politics

Anybody Get The License Number of That Truck?

April 19, 2004

Every reporter learns early on that two different witnesses to a vehicular accident often offer wildly different descriptions.

John Kerry appeared on “Meet the Press” yesterday, and, while it didn’t exactly qualify as a car wreck, we here at Campaign Desk were struck by the differences in how his remarks were reported by The New York Times and the The Washington Post today. More specifically, in what the Times left out but the Post thought worthy of including.

In stories about Kerry’s hour-long interview with NBC’s Tim Russert, both papers included a response from Marc Racicot, chairman of Bush’s re-election campaign, speaking during a conference call to reporters. The Times’ Jodi Wilgoren offered: “Mr. Racicot called Mr. Kerry’s reasoning on voting to authorize the invasion of Iraq but not the $87 billion appropriation for reconstruction, ‘remarkably flawed.'”

The Post’s Dan Balz decided readers needed to know both Racicot’s accusation and Kerry’s explanation for his seemingly contradictory votes. Here’s Balz:

Kerry was pressed hard to explain his vote against the $87 billion authorization for Iraq and Afghanistan, after having said shortly before the vote that no senator was “going to abandon our troops.” Kerry supported an amendment requiring Bush to pay for the authorization by rolling back part of his tax cut.

Kerry said that his final vote against the bill would not have prevented the troops from receiving what they needed — a statement Bush campaign officials dispute — and that, if his vote had been decisive, the administration would have been forced to negotiate the terms of the legislation.

Sign up for CJR's daily email

A hundred words, by our count — not a lot of work, for any reporter. But in this case, the Post went that extra yard and the Times did not.

–SQS

Susan Q. Stranahan wrote for CJR.