logo
When did the media go wrong? A new book blames Robert Caro.

When did the media go wrong? A new book blames Robert Caro.

Yahoo24-02-2025
Every election prompts months of media handwringing — which tweet, which interview, which embarrassing question really made them hate us this time?
In a new book,, the author Marc Dunkelman goes a bit further into history to pinpoint where American media lost its way — and lands on the glorious summer of 1974, when the Washington Post took down Richard Nixon and the New Yorker published four parts of a monumental biography of New York's great builder, Robert Moses. And his media villain is a man Dunkelman described to me as 'Abbie Hoffman in a tweed suit': Robert Caro, the revered, now 89-year old author of The Power Broker who is now working on the fifth volume of his biography of President Lyndon Johnson.
The 1,246-page is a legend of American biography, and sits on the shelves of most journalists. (Mine, I noticed this week, was leaning dangerously toward the sofa, and so I moved it and weighed it — 3 pounds, 3 ounces by my kitchen scale.)
By the time I read it in the late 1990s, it was received wisdom — detached from any time and place, and from any sense that it advanced a political agenda. It was both a brilliant exploration of the inner workings of mid-20th century government power and a cautionary tale of how The Establishment used that power to drive highways through neighborhoods, replace 'slums' with apartment buildings, and, well, build a lot of very nice parks.
Dunkelman puts the book back into context: 'When, during the Watergate summer of 1974, Robert Caro published his voluminous takedown of Robert Moses, the spellbinding narrative mirrored what was, nay then, an entirely familiar worldview. Moses had been a progressive … a man who believed unerringly in the wisdom of experts,' he writes. The exposé, 'released within weeks of Nixon's resignation, was yet more evidence of power gone awry.'
Earlier journalists had 'made a practice of taking public officials at their word.' (Muckrakers, like the consequential Jack Anderson, who broke much of the Watergate story but has largely been erased from its high-minded history, were confined to the margins as problematic gossip-mongers.) But there had been a cultural change: 'Boomers entering the news business in the 1960s weren't inclined to accept government claims so uncritically, and for good reason.'
Dunkelman argues that Watergate, and embodied a new sort of negative naivete: a reflexive skepticism of the use of power. The role of journalism became, as you'll often hear, to hold power to account — hardly to celebrate its successes, or even to recognize them. 'The individual has to yield in matters of this kind to the entire country, to the advantages and needs of the majority of the people,' Moses protested, after people stopped listening to him. 'If not, we wouldn't build anything!'
Caro didn't respond to an email inquiry about Dunkelman's line on him, or the broader reconsideration of Moses.
Dunkelman's book captures a rising tide in Democratic politics that sometimes goes under the 'YIMBY' ('yes in my backyard') heading.
This pro-growth liberalism has been brewing for years. The blogger Matt Yglesias proposed in in 2020 that the United States dominate its global competitors by tripling its populationa premise that was (obviously) not immediately embraced by either political party. A wing of the Democratic Party, beginning in San Francisco, has made a crusade of killing restrictive zoning regulations, sometimes pushing conservatives skeptical of an influx of big buildings into opposing growth in favor of a regulatory state.
The case has continued to develop, though, and its proponents are trying out a new label: the 'abundance agenda.' Ezra Klein's and Derek Thompson's much-anticipated new book Abundance is likely to focus the conversation around these arguments this spring. They make the case that a successful Democratic Party — and its cities — must rally around an idea of a future in which the price and quality of housing falls the way it has for consumer goods like flatscreen TVs. And they argue that Democrats' doctrinaire insistence on restraining the private sector in the first instance — through a blind embrace of regulations on business and technology — has cost them the ability to govern.
Dunkelman came to this subject in a familiar way: reading as he took the train into New York City, and disembarked in Penn Station. 'I would close the book, gather my belongings, and climb up into the daylight through the dingy, fetid basement corridors that serve as the city's front door,' he recalls.
My weekly trips to Washington take me through the gorgeous, airy Moynihan Train Hall, jammed to completion by former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. (The media coverage of its opening was mixed. Architecture critics called it 'glorious' and 'stunning.' 'Homeless feel unwelcome' without benches to sleep on, The City reported. The New York Post broke the news that the pressure of finishing the project had contributed to an executive's suicide.)
New York's government is, again, at a low, and a mayor's race is underway. Cuomo is likely to run, and he's long expressed a theory of government that harkens back to the progressive era: that in an age of public distrust, the best way to restore faith is to build and fix big, literal, public works — Moynihan, La Guardia Airport, the former Tappan Zee Bridge, now named after his father. I asked him last week about whether New York should reclaim the title of the biggest building in the world: 'Al Smith, [in the] midst of the Depression, [built] the Empire State building in one year. Yes, we can.'
A Brooklyn state senator, Zellnor Myrie, is running as the YIMBY candidate, proposing that the city put 85,000 apartments in whole 'new neighborhoods,' part of a plan for a million new homes that could add millions in populationHe'd also like the height title back: 'We shouldn't be beat by Dubai,' he told the New York Editorial Board, of which I'm a member, Thursday. 'New Yorkers just like to be inspired.'
Is it the job of the media to cheerlead such things, which bring — as Moses said — terrible tradeoffs? Generations of journalists would tell you: absolutely not. I suppose that's why the tallest building in the world is in Dubai, where they don't have these problems.
Moses was the embodiment and the arm of The Establishment. We live at a moment when all politics is populism and the public consensus is to tear down the elites, the Niskanen Center's Soren Dayton notes, while the original progressives were focused on crushing urban machines and putting power in the hands of wiser leaders.
'In a re-celebration of Robert Moses and the [Tennessee Valley Authority], you blow past public participation and celebrate a technocratic depoliticization. And, again, these same people explicitly tried to drive down public participation,' he wrote on X. 'Does that sound like a match for today?'
to can be read online, with this epigraph from Sophocles: 'One must wait until the evening to see how splendid the day has been.'
'The author and publisher do not comprehend the obligations of leadership,' Caro wrote in his typewritten 23-page response to the book's four-part New Yorker excerpts.
Moses's legacy for City Journal, and found him a less sinister — and monumental — figure: 'Moses survived not through Machiavellian machinations to subvert political will but by smoothly delivering what the state and city's governing class, business leaders, and editorial boards wanted him to accomplish.'
What is American journalism if it isn't focused on holding power to account, our profession's loose and perhaps self-important mission in recent decades? President Theodore Roosevelt raised that question back in 1906. 'The men with the muck-rakes are often indispensable to the well-being of society; but only if they know when to stop raking the muck, and to look upward to the celestial crown above them, to the crown of worthy endeavor,' he said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban
Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban

