| Revision as of 06:26, 2 March 2008 editTabletop (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers177,774 editsm Spell Feburary => February← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:43, 2 March 2008 edit undoSceptre (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors79,183 edits no allegationsNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{seealso|Criticism of The New York Times#McCain article criticism}} | |||
| On ], ], in the midst of ]'s ] in the ], both '']'' and the '']'' published articles detailing rumors of an improper relationship between ] and ] ].<ref name="NYT022108">{{cite news | author=Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick, Stephen Labaton | url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1203656400&en=d0734db651c10475&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin | title=For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk | publisher='']'' | date=], ]}}</ref><ref name="WP022108" /> | |||
| According to the ''New York Times'' story, McCain, who was a member of the Senate Commerce Committee during the period when Iseman was lobbying the committee, developed a close personal relationship with Iseman.<ref name="NYT022108" /> The ''New York Times'' came under intense criticism for the article because of its use of anonymous sources and its timing. | |||
| ==Alleged concerns about favoritism from McCain== | |||
| McCain wrote letters in 1998 and 1999 to the ] (the FCC) encouraging it to uphold marketing agreements allowing a television company to control two stations in the same city, a position which Iseman had been advocating on behalf of her client Glencairn Ltd. (now ]).<ref name="NYT022108" /> McCain also introduced a bill to create tax incentives for minority ownership of stations, which several businesses Iseman represented were seeking.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| In February 1999, McCain and Iseman attended a small fund-raising dinner with several clients at a ]-area home of a cruise-line executive, then flew back to Washington along with a campaign aide on the corporate jet of Paxson Communications (now ]), one of her clients.<ref name="NYT022108" /> Later in 1999, Iseman requested McCain to write to the FCC urging it to reach a speedy decision in a case involving Paxson Communications. Iseman, according to an email sent to The Times, provided McCain's staff with the information to write the letter. McCain's two letters to the FCC resulted in ], the FCC chairman, issuing a rare public rebuke to McCain for his interference in FCC deliberations.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| McCain also frequently denied requests from Iseman and the companies she represented, including attempts in 2006 to break up cable packages, something opposed by companies she represented. His proposals for satellite distribution of local television stations also failed to match the desires of Iseman's clients.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| Iseman said she never received special treatment from McCain's office, and McCain said he never demonstrated favoritism to Iseman or her clients. During a phone call to ], executive editor of the ''New York Times'', he said, "I have never betrayed the public trust by doing anything like that."<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| Iseman's clients contributed tens of thousands of dollars to McCain's campaigns.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| ==Alleged concerns about romantic relationship with McCain== | |||
| {{wikinews|John McCain denies romantic relationship with lobbyist}} | |||
| According to the ''Times'' story, Iseman began visiting McCain's offices and campaign events so frequently in 2000 that his aides were worried the senator might be having a romantic relationship with her. One staff member asked, "Why is she always around?"<ref name="NYT022108" /> Staff aides also worried that McCain's relationship with Iseman would receive negative media attention due to the letters McCain wrote to government regulators on her behalf, especially since McCain's campaign stressed his probity and included proposals for more stringent regulation of ]. | |||
| Long-time McCain staffer John Weaver stated that this wasn't true. ], McCain's 2000 communication director with no current connection to the campaign, said it was "highly implausible"; that he would have been made aware of any such concerns.<ref name="CNN022208" /> | |||
| ==McCain's aides allegedly intervene to "save McCain from himself"== | |||
| It is alleged that in a campaign to "save McCain from himself", his aides began restricting Iseman's access to McCain during the course of the 2000 presidential primary. According to a story in the '']'' published the same day as the ''New York Times'' story, Weaver met with Iseman at ] to tell Iseman not to see McCain anymore.<ref>{{cite news | author=Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Michael D Shear | url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/20/AR2008022002898_pf.html | title=McCain's Ties To Lobbyist Worried Aides | publisher='']'' | date=], ]}}</ref> Weaver, who arranged the meeting after a discussion among campaign leaders, said Iseman and he discussed "her conduct and what she allegedly had told people, which made its way back to us."<ref name="NYT022108" /> Weaver heard that she was saying "she had strong ties to the Commerce Committee and his staff" and told her this was wrong and for it to stop.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Cillizza | |||
| |first= Chris | |||
| |authorlink= The Fix (blog) | |||
| |url= http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/02/john_weaver_speaks.html?hpid=topnews | |||
| |title= John Weaver Speaks | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> No discussion of a romantic involvement occurred because, according to Weaver, "there was no reason to".<ref name="CNN022208">{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-22 | |||
| |last= Bash | |||
| |first= Dana | |||
| |authorlink= Dana Bash | |||
| |coauthors= Bronstein, Scott | |||
| |url= http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/22/mccain.lobbyist/ | |||
