NYC Political Reporters Admit They Didn't Scrutinize Bill de Blasio, Still Give Themselves High Journalistic Marks

You believe that there's nothing wrong, because that's what the media tells you in the newspapers. But watch them in this frank panel discussion, to hear some backchannel realness.

CUNY journalism director Greg David moderated a panel discussion on Nov. 19, 2013, amongst several reporters about the quality of the journalism coverage during the 2013 New York City mayoral campaign. The reporters, who took part on the panel, were Brian Lehrer of WNYC, Errol Louis of NY1, Joel Siegel of The New York Daily News, Kate Taylor of The New York Times, and Maggie Haberman of Politico. They were joined by two political insiders : Stu Loesser, the former spokesman for outgoing Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Scott Levenson, a lobbyist who administered a controversial $1 million Super PAC.

The self-congratulatory media panel, embedded with two political operatives to keep reporters in check, tell you that the media did a good job of reporting the truth during the mayoral campaign, even though the consensus that night was that the media failed at scrutinising Bill de Blasio's candidacy.

These major political reporters were asked to grade their own coverage of the 2013 NYC mayoral election, and their shocking answers will give you an idea about why voters are kept in the dark about serious problems with the corruptive influence of money and lobbyists in politics, as well as the growing problem of public corruption in city government. The reality is that voters are kept in the dark about these issues, and the media admits it doesn't scrutinize politicians. They even hate the word "vet."

Watch as Mr. Siegel says, "I think, collectively, the media saw 20 years of Republican and Republican/Independent rule and thought that was the norm -- where the norm really is this is a city that voted 80% for Barack Obama. It's a very liberal city, and we all sort of -- I believe -- misread how serious a contender Bill de Blasio really was from the very beginning. I don't think he got the scrutiny from the beginning that Chris Quinn got or Bill Thompson got."

Here are now the reporters scored their own political journalism :

REPORTER (OR POLITICAL OPERATIVE)	SCORE OF JOURNALISM PERFORMANCE (10 BEING THE HIGHEST)
Brian Lehrer, WNYC	7.0
Errol Louis, NY1	8.0
Joel Siegel, The New York Daily News	5.5
Kate Taylor, The New York Times	8.0
Maggie Haberman, Politico	7.0
Sue Loesser, former spokesman to      Mayor Michael Bloomberg	9.0
Scott Levenson, political operative	9.0

New Yorkers Continue To Be Deceived About Council Speaker Race

The NYTimes reports that the Council speaker race gets decided in "back rooms," but fails to report the back room deals.

After having been shut down last week-end, The NYTimes City Hall reporter Kate Taylor describes the Council speaker race with this one truth : the speakership "tends to be decided in back rooms." It's the process that is corrupt, and The NYTimes stops short of describing what back room deals are taking place, and that should be cause enough to once again sound the loud alarum bell to announce to the people the approach of corruption, but sadly the people have no say in the Council speaker race. Until the people demand a say, no alarum bell will ever be loud enough to drown out the backroom dealings. It doesn't matter who becomes speaker, because the winner can only win after brokering back room deals that only serve the winner. And the biggest loser in all this is not the speaker candidate who fails, but the public, who gets shut out of having any say -- and who gets deceived by media, like The NYTimes, who fail to report the true extent of the back room dealings.

Sam Roberts Stops City Hall Reporter Kate Taylor From Fully Discussing Council Speaker Backroom Deals

This Week In Self-Censoring, Corporate Newspaper Editors

On this week-end's edition of The New York Times Close-Up on NY1, the editor Sam Roberts asked City Hall reporter Kate Taylor to give a report back on the Council speaker race. Mr. Roberts only tolerated the most brief of report backs ever provided in the show's history. The instant that Ms. Taylor reported that leading Council speaker candidate Melissa Mark-Viverito may not have the votes needed to win the speakership, Mr. Roberts said, "We'll leave it right there," or something similar to that. Mr. Roberts had to cut off Ms. Taylor, before she could give the public a report back on all the corrupt backroom deals being wagered in the desperate power grab waged by Ms. Mark-Viverito's camp.

Even though very little scrutiny is being put on Councilmember Daniel Garodnick, Ms. Mark-Viverito's challenger for the speakership, both candidates have "manned up" with teams of real estate lobbyists/enablers. The Council speaker will be selected on Wednesday, when the next session of the municipal legislature will first convene in the new year. It remains to be seen if, before then, either side really becomes so disconsolate that they may actually break the kinds of laws that will trigger a federal corruption investigation. In the fight for the speakership, Ms. Mark-Viverito's team of lobbyists have thus far flouted campaign finance regulations, one of her lobbyists faces a Campaign Finance Board investigation, and Ms. Mark-Viverito has been engulfed in allegations of ethics violations.