Tag: deflategate
Broadcast Networks’ Climate Coverage Was Miserable During This Election Year

Broadcast Networks’ Climate Coverage Was Miserable During This Election Year

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet. 

Secretary of State John Kerry, in Marrakesh this week for international climate talks, recently said it “pissed him off” that there wasn’t a single question asked about climate change during the six hours of televised presidential and vice presidential debates prior to the election.

Kerry’s annoyance is justified. Given rapidly rising global temperatures, dramatic extreme weather events, the global agreement to curb carbon emissions, and stark divisions among the major party candidates, climate change deserved to be one of the most talked-about issues of the campaign. And yet, outside of a passing reference during the “town hall” presidential debate, the candidates were not asked about it, despite the fact that queries about climate change were the fourth most-popular question category submitted by the public for the town hall debate, demonstrating that voters wanted to hear about it.

But it wasn’t only the debates.

Since January, the broadcast television networks barely reported on climate, even though this year is on pace to be the hottest one in the books, setting a record for the third year in a row. Out of more than 1,700 evening, morning, weekly and Sunday public affairs news programs aired between January 1 and October 31, the four commercial broadcast networks that provided moderators for the debates — ABC, Fox, CBS and NBC — collectively aired only 32 segments and 24 briefs on the topic, a total of 56 pieces. And most of the evening news segments ran less than two and a half minutes in length, while each brief was no more than three or four sentences long.

By contrast, the commercial broadcast networks found time for considerably less important topics. Take the coverage of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and the fallout over his “Deflategate” football tampering scandal. During the first nine months of this year, ABC, CBS and NBC aired 33 segments and 40 briefs on Brady, for a total of 73 pieces. (Fox’s lone national news show somehow missed the story.) Nearly half of the pieces — 34 — were on Deflategate and Brady’s four-game suspension. The rest reported on such riveting topics as Brady’s haircut, his new $200 cook book, and his new family dog, Fluffy.

Rating the Networks

Fox Broadcasting Company — not to be confused with 21st Century Fox’s cable channel Fox News — was by far the worst offender. The network doesn’t have a nightly news program, but it does air Fox News Sunday, a public affairs show hosted by Chris Wallace, the moderator of the third and final presidential debate. Since the beginning of the year, Fox News Sunday only broached the topic of climate change once, during an interview Wallace did with Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein on September 4. Stein mentioned it in one sentence, and Wallace changed the subject. But Fox News Sunday was not alone. The topic didn’t come up on the other Sunday morning political gabfests either unless a guest mentioned it in passing. More often than not that guest was Bernie Sanders. (Given the incidental nature of these remarks, they aren’t included in the segment or brief totals.)

ABC, where town hall debate co-moderator Martha Raddatz works, was only marginally better than Fox, and it runs a lot more news programming. The network has aired only three segments on climate change this year, and they were all variations of the same story. On January 6, Good Morning America ran a relatively long segment on a melting glacier in Iceland that is retreating about a hundred yards every year. Nightline aired a shorter version of the piece that night, and the next morning, Good Morning America did a follow-up. Since then, the network aired only seven climate-related briefs, six on Good Morning America and one on World News Tonight, which merely reported that bumblebees are “threatened by climate change” in a two-sentence piece.

Over the same time frame, NBC aired 11 segments and two briefs on climate change. Seven segments were on Today, and the other four ran on NBC Nightly News, which is anchored by Lester Holt, the moderator of the first presidential debate.

Two of the four Nightly News segments piggybacked on other news stories. On August 20, an NBC correspondent took time off from the Rio Olympics to talk with locals about deforestation. Two weeks later, on September 3, the show reported on the G-20 Economic Summit in China, where President Obama and Chinese President Xi formally committed to the Paris climate agreement. All of the individual segments were well done, but given the magnitude and urgency of climate change, the fact that NBC’s premier daily news program ran only four segments on the topic over the course of nine months is incomprehensible.

CBS, whose correspondent Elaine Quijano moderated the vice presidential debate, aired the most segments and briefs of the broadcast networks — but that’s still not saying much. Nearly all of the briefs — 14 of 15 — and more than half of the segments — 11 of 18 — were on CBS This Morning or CBS Sunday Morning.

Two segments on The CBS Evening News linked climate change with extreme weather events. A July 20 segment on the heat wave broiling residents in more than two dozen states featured a National Weather Service meteorologist explaining how climate change works in simple, understandable terms. Two months later, on September 17, the show reported that the “world is on pace for the warmest year on record, breaking marks set in 2015, 2014 and 2010. But scientists say it’s more than temperatures. They have connected man-made climate change to deadly heat waves, droughts, and devastating floods.”

Those Evening News stories were excellent, but they were two of only five climate-related segments the show aired since the beginning of the year. 60 Minutes, meanwhile, sent a correspondent to Greenland to meet with climate scientists for a segment that aired on January 31 and again on July 31. That was it for the newsmagazine, but its competition at ABC and NBC — 20/20 and Dateline — avoided the issue altogether.

Millions are Watching, and They’re Not Being Served

The relatively few climate-related segments that did air on ABC, CBS and NBC since January demonstrate that the networks are quite capable of covering the subject in a compelling way. The amount of attention they devoted, however, was nowhere near what it should have been given the magnitude of the problem.

Besides their scanty coverage, the networks missed some obvious opportunities to make the climate connection. For example, all of the evening newscasts reported on the devastating rains and flooding in Louisiana last August. According to Climate Nexus, the storm that triggered the flooding “was supercharged by running over a warmer ocean and through an atmosphere made wetter by global warming.” No matter, according to Media Matters, none of the five NBC Nightly News segments, three World News Tonight segments, or three CBS Evening News segments on the floods cited the climate link. That’s just bad reporting.

One other point to consider is when the networks aired the bulk of their climate stories and briefs. Nearly two-thirds of the segments (20 of 32) aired on one of the network morning shows, as did more than 85 percent of the briefs (21 of 24). Why is that important? Because nearly twice as many viewers watch the evening news shows.

That said, despite the fact that the legacy broadcast networks have lost ground to cable and online sources in recent years, all of their news shows still command sizable audiences. According to figures from the week of October 24, slightly more than 23 million people watched one of the three broadcast networks’ evening newscasts. ABC’s World News Tonight led the pack with an audience of nearly 8.19 million viewers, just edging out NBC Nightly News for the top spot. The CBS Evening News came in last with 6.79 million viewers that week.

Fortunately, to paraphrase a Nobel Prize-winning poet, you don’t need a TV network to know which way the wind blows. Despite Donald Trump’s well-publicized contention that climate change is a Chinese-inspired hoax, nearly three-quarters of American voters now say global warming is happening and nearly 70 percent support a carbon tax.

When the story of this past election is written, however, a glaring and mystifying fact for historians will no doubt be how little attention was paid to perhaps the most important issue of our time. And the failure of the commercial broadcast networks to adequately address climate change should be front and center in that story. Their track record covering climate change this year has been so pathetic, it arguably violates the spirit — if not the letter — of the federal requirement that broadcast networks serve the public interest.

Elliott Negin is a senior writer at the Union of Concerned Scientists. His articles have appeared in the Atlantic Monthly, Columbia Journalism Review, The Hill and many other publications.

IMAGE: Photo Credit: Gil C / Shutterstock.com

Judge Tosses Tom Brady’s ‘Deflategate’ NFL Suspension

Judge Tosses Tom Brady’s ‘Deflategate’ NFL Suspension

By Joseph Ax and Nate Raymond

NEW YORK (Reuters) — New England Patriots star quarterback Tom Brady’s “Deflategate” suspension was thrown out by a federal judge in New York on Thursday, following a seven-month standoff between the National Football League and its players union.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman vacated NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s decision in July to uphold Brady’s four-game suspension over his alleged role in a scheme to deflate footballs used during a January playoff victory.

Goodell’s ruling, Berman found, was plagued by “several significant legal deficiencies,” including a failure to notify Brady beforehand that his alleged conduct could be punished by suspension.

“The court finds that Brady had no notice that he could receive a four-game suspension for general awareness of ball deflation by others or participation in any scheme to deflate footballs,” Berman wrote.

The ruling is unlikely to be the last word on the matter, which has dominated sports radio, made national headlines and inspired nicknames like “Deflategate” and “Ballghazi.” The NFL can appeal Berman’s decision, a process that will take months to resolve.

Neither the NFL nor the players union immediately commented on the decision.

In the meantime, Brady can take the field on Sept. 10 when the Patriots open their season against the Pittsburgh Steelers at home. He had been suspended until an Oct. 18 clash against the Indianapolis Colts.

Brady was suspended over the footballs used in the Patriots’ 45-7 postseason victory against the Colts that sent them to the Super Bowl, where they defeated the Seattle Seahawks 28-24.

Before the case went to federal court, Ted Wells, a lawyer hired by the NFL to investigate the incident, found it was “more probable than not” that Brady was “generally aware” that two low-level Patriots employees had conspired to let air out of the footballs, which can make them easier to grip. Wells’ 243-page report formed the basis for Brady’s suspension.

But Berman said that was not enough to justify the suspension and criticized Goodell for saying that Brady deserved the same penalty as a player who used steroids.

The judge also said Brady’s lawyers were improperly barred from cross-examining the NFL’s general counsel, Jeff Pash, who helped lead the Deflategate probe, and were unfairly denied access to certain investigative notes.

The NFL and the players union had engaged in settlement talks for weeks with Berman, who urged them to find an acceptable solution. But a deal never emerged, even though Berman said this week they “tried quite hard.”

Photo: New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady exits the Manhattan Federal Courthouse in New York, August 31, 2015. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

The Sound And The Fury Of Deflategate

The Sound And The Fury Of Deflategate

The bombast and grandiosity of NFL football have always put me off. Fans too often treat ballgames as if they were wars between rival tribes or nation states, symbolic struggles between good and evil. As somebody who watches probably 150 Major League Baseball games a year, I find the hype alternately exhausting and ridiculous.

So no, I don’t have even a fan’s stake in “Deflategate,” the highly publicized battle between the NFL front office and the New England Patriots over the allegation that the Patriots cheated their way to the Super Bowl by letting air out of game balls to make them easier to grip. Or something. It’s clear that pounds per square inch had little to do with the 45-7 beatdown the Patriots put on the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC Championship Game

In baseball, only umpires handle game balls. Doctoring them with pine tar, sandpaper, or saliva is against the rules, but guys have pitched their way into the Hall of Fame doing it and fans mostly admire their gamesmanship. It’s clear that NFL rules pretty much encourage customizing footballs, just as it’s clear that slight differences in pressure mean nothing to anybody except the guy throwing them.

Which brings us to Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and what really interests me about “Deflategate” — the way it exemplifies the great Dionysian Cult of Celebrity Worship that governs so much of American public life. Figuratively speaking, we turn people into demigods only to envy and destroy them.

Writing in the Boston Globe, Neal Gabler thinks, “it speaks to a sea change in our perception of human nature. Whether it is Brady, or Hillary Clinton and her emails, or Bill and his Foundation, or Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, we reflexively now always assume the worst about people. No one gets the benefit of the doubt.”

I wouldn’t go that far, but Gabler’s examples are well chosen. It’s certainly true that once somebody like Brady (or Hillary Clinton) has been targeted, it’s almost impossible for them to get even-handed treatment in the scandal-mongering media.

“Deflategate” has been fueled by inaccurate, insider-driven reporting from the get go. As usual, Bob Somerby’s Daily Howler website has been all over it: “As with most of our consensus scandals,” he writes, “the scandal our press corps has dubbed ‘Deflategate’ began with some false information… At ESPN and at NBC Sports, major journalists attributed this false information to unnamed ‘NFL sources.’ Apparently, the bad information was being dispensed by people within the league.”

ESPN’s investigative reporter Chris Mortensen got the party started just before the Super Bowl:

The NFL has found that 11 of the New England Patriots’ 12 game balls were inflated significantly below the NFL’s requirements, league sources involved and familiar with the investigation of Sunday’s AFC Championship Game told ESPN…The investigation found the footballs were inflated 2 pounds per square inch below what’s required by NFL regulations.

A veritable chorus of televised outrage began that has basically never let up. NBC Sports correctly reported what we now know from the league’s own Wells Report: that the real numbers were closer to one pound under the 12.5 psi (pounds per square inch) standard — which is pretty much what the physics of gases would predict of a ball inflated in a 70-degree locker room and exposed to mid-40s temperatures for a couple of hours.

However, hardly anybody outside Boston noticed. According to the Patriots organization, the NFL forbade them from releasing these facts. The league also sent the team a misleading letter claiming that a ball intercepted by a Colts linebacker measured 10.1 psi.

Wrong again.

The offending football was measured three times. Again via the Wells Report, the resulting numbers were 11.45 psi, 11.35 psi, and 11.75 psi.

So why are we still talking about this foolishness? Incredibly, because NFL investigator Ted Wells decided the referee must have been wrong about which of two gauges he’d used to measure the footballs. Seemingly because if the referee had been right, then there would have been zero evidence of tampering and nothing to investigate. All the rest is a poorly written novel.

Anyway, here’s veteran sportswriter Frank Deford on NPR, explaining the imagined motives of that bad novel’s villain:

Sure, deflating the balls must’ve helped the Patriots but maybe more it helped pretty Tom Brady, the Golden Boy, hang on to that immortality mode for an overtime…it was vanity as much as victory that drove Tom Brady…Oh, well, he still has his looks. I wonder if it’ll be just as difficult for him when his beauty starts to fade as it was back when he realized that his skills were beginning to deflate.

Any questions? For sheer, unadulterated bitchiness, I don’t believe the third runner-up in the Miss Alabama Pageant could top that.

So why would the NFL want to tear down one of its marquee stars? Beats me. The old saw probably says it best: “Never ascribe to conspiracy that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.”

Photo: New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady speaks to the media at a press conference at Gillette Stadium on Thursday, Jan. 22, 2015. The press conference centered around the fact that 11 of 12 Patriots game balls were underinflated according to NFL rules during the first half of the AFC Championship victory over the Colts. (Brad Horrigan/Hartford Courant/TNS)

Tom Brady Should Sue Goodell’s Pants Off

Tom Brady Should Sue Goodell’s Pants Off

By Gil Lebreton, Fort Worth Star-Telegram (TNS)

Considering that he has amassed career earnings of $150 million and that his supermodel wife Gisele banked $47 million herself just this past year, it’s probably ludicrous to think that Tom Brady lies awake these nights, worrying about Roger Goodell.

But it’s a good thing that his lawyers are, at least.

Sue Goodell. Sue his pants off, Tom.

Please spare me your righteous indignation about NFL integrity and the New England Patriots’ rap sheet and coach Bill Belichick’s tendency to fondle the loopholes.

We are talking about the air in footballs here, not knocking out spouses or switching a child until he bleeds. Did you even know there was a rule about air pressure before Deflategate?

When we were growing up, the kid down the street always liked to use his ball — the one he got for Christmas with the stripes on it, college style — when he quarterbacked our touch football games.

We preferred our old scuffed football. No problem. Both sides could use what they want.

How the Patriots’ interpretation of this time-honored sandlot protocol grew into a national scandal would be funny, if Goodell hadn’t gone all medieval on the thing.

An original two-game suspension for Ray Rice, but a four-game suspension for Brady?

Sue Goodell’s pants off, Tom.

Clearly the commissioner, emboldened by hoodwinking the players’ union into handing him deity-like powers, is making up punishments as he goes along. His handling of the New Orleans Saints’ imaginary Bountygate scandal was only the first hint.

This time he waited for “independent” investigator Ted Wells’ 243-page report, which concluded that the Patriots’ deflating was “more probable than not.”

Goodell’s sword was swift. Brady was suspended four games without pay for the 2015 season — which will include a road game against the Dallas Cowboys on October 11. The Patriots were also fined one million dollars, plus ordered to forfeit their No. 1 draft pick in 2016 and No. 4 in 2017.

Brady’s lawyer filed an immediate appeal on his behalf. Cowboys fans may want to follow the progress of that appeal.

The NFL Players Association, meanwhile, is trying to get Goodell dismissed from hearing the appeal of the case since the Patriots intend to call him as a witness.

Director DeMaurice Smith and the players’ union brought this upon themselves by treating Goodell’s magic-wand powers as a bargaining chip in the last contract negotiations.

Now the union finds itself pulling the rope, trying to drag ashore lost leverage while unpopularly defending the likes of Rice, Greg Hardy, and Adrian Peterson.

Brady? Oh, he’ll be fine. He remains adored by many, even beyond New England. And he still gets to keep the $47 million girl.

His legacy tarnished? Oh, please. For using a football that felt slightly more comfortable in his hand?

And if his suspension isn’t reduced on appeal, consider the trade-off. There isn’t a coach in the league who wouldn’t trade a four-game suspension for four Lombardi trophies.

In the end, despite his arrogant facade and $44 million annual salary, Goodell will take the biggest hit. It’s one thing for a rogue owner like Jerry Jones to profess his loyalty for the commissioner. It’s quite another that Goodell has angered Bob Kraft, the powerful Patriots owner who was once his ally.

Despite what Goodell says, Deflategate has never been about integrity and fairness. Nobody hacked into any Seattle Seahawks computers here.

From the beginning, this has been much ado about nothing. It’s been about NFL fans’ disdain for Belichick and their jealousy of Brady, the luckiest football player alive.

Goodell had to do something, and now he’s got half of America again questioning his integrity and job performance.

No objections here, your honor.

Sue his pants off.

Photo: Keith Allison via Flickr