USAT Reporter Caught in Distortion, Portrays Thompson as Unambitious
Erick at Red State reports that USA Today reporter Jill Lawrence distorted what she reported Saturday on a statement made by Fred Thompson to a Burlington, Iowa audience.
Here, per Erick, is how Thompson actually responded to the question, “Do you want to be President?” –
The first place, I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t. I wouldn’t be doing this. I grew up in very modest circumstances. I left government and I and my family have made sacrifices to be sitting here today. I haven’t had any income for a long time because I figured to be clean, you’ve got to cut everything off. I was doing speaking engagements and I had a contract to do a tv show. I had a contract with ABC radio…and so forth. A man would have to be a total fool to do all those things and to be leaving his family which is not a joyful thing if he didn’t want to do it.
I am not consumed by personal ambition. I will not be devastated if I don’t do it. I want the people to have the best president they can have.
But here is what Lawrence posted:
Bill Theobald of Gannett News Service has been following Republican Fred Thompson around Iowa. In a dispatch today from Burlington, Bill quotes the former Tennessee senator as saying he doesn’t like modern campaigning, isn’t that interested in running for president and “will not be devastated” if he doesn’t win.
This makes it appear as if Thompson is just going through the motions, doesn’t it?
To her credit, Lawrence updated within an hour when Theobald called “to clarify that Thompson said he doesn’t like the process of running for president but he does want to BE president. He told the Burlington audience he would not have given up his acting career and time with his family to run if that were not the case.”
She then posted a link to a transcript of Thompson’s remarks at the Corner at National Review, and Theobald’s original story (which I could not find elsewhere). Theobald’s report began thusly:
Fred Thompson said Saturday he does not much like the modern form of presidential campaigning and that he “will not be devastated” if he doesn’t win the election.
“I’m not particularly interested in running for president,” Thompson said, but rather he feels called to serve his country.
But what originally caused Lawrence to take that bolded sentence and turn it into what she did? Was it “easy” because of the “lazy, uninterested” meme Old Media has been developing on Thompson ever since (perhaps even before) he entered the race? Is it, as Erick seems to believe, that Lawrence is “feeling slighted by the campaign for not getting a one on one with FDT”?
Regardless, it was clearly an error, in an answer to a question about Thompson’s ambition for the presidency, to skip over the full context of his answer.
Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.
______________________________________________
UPDATE: The Iowan who asked the question provides full context. I am copying it in full from The Campaign Spot because it’s a keeper:
After watching the blogs and media coverage of the question, I think the question and answer were taken out of context. From the start I want to make one thing clear, I do not nor have I ever thought Sen. Thompson is lazy. No one can accomplish in a lifetime what he has accomplished and be lazy. The question really came from months of frustrations. I started looking around for a candidate early because I really wanted to be a part of a campaign. Gov. Allen from Virginia was a possibility until his election meltdown. I looked at Gov. Huckabee early, but wrote him off as not being a viable candidate this time around. Shows you what I know. I also saw some of the big government ideas the Romney camp is now pointing out.
Speaking of Gov. Romney, I looked at him as well. Something about Gov. Romney just does not feel right. There is something about him I just do not trust. He is a little to slick. His image is a little too perfect. I could care less he is a Mormon. Frankly, I think the press made too big of an issue of his faith. I can only remember one person who mentioned his Mormon faith as being an issue. Most Iowa Republicans I spoke with about Romney were more concerned about his flip-flopping on the issues, than him being a Mormon bishop.
A high school friend of mine is a lobbyist in Washington D.C. During a phone call he mentioned Fred Thompson was thinking of running for President. I remember asking “The guy from Law & Order?†I knew he had been a senator, but did not know much anything else about him. Then I started receiving emails from Lamar Alexander and his Volpac telling me he was trying to get his good friend Fred Thompson to run for president. I began to look at Sen. Thompson and his record. I got excited. Here was proven conservative with a proven track record. He was well known to people outside of the political geeks. Not mention the last time the Republicans nominated a proven conservative who was marginal actor we nominated one the greatest presidents of all time.
Then the waiting began. I was in the Ames area during the straw poll, but I did not go, because I was waiting for my candidate to get into the race. I rationalized his late entry the same way he did on Saturday, he was getting into the race when candidates use to get into the race. I kept telling my family and friends just wait until he gets into the race, it will be like a ground fire. Finally, he announced and then nothing. It was like running downstairs on Christmas morning, only to find underwear under the Christmas tree. The day arrived, but there was no excitement. To be honest, my interest waned.
A few months ago he came to Burlington. I arrived at the event site when the doors were to open and the place was packed. There was excitement. He walked into the room and spoke. He said what I wanted to hear. Finally here was my candidate. There was still something missing. He did not ask me to support him. He told me what he thought about the issues. He fielded questions from the audience. It did not feel like a campaign rally. It was more like a lecture from an outstanding political speaker. Then the questions really started to creep into my mind, does this man really want to be President? Is he running for President or Secretary of Homeland Security? We see that in Iowa. Candidates for “president†are really running for some other office. I wanted to ask him that night do you want to be my president. I found myself wanting to support Sen. Thompson, but not knowing if he wanted me to support him.
I continued to look at all the candidates, but I kept coming back to Sen. Thompson. I wanted the chance to hear him talk again and Saturday was my chance. My friend from D.C. was visiting town so we went together to hear Sen. Thompson. The room and crowd were smaller this time. The only seats left were next to a woman I know through my work with the Boy Scouts. We waited for Sen. Thompson to arrive. Rep. King of Iowa introduced him. He walked into the room and sat down at the table with one of our local radio personalities. Again his answers were refreshing. Instead of sound bite after sound bite, he gave long thought out answers. He was advocating the ideas I wanted to hear. Then the question and answer session arrived. I wanted to know does this man want to be my President? I got the last question in.
The answer was exactly what I hope it would. It was a great answer. At points during the answer I was ashamed I had asked the question. I knew the answer. Do I really want to support a candidate who lives to be President? Is that type of candidate really interested in serving the nation or serving his own self-interest? Sen. Thompson positioned himself as willing to serve, not for an enlarged ego, but out of a deep desire to serve his nation. He has desire to make our nation better for his children and grandchildren. Far from a slick Branson like presentation, he presented himself as a dedicated patriot willing to serve if we, the American people, were willing to have him do so. He refuses to be a President under false pretenses. He is not leading us into a shotgun relationship. He understands that under the founder’s concept of the social contract, both parties must be fully aware of the terms of the contract when entering into the agreement. If the American people do not want him to be President, he is not going to trick us into agreeing to him. As I said, the answer was refreshing. It was a great answer.
I went and saw Gov. Romney that night. Do not misunderstand me; if Gov. Romney is the Republican nominee for President, I will support him. His presentation was an event. His hair and teeth were perfect. He smiled. He pressed the flesh. His wife glowed as she stood next to him. Make no mistake; Gov. Romney wants to be President of the United States. Maybe that is why I do not trust him. In the end, Sen. Thompson was right, the next President should be someone who wants to serve the nation, not someone who wants to be President. Far from the press coverage that stated Sen. Thompson does not have the desire to be President, his desire is to serve the American people. He believes the best way to do that is to be President. If he is not elected President, he will not be disappointed. He will find some other way to serve the American people, just like he has throughout his career. After listening to Sen. Thompson and thinking about what he said, I can only conclude he is the best candidate for the job.










FOX STABBED FRED IN THE BACK! 12/30/07 noon est
At the end of the noon news, the announcer claimed that on FOX News Sunday Fred said he didn’t really care about being president; he only cared about his kids and grandkids. The made it sound like he is an old man that wants to stay at home and sit by the fire playing with the grandchildren!
My email to them follows. FOX NEEDS TO BE FLOODED WITH COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS!email ============
I never thought I would hear FOX News twist someone’s statements as maliciously as you did when you smeared Fred Thompson at the end of your noon (Eastern) news report. Fred’s statement, “… I am consumed with the notion of what’s going to happen to my kids, my grandkids and my country, and that that’s why I was running for president” was clearly intended to emphasize with personalization that his focus is the well-being of the people of this country, not political games. You chopped apart his sentences - leaving the word, country, out completely - distorting his intent and misleading your viewers by portraying Fred as an old man who is uninterested in the presidency and only interested in sitting at home with his family.
Your contorted representation is without excuse. There is no connection between your report and the reality. No literate person could have mistakenly interpreted the meaning of his statements. This was plainly willful and plainly dishonest. If you think you viewers are the type to tolerate willful deception, or too dense to see through it, you are sadly mistaken. Either you are fair and balanced with everyone or you are not fair or balanced at all.
Even if you don’t care about being fair to Senator Thompson, you had better start caring about being fair and honest with your viewers. And you had better consider how your dishonesty reflects on every other reporter and commentator affiliated with FOX. No one watches FOX to be lied to. You owe it to them to make it right.
Comment by Allan Stewart — December 30, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
My gosh, Allan Stewart, THANKS! I wish I had written the letter you sent to FOX. Bless you.
Comment by Excelsior — December 31, 2007 @ 12:46 am
Fox News initially reported this early in the morning and it sounded like the report as shown on Nixguy.com. It looks as though Fox took that initial report and ran with it without checking out all the facts. They look as lazy as the old 527 media in this instance. I guess too many people are off for the holidays and accuracy has to suffer. That and the candidacy of the only conservative in the race.
Comment by Gary — December 31, 2007 @ 7:23 am
I watched Fred’s interview this weekend on Fox, as much as the interviewer, I believe Mike Wallace?, tried to get him to attack the other candidates, Fred showed real class in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each of the candidates he was asked about without being negative. Fred’s position was quite clear and sensible, you vote for the candidate that best respresents you views and if Fred does then vote for him, if not vote for someone else.
How refreshing to see a candidate get back to the Repub roots of what politics is supposed to be about, REPRESENTATION.
I made up my mind, I’m for Fred! Fred is a Conservative, and he represents my thinking as opposed to flaming RINOs like Romney and Huckabee. Rudy and McCain are in a different level of RINO, but RINO none the less. I also like Hunter and Keyes, maybe good VP material.
Comment by dscott — December 31, 2007 @ 8:24 am