eorge W. Bush's Tuesday TV chat with Oprah Winfrey created a monster media buzz. The story and a photo of a relaxed Bush bantering with the talk host made Page 1 of The New York Times while pundits speculated feverishly about the political value of the buss he planted firmly on her cheek.
It's a busy week for the candidates humanizing themselves on the TV chatter circuit. For Bush, it's Winfrey and Regis Philbin, while Al Gore, fresh off his Winfrey appearance, yukked it up with Jay Leno. Ever since Bill Clinton donned a pair of shades and blasted out ''Heartbreak Hotel'' on the sax with Arsenio Hall in 1992, it's pretty much ''de rigueur,'' in the words of TV historian Alex McNeil, for politicians to expose their lighter side in pop culture venues. It's also considered to be a reasonably low-risk way to score political points.
But at least one analyst says that in the longer run, politicians and the body politic pay a price for this harmless-looking exercise. Larry Sabato, author of ''Peep Show: Media and Politics in the Age of Scandal,'' thinks politicians' efforts to use the media to transform themselves into just plain folk ''shrinks them'' and the office they seek.
''When I was growing up, we revered the presidency. We wanted them to be on a pedestal. It was an office that was always respected,'' he says. ''These candidates ... have lowered themselves to the point where they'll never be on a pedestal ... and you better believe that matters in governing.''
To be sure, some of these experiments have been clunkers. Clinton might have looked cool with Arsenio, but probably regretted telling MTV he preferred briefs to boxer shorts. McNeil recalls a surprisingly engaging Richard Nixon on Jack Paar's talk show in the early '60s, but his 1968 appearance on ''Laugh In'' was off kilter and goofy.
Still, Sabato's is a minority view. ''I'm for any way that isn't demeaning that gets politics into the popular culture,'' says Craig Crawford, editor of The Hotline political newsletter. ''I think we can learn more about a candidate in an hour on Oprah than during an angry press conference.''
McNeil says chats with Winfrey or Leno simply reflect the reality of a changing media culture since ''you gotta go where your voters are, and your voters aren't reading the newspaper now and they're not watching the network news.'' But CNN senior analyst William Schneider notes that if appearances on shows like Winfrey's work, ''it works among a tiny number of people'' who may not be regular voters. As to Sabato's concern, Schneider says candidates ''are only worried about winning. They don't worry about diminishing the presidency.''
Media bias perceived
A new survey taken for Editor & Publisher magazine indicates that the perception of media bias - particularly among Republicans - is alive and well. The September survey of nearly 2,000 adults found that almost 40 percent of the voters believe their newspaper has exhibited favoritism toward one of the presidential contenders, with Bush supporters far more inclined to cry foul. More than half of them believe the media are biased and of that group, about 80 percent feel Gore has been the beneficiary of friendlier converage. Conversely, only about 30 percent of the Gore backers alleged media bias, and a substantial chunk of them - 35 percent - agree with the Republicans who say the vice president is getting an easier ride.
Editor & Publisher features editor Greg Mitchell thinks the results suggest a ''blame the messenger'' response to Gore's big bounce. ''In my opinion, I would tend to support those who thought that Gore got gored pre-convention, and since then, he's gotten a sunnier spin,'' he adds. Now, ''the
polls are even and the coverage should be even. Everyone's had their day.''
Asked to name their key source of campaign news, 25 percent of the respondents selected cable TV, 23 percent said newspapers, and only 19 percent said network news, another clear indicator of network television's dramatically waning impact.
Corporate counterculture
In a case of synergy too good to be true, the Oct. 12 Rolling Stone magazine features expansive coverage of Cameron Crowe's new movie, ''Almost Famous,'' which is based on his experiences as a teen Rolling Stone writer chronicling the wondrous world of '70s rock 'n' roll. But Crowe fashioned a morality tale about the conflict between the pure passion that drove that music and the bean counters who soon arrived to corporatize the industry. On that score, Rolling Stone doesn't fare so well.
In one scene, members of the fictitious band Stillwater celebrate the news that their scruffy visages will grace the magazine's cover by breaking into a rowdy version of ''On the Cover of the Rolling Stone.'' Here's the roster of those who make the cover these days: Bare-chested actor Keanu Reeves; barely bikini-clad supermodel Gisele; pop Lolitas Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera in a spirited competition to bare the most midriff; and teen hearthrob actress Sarah Michelle Geller.
The irony of Crowe's cinematic longing for lost days of innocence seems lost on the editors who chose to hype the movie with its current version of the cover of Rolling Stone, a come-hither shot of the movie's half-clothed star, Kate Hudson.