Boston Globe

time5 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban

Australia has allowed imports of beef grown in the United States since 2019. But Australia has not allowed imports from the U.S. of beef sourced from Canada or Mexico because of the disease risk. But the U.S. has recently introduced additional movement controls that identify and trace all cattle from Mexico and Canada to their farms of origin. Advertisement US cattle import controls satisfy Australian authorities Australian authorities were 'satisfied the strengthened control measures put in place by the U.S. effectively manage biosecurity risks,' Collins said. The timing of the new, reduced restrictions has not been finalized. Trump attacked Australian import restrictions on U.S. beef when he announced in April that tariffs of at least 10% would be placed on Australian imports, with steel and aluminum facing a 50% tariff. 'Australia bans — and they're wonderful people, and wonderful everything — but they ban American beef," Trump told reporters then. 'Yet we imported $3 billion of Australian beef from them just last year alone. They won't take any of our beef. They don't want it because they don't want it to affect their farmers and, you know, I don't blame them, but we're doing the same thing right now,' Trump added. Advertisement Lawmaker fears appeasing Trump endangers Australian cattle industry Opposition lawmaker David Littleproud suspected the government was endangering Australia's cattle industry to appease Trump. 'I want to see the science and it should be predicated on science. I'm suspicious of the speed at which this has been done,' Littleproud told reporters. 'We need to give confidence to the industry, but also to you (the public): this is not just about animal welfare, this is about human welfare, this is about BSE potentially coming into this country and having a human impact, so I think it's important the government's very transparent about the science and I don't think it's even beyond the question to have an independent panel review that science to give confidence to everybody,' he added. Around 70% of Australian beef is exported. Producers fear that export market would vanish overnight if diseases including mad cow or foot-and-mouth disease infected Australian cattle. Will Evans, chief executive of Cattle Australia who represents more than 52,000 grass-fed beef producers across the nation, said he was confident the agriculture department had taken a cautious approach toward U.S. imports. 'The department's undertaken a technical scientific assessment and we have to put faith in them. They've made this assessment themselves. They've said: 'We've looked at this, we've looked at the best science, this is a decision that we feel comfortable with,'' Evans told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. 'When you have a 75 billion (Australian dollar, $50 billion) industry relying on them not making this mistake, I'm sure they've been very cautious in their decision-making,' he added. US beef prices rise because of drought and a domestic cattle shortage Beef prices have been rising in the U.S. due to factors that include drought and shrinking domestic herd numbers. Advertisement The average price of a pound of ground beef in the U.S. rose to $6.12 in June, up nearly 12% from a year ago, according to U.S. government data. The average price of all uncooked beef steaks rose 8% to $11.49 per pound. Australia's opposition to any U.S. tariffs will be high on the agenda when Prime Minister Anthony Albanese secures his first face-to-face meeting with Trump. Albanese and Trump were to hold a one-on-one meeting on the sidelines of a Group of Seven summit in Canada last month, but the U.S. president left early. Albanese expects the pair will meet this year, although no date has been announced. The two countries have had a bilateral free trade deal for 20 years and the U.S. has maintained a trade surplus with Australia for decades.

Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban

time7 minutes ago

Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban

MELBOURNE, Australia -- MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia will reduce restrictions on U.S. beef imports after U.S. President Donald Trump criticized what he described as an Australian ban on the meat, Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said. Collins said Thursday that relaxing the restrictions designed to keep Australia free of mad cow disease, also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, among its cattle herds would not compromise biosecurity. 'Australia stands for open and free trade — our cattle industry has significantly benefited from this,' Collins said in a statement. Australia has allowed imports of beef grown in the United States since 2019. But Australia has not allowed imports from the U.S. of beef sourced from Canada or Mexico because of the disease risk. But the U.S. has recently introduced additional movement controls that identify and trace all cattle from Mexico and Canada to their farms of origin. Australian authorities were 'satisfied the strengthened control measures put in place by the U.S. effectively manage biosecurity risks,' Collins said. The timing of the new, reduced restrictions has not been finalized. Trump attacked Australian import restrictions on U.S. beef when he announced in April that tariffs of at least 10% would be placed on Australian imports, with steel and aluminum facing a 50% tariff. 'Australia bans — and they're wonderful people, and wonderful everything — but they ban American beef,' Trump told reporters then. 'Yet we imported $3 billion of Australian beef from them just last year alone. They won't take any of our beef. They don't want it because they don't want it to affect their farmers and, you know, I don't blame them, but we're doing the same thing right now,' Trump added. Opposition lawmaker David Littleproud suspected the government was endangering Australia's cattle industry to appease Trump. 'I want to see the science and it should be predicated on science. I'm suspicious of the speed at which this has been done,' Littleproud told reporters. 'We need to give confidence to the industry, but also to you (the public): this is not just about animal welfare, this is about human welfare, this is about BSE potentially coming into this country and having a human impact, so I think it's important the government's very transparent about the science and I don't think it's even beyond the question to have an independent panel review that science to give confidence to everybody,' he added. Around 70% of Australian beef is exported. Producers fear that export market would vanish overnight if diseases including mad cow or foot-and-mouth disease infected Australian cattle. Will Evans, chief executive of Cattle Australia who represents more than 52,000 grass-fed beef producers across the nation, said he was confident the agriculture department had taken a cautious approach toward U.S. imports. 'The department's undertaken a technical scientific assessment and we have to put faith in them. They've made this assessment themselves. They've said: 'We've looked at this, we've looked at the best science, this is a decision that we feel comfortable with,'' Evans told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. 'When you have a 75 billion (Australian dollar, $50 billion) industry relying on them not making this mistake, I'm sure they've been very cautious in their decision-making,' he added. Beef prices have been rising in the U.S. due to factors that include drought and shrinking domestic herd numbers. The average price of a pound of ground beef in the U.S. rose to $6.12 in June, up nearly 12% from a year ago, according to U.S. government data. The average price of all uncooked beef steaks rose 8% to $11.49 per pound. Australia's opposition to any U.S. tariffs will be high on the agenda when Prime Minister Anthony Albanese secures his first face-to-face meeting with Trump. Albanese and Trump were to hold a one-on-one meeting on the sidelines of a Group of Seven summit in Canada last month, but the U.S. president left early. Albanese expects the pair will meet this year, although no date has been announced. The two countries have had a bilateral free trade deal for 20 years and the U.S. has maintained a trade surplus with Australia for decades.

