[Kurtz:] Welcome back to RELIABLE SOURCES. President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin completed a three-day summit this week that included talk of reducing nuclear warheads. But it was also filled with feel-good activities down at the Texas ranch. And an interrogation of sorts from students at a local school.
[Unidentified Male:] I was wondering if you've come to a conclusion about whether or not to deploy the national missile defense system?
[President George W. Bush:] Are you with the national press corps, or? I notice my friends in the national press corps are giving you a thumbs-up.
[Kurtz:] Mark Whitaker in New York, the coverage of the summit, these guys clearly got along very well, but was the media coverage skeptical enough? I mean they didn't have a whole lot of hard accomplishments here.
[Whitaker:] You know I think in general, I mean you talk about stories that have been lost a little bit or haven't been given enough emphasis in the wake of the terrorist attacks. I mean I think the evolving relationship between the U.S. and Russia and between Bush and Putin is fascinating. I mean it has many good aspects, but I think there are a lot of questions to be raised, and I think that all of us have to get around to exploring them in greater depth. I mean you're right in fact, not much of substance was accomplished. Missile defense, NATO, all of those things were kind of put off for another day. On the other hand, you know I think that, you know, warm relations between the leaders of the super powers is meaningful. You look at Reagan and Gorbachev and their personal chemistry, and this was an objective that George Bush set for himself, that he was going to charm Vladimir Putin and he succeeded. And I guess all I can say is I'm so glad we didn't at least have to watch them dancing the Cotton-Eyed Joe. I think that might have been a little too much.
[Kurtz:] It's hard to imagine a meeting between the President of the United States and the President of Russia being overshadowed as Mark Whitaker said.
[Brownstein:] I think one thing Condy Rice said this week, was quoted as saying, I think actually explained some of the coverage as well, where she said that post September 11th, missile defense in particular is not as big a piece of the overall U.S. Russia relationship as it was before. And I think that was very much reflected in the coverage, where the fact that they continue to cooperate on the crisis in Afghanistan and the building of a government and the military campaign, it really does overshadow the importance, the continued deadlock on missile defense. Not that that isn't important, it's just a new reality and there are new issues in the room and new issues in the press to focus on.
[Kurtz:] So the media can't walk and chew gum and cover a war in Afghanistan and this at the same time?
[Thompson:] Well, that's a function of 24-hour cable. That's a serial enterprise. It can only cover one story intensely at a time. But you've got two young presidents, early in their tenure. They're becoming friends. I mean things could be worse. I think what we're seeing here is a tilling of the soil for future harvests, and I think the lack of agreement this week really isn't that important, given what else was going on.
[Kurtz:] Speaking of stories being overshadowed, we had the media recount in Florida. After 10 months, nearly $1 million, consortium news organizations including CNN, "Washington Post," "New York Times," "Wall Street Journal," Tribune Company including the "LA times," and it produced a variety of headlines. The "Washington Post" says, "Florida recounts would have favored Bush." A number of newspapers wrote that. But here's the Chicago Tribune with "Still Too Close to Call."
[Brownstein:] Yes, most people are in the "Post" camp. I mean, obviously the most conventional scenarios of what was in the realm of the possible at the time, the recount concluded that Bush would have still won. I mean the reality was...
[Kurtz:] My question is not who would have won. My question is, after all this time, was this worth doing?
[Brownstein:] Well, the intermediate events made it probably not worth doing, except there's a historical record. For all practical purposes, September 11 among other things, ended the election of 2000. It was the moment at which Bush became President in the minds of all Americans, even those that didn't vote for him. I mean right up until September 10, Howie, you were still getting 40 to 45 of the people in the polls saying they didn't think Bush had the experience and skills to be president, most of them, of course, being Gore voters. I mean a 48-48 split in polling, so people were still divided. But that really ended the question and I think for most voters and for most Americans at this point, this is superfluous. It's not a bad thing to get it. It's a good thing to have the historical record, but it doesn't have much contemporary impact.
[Kurtz:] Mark Whitaker, "Newsweek" opted out of this expensive effort, so can I conclude that you along with much of the public thinks that this whole recount was a bit of a yawn?
[Whitaker:] Well, I mean we did it for reasons really of our deadline and that basically after a lot of negotiation, it was pretty clear that on our deadline we couldn't make much use of the results.
[Kurtz:] Right, bottom line there?
[Whitaker:] You know, I think the bottom line is, you know, after all this time and all that money, you know, it shows that it was still in the margin of error and I think we kind of knew that at the beginning.
[Kurtz:] That sounds like an awful lot of work, money, effort expended for a finding that didn't really take us that much beyond the last media obsession which was the 2000 elections.
[Thompson:] Howie, good journalism requires drilling a lot of dry holes. This might have been one of them, but you've got to drill ten dry holes for every gusher, and maybe I think some of the folks that have invested so much money might have overplayed the story a little bit. I do think, as Ron says, it is important for the historical record.
[Brownstein:] Still going back to what the election commissioner in one county in Florida said, "the margin of victory in this election was less than the margin of error" and that is the reality and I doubt that any recount would have found some decisive result. This was one in which you can argue forever. It had to be settled. It had to be stopped and it was.
[Kurtz:] If there wasn't a war in Afghanistan, this would be argued by every talk show for cable for a couple weeks on, because it would be the juiciest thing around. Mark Whitaker in New York, Ron Brownstein, Mark Thompson, thanks very much for joining us. When we come back, the spin cycle on the nation's media critic- in-chief.