< PREVIOUS ] [ 1996 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
than financial disclosure
James Fallows, a writer whom I admire, has just issued a
new book: Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine
American Democracy.
Naturally, I haven't read it yet, but I've heard plenty
about it. One Fallows contention is that programs like
The McLaughlin Group
are a big part of the
problem.
Nobody has time to be expert on everything, and yet the participants are supposed to say clever things about a wide variety of topics. Their comments thus tend toward the sound-bite and superficial, or else everybody focuses on what he can talk about -- substantive matters like Hillary's hair-do or tonal variations in Bob Dole's snarl.
Participation on these programs also means that you've got to be available in Washington, rather than doing some real reporting which might take you away from the studio.
So, why do journalists bother? If you're on TV often, then you're a celebrity. Corporations will want you to speak at their gatherings, and there's the prospect of speech honoraria at $10,000 or $15,000 a pop.
We expect politicians to account for their income sources. And it seems only fair that others in public positions, people who influence public affairs, should list their sources of income, too.
I know I would think twice before accepting a lucrative
speaking gig if the fine print at the end of the column
would thereafter say On Jan. 6, Ed Quillen received
$5,000 for presenting the keynote speech to the annual
convention of the American Association of Toxic Waste
Producers
or Ed Quillen is scheduled to receive
$1,000 for 15 minutes of sitting on a panel at the
quarterly meeting of the Colorado Society of Trans-Basin
Water Diverters.
Fortunately for my ethics, but unfortunately for my checking account, I never get such invitations. My speaking honoraria barely break into three digits. Even though I frequently swear that I will never again leave town, especially in the winter, for less than $1,000 and very generous expenses, it's a vow I often break.
Vanity conquers greed, and I will think It's so
flattering that these nice people would want to hear from
me, and since I'm a loudmouth who enjoys being the center
of attention, I'll be glad to speak to them even if they're
just giving me lunch.
Major-league speaking honoraria aren't the only route toward possible corruption, of course.
Many op-ed contributors are tied to think tanks which
are financed by ideologues of various stripes. The fine
print at the bottom might tell you that Pompous Pundit
is a senior research fellow at the Avarice Institute for
Policy Studies,
but they don't go on to tell you that
The Avarice Institute gets about 98 percent of its money
as a tax-deductible contribution from the Schamm Insurance
Corporation, which hasn't paid a claim since 1983.
This full-disclosure proposal might even be extended. Years ago, I heard Sen. Gary Hart speak at a Colorado Press Association Convention. He had no quarrel with requiring office-holders to file annual financial statements, available for public perusal, but he argued that newspaper publishers, broadcast station owners and the like should also disclose all their sources of income to the public.
It seemed reasonable, but beneath all this is a deeply
cynical assumption that everybody is for sale: Whose
wine I drink, his song I sing.
That if Congressman A
defends the Second Amendment, then he's a chattel of the
National Rifle Association, and that if Pundit B questions
NAFTA, she's a shill for Big Labor.
I suspect the truth is a little more complicated, and that Congressman A wouldn't change his tune even if he got a big donation from Handgun Control, Inc., and Pundit B would still have problems with NAFTA after getting a handsome check for speaking to the Association of Manufacturers.
The old saying about Follow the money
does
explain a lot of things, but it won't explain everything.
People believe a lot of things that they aren't paid to
believe.
But while the mood for considering reform is upon me, here's a suggestion.
Recently, various ethics groups have been pondering how to treat book royalties earned by public officials.
Forget that. Let's just require that all books be
written by the people that they're supposedly written by.
If Hillary Rodham Clinton actually wrote It Takes a
Village,
fine. If some research assistant did all the
work, then list her as the author.
Ditto for To Renew America. If the Speaker of the House of Representatives actually had time, among his other duties, to write a book, more power to him. It's a good thing for our polity and our society if our leaders explain in some detail their visions, concepts and reasoning. But if the book was actually put together by some unnamed hack, list the hack as author.
We should require truth in labeling
of the
publishing industry before we start trying for more
financial disclosures.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1996 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >