Five Minutes With: David Brock
Tuesday May 23, 2006
Once a reporter for right-wing publications, now the media’s most valuable watchdog, David Brock has undergone a remarkable transformation. As a writer for The American Spectator and Insight and author of the infamous The Real Anita Hill, Brock’s writings agressively attacked the people most reviled by conservatives, especially Bill and Hilary Clinton, and helped unleash events that resulted in the impeachment of a president. After publishing The Seduction of Hillary Rodham, and being shunned by his conservative cohorts for taking a somewhat more measured, responsible approach in it, Brock reached a turning point. In 1997 and 1998 Brock wrote articles for Esquire apologizing for his past work. He has since published two books, Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative and The Republican Noise Machine.
Having exposed in his books the troubling journalistic standards of the conservative media, Brock is now making a career of holding them accountable for it. He founded Media Matters for America in 2004. As its President and CEO he is in charge of implementing its programs for “comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” In addition to the daily debunking of right-wing spin and biased reporting, Media Matters recently released the If It’s Sunday report, which showed, through a statistical analysis of ten years of programming, that conservatives are more frequently invited on the Sunday morning talk shows than progressives. Brock answered some of our questions over email:
 Given that organizations like Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) already exist, why did you think it was important to found Media Matters?
FAIR continues to be a critical player in eradicating mis-information in the media. We take a different approach at Media Matters, focusing more on rapid response and a bit less on media ownership and other issues. We think there’s room for what we do, and what FAIR does; we think we complement each other. More, and more variety, is better, as far as we’re concerned. News organizations are simply awash in conservative misinformation and aren’t serving their audiences well – and that’s damaging not only to progressives, but detrimental to a functioning American democracy.
Have you seen any improvement in terms of factual accuracy from the rightwing media as a result of the work of your organization and other like minded groups? How big is the gulf in accuracy between the liberal and conservative media in your experience?
We’ve certainly forced some corrections, and nipped some false stories in the bud before they are repeated so often they become true. Having said that, the explicitly "rightwing" media – Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, etc – simply don’t make accuracy much of a priority. They have an agenda they are committed to advancing; if they can do so accurately, that’s really just a bonus to them. It’s important to realize, though, that the "rightwing" media isn’t the entire problem. The New York Times and The Washington Post and CNN and the rest of the "mainstream" media served their audiences very poorly in the run-up to the Iraq war, as many of them have now acknowledged. They relentlessly pursued the Whitewater scandal-that-wasn’t – and all but ignored George Bush’s questionable Harken stock sale. They constantly advanced the storyline that Al Gore was a liar and exaggerator – often lying and exaggerating about him in order to do so. They gave extensive coverage to the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and were slow to attempt to assess the group’s credibility. I could go on and on and on; the point is that when I say the media is awash in conservative misinformation, I’m not just talking about the "rightwing" media. I’m talking about nearly all of the media. That, by the way, is why we don’t talk about the political or ideological bias of reporters and news organizations. We talk about the content of news reports – not the intent of the reporters who produce them.
What was it like being gay and a member of the vast rightwing conspiracy? Can you name some other people who might be dealing with that issue right now?
Being gay and a member of the conservative movement was a train wreck waiting to happen. One had to live in a state of denial, especially as the movement turned more openly anti-gay in the late 1980s and 1990s. That state of denial and conflict allowed me, for a time, to deny not only the anti-gay posturing of the right but a lot of the dishonesty I was seeing all around me at so many levels inside the conservative movement. I came out in 1994, when I was still in the conservative movement, and in retrospect, as I wrote in "Blinded by the Right," I think that was a critical first step in allowing me a more clear-eyed and balanced view—not only of politics, but of life. I wouldn’t want to speculate about others, except to say if they haven’t read my book, they might consider doing so.
What do you think has been Media Matters’ biggest success thus far?
Two accomplishments of which we are proudest have been our exposure of outrageous comments by right-wing media figures Pat Robertson and Bill Bennett and the debunking of right wing books such as Edward Klein’s The Truth About Hillary and David Horowitz’s The Professors. Exposing Robertson and Bennett’s comments led to them being denounced by leaders throughout the country, including by the White House.
Having been a young rising star in the right-wing media, what do you think the left can do to engage and promote their own young talent more effectively?
One of the great differences between conservatives and progressives is the institutions that have been established to develop messages and messengers. Conservative publishing houses—not just Regnery, but Sentinel and the other conservative imprints– publish and promote authors with little experience and few credentials. “News” outlets like the American Spectator and Washington Times give a head start to young conservatives who are willing to put an ideological agenda – and the quest for fame and fortune – ahead of journalistic integrity. Representatives of The Weekly Standard and National Review regularly appear as guests on political talk shows – far more often than their peers at progressive magazines like The American Prospect or The Nation. The Right, in short, has a vast infrastructure in place to hire, train, and promote wave after wave of new talent. Progressives have begun to build their own infrastructure with organizations like the Center for American Progress and Campus Progress. Progressive media organizations like Air America, the American Prospect, The Nation, and the Washington Monthly feature talented young writers and thinkers. The development of the progressive blogosphere provides yet another outlet for new leaders to emerge.
Who throws better parties, progressives or conservatives?
As long as conservatives’ parties involve Ann Coulter, the answer to that question should be obvious.
--------
Comments
Leave a comment about this article below. For more discussion, visit our community page and sign up for your own Campus Progress blog!
|
!
From the Q&A: “What was it like being gay and a member of the vast rightwing conspiracy? Can you name some other people who might be dealing with that issue right now?”
I had to read that question over, several times, before I realized that yes, the interviewer was actually asking Mr. Brock to name who is gay and part of the far right wing.
Honestly, I cannot understand this question or its relevance. The response Mr. Brock provided was kind—almost too kind, considering this low-brown, unnecessary question. It would have been one thing if the journalist would have asked Mr. Brock to not name the individual, or to discuss the circumstances of it, or to discuss already “out” right-wingers, but the journalist doesn’t.
This is a disrespectful, unnecessary question that only panders to the general public’s nosiness and love for the sensational (much like the last question, I should add).
Whoever conducted this interview should be ashamed. I would appreciate a response.
If CampusProgress hopes to become a formidable force, it should start approaching its journalism a little more seriously.
— Whitney Woodward - May 25, 04:51 PM - #Hooray for you!
— Terry Robinson - May 25, 07:09 PM - #I enjoyed this artical and would like to read more of David Brocks work. And i liked the question abpout who is gay in facist America. God knows they would love to burn us at the stake ( thats christianity for u)
If theyre coming after us, Then we should GO AFTER THEM FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE!!!! I doubt if old whitney is a Lesbian and therefore doesnt have the SLIGHTEST idea of what shes TALKING ABOUT.— Tom - Jun 1, 09:53 AM - #I read your book, “Blinded By the Right”; gave it to others to read. I found it very interesting and informative. I had left the Republican Party, though, a long time ago as they were becoming more radical and less for the “middle class”. The last election certainly proved my fears…...Mary Newlon
— Mary Newlon - Jun 5, 11:28 AM - #David Brock is a hero, and an extremely smart and talented guy. When he speaks, listen.
— Al - Jun 8, 09:35 PM - #Hi, videos!
— Ahmed - Mar 1, 12:14 PM - #<a href=http://ca.geocities.com/brandiebranch01>free189</a><a href=http://ca.geocities.com/eileenwhite42>free90</a><a href=http://ca.geocities.com/janellemcneil41>free166</a>