WASHINGTON, May 26 - Four years ago, the leaders of the Congressional
Black Caucus began looking for a television outlet to co-sponsor and
broadcast a presidential debate to address the concerns of minority
voters.
Only one news channel made an acceptable proposal, and an unlikely
channel at that: Fox News, in what some Democrats viewed as an effort
to associate itself with a group that could help it make good on its
claim of presenting "fair and balanced" news coverage.
But now that relationship is being shaken by the decision of Senator
Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois,
and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina to shun the debate,
a move that has exposed fault lines among two major constituencies of
the Democratic Party. While the withdrawal by the candidates
frustrated members of the black caucus, it mollified liberals who had
objected to the involvement of Fox News, whose programming includes
some of the most conservative and pro-Republican commentary on the
air.
The sensitivities surrounding the issue were evident this week when a
spokeswoman for Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who is seeking the
Democratic presidential nomination, said Mr. Richardson would not
participate in the debate, which is scheduled for September. But only
a few hours later, the spokeswoman phoned the reporter to say that she
had misspoken, and that Mr. Richardson had yet to decide. In the
interim the reporter had sought a response from the caucus on Mr.
Richardson's apparent withdrawal.
Meanwhile, members of the caucus have been pushing back, with press
secretaries for caucus members getting "talking points on how to cast
the debate in a positive light," as one staff member explained it.
The caucus is bent on salvaging what remains of the debate, and of a
relationship that has produced other benefits. Not only has Fox given
over precious air time for the debate, but an examination shows that
its parent company, News Corporation, has also taken other steps to
reach out to the group's constituency, including making campaign
donations to the caucus and its members and creating internship
programs at predominantly black colleges.
By design or not, News Corporation also gained currency among black
and Hispanic leaders by helping orchestrate a campaign to increase the
participation of minority viewers in the television ratings system, a
task it entrusted to a consulting firm with strong ties to Bill and
Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mrs. Clinton, in turn, has established a
relationship with Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of News Corporation,
who, for example, held a fund-raiser for her last year during her
Senate re-election campaign.
But the fragility of those alliances, and Fox's efforts to cultivate
them, was cast into the open last month, when Mr. Edwards, Mr. Obama,
and Mrs. Clinton announced that they would not participate in the
latest debate co-sponsored by Fox and the caucus.
Mr. Edwards, at least, cited what many Democrats had long said
privately but had been unwilling to say aloud, given Fox's large
megaphone: that the network is neither fair nor balanced, but tilts
right. Neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs. Clinton chose to characterize Fox in
withdrawing.
Still, the relationship between the black caucus and Fox News remains
beneficial enough to both sides that the caucus continues to insist
the show will go on in September, even if the candidates who remain
are unlikely to capture either the public's imagination or the
nomination.
While Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware said this week through a
spokesman that he would be there, he may not have much company;
representatives for two other Democratic candidates, Senator
Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Representative Dennis J.
Kucinich of Ohio, did not respond to messages asking whether they were
in or out.
Despite a fierce debate within the 43-member caucus over whether to
sever ties with Fox News, those representing the caucus in its
dealings with Fox have thus far held firm. The network itself has
apparently urged the caucus to do just that. There was, for example, a
meeting for caucus press secretaries attended by representatives of
News Corporation and Fox News, where talk turned to how to publicly
present the merits of the debate. (Also working in Fox's favor is that
the debate is to be held in Detroit, the home city of Representative
Carolyn Cheeks Kirkpatrick, the caucus chairwoman.)
Democratic advocates, meanwhile, especially with those affiliated with
Moveon.org, have sought to drive a wedge between the caucus and Fox
News.
But all of these machinations may ultimately prove moot. "If the
candidates are not going to participate, then you don't have a debate
worthy of viewership," said Representative Charles B. Rangel, one of
the most prominent members of the caucus, whose district includes
Harlem. "They made the decision for us, and for Fox."
A Fox News spokeswoman declined to comment for this article, or to
make available anyone else at the channel, including Roger Ailes, the
chairman and chief executive of Fox News.
The partnership between Fox News and the caucus began in earnest in
2003, when the news channel responded to the caucus's request for a
broadcast partner for its debates for the 2004 presidential election.
(Technically, the caucus was sponsoring the debate through an
affiliate group, the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education
and Leadership Institute; the use of the institute gives the caucus
itself some distance, even though several prominent caucus members are
on the institute board.)
Fox's proposal included broadcasting the debates in prime time, giving
the caucus a say in selecting moderators and covering much of the
production cost, said one former caucus staff member close to the
negotiations.
Months after joining forces with the caucus, Fox News created
internships for students at Morgan State University, a black college
in Baltimore, in the Congressional district of Representative Elijah
E. Cummings, who was then chairman of the caucus.
In June 2003, its political action committee, known as News America-
Fox, made a $1,000 contribution to Mr. Cummings's political committee.
The Fox group later made contributions of at least $1,000 each to
other caucus members, including Representatives Sheila Jackson-Lee of
Texas, and Gregory W. Meeks and Edolphus Towns of New York. The
political arm of the caucus itself received a $5,000 contribution from
the Fox group, in May 2006. And on the Web site of its foundation, the
caucus lists News Corporation among several dozen corporate sponsors.
Though Howard Dean and Senators John Kerry, John Edwards and Joseph I.
Lieberman appeared in 2003 at the Fox-caucus debate, the absence of
the leading candidates this time around, including Mr. Edwards,
underscores the change in the political climate.
Among the reasons Democrats have been willing to take on Fox News more
stridently than before is the galvanizing of the left around its
opposition to the Bush White House, especially its handling of the
Iraq war. Meanwhile, Fox's viewership declined last year, perhaps
emboldening Democrats who may no longer see it as having quite the
reach it once did, especially with Congress now in the control of the
Democrats.
In this atmosphere, some Democrats have begun to question the news
channel's motives for courting the caucus.
James Rucker, executive director of a group that has tried to mobilize
opposition to the partnership between Fox News and the caucus, said
that the news channel was using its association with the caucus to
inoculate itself against criticism that its coverage of Democrats in
general and blacks in particular was biased.
"This is Fox's brilliance," said Mr. Rucker, whose group is known as
the Color of Change. "In '03, they made a brilliant investment. On the
one hand, they got to be aligned with the brand of the Congressional
Black Caucus. On the other hand, they got to proceed with business as
usual."
Mr. Meeks acknowledged that Fox, in partnering with the caucus on the
debates, seemed to be trying to do a little image-building. But he
said at least Fox was willing to sponsor the debate, when no other
network would.
"Fox was trying to at least give the appearance they could be what
their slogan is: fair and balanced," he said. "I would have to give
them their due."
Mr. Meeks said that he had yet to decide whether to advocate canceling
the debate. Fox's supporters within the caucus have moved quickly to
close ranks, even taking the unusual step of sending a letter to
candidates seeking the Democratic nomination, urging them to
participate in the debate and noting "the importance to African-
Americans and others to hear from you."
While 26 members of the caucus signed the letter, it is also notable
who did not, including Representative Maxine Waters of California, a
prominent and powerful member of the group.
Asked about the debate in a brief telephone interview, Ms. Waters said
only, "I'm opposed to it."
It is perhaps telling that the last of three candidates to spurn the
debate was Mrs. Clinton. Her top communications adviser, Howard
Wolfson, helped run News Corporation's campaign seeking more black
representation in the Nielsen television ratings. He did so in his
capacity as a partner in the Glover Park Group, the consulting firm
hired by News Corporation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/us/politics/27fox.html?ei=5065&en=50809b5a87916cb1&ex=1180843200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
.
|
