PressEthic

What do the New York Times, CNN, New York Daily News, Agence France Presse, Toronto Star, Associated Press and Atlanta Journal-Constitution have in common? A quick search on Lexis-Nexis shows that all have referred to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald as a modern day Eliot Ness. Ness, for those who don't remember their history (or, this being the U.S., haven't watched the Kevin Costner/Sean Connery movie), was the prosecutor who had a reputation for being "untouchable" in a time of corruption, and who eventually brought down Al Capone (or Robert DeNiro, if you watched the movie.)

The interesting thing is that they all claim to have picked up the analogy from someone else. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution said on October 19th that the Toronto Star was the first to give Fitzgerald the moniker. The Toronto Star said on August 19th that other "media reports" described him as the modern Untouchable. Agence France Presse stated on October 28th that he was "often seen as a modern Eliot Ness," an interesting early 20th century American prosecutorial reference for an international wire service to make. The Associated Press cited an introduction at the Justice Department for the reference in an October 24th article, but doesn't give the name of who gave the introduction. CNN's Miles O'Brien said that many Americans consider Fitzgerald "today's Eliot Ness" on October 28th (he must assume that everyone saw the movie). Maureen Dowd refers to Fitzgerald's "big Elliot Ness moment" in an October 29th article in the Times, sans attribution.

Why the oft-repeated analogy? Perhaps there's just not enough famous prosecutors to compare Fitzgerald to, and reporters couldn't figure out a way to compare him to Atticus Finch. But no one ever called Kenneth Star a modern day Eliot Ness, not even those on the far right. Is it just pack journalism, where one reporter makes the analogy and then everyone else jumps on it?

Whatever the cause is, it effectively frames the story in a curious way. If the prosecutor is an Untouchable, then Libby is by default as corrupt as Al Capone, even before the trial begins. He very well may be guilty, but making the analogy now clouds attempts at objectivity, or at the very least originality.