| |title= Ex-McCain aide: New York Times report 'highly implausible' | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-22}}</ref> Iseman confirmed she met with Weaver, but disputed his account of the conversation.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| A campaign adviser was instructed to keep Iseman away from McCain at public events, and plans were made to limit her access to his offices. Campaign associates also confronted McCain directly about the risks he was taking with campaign and career. McCain allegedly admitted he was behaving inappropriately and promised to distance himself from Iseman. Concerns about the relationship eventually receded as the campaign continued.<ref name="NYT022108" /> | |||
| ==Response from McCain's campaign== | |||
| On February 20, the night before the article appeared in the printed newspaper, but just after the story was available online, the McCain presidential campaign issued the following statement: "It is a shame that ''The New York Times'' has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election. Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”<ref name="NYT022108" /> A McCain campaign adviser added that the report “reads like a tabloid gossip sheet”.<ref name="FOX02210" /> | |||
| McCain spoke in a press conference the following day saying, "I'm very disappointed in the article. It's not true." He stated he never showed favoritism for her clients: "At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust." He went on to characterize Iseman as a friend but no closer than other lobbyists. Both he and his wife strenuously denied any impropriety. He said he wasn't aware of the meeting Weaver had with Iseman nor of any concerns among his staff about his association.<ref name="WP022108">{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Quaid | |||
| |first= Libby | |||
| |url= http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022100343.html?hpid=topnews | |||
| |title= McCain Says Report Is "Not True" | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> | |||
| ==Ethics of publication questioned == | |||
| ''The Times''' decision to publish the article while relying almost entirely on anonymous sources has raised ethical questions relating to the story's veracity and importance. | |||
| ], an '']'' correspondent, said that — while damaging — as long as the sources remain anonymous this story will not throw the campaign off course. He quoted McCain aides that they will go after ''The New York Times'' "with extreme aggression — if the newspaper was going to act like a partisan they were going to treat them as a partisan."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Stephanopolous | |||
| |first= George | |||
| |authorlink= George Stephanopolous | |||
| |url= http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4322573 | |||
| |title= McCain Charges: Scandal or Smear | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> On the same day, fellow Senator ], who has endorsed McCain for the presidency, said, "The story I think is outrageously unfair to him. There's no 'there' there."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-18 | |||
| |last= Singer | |||
| |first= Stephen | |||
| |url= http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2008/02/21/lieberman_defends_mccain_from_suggestion_of_improper_relationship/ | |||
| |title= Lieberman defends McCain from suggestion of improper relationship | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> | |||
| '']'' publisher ] said, “I don’t think that there is enough acknowledged sourcing for this story." | |||
| Academics and legal journals offered both support and criticism of the story. The editor of the ] said while the article wasn't entirely convincing it did put to question McCain's reputation as a reformer.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |year= 2008 | |||
| |month= February/March | |||
| |last= Rieder | |||
| |first= Rem | |||
| |url= http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4482 | |||
| |title= The Senator and the Lobbyist | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-24}}</ref> The editor of the ] said the circumstances outlined in the story were sufficient to justify its publication.<ref name="LAT022228">{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-22 | |||
| |last= Rainey | |||
| |first= James | |||
| |pages= page 2 | |||
| |url= http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-media22feb22,1,3173594.story?page=1&cset=true&ctrack=1 | |||
| |title= McCain story proves incendiary among journalists, conservatives | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-24}}</ref> However, a ] at the ] disagreed, saying, " you haven't covered all your bases or been transparent about where you got the information . . . then the criticism takes over and the story loses its significance."<ref name="LAT022228" /> ], director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center faulted the paper for focusing on the purported affair.<ref name="LAT022228" /> | |||
| Several conservative voices, who had recently criticized McCain, came to his defense. ] of the ] ] said, “The ''New York Times'' is giving the '']'' a bad name”. <ref name="FOX02210">{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |pages= | |||
| |url= http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/21/fit-to-print-new-york-times-in-crosshairs-for-report-on-mccain-and-female-lobbyist/ | |||
| |title= Fit to Print? New York Times in Crosshairs for Report on McCain and Female Lobbyist | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> He said the story was done hastily because it feared the embarrassment of an imminent '']'' article reporting on internal dissension about the story.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Kessler | |||
| |first= Glen | |||
| |url= http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/21/mccain_camp_takes_on_the_new_y.html | |||
| |title= McCain Camp Takes On the New York Times | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Sherman | |||
| |first= Gabriel | |||
| |url= http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=8b7675e4-36de-43f5-afdd-2a2cd2b96a24 | |||
