Covering Teddy

Asking the question again

On a visit to Boston, Senator Ted Kennedy was cornered by a local television reporter. With mike in hand, she dutifully asked the question, and Kennedy coolly responded with the answer. Yes, he had every expectation that President Carter would be renominated, he said, and yes, he fully intended to support him. The reporter was disappointed. "I've heard that answer before," she groused off-camera. "Oh, uh, that's all right," smiled Kennedy, "I, uh, T've heard the question before too."

So he has. And, as Reporter James Wooten points out in a recent cover story in the Washington Post magazine recalling that unsuccessful interrogation, both the question and the Senator's coy answer will be analyzed countless more times. The punditry should reach a crest this week as journalists almost everywhere take yet another look at Kennedy and his intentions. The reason for the outpouring: it will be exactly ten years since a car driven by Kennedy plunged off the bridge at Chappaquiddick, next to Martha's Vineyard, and a young female aide drowned.

On the eve of the anniversary, all three networks were preparing Kennedy stories, as were the two major wire services, the New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Gannett newspapers and many others. The New York Post got a head start with a turgid, unrevealing nine-part series. In the past few months he has been on the covers of Newsweek twice, the New York Times magazine, Look, PEOPLE, the Washingtonian, the Boston Globe magazine. With Jimmy Carter getting the worst press of his presidency, Kennedy's "coquettish noncandidacy," as one writer called it, has become the hottest political story around.

It may also be the toughest, since it raises basic questions about fairness, privacy and the press's role in the political process. Asks M.I.T.-based Media Critic Edwin Diamond: "Why does the press go along with him? Why not take him at his word and forget about it?" Some apparently agree, and are beginning to hit the brakes on covering every Kennedy tease. Says Executive Producer Av Westin of ABC's World News: "We don't want to end up giving him a free campaign ride."

Kennedy, to be sure, generates plenty of copy with his energetic Senate activities. But at times it almost seems as if the press wants to build up Kennedy as a presidential prospect because that would make covering the nominating process far more interesting. Says Washington Post Ombudsman Charles Seib: "If there isn't a fight, we'll make one."

Many reporters are sensitive to suggestions that they are not tough enough on Kennedy. But it is no easier for journalists to get angry with Teddy than it was for them to get angry with Brothers Jack and Bobby. Explains James Weighart, Washington bureau chief for the New York Daily News: "He's such a likable guy. He's responsive ... You smoke cigars together. You kid together."

When journalists try to catch Kennedy off base on specific issues, notes Esquire National Editor Richard Reeves, he "can be creatively incoherent." Elaborates David Broder, the Washington Post's national political columnist:

"The front half and back half of his sentences match up less frequently than most politicians' ... I think it is a technique for slowing himself down and not saying what he doesn't want to say." Still, considering that the first primary is more than six months away, most editors are satisfied with their treatment of Kennedy to date. "I don't believe Baker or Connally or Reagan or any of the others have been subjected to as close scrutiny as Kennedy," says Washington Post Executive Editor Benjamin Bradlee.

The current batch of magazine pieces has been fairly tough-minded. Chappaquiddick is discussed, as is Kennedy's reputation as a womanizer, his disintegrating marriage, his expulsion from Harvard for cheating. Still, perhaps because readers are inured to his indiscretions, the impact is blunted. His growth as a Senator, his devotion to important national issues, and his overcoming of wrenching sorrow are more likely to create the image of a sympathetic, decisive, if all too human leader.

Precious little new will come out about Chappaquiddick this week. Says Boston Globe Editor Thomas Winship: "I think it's silly to get all worked up when everybody is still offering the same old stuff."

But investigative zeal would surely return if Kennedy were a candidate. Not waiting, the New York Times has assigned a team of reporters to Chappaquiddick and was scheduled to interview Kennedy about it this week.

Other aspects of Kennedy's personal life, especially his troubled relationship with his wife Joan, would also get closer scrutiny if he declared for President. "It will be a different kind of presidential election than any we have seen in years," writes the New Republic's White House watcher, John Osborne. "If Kennedy runs, political reporters will have to move over for gossip writers, psychiatrists and investigative reporters."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.