Small Brazilian coffee producers fear for the future after Trump's 50% tariff

time12 minutes ago

Small Brazilian coffee producers fear for the future after Trump's 50% tariff

PORCIUNCULA, Brazil -- Brazilian José Natal da Silva often tends to his modest coffee plantation in the interior of Rio de Janeiro state in the middle of the night, sacrificing sleep to fend off pests that could inflict harm on his precious crops. But anxiety has troubled his shut-eye even more in recent weeks, following President Donald Trump's announcement earlier this month of a 50% tariff on Brazilian imported goods, which experts expect to drive down the price of coffee in Brazil. Da Silva sighed as he recounted his fears, sitting on the dry earth surrounded by his glossy green arabica coffee shrubs, in the small municipality of Porciuncula. 'We're sad because we struggle so much. We spend years battling to get somewhere. And suddenly, everything starts falling apart, and we're going to lose everything,' da Silva said. 'How are we going to survive?' Trump's tariff on Brazil is overtly political. In his public letter detailing the reasons for the hike, the U.S. president called the trial of his ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro, a ' witch hunt.' Bolsonaro is accused of masterminding a coup to overturn his 2022 election loss to left-leaning President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The tariff has sparked ripples of fear in Brazil, particularly among sectors with deep ties to the American market such as beef, orange juice — and coffee. Minor coffee producers say the import tax will hit their margins and adds to the uncertainty already generated by an increasingly dry and unpredictable climate. Brazil, the world's largest coffee producer, exports around 85% of its production. The United States is the country's top coffee buyer and represents around 16% of exports, according to Brazil's coffee exporters council Cecafe. The president of Cecafe's deliberative council, Márcio Ferreira, told journalists last week that he thinks the U.S. will continue to import Brazilian coffee, even with the hefty tariff. 'It's obvious that neither the United States nor any other source can give up on Brazil, even if it's tariffed,' he said. But the tariff will likely decrease Brazilian coffee's competitiveness in the U.S. and naturally reduce demand, said Leandro Gilio, a professor of global agribusiness at Insper business school in Sao Paulo. 'There's no way we can quickly redirect our coffee production to other markets,' Gilio said. 'This principally affects small producers, who have less financial power to make investments or support themselves in a period like this.' Family farmers produce more than two-thirds of Brazilian coffee. They are a majority in Rio state's northwestern region, where most of the state's coffee production lies. Coffee farming is the primary economic activity in these municipalities. In Porciuncula, which neighbors Brazil's largest coffee-producing state Minas Gerais, gentle mountains are layered with symmetrical lines of coffee shrubs. Da Silva, who wore a straw hat for protection from the sun and a crucifix around his neck, owns around 40,000 coffee trees. He started working in the fields when he was 12. Besides coffee, he grows cassava, squash, bananas, oranges and lemons and has a few chickens that provide fresh eggs. 'We have them because of the fear of not being able to eat. We wouldn't manage if everything were bought, because the profit is very low,' he said. Last year, drought — made more likely by human-caused climate change — devastated large swathes of da Silva's production. The reduction in supply pushed coffee prices up, but only after many small-scale farmers had already sold all their crops. Since peaking in February, prices of arabica have fallen, dropping 33% by July, according to the University of Sao Paulo's Center for Advanced Studies in Applied Economics, which provides renowned commodity price reports. 'When you make an investment, counting on a certain price for coffee, and then when you go to sell it the price is 20-30% less than you calculated, it breaks the producers,' said Paulo Vitor Menezes Freitas, 31, who also owns a modest plantation of around 35,000 coffee trees in the nearby municipality of Varre-Sai. Life out in the fields is tough, according to Menezes Freitas. During harvest season, he sometimes gets up at 3 a.m. to turn on a coffee drier, going to bed as late as midnight. The rest of the year is less intense, but still, there are few to no breaks because there's always work to do, he said. Menezes Freitas, who is expecting his first child in October, said the tariff's announcement increased his fears for the future. 'It's scary. It feels like you're on shaky ground. If things get worse, what will we do? People will start pulling out their coffee and finding other ways to survive because they won't have the means to continue,' he said. In addition to slashing the value of his coffee beans, Menezes Freitas said the tariff will impact machinery and aluminum — goods that producers like him use every day. 'We hope this calms down. Hopefully, they'll come to their senses and remove that tariff. I think it would be better for both the United States and Brazil,' he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store