Stephen Hess – författare

Whatever Happened to the Washington Reporters, 1978–2012, is the first book to comprehensively examine career patterns in American journalism. In 1978 Brookings Senior Fellow Stephen Hess surveyed 450 journalists who were covering national government for U.S. commercial news organizations. His study became the award-winning The Washington Reporters (Brookings, 1981), the first volume in his Newswork series. Now, a generation later, Hess and his team from Brookings and the George Washington University have tracked down 90 percent of the original group, interviewing 283, some as far afield as France, England, Italy, and Australia. What happened to the reporters within their organizations? Did they change jobs? Move from reporter to editor or producer? Jump from one type of medium to another—from print to TV? Did they remain in Washington or go somewhere else? Which ones left journalism? Why? Where did they go? A few of them have become quite famous, including television correspondents Ted Koppel, Sam Donaldson, Brit Hume, Carole Simpson, Judy Woodruff, and Marvin Kalb; some have become editors or publishers of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune, Miami Herald, or Baltimore Sun; some have had substantial careers outside of journalism. Most, however, did not become household names. The book is designed as a series of self-contained essays, each concentrating on one characteristic, such as age, gender, or place of employment, including newspapers, television networks, wire services, and niche publications. The reporters speak for themselves. When all of these lively portraits are analyzed—one by one—the results are surprisingly different from what journalists and sociologists in 1978 had predicted.

What happens when a conservative president makes a liberal professor from the Ivy League his top urban affairs adviser? The president is Richard Nixon, the professor is Harvard's Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Of all the odd couples in American public life, they are probably the oddest. Add another Ivy League professor to the White House staff when Nixon appoints Columbia's Arthur Burns, a conservative economist, as domestic policy adviser. The year is 1969, and what follows behind closed doors is a passionate debate of conflicting ideologies and personalities.Who won? How? Why? Now nearly a half-century later, Stephen Hess, who was Nixon's biographer and Moynihan's deputy, recounts this fascinating story as if from his office in the West Wing.Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1927–2003) described in the Almanac of American Politics as ""the nation's best thinker among politicians since Lincoln and its best politician among thinkers since Jefferson"", served in the administrations of four presidents, was ambassador to India, and U.S. representative to the United Nations, and was four times elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.Praise for the works of Stephen HessOrganzing the PresidencyAny president would benefit from reading Mr. Hess's analysis and any reader will enjoy the elegance with which it is written and the author's wide knowledge and good sense.—The EconomistThe Presidential CampaignHess brings not only first-rate credentials, but a cool, dispassionate perspective, an incisive analytical approach, and a willingness to stick his neck out in making judgments.—American Political Science ReviewFrom the Newswork SeriesIt is not much in vogue to speak of things like the public trust, but thankfully Stephen Hess is old fashioned. He reminds us in this valuable and provocative book that journalism is a public trust, providing the basic information on which citizens in a democracy vote, or tune out.—Ken Auletta, The New Yorker

""Some people think that etiquette is fine for tea parties, but there's no room for it when important political business has to be done,"" writes Miss Manners, otherwise known as Judith Martin. ""That's not true. The more controversy you have, the more etiquette you need. You need rules and order."" The missing ingredient in efforts to improve campaign discourse is a set of agreed-upon norms and standards for behavior. In this shrewd and amusing series of observations, Stephen Hess provides a political etiquette for campaign behavior on the part of both politicians and journalists. Organized alphabetically under such headings as Advertising, Bias, Cyberpolitics, Disclosure, Families, Lying, Money, Sex Scandals, and Talk Radio, forty-three brief essays examine common practices and places where the system breaks down, then recommend preventive or corrective action through a few clear rules. After discussing the paucity of local television reporting on local and state political campaigns, for example, Hess comments, ""the etiquette for local news directors is to ask, 'If we are not reporting local elections, who will?' Then act accordingly."" With its broad coverage of campaign-related topics and its sensible suggestions, this book provides a useful corrective for practices that are dishonest, downright illegal, or sometimes just endlessly irksome. The book features illustrations by some of America's foremost political cartoonists, including Herblock, Jim Borgman, Walt Handelsman, Mike Peters, Wayne Stayskal, and Garry Trudeau.