| |title= The Long Run-Up | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-21}}</ref> Talk show host ] said, "This is what you get when you walk across the aisle and try to make these people your friends. I'm not surprised in the least that the NYT would try to take out John McCain."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Szep | |||
| |first= Jason | |||
| |url= http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1931768920080221 | |||
| |title= McCain could gain from report on lobbyist link | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-22}}</ref> Jay Ambrose, an opinion columnist for the '']'', summarized their sentiment by writing, "One of the first rules of decent, principles-abiding journalism is that you don’t print rumors. That is nevertheless what The New York Times just did in a smear job on John McCain...."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-22 | |||
| |last= Ambrose | |||
| |first= Jay | |||
| |url= http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1075170&srvc=home&position=rated | |||
| |title= All the rumors unfit to print | |||
| |publisher= '']'' | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-22}}</ref> '']'' columnist ] chimed in with, "The paper set out to shine a spotlight on McCain's ethics, but it ended up turning a harsh light on its own ethical lapses."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-22 | |||
| |last= Saunders | |||
| |first= Debra | |||
| |authorlink= Debra Saunders | |||
| |url= http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/22/EDJUV6KCB.DTL | |||
| |title= New York Times sullies itself with McCain story | |||
| |publisher= '']'' | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-22}}</ref> | |||
| Some liberal commentators and critics of the ] have also questioned the purpose of the story. ] of '']'' said the article lacked physical evidence, noting, "et‘s face it, people are more interested in sex than they are in telecommunications lobbying activity."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-20 | |||
| |last= Alter | |||
| |first= Jonathan | |||
| |authorlink= Jonathan Alter | |||
| |url= http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23275773/ | |||
| |title= 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for Feb. 20 | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-24}}</ref> ] argued that, if false, the article is both unfair and damaging, suggesting that legal recourse was possible.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-22 | |||
| |last= Dean | |||
| |first= John | |||
| |authorlink= John Dean | |||
| |url= http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20080222.html | |||
| |title= The New York Times Story Linking John McCain with Lobbyist Vicki Iseman: Should It Have Been Published? | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-24}}</ref> Journalist ], writing in ], said the ''Times'' rushed the story to publication and left key questions unanswered, writing "Either write the cheating story or don't. As it is, it just looks like a lame story where they quote a bunch of anonymous old campaign sources but don't have any actual evidence of the affair themselves. And they make it much easier for McCain to just stomp on the story."<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-20 | |||
| |last= Rosin | |||
| |first= Hanna | |||
| |authorlink= Hanna Rosin | |||
| |url= http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/02/20/its-about-vicki-stupid.aspx | |||
| |title= It's About Vicki, Stupid | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-25}}</ref> | |||
| In defense of the article, reporters for '']'' wondered that if the story was about McCain's possible 2008 presidential opponent, Senator ], whether conservatives may have been more curious about the details of the story which they felt had substance,<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-24 | |||
| |last= Allen | |||
| |first= Mike | |||
| |coauthors= ] | |||
| |url= http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8649.html | |||
| |title= Why the right reluctantly defended McCain | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-25}}</ref> a sentiment echoed by '']''.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-24 | |||
| |last= Sheiber | |||
| |first= Norm | |||
| |url= http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/02/24/why-are-conservatives-so-delusional-about-the-mccain-story.aspx | |||
| |title= Why Are Conservatives So Delusional About the McCain Story? | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-25}}</ref> Times editor ] defended the story saying the facts were well ] and the timing was a result of waiting until the story was ready.<ref name="LAT022228"/> Other Times editors defended the use of anonymous sources saying they knew their identities and that they provided thorough and consistent stories.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-21 | |||
| |last= Abramson | |||
| |first= Jill | |||
| |authorlink= Jill Abramson | |||
| |coauthors= et. al. | |||
| |pages= page 2 | |||
| |url= http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/business/media/21askthenewsroom.html | |||
| |title= The McCain Article | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-25}}</ref> However, ], the ] for ''The New York Times'', criticized the article for its lack of details and independent proof.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| |date= 2008-02-24 | |||
| |last= Hoyt | |||
| |first= Clark | |||
| |authorlink= Clark Hoyt | |||
| |url= http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24pubed.html?em&ex=1203915600&en=0cc088c86203723a&ei=5087%0A | |||
| |title= What That McCain Article Didn’t Say | |||
| |publisher= ] | |||
| |accessdate=2008-02-24}}</ref> | |||
| == Follow-up article == | |||
| On February 23, The New York Times followed up their original article with an article on McCain's efforts to help a client of Iseman's before the ]. According to the article, "In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole."<ref> By STEPHEN LABATON February 23, 2008 ''New York Times''</ref> | |||
| == References == | |||
| {{reflist|2}} | |||
| == External Link == | |||
| * | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 12:43, 2 March 2008
Redirect to: