|
Media Myth: Taxation
with Misrepresentation
Networks call administration actions
‘taxpayer-funded’
while liberal priorities often treated as ‘government-funded’
“When it’s
taxpayer money, the taxpayers must ultimately decide if it’s worth
it.”
– Brian Williams, “NBC Nightly News,” March 7, 2006
“Taxpayers are obviously very concerned about where their money’s
going.”
– Tim Russert, NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Feb. 19, 2006
By Amy Menefee
Business & Media Institute
April 12, 2006
Executive Summary
When is a dollar a taxpayer dollar?
A. When it’s paying for stem cell research.
B. When it’s going to the military in Iraq.
C. When it’s supporting public education.
D. When it’s aiding sick and hungry Africans.
E. All of the above.
The correct answer, of course, is E. but that wasn’t
how broadcast journalists answered in the last year. They treated
taxpayer dollars unequally – claiming many were “government funding”
or “federal funding.”
Viewers’ ears are likely to perk up when their tax
dollars are mentioned, especially when they’re told those dollars
are going to waste. On the other hand, the government’s funding yet
another study isn’t exactly the most exciting of reports. The
difference between the two is all in how journalists frame the
story.
According to a Business & Media Institute review of a year’s
worth of “taxpayer” mentions on broadcast news, how the media report
on spending depends on the subject. “The U.S. government is spending
billions of your tax dollars fighting the war in Iraq and billions
more to rebuild the country,” said CBS’s Scott Pelley on the Feb.
10, 2006, “Evening News.” In contrast, when the subject was stem
cell research, NBC reporters mentioned support for “federal funding”
for the research three times in a July 29, 2005, “Nightly News”
report.
|
 |
 |
 |
| The "taxpayer-funded" PR
effort in Iraq |
 |
|
|
|
| Presidential gasoline
"cost taxpayers" |
 |
|
|
|
| "Federal
funding" for
stem cell research |
Two of the media’s favorite topics to criticize the
Bush administration – Iraq and Katrina – were treated as taxpayer
funds gone wrong. On the Jan. 6, 2006, “Early Show,” CBS’s Thalia
Assuras asked acting FEMA Director David Paulison: “Can you assure
the American people that FEMA is not wasting their money?” following
with “The taxpayers will be watching.”
Broadcasters even made a point of reminding viewers
that they were paying “upwards of $100,000 a year – taxpayer money”
for the White House executive chef (Mark Knoller, Aug. 14, 2005,
“CBS Evening News”) and gas for the president’s motorcade. On the
Sept. 27, 2005, “Good Morning America,” ABC’s Jessica Yellin
discussed President George W. Bush’s call for energy savings
following Katrina’s oil supply disruption. She then snarked about
the president’s own energy use. “When the president traveled less
than five miles to have dinner last night, he used five SUVs, four
vans and two limousines,” Yellin said. “It’s estimated filling up
all those tanks cost taxpayers more than $600.”
But when it came to massive amounts of foreign aid and
controversial funding for stem cell research, those endeavors were
often described as funded by the more benign, faceless “government”
or “federal” money.
Making those distinctions can affect what viewers take
away from a news story, said Business & Media Institute adviser John
Berthoud, president of the National Taxpayers Union. “Just as
politicians try to make government benefits as visible as possible,
and government costs as hidden as possible, members of the
media can strategically choose their language about who is paying
for a government program to try to influence viewers’ perceptions of
the program,” Berthoud said.
“A reporter will remind viewers that they ultimately
pay the cost of government when the reporter wants to subtly
influence the audience to dislike a program. But if the reporter
likes the expenditure, they will use the language of politicians in
describing who is paying for it,” he added.
The government has no money of its own – a fact the
media often forget. The
$2.4 trillion spent by the federal government in 2005 was
extracted from taxpayers. As NBC’s Brian Williams said on the
“Nightly News” March 7, 2006, “When it’s taxpayer money, the
taxpayers must ultimately decide if it’s worth it.”
It’s all taxpayer money – and the Business & Media Institute
highlights the media’s inconsistency on this subject.
What is taxpayer-funded?
“Funded by taxpayer dollars” has an ominous ring to it.
At the very least, it calls attention to the fact that individuals
across the country are sacrificing for a certain program to go
forward. Journalists used the term “taxpayer” to place emphasis on
many expenditures, with Katrina netting the most mentions.
▪ Katrina: On the Oct. 5, 2005, “NBC Nightly
News,” Lisa Myers did a one-sided story about FEMA contracts.
“Critics say again and again taxpayers are paying too much, driving
up the already-staggering costs of Katrina,” Myers said. She
interviewed a mobile home manufacturer and a roofer who didn’t get
government contracts, as well as a Democratic congressman who argued
that administration decision-makers had paid too much. She didn’t
interview anyone involved in the process, but only alluded: “The
Corps of Engineers says Akima could deliver the classrooms faster.”
▪ Iraq: The war has
produced a landslide of negative stories, as the MRC’s Rich Noyes
showed in a
2005 study. David Wright’s Feb. 18, 2006, “World News Tonight”
report dwelled on problems in Iraq and sent the bill to the American
taxpayers. “The U.S. taxpayers have spent nearly $5 billion so far
on reconstruction, but many Iraqis have yet to reap the benefits,”
Wright said on the ABC broadcast.
ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas mentioned the “intense battle for hearts and
minds” involved with in Iraq on the Dec. 14, 2005, “World News
Tonight,” teasing a story “inside the taxpayer-funded PR effort
touting Iraqi forces.”
▪ Tax breaks: Chip Reid reported on the energy
bill in Congress on the July 28, 2005, “Nightly News.” He referred
to “tax breaks and subsidies, most for the oil, gas, coal and
nuclear industries.” After showing clips of a Republican and
Democrat, Reid reiterated the Democratic position on tax breaks:
“calling it a massive giveaway of taxpayer dollars when oil
companies are making record profits.” The media have
repeatedly treated tax cuts and tax breaks as government
“expenditures,” even though that money was not the government’s to
begin with.
Reid had done a similar report the previous month.
Brian Williams introduced a “Fleecing of America” segment on the
June 3, 2005, “Nightly News,” lamenting a “corporate tax break” that
is “still being used today and costs the treasuries millions.” Reid
accused the tax break of “burning billions of dollars of taxpayers’
money,” ignoring the taxes paid by both the companies and their
shareholders.
What’s not taxpayer-funded
If something isn’t called “taxpayer-funded,” then it’s
funded by some faceless entity called the “government,” “federal
funds” or even “public money.” Using these terms separates the
spending from those who fund it.
▪ Stem cell research: The media have given
favorable treatment to stem cell research, as the MRC’s
CyberAlert has documented. On the July 29, 2005, “NBC Nightly
News,” Brian Williams introduced a story about Senate Majority
Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) breaking “with the President’s position
on federal funding for stem-cell research.” Chip Reid continued that
Frist had “declared his support for expanded federal funding of
stem-cell research using human embryos that would otherwise be
discarded by fertility clinics.” Reid later added that “Fifty
percent of Americans support federal funding of embryonic stem-cell
research.”
Likewise, ABC’s Bob Woodruff discussed a possible ban
on “cloning to create embryos for stem cell research” on the March
27, 2005, “World News Tonight.” He said “the United States has
already effectively banned federal funding, but the states are
picking up where the federal government left off, and public
spending actually tripled in the last year.”
▪ Public Education: How education was funded
depended on what sort of education the journalist meant. On the July
2, 2005, “Saturday Today,” NBC’s Pete Williams discussed Justice
Sandra Day O’Connor’s voting record. He said she had “approved
taxpayer-funded vouchers for sending students to religious schools.”
Of course, all public schools are taxpayer-funded. Those who choose
to send their children to private or “religious” schools essentially
pay for two educations – the one their children receive, and the one
everyone else’s children receive.
But in a May 2, 2005, “Closer Look” segment about the
“No Child Left Behind” education program, ABC focused on the
“federal” funding of education. Elizabeth Vargas opened the “World
News Tonight” report with “complaints that … Washington is not
providing enough money to pay for the improvements.” Bill Redeker’s
report detailed the state of Utah’s plans to rebel against “No Child
Left Behind,” which might mean losing “$76 million in federal
funding” or as Redeker said later, “giving up federal funding.”
▪ Foreign Aid: First Lady Laura Bush gave NBC’s
Ann Curry a lesson on the July 12, 2005, “Today.” Curry acted as
though President Bush had been giving his own money to foreign
relief: “You know, your husband has significantly contributed to
AIDS in Africa …” but said that “the American people have heard the
criticism that’s he’s not done enough to truly make a difference.”
Mrs. Bush corrected her: “Well, I think there – I think we’re really
seeing a difference, and not just for money that comes from the
United States government and from the taxpayers …”
In a story about the Group of Eight (G-8) wealthiest
nations’ Summit, CBS reporter Allen Pizzey said protesters “want the
rich nations to do something about African debt and aid.” In the
July 5, 2005, “CBS Evening News” story, a clip of President Bush
speaking added the real source of that “aid”: “Why does it make
sense for me, as the person who’s supposed to be wise and guardian
of the taxpayers’ money, to send money to a country and to have –
and know the government’s going to steal it? That doesn’t make any
sense.” The Business & Media Institute found the media cheerleading the
Live 8 concerts last year and celebrity pleas for G-8 nations to
contribute more taxpayer-funded aid to poor countries.
▪ Local services: On the July 31, 2005, “CBS
Evening News,” Joie Chen reported on the city of Alexandria, Va.,
and its new “free” wireless Internet program. She referred to it as
paid for by “the city,” while United States Telecom Association CEO
Walter McCormick portrayed it more accurately as “a questionable use
of taxpayer dollars.”
▪ School meals: Former Sen. Bob Dole reminded
viewers of another way to describe taxpayer-funded programs on the
March 7, 2006, “Today” show. He was discussing a public school
breakfast program with NBC’s Katie Couric. Couric asked him, “And
when you say eligible kids, this is a government-funded program …”
Dole interrupted: “Entitlement.”
Methodology
The Business & Media Institute looked at stories on ABC, CBS
and NBC from March 9, 2005, to March 9, 2006, and analyzed
journalists’ use of the word “taxpayer” to describe U.S. government
expenditures. Mentions were counted only if a reporter or anchor
used the word “taxpayer” in that context. Stories pertaining to
citizens paying taxes (mostly around April 15) were disregarded. In
all, 155 mentions of “taxpayer” were analyzed, with a few stories
containing more than one different context for the word. If separate
mentions were given in a show’s introduction and a story later in
the show, both were counted.
Recommendations for taxpayer watchdogs:
Be consistent. If something is paid for by the government,
that means it’s the taxpayers – no matter what the project is.
Don’t confuse tax breaks with government programs. One lets
people keep more of their money; the other takes their money and
uses it elsewhere.
Distribute cheap shots evenly. If you’re going to point out
how much taxpayer money the president spends to go out to dinner,
why not investigate how much of the public dime Democrats are
spending for travel, etc.?
|
