campaign desk

Talking Shop: Chris Drew

New York Times reporter on covering Obama off the trail
July 23, 2008

New York Times investigative reporter Chris Drew has covered Barack Obama’s candidacy, including pieces on his fundraising practices, voting record in the Illinois State Senate, and time in Chicago.

1. Most of the campaign coverage we see is on-the-bus stuff. What’s the value of doing off-the-trail coverage?

Some of the most valuable stuff comes from what’s off the trail because on the trail the campaigns are trying to stage everything they can. The stump speeches are the same. You’re trying to fight through covering the pageantry, but if you want to know where the candidate really stands on things what his or her background is, what they’ve really done on issues in the past, who they’re getting their money from, who’s got influence with them, any questions about their character, you’ve got to do your own digging.

I’ve been covering Obama for a year, and I’ve never met the man, never spoken to him. That’s a tactical decision on the part of the campaign. I’ve done seven or eight front page stories on Obama, and they’ve never put him on the phone to answer any questions.

It’s fairly standard for these campaigns to shield the principal, as they call him, because anything the candidate says can be used against him, and they try to run interference by having other people answer those questions, so their words can’t be used against him later.

But, it surprised me early on in March 2007, when he was still the longer shot upstart that we couldn’t even get him on the phone to respond.

Sign up for CJR's daily email

2. Talk about using the investigative approach to cover a candidate.

You’re looking at where the candidate came from and who has been around him, and what that tells you about his essence. That’s often more revealing than what they’re saying. Often the public positions are carefully worked out by their advisors as to what will appeal to the most people, and sometimes they’re at odds with what they’ve done in the past.

With Obama, we started looking at his financial disclosure records. When he got a lot of money from his book deal, one of the things he invested in was a $100,000 in a few odd little stocks that it turned out had been bought after he consulted with a big campaign contributor who was a hedge fund manager who had invested in those stocks. It was surprising b/c the rest of his investments were more conservative.

And he said he supposed to have set up a blind trust, but he did it afterward. This raised a lot of initial questions, because he’s a very careful guy, he’s a lawyer, and yet.

He’s had a longtime relationship with Tony Rezko, who was recently convicted of some influence peddling that didn’t involve Obama, but there’s the question of why he was hanging out with him for 17 years.

Maybe the biggest thing is that he’s portrayed himself as a different kind of politician and a lot of people believe that he represents a different kind of politics and so it was pretty interesting when we took a look at how he navigated the rough and tumble world of Chicago politics.

He’s always coming up with fairly nuanced positions and in the Illinois senate he was trying to compromise, and it was an interesting look at what he would be like as president. He might not be as liberal as he appears, as partisan as people can be and he might be somebody who is trying to work out deals with both sides.

3. How does this relate to the narratives that the campaign is putting forward and also that the media is constructing.

Every campaign is trying to come up with a narrative to represent the candidate and we’re trying to examine the story they’re telling and trying to find what the meaning of the differences is.

One of the things that is just the recognition that he’s raised extraordinary amounts of money in conventional ways, not just on the Internet, which is all the more amazing for a guy who portrays himself as a new kind of politician.

The common theme of all these stories is looking at where he is like other politicians and coming to the conclusion that while he is very charismatic and very smart, he’s also a very deft politician and that’s how he got where he is. It’s funny, but for all politicians it would be a fairly obvious thing to say, but for him, it’s actually significant.

4. Do you think that the media’s construct of Obama is affected by the stories you’ve done?

By peeling back the layers, and story by story, certain adjustments gradually get made in the sense of who he is, and over time that filters into everyday coverage.

One example is when Obama opted out of public financing. He’d always backed public financing, and he said that if the Republican candidate did it, he would do it. But he’s raising such incredible sums of money, and for the first time the Democrats can really out-raise the Repub. That’s a good example where he can put aside some of the ideals that he’s espoused and be very pragmatic. And I noticed that there were a lot of newspaper editorials that were criticizing him for that, and that’s an example of where it’s starting to filter in, this sense of his pragmaticism.

