Washington Buzz Harry Jaffe National editor, The Washingtonian
Washington Post vs. Howard Stern-Whose Endorsement Counts More?
You are John Kerry. An aide tells you that you are about to get a key media endorsement the weekend before the election. You are ecstatic because it is:
a. Washington Post b. New York Times c. Howard Stern d. Jon Stewart.
Answer: c. Howard Stern.
The shock jock's 9 million loyal listeners, who might not think about the election until after Halloween, are likely to take direction from Stern. Comedy Central's The Daily Show host Jon Stewart would be the next best.
The stamp of Don Graham's Washington Post would come in fourth for its potential to encourage voters to punch the Kerry ticket.
The endorsement season is upon us, when editorial boards and publishers across the nation contemplate a candidate's record and render an editorial verdict. Many papers have passed judgment already. The most influential papers-the Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and others-have yet to make their endorsements.
But do endorsements really count? Do readers vote their newspaper's editorial preference? Can an endorsement swing an election-or even a state?
The answer seems to be: less and less.
"Newspapers probably don't have the influence they did when they were the only game in town," says Tom Kunkel, dean of the University of Maryland's journalism school.
"People who care enough to read the Post and the Times are reading Time magazine, Salon, blogs. There are a lot more voices in the discussion."
Joshua Micah Marshall, author of the online Talking Points Memo, says, "I tend to think they [newspapers] don't have much effect unless they cut heavily against expectations. I believe the Financial Times just endorsed Kerry, for instance. That catches people's eye."
Says Matthew Felling with the Center for Media and Public Affairs: "For some voters it's Jon Stewart, for others it's Bill Safire. For some it's Emeril on the Food Network."
So if a newspaper's voice is being drowned out by Stern's potty mouth or the chopping sound of Emeril's cleaver, why go to the trouble of endorsing?
Because that's what newspapers do.
"Newspaper endorsements are coming out now for the same reason that we have political conventions," says Felling. "It's a longstanding tradition, teetering on the brink of becoming an anachronism."
Some papers don't feel compelled to endorse a candidate, among them USA Today, the nation's largest-circulation daily.
"Our readers are inundated with information from which they can make a decision," says editorial-page editor Brian Gallagher. "They don't need us to tell them who to vote for."
Besides, says Gallagher, by endorsing a candidate a newspaper makes a political statement, and "we don't want the taint of either party."
Many newspapers are endorsing early. As of this week, nine papers in battleground states have backed John Kerry, according to Editor & Publisher, while four have come out for President Bush. Philadelphia's two major dailies and the two in Seattle have endorsed Kerry. So have the Detroit Free Press and the St. Louis Post Dispatch.
The early endorsements are "a sign of how partisan this election is," says Kunkel, who adds that while one endorsement might not sway voters, a collection of editorials "builds a sense of momentum."
Who will get the Washington Post endorsement?
The Post's editorial record over the past three years should put it in the Bush camp, notes Washington City Paper editor Erik Wemple, who writes that the editorial board's steadfast and increasingly contorted support for Bush's invasion of Iraq would seem to make it hard for the paper to back Kerry.
But endorsing a Republican would break with the Post's traditional support for the Democratic nominee. Dwight Eisenhower was the last Republican to get the paper's nod.
Make no mistake-Don Graham makes the call. He might have given up the title of publisher so he could devote more time to the Post Company's more profitable holdings, but he's still chairman and still ultimately controls the editorial page.
Graham, along with editorial-page editor Fred Hiatt, is a hawk on national-security matters, which put the paper behind the Iraq war. Advantage Bush. But Graham and his editorial writers are also advocates of civil liberties and mainstream economic policy. Advantage Kerry.
The Post more than likely will publish a long and tepid endorsement of John Kerry.
But will it have an impact on the election? Hardly. Regardless of what the Post says, Virginia will go for Bush. Both Maryland and DC will be in the Kerry camp.
And whither the New York Times? Even without Howell Raines giving orders to march left, the Manhattan-based daily is almost certain to endorse Kerry.
"The New York Times is the top political machine in America," says political operative Dick Morris, whose book deconstructing Bill Clinton's memoir just hit the stores. "It's capable of getting one million intelligent people to switch on a dime, particularly in local races. But in a presidential race, it doesn't matter much. Too much direct contact via TV."
Ah, TV. Which brings us back to Comedy Central's Jon Stewart, whose 1-million-plus viewers tend to take the funnyman seriously. Today Stewart told a breakfast meeting sponsored by the New Yorker that he was inclined to go for the Democrat. An on-air endorsement might be in the offing.
Kerry doesn't have to wait for Howard Stern's support. Furious at FCC attempts to muzzle his foul mouth, Stern has been smacking Bush daily and urging his minions to vote for Kerry. And it could make a difference. A Keystone poll in August reported that a third of Stern's Pennsylvania audience had switched from Bush to Kerry as a result of Stern's prodding.
Who would have thought-Howard Stern and Jon Stewart, kingmakers.