Taft was generally slow to act, and when he did, his actions often generated enemies, as in the Ballinger–Pinchot affair. Roosevelt was able to secure positive coverage in the newspapers; Taft had a judge's reticence in talking to reporters, and, with no comment from the White House, hostile journalists filled the gaps with quotes from Taft opponents.[231] And it was Roosevelt who engraved in public memory the image of Taft as a James Buchanan-like figure, with a narrow view of the presidency that made him unwilling to act for the public good. Anderson noted that Roosevelt's Autobiography (which placed this view in enduring form) was published after both men had left the presidency (in 1913), was intended in part to justify Roosevelt's splitting of the Republican Party, and contains not a single positive reference to the man Roosevelt had admired and hand-picked as his successor. While Roosevelt was biased,[232] he was not alone: every major newspaper reporter of that time who left reminiscences of Taft's presidency was critical of him.[233] Taft replied to his predecessor's criticism with his constitutional treatise on the powers of the presidency.