5. A lot of your bylines are shared. How does that work?

This is such a high profile fascinating race, and it’s competitive in terms of coverage. If you have a couple of people, you can cover the ground twice as fast, it’s easy to get beat on these stories if you’re not moving quickly.

We try to divide up the reporting in ways that make sense, and depending on who is freer, they might take the lead writing on it, it varies.

The good thing is the editors at the Times are still wiling to give us the time we need to dig into these things, always with the sense that there’s only a few of us.

Even with as many people as we have on the campaign and digging into the candidates background, there’s always the sense that we’re moving as fast as we could. If you’re looking at something that’s possibly negative, the campaigns aren’t shy about jumping in and dealing with the issue before you even finished your story.

I’m worried about journalism in general, because so many papers around the country covering gubernatorial races and mayoral races, as the staffs get cut back, and the emphasis gets place on the quicker and shorter pieces, I’m not sure how much digging will done.

6. How did your most recent piece about the bundlers come about?

Obama had a published list on his Web site with 328 bundlers, and we set out to take a look at who they were and what their interests were and what they raised, and where they lived and what companies they worked for, and just put together a picture of his financing operation

When we were talking to his biggest fundraisers around the country and we were asking who in their areas raised a lot of money, they started giving us names of people who weren’t on the list of major fundraisers.

Then there was a list of his national financing committee, and several dozen names weren’t published on his Web site, and once we found that there were some who had raised enough money, and it seemed that they hadn’t updated the site in months.

Obama here wasn’t different than Clinton or McCain, but given the emphasis he’s put on transparency, for example, one of the bills that he passed to disclose bundlers who were lobbyists, it seemed important. And McCain too has a long history of working on campaign finance reform.

These two have some of the strongest track records and that they had fallen behind was pretty interesting.

7.What do you think is missing from the Obama story?

It is stunning think how quickly this guy got to where he is. Just eight years ago he lost by 30 percentage points in a senate race on the South Side of Chicago, and they never thought he’d past the state senate seat. Just to think in eight years, he’s dusted himself off from that and is the presidential nominee is pretty amazing.

People forget how lucky he is: In the 2004 senate race, he was still running third in the primary, when the leading candidate was forced to drop out because of a scandal, and then Obama won that primary. Then, his Republican opponent got knocked out in the general election because of a sex scandal. Who knows if it wasn’t for those two scandals coming up on his opponents that we wouldn’t even be talking about him right now.

8. Do you sometimes wish you were on the campaign bus?

I think it would be interesting to see what’s it like, but I couldn’t do the kind of stuff I could do there. When Jo Becker and I did the story about how he rose in Chicago, we both spent a week or more in Chicago and two or three on the phone, and we talked to dozens of people who knew him from when he first showed up and through every step of his life there, and that’s how you figure out what the guy is really like.

We talked to not only obvious people, but we found people who worked for him, and other people who hadn’t talked to the press before so the only real way to peel back the truth about somebody is to get on the street where they’re from.

9. How do you feel about campaign coverage with the way the play-by-play minutia sometimes becomes a big story?

Sometimes it can seem like noise, but this cycle has been so fascinating with the first black presidential nominee dueling with Hillary Clinton, and the possibility of the first female nominee. And all the turmoil on the McCain side, when his campaign almost collapsed last summer. Even the horse race has been interesting to watch.

10. Do you work with the on-the trail reporters?

As an investigative reporter, you might have time and the investigative skills, but you go into the situation with no contacts and having to start from scratch. We have people on the staff who know a lot of people, and I’ll call Adam [Nagourney] and get a list of people to call and find out what he’s thinking. And Jeff Zeleny and Jim Rutenberg, I’ve done stories with both of them: I might be doing some of the stuff calling people on the outside, and then they’re talking to the campaign people.

After Obama announced that he wasn’t going to take public financing, the editors wanted us to do a story about how he was going to spend this incredible amount of money that he’d been raising. So I was assigned, and Jim Rutenberg was assigned. And Jim started talking to some people, and Jeff Zeleny was traveling with Obama and he was able to get the main campaign to go over everything with him. And the three of us could put together a better story much more quickly than one of us could.

Katia Bachko is on staff at The New Yorker.