Jan. 15, 2007 – Page 169
It’s no wonder that Americans tune into “Hannity & Colmes,” “Hardball with Chris Matthews” and those other high-decibel shows for their daily dose of politics. The real McCoy can be a yawner when politicians control the cameras.
Despite all the changes on Capitol Hill the New Year brought, it looks like America won’t be seeing more lively coverage from inside the House chamber. One of House Speaker
Right now, every word spoken on the floor is broadcast live. But television coverage of Congress is stuck in the Huntley-Brinkley era. C-SPAN gets a static head shot of the person speaking — no reactions, no panning the chamber to see who’s listening, no leaders twisting members’ arms for votes the way Majority Leader Tom DeLay did in 2003 during the three-hour roll call on the Medicare drug bill.
That’s not to say C-SPAN hasn’t done an excellent job. Since floor cameras were allowed in 1979, C-SPAN has shown that the goings-on in Congress can be covered in a fair, impartial and respectful way. The feeds are also available to accredited news media. C-SPAN, a creation of the cable television industry, receives no government funding, and its operations are paid for by fees paid by cable and satellite affiliates that carry its programming. It is painstakingly objective and nonpartisan. “We’re not going in there to make members look ridiculous,” C-SPAN President Susan Swain told me. “That’s not the point. We want to provide the public with a more accurate view of what is happening.”
But to control the camera is to make an editorial judgment. The lens can be trained on a passionate orator or a snoozing pol. The person making the choice is doing journalism. Once C-SPAN gets control of the camera, other media companies may want a turn, too, or want their own cameras in the chamber. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.
This is a time of rapid change in media, technology and politics. Some newspaper and magazine reporters are now carrying video cameras along with their notepads. The future may usher in an age when print, online and broadcast news all converge and compete to provide streaming video of congressional debates and votes.
In the meantime, though, how does it look to have Congress controlling the only cameras on the House floor — especially when the new Speaker has pledged to make the 110th Congress “the most honest and open in history”?
Independent cameras are already allowed in committee meetings and joint sessions. During the State of the Union, the opening day of Congress and joint sessions, news media can bring their own cameras. That coverage is more lively and representative. When a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee pressed Hewlett Packard officials about spying on journalists and others, viewers got to see the red faces of the corporate honchos. It was like something out of “The Apprentice.”
Moreover, having politicians controlling the cameras can give viewers a distorted sense of what’s happening. Remember ‘Camscam’? In 1984, a group of Republicans (including then-backbencher Newt Gingrich) started taking advantage of the special-order sessions to rant against Democrats and posture about pet issues — knowing C-SPAN was providing them a national TV audience. Democratic Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill Jr., who controlled the cameras, ordered them to start panning to the empty chamber — sparking debate in the House, calls to C-SPAN and accusations by members of “underhandedness.”
But the change stuck. House camera rules are now inconsistent. Right now, the cameras on the House floor focus only on the person speaking during regular sessions. During special-order speeches, which are usually at the end of the day after legislative business is finished, cameras can pan the chamber. If it’s OK to see empty seats during the posturing, why not during debates on actual bills?
The National Press Club threw its weight behind the C-SPAN request, pointing out that voters have a right to know what their lawmakers are up to. “There’s no harm in letting an independent camera pan the floor,” said National Press Club President Jonathan D. Salant of Bloomberg News. “You can’t give too much information to the public about what its officials are doing.”
Allowing C-SPAN to control cameras on the floor may set a precedent that encourages others with cameras and a Hill press pass to demand access. But that’s no reason to stick with the status quo. Media companies are trying all kinds of innovations, from delivering news videos over the Web to allowing citizens to post their own content.
The tools we use are changing fast, and so is the culture, which gives Pelosi’s “dignity and decorum” argument a bit of a hollow ring. Lawmakers recently have been filmed using racial slurs on the stump, joking with Stephen Colbert about cocaine use, and slugging a U.S. Capitol Police officer while hurrying through security.
These days, being caught on TV catching 40 winks may not be the worst thing. It tells voters back home you’re not getting into trouble.
Contributing editor Elizabeth Wasserman is a Washington freelance writer. She can be reached at ewasserman@cq.com.