Mark Dann Party-ID Follow-up: Ohio Media’s Amnesia Mostly Goes into Remission when the News Is ‘Positive’

Here, for fair use and discussion purposes, is the guidance from the 2000 Associated Press Stylebook on how to handle a story subject’s party affiliation:

Let relevance be the guide in determining whether to include a political figure’s party affiliation in a story.

Party affiliation is pointless in some stories, such as an account of a governor accepting a button from a poster child.

It will occur naturally in many political stories.

For stories between these extremes, include party affiliation if readers need it for understanding or are likely to be curious about what it is.

Saturday’s post (”Ohio Media Suffers Collective Amnesia on AG Marc Dann’s Party”), was about the apparent inability of Ohio’s Old Media, including AP, to identify what party Ohio Attorney General Marc “My Beloved” Dann belongs to in stories relating to the ongoing sexual-harrassment scandal involving employees in his office.

My post brought forth this comment from “Kevin”:

What’s even more odd about this is that they had no problem identifying Dann as a Democrat when writing about non-scandalous aspects of his job. When he’s suing a polluter or any other corporation, he’s a Democrat. When he’s talking about bringing crime labs to another city, he’s a Democrat. When he gets in hot water, everyone magically fails to include what party he is in …..

Kevin is in essence suggesting that what I called left-brained “Chronic Reportorial Amnesia” (CRA) should more accurately be referred to as “Selective Left-brained Amnesia in Media” (SLAM). Update your Physician’s Desk Reference accordingly.

Evidence of SLAM’s impact on Ohio Old Media reporting relative to Marc Dann is easily found:

• Youngstown Vindicator; April 3, 2007 — “Dann to move 38 jobs downtown Youngstown.” Job Go-Getter Dann’s identification as a Democrat is in Paragraph 2.
• Columbus Dispatch; Feb. 27, 2007 — “Dann chases mortgage cheats.” Crusader Dann’s party ID is in the fifth paragraph. Go to the link and decide for yourself whether the headline fits the story.
• Columbus Dispatch; June 8, 2007 — “10 mortgage lenders sued; state alleges illegal practices.” Eliot Spitzer Mini-Me Dann’s party ID is in Paragraph 7.
• Warren Tribune Chronicle; March 18, 2008 — “Dann talks to students about public service.” Word Number 7 in Jennifer Kovacs’s puff piece is “Democratic.”
• Cleveland Plain Dealer; Jan. 11, 2008 (from Google cache) — “Attorney general collects record $329 million.” Reginald Fields identified Delinquent Dunner Dann as a Dem in Paragraph 5, and set up the story to highlight Dann’s criticism of former AG Jim Petro for Petro’s alleged “pay to play” approach. The trouble is that the story’s entire premise falls apart after adjusting for inflation. After considering the 2006-2007 annual average inflation of 2.8%, the $329 mil Dann collected in 2007 is $320 million ($329/1.028) in 2006 dollars — that is, over $5 million less in real terms than the previous year’s $325.4 mil.

Of course, SLAM is not an Ohio-only affliction. NewsBusters, at this link, has 350 or so posts carrying the “Labeling” tag. Probably half of them, and maybe more, are specific examples of either D-avoidance or R-emphasis relating to political figures or political commentators.

Referring back to AP’s Stylebook, which likely reflects guidance journalists in general are supposed to follow: If Dann’s party affiliation is “relevant” when the news is “good,” it ought to be equally so when the news is “bad.”

As to the specifics of Marc Dann’s most current problems — the harassment cases, plus the concealed-carry issue (”Dann authorized his driver to carry concealed weapon”) that broke over the weekend — the two major parties have been trading charges over which is more corrupt, less law-abiding, and less ethical for years. The parties obviously think these matters are “relevant” to “curious” voters, or they wouldn’t waste their time with them. So, “naturally,” it’s pretty difficult (I’d say impossible) for reporters to argue that party affiliations should be kept out of such stories, or that they can be justifiably buried until the final few paragraphs.