These candid conversations capture the difficulties of reporting during crisis and war, particularly the tension between government and the press. The participants include distinguished journalists—American and foreign, print and broadcast—and prominent public officials, past and present. They illuminate the struggle to balance free speech and the right to know with the need to protect sensitive information in the national interest. As the Information Age collides with the War on Terrorism, that challenge becomes even more critical and daunting. "We are very careful in what we talk about publicly. We do not want to paint a picture for the bad guys. So we don't talk very much at all about what we're going to do going forward."—Victoria Clarke, Department of Defense "This was a war that was very different. It was conducted primarily by about 200 to 250 special forces soldiers on the ground. There were no reporters with those soldiers until after the fall of Kandahar, until the war was essentially over. There were no eyes and ears, and that's the way the Pentagon wants it."—John McWethy, ABC News "I covered Capitol Hill for a very long time and was always astounded by the nonpolitical motivation of a lot of people that are up there who really do want to make the world better, want to make the U.S. better. So don't come away believing that because there are political implications that there are always political motivations."—Candy Crowley, CNN "There is a feeling among the community, Muslim Americans, and also overseas that we might become the new enemy. But so far nobody knows whether it is just because of the war or if it's going to last."—Hafez Al-Mirazi, Al-JazeeraCosponsored with the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School, Harvard University.

Americans often forget that, just as they watch the world through U.S. media, they are also being watched. Foreign correspondents based in the United States report news and provide context to events that are often unfamiliar or confusing to their readers back home. Unfortunately, there has been too little thoughtful examination of the foreign press in America and its role in the world media. Through Their Eyes fills this void in the unmistakable voice of Stephen Hess, who has been reporting on reporting for over a quarter century. Globalization is shrinking the planet, making it more important than ever to know what is going on in the world and how those events are being interpreted elsewhere. September 11 was a chilling reminder that how others perceive us does matter, like it or not. Hess seeks to answer three basic yet essential journalistic questions: Who are these U.S.-based foreign correspondents? How do they operate? And perhaps most important, what do they report, and how? Informed by scores of interviews and armed with original survey research, Hess reveals the mindset of foreign correspondents from a broad sample of countries. He examines how reporting from abroad has changed over the past twenty years and addresses the daunting challenges facing these journalists, ranging from home-office politics to national stereotypes. Unique among works on the subject, this book provides an engaging and humanizing ""Day in the Life?"" section, illustrating how foreign correspondents conduct their daily activities. This book continues the author's comprehensive Newswork series on the nexus of media, government, and politics. These five books, starting with The Washington Reporters (Brookings, 1981), have become valuable reference materials for all who seek to understand this intersection of journalism and government. Through Their Eyes furthers that rich tradition, making it essential and enjoyable reading.

In the vast literature on the way democratic governments work, the role of the press is often overlooked. Yet the press, no less than the formal branches of government, is a public policy institution and deserves to be included in explanations of the governmental process. In The Washington Reporters, Stephen Hess focuses on those who cover the U.S. government for the American commercial news media. His book is based on interviews with reporters and editors and on responses to questionnaires from nearly half of the over 1,200 American reporters in Washington. Analysis of these responses and comparison with the content and placement of over 2,000 of these reporters' news stories permit an unusual—and sometimes startling—perspective on Washington newswork. Mr. Hess demonstrates, for instance, how information in the news regularly comes from the legislative branch of the government, despite the greater number of stories on the presidency; and he shows that Washington news dominates the front pages of daily newspapers across the country, no matter how little may be going on in the nation's capital. The author concludes that "Washington news gathering fragments [media] power, while at the same time it shifts decisions on what is news and how it should be covered to the reporters." The import of this impression is that "reporters are not simply passing along information; they are choosing, within certain limits, what most people will know about government. The freedom given and assumed by these news workers affects the shape of national affairs."

This book surveys press relations with the federal government, examines the way official press offices prepare and conduct briefings, and considers criticisms concerning the government's control of information.

