundits at "Inside Politics" into frenzy. Wolf Blitzer reported that the White House saw Dole's play as a sign of "desperation, panic, and instability." Gene Randall weighed in with the news that, yes, the Dole campaign was still broke. Number-cruncher extraordinaire Bill Schneider told viewers that Clinton was kicking Dole's butt in suburbia, a traditional Republican stronghold. And anchor Judy Woodruff closed by chit-chatting with Republican chairman Haley Barbour, who called Dole's resignation his "duty to the country," and Democratic chairman Chris Dodd, who lambasted the move as -- imagine! -- a "political decision."
Media critics such as the Atlantic Monthly's James Fallows castigate the Washington press corps for its soundbite coverage and its treatment of politics as sports. "Inside Politics" would take that as a compliment. The show revels in the horse race, offering up daily fixes of stuff that only true political junkies could crave: obscure Republican vice-presidential hopefuls, reports on local races such as the semi-sentient nonagenarian Strom Thurmond's bid to win re-election to the Senate, and polls, polls, polls. When "Inside Politics" takes on an actual issue, such as welfare reform, it focuses mainly on who the political winners and losers will be. (You can catch up on shows you missed by logging onto the show's Web site ).
"People believe that politics is the enemy of problem-solving," Schneider told Salon. "But at the same time, there's a constituency that enjoys politics, that follows it avidly. Those are the people who follow our show. It's a very small audience. We hope it gets bigger."
Indeed, only about 500,000 people tune in for the 8:30 p.m. (Eastern time) show, a far cry from the 30 million or so who watch "Friends," "ER," and "Seinfeld." But the audience for "Inside Politics" is about the same size as Larry King's, and in the age of narrowcasting, that's enough.
Unlike talking-head shoutfests such as "The McLaughlin Group" and "Crossfire," "Inside Politics" is a real news program, with anchors, interviews, and lengthy (by television standards) reported pieces. Narrow though the show's focus might be, it's impossible to tune in without learning something. When was the last time you found anything edifying about an exchange between McLaughlin and Morton Kondracke?
"Inside Politics" debuted during the 1988 campaign. The show was discontinued after the election, and revived for the '92 campaign. It's been going strong ever since, Monday through Friday at 4 and 8:30 p.m. (the show is cablecast live both times, although many of the features are repeated), with a special weekend edition on Saturdays at 7:30 p.m. and Sundays at 10:30 a.m.
The need to fill that half-hour every day has created a relentless appetite that often can only be sated with the journalistic equivalent of junk food. During the Republican primaries, "Inside Politics" regularly hyped trends that weren't borne out at the ballot box, such as the alleged Steve Forbes surge and Pat Buchanan's "victory" in New Hampshire, where the Chardonnay-sippin' pitchfork populist received fewer votes than he did four years ago. Of course, "Inside Politics" was hardly alone in doing that. But since it's watched avidly by many political reporters, it has influence beyond its audience numbers.
The yawn-inducing Dole-Clinton race has left "Inside Politics" scrambling. Indeed, Candy Crowley's day-after-the-resignation report focused on such trivia as Dole's shedding his tie and relying on a TelePrompTer to sharpen his delivery before a Chicago audience. "Dole's off-the-cuff, stream-of-consciousness remarks have been honed into -- well, a speech," marveled Crowley, that rarest of TV creatures: an XL woman in a serious, on-camera position.
Stuff like this is a far cry from Fallows' call for "civic journalism," the notion that the media should offer in-depth reports on issues that citizens, through polls and interviews, say are important. To be sure, there's a place for that. But there's a place for horse-race coverage, too.
Besides, as University of Virginia government professor Larry Sabato, a well-known media critic, points out, the Clinton-Dole race just doesn't lend itself to a focus on the issues. "They both have wanted to be president since they were 11, or maybe 20 in Dole's case," he says, "and this has led them to a life of conventional career politics where they have made compromise after compromise after compromise. I'm sure it's sometimes difficult for them to remember what they believe in."
Adds Schneider: "We're not ashamed of covering politics. We believe that's how the system works. I like and admire professional politicians. There, I've said it. I like them. I believe in politics. I honestly do."
Dan Kennedy (dkennedy@shore.net) is the media reporter for the Boston Phoenix.