CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA — The media has been abuzz about Rick Santorum since Wednesday, when a CNN/Time/ORC International poll showed support among likely Iowa GOP caucus-goers for the long-lagging Santorum more than tripling since the start of December, and an NBC/Marist poll released Thursday showed similar numbers.
While these polls offered reporters a few interesting potential story lines—the Santorum surge (the CNN/Time poll put him at 16% support, or third place behind Mitt Romney and Ron Paul), a plunge in support for Newt Gingrich (to 14%, down from 33% at the start of the month), and Romney leading with 25% to Paul’s 22% (margin of error 3%)—it was the Santorum news that, to paraphrase Politico Wednesday, “won the day.”
The spoils: Seemingly more press attention since Wednesday than Santorum has received almost the entire campaign season. Take NBC News alone: Santorum was on the Today show on Thursday morning; NBC News’ First Read email that day asked, “Why not Santorum?”; and Santorum was booked for Meet the Press Sunday.
The Wall Street Journal and New York Times, among others, have reported that Santorum has started seeing larger crowds at his campaign events this past week, “reflecting,” in the Times’s words, Santorum’s rise in the polls.
Here’s the Boston Globe’s look at what that looked like:
Yesterday, standing before a packed room in Muscatine, Santorum noted he is no longer being largely ignored by the news media.
“People with all this machinery, I didn’t see them back then,’’ Santorum said, gesturing to seven television cameras around the function room overlooking the Mississippi River.
And, from the LA Times:
For Rick Santorum, it was the paparazzi moment that looked like it would never come. Cameras and correspondents awaited him Thursday at an event in eastern Iowa in numbers that had rarely, if ever, been seen by his campaign. Even the presidential candidate seemed a bit taken aback.
“Enjoying the circus?” one reporter asked.
“This is the first day,” Santorum replied.
Here in Cedar Rapids, I have yet to witness this “circus.” The atmosphere at a Santorum town hall event here on Wednesday night was less-than-enthusiastic. I had assumed there would be a crush of reporters, and probably people, too, given the day’s big news that Santorum was surging. In fact, there were only a handful of reporters and a staid crowd of 80-some Iowans. They were respectful and asked questions—a few of them nodded with the occasional, fervent ‘uh-huh’—but they lacked the hum, energy and size of crowds I’ve seen here at Gingrich, Romney, and Perry events.
The Des Moines Register’s William Petroski, who has been covering Santorum for much of the campaign, offered this insight from an event on Thursday:
Santorum spoke to about 60 people at a town hall meeting in the Coralville City Council chambers. About half of the crowd was Iowa and national news media who are covering his campaign, which has appeared to be gaining momentum heading into Tuesday’s Iowa Caucuses.
About half the crowd was media.
Something to keep in mind in the coming few days, and one of several caveats (in addition to, say, Santorum’s lack of money and organizational resources) for reporters contemplating Santorum’s surge and what it might yield in Iowa and beyond. Some self-awareness and restraint are in order. The atlantic.com’s Elspeth Reeves captured here some of the skepticism I’m feeling about the way this latest GOP candidate surge is being covered:
Is there time to squeeze in one more Not Mitt Romney candidate surge in the few days before the Iowa caucus? There’s definitely a surge of Rick Santorum surge stories: The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, USA Today, The Hill .
[A] Santorum boomlet would be fun for reporters, at least.
Momentum is a precious thing, particularly a few days before the caucus—it’s fine for the media to report it, but let’s keep some perspective.
Another thing to keep an eye on: this bit from the Times piece I referenced earlier:
[Santorum’s] recent rise in the polls seems to counter a major new theory in this primary contest — that support in Iowa can be won in televised debates and in cable news studios, without much retail campaigning.

Ron Paul gets only the attacks as soon as he starts into the lead, and not all the puffing up of the media surge. Where is Santorums vetting for calling himself conservative while voting for no child left behind, voting to raise the debt ceilng 5 times, voting for every major government expansion under the Bush administration? The media clearly has its story lines it does AND does NOT want to push.
#1 Posted by KJ, CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 11:01 AM
NCLB was a George and Laura Bush creation. It is not the barometer for whether someone is conservative or not. Not the same yardstick as Pro-life, as Santorum decidedly is.
#2 Posted by NYFM, CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 11:52 AM
@NYFM - Yeah, Santorum is so decidedly pro-life he endorsed a pro-choice liberal Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey back in 2004. That's the principle reason why he lost his re-election in 2006 to a pro-life democrat Bob Casey Jr.
Santorum was Bush's and Rove's lap dog in the senate, and campaigned for pro-choice moderates at their behest. He's like one of those pro-choice people who says "I'm pro-life for myself, but not for anyone else", unless he's running for office in a pro-life electorate that is.
#3 Posted by Jonathan, CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 01:14 PM
I don't see how any of these people can survive the primaries, but I suppose one of them must. How is it that in a year where the incumbent is limping to the starting gate, Republicans manage to field the most bizarre, incompetent field of wannabes ever? The real disconnect in the press coverage of the Santorum surge is that he's taken at all seriously by anyone; he's not even going to clear a decent book deal out of this sorry escapade in his sorry, batsh*t crazy man-on-dog political life.
#4 Posted by Weldon Berger, CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 01:26 PM
I'm surprised most reporters seem to have missed the reason for Santorum's surge--the leaders of the fundamentalists in Iowa came out for Santorum, and the surge, such as it is, followed.
#5 Posted by Larry , CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 03:12 PM
Larry
The focus of Ms Fry's article and analysis is that the media can't be relied upon to do its own analysis of an event, whether it be news worthy or not. That's our current media, ideologically committed to whom ever it sees as a front runner and trying as hard as it can to create a front runner when none appears to be gaining real momentum.
#6 Posted by Jack, CJR on Sat 31 Dec 2011 at 04:57 PM
The best way to cover a Santorum surge is with some wet wipes. Gotta catch that stuff before it gets on the bed sheets.
#7 Posted by lol, CJR on Sun 1 Jan 2012 at 03:42 PM
About half the crowd was media.
surpris====http://youtu.be/zXKV78VERio
#8 Posted by jack, CJR on Sun 1 Jan 2012 at 04:25 PM
What is scary is the depth to which most of the seven will stoop to retain the support of the teabaggers, even renouncing relatively sane positions they have taken in the past. At some point, someone with the courage of a Joseph Welch is going to have to say to the frontrunner, "At long last ... have you no sense of decency?"
#9 Posted by C.W., CJR on Mon 2 Jan 2012 at 09:35 AM