In this book, Stephen Hess examines why certain Senators are considered more ""newsworthy"" than others. Using interviews, observation, and statistical studies, he identifies the major factors that influence media coverage.

Today, American public opinion is having more influence than ever on how U.S. leaders respond to international crises and formulate foreign policy. Yet at the same time, there is evidence that Americans are increasingly ill-informed of international affairs. This paradox raises many serious questions: What information about the world are we given by the mainstream media? How much? How good? By whom? Through what means? And how much foreign news is really enough?In this fifth volume of his highly acclaimed Newswork series, Stephen Hess addresses these questions and offers a revealing look at how the print and broadcast media cover international affairs and how foreign correspondents do their work.Hess contends that the United States is a nation of two media societies. One is awash in specialized information, available to those who have the time, interest, money, and education to take advantage of it. The other encompasses the vast majority of Americans, who rely on the top stories of TV networks' evening news programs and their community's daily newspaper. For them, Hess says, the current diet of international news offered is not adequate considering its potential importance to their lives.When the world imposes itself on the U.S. media, it does so in a big way—the Gulf War, the coup in Moscow, the fall of the Berlin Wall. But there are remarkable peaks and valleys in international news coverage. According to Hess, TV in particular shrinks the globe geographically—with Asia underrepresented and the Middle East overrepresented, for example. And much of TV's focus on international violence is gratuitous, telling us where and how, but very rarely why. Hess concludes with suggestions for improving international coverage.

The period from Election Day to Inauguration Day in America seems impossibly short. Newly elected U.S. presidents have less than eleven weeks to construct a new government composed of supporters and strangers, hailing from all parts of the nation. This unique and daunting process always involves at least some mistakes—in hiring, perhaps, or in policy priorities, or organizational design. Early blunders can carry serious consequences well into a president's term; minimizing them from the outset is critical. In What Do We Do Now? Stephen Hess draws from his long experience as a White House staffer and presidential adviser to show what can be done to make presidential transitions go smoothly. Here is a workbook to guide future chief executives, decision by decision, through the minefield of transition. You'll have to start at the beginning, settling on a management style and knowing how to ""arrange all the boxes."" Something as seemingly mundane as parceling office space can be consequential—hence the inclusion of a proposed White House organizational chart and floor plans of the West Wing. What qualities are needed for each job, and where are the best candidates for those positions most likely to be found? How can you construct a cabinet that ""looks like America""? What Do We Do Now? is your indispensable guide through the thicket of these decisions. There are small decisions, too. You'll have to pick a desk—photos of the choices are included. Which presidential portraits should hang in the Oval Office? Which ones have previous presidents chosen? And when it comes time to write an inaugural address, what should be the content, theme, and tone? It's all here in the presidential transition workbook—don't leave for Washington without it. This concise volume is sure to be a valuable resource for the president and team of advisers as they attempt to herd cats into an effective government. o W e Do Now? is alsis also a delightful read for anyone interested in exactly how one goes about being the president of the United States.

Examining how the White House works—or doesn't—before and after TrumpDonald Trump has reinvented the presidency, transforming it from a well-oiled if sometimes cumbersome institution into what has often seemed to be a one-man show. But even Trump's unorthodox presidency requires institutional support, from a constantly rotating White House staff and cabinet who have sought to carry out—and sometimes resist—the president's direct orders and comply with his many tweets.Nonetheless, the Trump White House still exhibits many features of its predecessors over the past eight decades. When Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated, the White House staff numbered fewer than fifty people, and most federal department were lightly staffed as well. As the United States became a world power, the staff of the Executive Office increased twentyfold, and the staffing of federal agencies blossomed comparably.In the fourth edition of Organizing the Presidency, a landmark volume examining the presidency as an institution, Stephen Hess and James P. Pfiffner argue that the successes and failures of presidents from Roosevelt through Trump have resulted in large part from how the president deployed and used White House staffers and other top officials responsible for carrying out Oval Office policy. Drawing on a wealth of analysis and insight, Organizing the Presidency addresses best practices for managing a presidency that is itself a bureaucracy.