'Time' says Sidney is massively right. Then they say, 'Don't buy this book'

Point. Click. Search.

Contents:

Definition of term
About the editor

Our current howler

Archives:

2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998

by Bob Somerby
bobsomerby@hotmail.com

E-mail This Page

A companion site.

Site maintained by Allegro Web Communications, comments to Marc.

Caveat lector

TIME WARP! Time says Sidney is massively right. Then they say, Don't buy this book:

WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2003

TIME HATES SURPRISES: When Lev Grossman limns The Clinton Wars, the word “surprisingly” tells the whole story. Here is the nugget of Grossman’s review in the current Time magazine:

GROSSMAN: The Clinton Wars takes us through Whitewater, [Dick] Morris, Vince Foster, Paula Jones and Monicagate…Blumenthal’s abiding theme is that Clinton’s presidency was the victim of a right-wing political cabal that manipulated the media and the legal system to make mountains out of dunghills, and he makes a surprisingly convincing case by doggedly following countless news stories and allegations to their origins in tainted, planted, unfounded, retracted, distorted, misleading and plain nonexistent evidence.

What did Grossman find in The Clinton Wars? According to Grossman, if you examine “countless news stories and allegations” against the Clintons, you find that they trace back to evidence that is “tainted, planted, unfounded, retracted, distorted, misleading and plain nonexistent.” And Grossman tells us how that could be: “Clinton’s presidency was the victim of a right-wing political cabal that manipulated the media.”

What an astonishing statement! According to Grossman, the media pushed an endless string of iconic “scandals” on the basis of fake and bogus evidence. According to Grossman, The Clinton Wars makes a “surprisingly convincing case” that these astonishing events did occur.

The key word here is “surprisingly.” Why is Grossman “surprised” to learn that the case is so strong? He is surprised for an obvious reason—because the political reporters at Time (and elsewhere) kept him in the dark for ten years. Grossman is a book reviewer, not a political scribe; like all other American citizens, he relies on the political press to keep him reasonably well informed. And what does he find as he reads this important book? He finds himself “surprised” by what it reveals about the best-known stories of the past decade! Like everyone else, Grossman had been deceived and misled as that mainstream press pushed that long string of scandal tales—stories that were (let’s say it again) based on evidence that was “planted, unfounded, misleading, nonexistent.” Grossman is “surprised” by the strength of Blumenthal’s case because—like every other American—he’s been defrauded for the past ten years by the colleagues in the political press corps.

But Grossman is a professional journalist, and he knows not to take it too far. His review goes farther than any other; to his credit, he explains exactly what Blumenthal says, and he says that Blumenthal seems to be right. But professionals don’t betray the pack. Emit a set of low, mordant chuckles as you see Grossman instantly pivot:

GROSSMAN: Blumenthal’s abiding theme is that Clinton’s presidency was the victim of a right-wing political cabal that manipulated the media and the legal system to make mountains out of dunghills, and he makes a surprisingly convincing case by doggedly following countless news stories and allegations to their origins in tainted, planted, unfounded, retracted, distorted, misleading and plain nonexistent evidence. Throughout, we get too brief flashbulb glimpses of the real star of the show: Blumenthal’s Clinton is a smart, extroverted, cardplayer, charismatic, 24/7 conversation junkie—but Blumenthal is much too loyal an ally to make a good portraitist.
Which points to the real problem with The Clinton Wars: Blumenthal is still fighting them. He’s missing the peaceful perspective on the past that a good memoir brings. To us, the events he describes already feel like they happened decades ago, but he writes as if they just happened yesterday—with a brittle, unpleasant, debater’s edge, still eager to score points and settle scores. The Clinton Wars is neither history nor journalism nor memoir. It’s just more politics. [END OF REVIEW]

Grossman’s pivot is simply amazing. According to Grossman, the Clinton scandals were largely hoaxes, gimmicked up by the mainstream press. And he understands that most people don’t know this—the case is “surprising,” he says. But what conclusion does he draw? Blumenthal shouldn’t have bothered to tell us! “To us, the events he describes already feel like they happened decades ago,” Grossman writes. He should simply let them go; instead, he should offer a “peaceful perspective.” In this pivot, we see how far they will go—how far the mainstream “press” will always go to steer you away from this story.

According to Grossman, Blumenthal describes an astonishing scandal. His case is strong—and his case is surprising. But what is Grossman’s advice? Dude! You should drop it! The Washington press corps wants one thing only—it wants to have its license unchecked. Don’t buy this book, Lev Grossman implores. Grossman (or his editor) has an easy, overpaid job. He’s trying real hard not to blow it.

TIME IS PREDICTABLE: Grossman (or his editors) knew where to go after saying that Blumenthal’s case was strong. The Official Approved Spin-Points followed quickly. Let us count the ways:

“Blumenthal is much too loyal an ally to make a good portraitist.” Translation: Grossman has already said that Blumenthal is right. Here, he pretends it’s just “loyalty.”
Blumenthal is “still eager to score points and settle scores.” Translation: Grossman has said that Blumenthal is right. Here, he pretends it’s all about getting even.
“The Clinton Wars is just more politics.” Translation: Ignore the fact that this book is right. Instead, just speculate about naughty motive.

And Time’s headline writer was also on message. Grossman says that the book is “surprising.” But the headline guy knew to say something else. The book “yields a dull, predictable view,” the headline predictably says.

Don’t buy this book, that headline implores. But then, the press corps will say this again and again. They don’t want you to see what’s inside it.

The Daily update

ALL PRAISE MICHAEL WINERIP: The press corps’ hacks will focus on Jayson Blair—and they’ll direct you away from the Blumenthal story. The Times has been a car-wreck for years—but only some episodes can be discussed. But despite the chaos that is the Times, Michael Winerip hits a massive grand slam in today’s “ON EDUCATION” column. We’ll discuss this piece in detail tomorrow. Meanwhile, all praise to Michael Winerip—and to Stephen Leggett, of Lake Silver Elementary.

Our press corps is defined by its stale, hackneyed work—but Winerip and his predecessor, Richard Rothstein, seem to write from a world away. This column really must be read. Tomorrow, incomparably, we say why.