You get only one guess.

Spencer Irvine of Accuracy in Academia reports.

Academic Blame Bush Syndrome

Robert Entman, a news media professor at George Washington University, recently wrote a book entitled, Scandal and Silence: Media Responses to Presidential Misconduct. It was far from that and a more appropriate title would have been The Bush Years: Which Scandal didn’t the Media Report and Why.

Entman teaches a course on media bias at GWU. The 212-page book could have included scandals from at least the first term of President Barack Obama, but they were conspicuously missing. Instead, Entman focused on the George W. Bush scandals, ranging from insider trading of Harken Energy, Bush’s time in the National Guard to WMDs in Iraq. He included examples from the Reagan administration, primarily the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980s, the alleged sex scandals of both Bob Dole and George H.W. Bush and former vice presidential candidate Dan Quayle’s Vietnam service controversy.

Entman must be suffering from a prolonged anti-Bush, pro-Gore 2000 election hangover when he suggested that the media’s lack of reporting on Bush’s service in the National Guard won the 2000 presidential election. Entman inferred that if Bush’s service was reported in its entirety, he could have lost the election in Florida due to the heavy presence of retired military veterans. He said the following:

“…Recalling that the 2000 election was decided by about 500 votes in Florida, where many retired military personnel live, it does not seem too much of a leap to suggest that framing Bush similarly to Quayle on this matter could have put Democratic candidate Al Gore in the White House.”

While criticizing Quayle and Bush for their service, Entman gave a pass to Clinton, even though he admitted that the former president exploited every loophole available and did not even try to enlist in any service (unlike Quayle and Bush). This admission only confirmed that Clinton was more of a draft dodger than Bush or Quayle were.

It begged the question, why focus on George W. Bush but not other scandals? In his own words, Entman said, “I believe concentrating on George W Bush yields far more insights into the evolution and operation of the scandal process than would rehashing Clinton’s many troubles.”