After Democrats experienced unexpected losses in the 2002 congressional elections, former Vice President Al Gore lashed out at Fox News Channel and other media outlets for favoring conservatives. Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle and former President Bill Clinton both have also brought up conservative media.

Dan Rather has not derided their comments, and probably will not, but that's exactly what he did about a speech President Richard Nixon's Vice President, Spiro Agnew, gave during Nixon's first term.

Both Agnew and Gore have some similarities. Both were vice presidents and both attacked certain media outlets. Both also had to deal with suggestions that they were not their "own man." At the 2000 Democratic convention, Gore had to stand before the delegates and tell them, "I am my own man," not Bill Clinton's. Rather was sure Agnew was anything but that. "He kept insisting that he was his own man," said Rather, but it was "only half true." Their similarities end when looking at the reaction they received after launching their respective attacks. The mainstream media wholeheartedly agreed with Gore's comments, but Agnew's comments were received with outrage and shock, including the reaction of Rather.

He said Agnew's comments were "inflammatory" and part of a "holy war" against the press.

In his November 13, 1969 speech Agnew spoke of the "nattering nabobs of negativism" and shined the spotlight on the men who run the three television news divisions:

The purpose of my remarks...is to focus your attention on this little group of men who not only enjoy a right of instant rebuttal to every Presidential address, but, more importantly, wield a free hand in selecting, presenting, and interpreting the great issues in our nation....

Now how is this network news determined? A small group of men, numbering perhaps no more than a dozen anchormen, commentators and executives producers, settle upon the 20 minutes or so of film and commentary that's to reach the public.... They decide what 40 to 50 million Americans will learn of the day's events in the nation and in the world.

We cannot measure this power and influence by the traditional democratic standards, for these men can create national issues overnight....

What do Americans know of the men who wield this power? Of the men who produce and direct the network news, the nation knows practically nothing. Of the commentators, most Americans know little other than that they reflect an urbane and assured presence seemingly well-informed on every important matter.

We do know that to a man these commentators and producers live and work in the geographical and intellectual confines of Washington, D.C., or New York City, the latter of which James Reston terms the most unrepresentative community in the entire United States....

How many marches and demonstrations would we have if the marchers did not know that the ever-faithful TV cameras would be there to record their antics for the next news show?

We've heard demands that Senators and Congressmen and judges make known all their financial connections so that the public will know who and what influences their decisions and their votes. Strong arguments can be made for that view. But when a single commentator or producer, night after night, determines for millions of people how much of each side of a great issue they are going to see and hear, should he not first disclose his personal views on the issue as well?

Agnew's comments did not go off very well with members of the media, and one of the most offended was White House correspondent Dan Rather, who spoke derisively of Agnew's "inflammatory" speech in a book on the Nixon administration he co-wrote during Nixon's second term, The Palace Guard:

Even more abrasive was the unleashing that fall of Spiro Agnew. His attack on the television networks (and sundry other groups that might, in any way, qualify as "effete snobs" or "nattering nabobs of negativism") was the opening round in the administration's holy war against the press, which, two years later, would be carried to the Supreme Court in the Pentagon Papers case, and would continue on afterward with ever-deepening hostility....

All this commotion was a far cry from the low-key, centrist approach, reminiscent of Ike. No longer was there any pretense that the Nixon White House might serve as a forum of conciliation, a temple of togetherness (109).

In the fall of '69, the malcontents on the right throughout the country were given a huge, juicy bone to chew on in the form of Spiro Agnew. His lively fusillades against the media and other "Eastern elitists" who indulged in effete snobbery were carefully orchestrated by the White House (170).

As Haldeman and the other hard-liners established control over the Nixon White House and engineered the post-Chappaquiddick shift to the right, they--and the President--decided to make Agnew a part of the action, to unleash him on the country as a respectable, white-collar version of George Wallace. Or as some observers said at the time, Spiro became "Nixon's Nixon," the Veep who traveled the low road for his President in much the same way Nixon had traveled it for Ike back in the fifties. Agnew rejoiced in his new celebrity status (it was nice to become known nationally for something besides ethnic faux pas), and as he continued to delight conservatives and infuriate liberals with his broadside attacks, he kept insisting that he was his own man, and was giving voice to his own views.

This was, at best, only half true. It is conceivable that Agnew sincerely believed in the hard-hitting speeches he made during this period, though it should not be forgotten that three years earlier, when his needs were different, he seemed just as "sincere" in presenting himself to the voters of Maryland as a friend of the blacks. In any event, regardless of how true or deep his own convictions were, Agnew was not, in this role, his own man. His most inflammatory speeches, including the famous diatribe against the television networks, were written by Pat Buchanan, who liked to boast that he was the most militant conservative on the White House staff. What's more, the entire Agnew "blitz," as it was called, proceeded under Haldeman's overall direction. And the

White House power brokers couldn't have cared less if Spiro was being "sincere" or not. Indeed, they were even somewhat amused by the suggestion that he had coherent ideas of his own. (When it came to the Veep's intellectual prowess, the prevailing view at the Nixon White House was that he might need a course in remedial reading in order to get through the speeches Buchanan wrote for him.) (255-256) print_file('footer'); ?>