challenge question was d, the poor panda, perhaps the most famous chinese animal, does not get a year named after it in the chinese zodiac. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next we'll. stay tuned for owe rye liable sources." newt gingrich said to me you're dead after much of his staff quit last summer, dead after being buried by ads in iowa, and, yet, somehow, newt beginning riff won the south carolina primary yesterday. a human i will yags for the pundit pack he loves to attack. abc airs a sit down with gingrich's ex-wife on the eve of the primary, reviving the issue of infidelity, and newt denounces cnn's john king for using that report to lead off a deba dein south carolina. >> i astounded that cnn who take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate.

>> was that a mistake by cnn? was the abc story itself a late hit, repeating charges that marianne gingrich first made long ago? we'll ask the correspondent, abc's brian ross. fox's juan williams draws flack at another debate for challenging the candidates with a series of race-related incidents including this one with gingrich. >> can't you see that this is viewed at a minimum as insulting to all americans, but particularly to black americans? >> was he acting as a journalist, or an advocate? plus, the "new york times" ombudsman hit by a media firestorm after asking whether his paper should be a vigilante for truth? we'll ask art brisbane why his column touched a nerve. i'm hourt kurtz, and this is "reliable sources." this is cnn, breaking news. we'll get to the campaign

shortly, but the breaking news this hour, joe paterno is dead at 85. the former penn state football coach who has been much in the news lately had been hospitalized for lung cancer. the word came this morning that he has passed. he has been with that program, associated with that school and that program for half a century, associated with college football himself. his name practically sin no, ma'am nuss with the word college football. cnn's susan candiotti is standing by. as this news has broken this morning, tell us about the scene at the school where he was, you know, frankly a beloved figure? >> reporter: it's hit hard here, howard. it's a very difficult day for the men -- for whoever who believed and loved the man that they've known as joe pa. you can see over ni mi shoulder that iconic statue of joe paterno here, posed with his number one finger up in the air saying we're number one. this man, the winningest coach

in football. they said you don't understand what joe pa, joe paterno, means to penn state nlsz you are actually part of this community. he made penn state. he is penn state. there are candles set up here last night in a vigil. dozens of students and non-students here coming by. they said to pay their respects as soon as they got word that his condition was downgraded following complications of his treatment for lung cancer. the family put out a statement saying that he fought hard until the end and how much they loved him, how much he meant to this community. you know, behind that statue, howard is a saying, and it means in joe paterno's words, they candidate me what i liked written about me when i'm gone. i hope they write i made penn state a better place, not just that i was a good football coach. >> as you know, some of the words that will be written,

pretty prominently in the stories tomorrow, are going to be about the sex scandal involving the former assistant coach in which paterno was drawn and did not acquit himself very admirably, and how that, unfortunately, is part of the legacy, but i would imagine that looms less large for those who loved him on the campus where you are standing right now. >> reporter: absolutely. people bring that up themselves. they know what happened here in the last few months here. it's hit everyone hard here. it's affected penn state, but they believe in their hearts that penn state will be able to overcome that. they say they loved joe paterno despite that. they still support him. >> all right. susan candiotti, thank you very much from state college, pennsylvania, this morning. we're reaching out to people in the sports world, the journalism world who cover joe paterno, worked with him. we'll bring you more later this hour and later throughout the day. turning now to the political

portion of the program, it was in the anals of presidential debate a classic confrontation. john king began a cnn faceoff in south carolina, as know knows by now, by asking about an abc news interview about his ex-wife marianne, and the former speaker looked furious. >> she said you asked her to open into an open marriage. with you like to take type to respond to that? >> no, but i will. i think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country and harder to attract people to run for government office. to take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary, a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything i can imagine. >> when king protested that the story did not come from cnn, gingrich cut him off. >> john, it was repeated by your

network. you chose to start the debate with it. don't try to blame somebody else. >> joining us now to examine gingrich's war with the media and his stunning comeback victory in the south carolina primary, ryan lizzo, correspondent for "the politico magazine, jennifer ruben, author of the washington post right turn blog, and terrence smith, former media correspondent for pbs's "news hour." terry smith, was it a blunder, plain and simple, for john king to lead off that debate, very first question, with the question about gingrich's ex-wife? >> it was a gift to newt beginni gingrich, i'll say that. you got the impression that newt was rather ready for that, didn't you? he used it. he used it effectively. you would have to judge from the results profitably in the primary. was it a mistake? you can defend it on the grounds that it was the news of the day. it certainly was not very well done, and it would have been

vastly better if it had been brought up by one of the other candidates. >> i think it it was a misstep. i think it was fine to ask the question, but to ask it at the top. cnn thought this was the most important thing to be discussed, you knowing, more important than the economy, and more important than health care and afghanistan. >> wait a minute. i totally disagree. we had over a dozen debates, right? we've gotten to every single important issue in this campaign. it's come one after another, week after week. that was the issue that day. it was driving all the coverage of the campaign, and right now we would be sitting here taik talking about why didn't john king ask that question if he hint. >> you are totally fine with him asking, and you are fine with him asking it at the top? is. >> everyone was tuning in. they were wonder about this campaign. everyone was tuning in to see it. >> the genius of gingrich, these aren't really debates. they're press conferences. the fact -- >> theater. >> they're theater. the fact is i thought this was

shrewd. they've sucked some of the power from the campaigns to us in the press, which is great if you are in the press. newt's gift here is he figured out a way to shift that power back to him. >> it's no secret that you have been a big mitt romney supporter in your blog and very -- >> not exactly. the only one to ever come for rick santorum before the rest of the media caught up. >> that's fine. >> i have been critical of so many other candidates. >> you have been critical of one newt gingrich much georgia. >> yes. >> coming back to the john king question. on twitter when this happened, you called him a dope. this is a guy who has been a respected political reporter for 25 years for a.p. and cnn. i thought that was beneath you. >> i think it's fair. i think the question was phrased in a very dopey fashion. >> maybe it was a dopey question. >> yes. >> you called him a dope. >> listen, it's twitter. in the midst of the moment. >> do you regret using that language? >> the question was dopey. if he hadn't thought through it, then shame on him. it was a setup. he should have -- newt gingrich should thank him for the largest

in kind donation because he probably won the south carolina primary on that basis. for someone to ask a question in that fashion where you know he is going to hit it out of the ballpark, follow it up with a very defensive kind of silly argument that it didn't come from cnn i thought was beneath him. it didn't play to his benefit. it sort of transfecked the rest of the panel, subsumed the rest of the debate, and i think it was a mistake. >> let me pick this up after we have a chance to hear what john king said after the debate. this is him on the situation room saying it was his decision to use that question at the top. >> we decided -- i decided that we were going to do it, and then we decided don't try to be cute or hide it as part of any other discussion. just ask the speaker, you look in his business, you know this, you got to take your lumps. i instanted by my decision. he had s a politician. i have my job to do. >> he makes the point that this is what everyone was waiting for, but everyone, i think, what ryan really means is

journalists, political insiders. people obsessed with this stuff. i wonder if there's a disconnect with what the political media complex and average folks who may not care all that much about what marianne gingrich thinks about their marriage. >> i suspect there were people in that audience and in the audience at large that did care about what marianne gingrich said and were at least curious to see what newt gingrich would say in response, but what stunned me was the standing applause for newt gingrich when he attacked john king. the delight of that audience in south carolina that republican, largery white audience in south carolina who loved to see the media secured by -- >> cared more about that than the messiness in gingrich's personal life. >> more than the answer. >> how can they like the answer? what the answer was is we're sick of the media. it was a nonsubstantive, had nothing to do with the issues of the day, and he has tapped into that vein of segmented anger. >> the answer of the securing. that's what they liked.

>> i think the gap between what the average voter wants, which we really don't know, and what so-called insiders want in these campaignses, it's narrowed. everyone has access to the same information. everyone is on-line. people who watch a republican debate or who are there, they know what the political conversation is among the insiders because that's been sort of universalized. i don't think we should pretend to know what people really want. >> there are times, let's face it, when the media are simply out of touch with america. i want to come back to this conversation. i -- settle down. i didn't mean to shock you. i know it's early on a sunday morning. an unusual move fox anchor neil cav outo tore up the format to defend cnn's john king. let's take a look at that. >> john king is an excellent journalist. newt gingrich is an excellent politician. the excellent politician tries to embarrass the guy who asks

the question. the excellent journalist, nevertheless, asked that question. knowing full well a crowd and a big one will turn on him because he did ask it. >> brian, should king have frame the question more pointedly rather than to say do you want to say something about this so the government would understand why it was important, and then once they were unloaded on, and took that club and whacked him, should he have come back more forcefully -- >> gunning rich was prepared for that to be the first topic of the night, and he had an attack planned on the press. no matter how it was asked. >> the danger then, you are the moderator of the event, and you don't want to be drawn into the position of debating the candidate, like you're not just a moderator, but a participant. >> you don't want to make it all about you. >> i disagree. there was a great opportunity to do that because in an earlier debate when they were speaking more generically about the issue of infidelity, gingrich gave a rather sincere little speel that

people had to be concerned, it's part of the whole, and i wonder if john king had read that back to gingrich in this context and explained people's concerns, whether he would have gotten such a strong response. >> to your point, should john king have come back at him. the next day at lunch an attorney friend of mine said to me he should have. that he should have come back and said to gingrich that he was being hip critical. your character. you led the clinton impeachment. >> would i argue, no, that's not his role. he is a motted rater and a moderator is supposed to ask the questions, frame the debate, keep it moving. it's different than an interviewer. a moderator has a different role. >> speaking of framing the debate, i want to get now to the fox debate a couple of days earlier because juan williams did a lot to frame that debate and the coverage of that debate and the former house speaker went back. now, williams asked a series of questions of various candidates that were race-related.

he is there as a fox commentator and an african-american journalist. the one that got the most attention was this exchange. >> speaker gingrich, you recently said black americans should demand jobs, not food stamps. you also said poor kids lack a strong work ethic and propose having them work as janitors in their schools. can't you see that this is viewed at a minimum as insulting to all americans, but particularly to black americans? you saw some of this reaction during your visit to a black church in south carolina. [ booing ] >> first of all, juan, the fact is that more people have been put on food stamps by barack obama than any president in american history. >> did it seem to anyone here that juan williams by focussing on race and belittling comments was pushing any kind of an agenda? >> i think the start of the question, can't you see, rather

than do you believe, that gave the question a little bit more of an activist edge, but it's a legitimate issue to raise. >> actually, i would take issue with that. republicans care nothing about this, and i think part of this has to be taken -- approximate. >> nothing? >> yes, relatively nothing. about the comment, the accusation of race, they don't believe it. they're not interested. it wasn't a point of controversy within the republican primary. this is an issue from the mainstream media and from the left with the republican party, but not -- >> that's a strange standard. >> i have to ask you to hold that thought. i talked to juan williams, by the way, and he said he felt these kinds of questions were not being asked in any of the debates, and i have to agree with him on that. we're going to go back to the joe paterno story, the breaking news, if you haven't heard, about the former penn state coach dying this morning at 85. usa today's christine brennan will join us in just a moment. when i grow up,

i want to fix up old houses. ♪ [ woman ] when i grow up, i want to take him on his first flight. i want to run a marathon. i'm going to own my own restaurant. when i grow up, i'm going to start a band. [ female announcer ] at aarp we believe you're never done growing. thanks, mom. i just want to get my car back. [ female announcer ] discover what's next in your life. get this free travel bag when you join at aarp.org/jointoday. try bayer advanced aspirin. it has microparticles so it enters the bloodstream fast and rushes relief to the site of your tough pain. it's proven to relieve pain

twice as fast as before. bayer advanced aspirin.

we've learned this past hour that joe paterno is dead at 85. the former penn state football coach has been much in the news lately. people are gathering for sort of a vigil at the campus in state college, pennsylvania, and joining us now on the line is "usa today" sports columnist christine brennan, who has written and talked about paterno much over the years, and, christine, to what extent will the stories and the talking about this legendary coach be influenced, marred, some would say, by his role in the sex scandal involving his foremaner assistant coach jerry sandusky who has been a huge story this past year? >> i think it will be a large extent, which is sad. there's nothing but sadness right now about this news and i know everyone, you know, is

thinking of the paterno family and his wife and coach paterno himself. there's no way you can not feel incredible sadness for them at this time, but you mentioned the news that broke november 5th that within a few days he was pfeiffered by penn state, which are words we never would have thought we would hear that penn state fired joe paterno. that is a huge part of joe pattern yoes ae legacy. sadly, it will be there. it will be part of his biography. it will be in the first pairgraphy or two of every story, every obituary that's written, as it should be, unfortunately. >> right. at the same time half century career as a college football coach who became an icon for the sport, just briefly. >> yes. without a doubt. that can't be forgotten either. as an educator, he admitted himself that he, of course, failed. didn't do enough with the sandusky news, and i think that is something. the sports end of joe pattern yoes ae career, amaze, memorable, never to be forgotten. >> thank you for putting that in perspective.

christine brennan from "usa today." we breesht it. i made a mistake last night on twitter because there was a false report that he had died last night. got picked up by cbs sports blog, the daily beast where i work. i didn't check it. i decided it was sad news. i should have been more careful. lesson learned. turning now back to the presidential campaign. the toddry tale had been public for 13 years now. newt gingrich dumped his second wife marianne while having an fair with a congressional aide who is now his third we'll, callista. marianne gingrich talked to print reporters, but never on camera until her ex-husband started doing well in his presidential campaign. abc's brian ross sat down for this report" nightly." >> i said to him we've been married a long time. he said, yes, but you want me all to yourself. callista doesn't care what dow. >> what was he saying to you, do you think? >> he was asking to have an open marriage, and i refused. >> he wanted an open marriage.

>> yeah, that i accept the fact that he has somebody else in his life. >> but was it fair to revive that story from gingrich's past 36 hours before the voting began in south carolina? i spoke earlier with chief investigative correspondent from new york. >> brian ross, welcome. >> good to be here. >> to air this story a day and a half before the south carolina primary feels like a late hit. were you uncomfortable with the timing? >> not at all. we had done a story on wednesday night about mitt romney and his accounts and funds that are in the caymen islands off shore, and we have the story on mr. gingrich and his ex-wife for thursday. we wanted to run them in tan dem, and we felt that as long as it wasn't within 24 hours, that was good for us. >> 24 hours would have been too close, but 36 or 48 hours is okay? >> well, it sort of one nauz cycle to allow mr. gingrich to respond, and respond he did. >> we'll get to his response in a moment. on some level, wasn't abc used

by mary ann gingrich to take revenge against her ex-husband, just at the time that he was surging in the polls? >> we didn't know he was surging in the polls, first of all, howie, but we had been trying to get this interview with her since november, and if she was out to really get him, i think she probably would have pushed to do it in december when he also appeared to have been surging. this was a long involved process, and we did the interview last friday, and took a few days to digest it, and then we were ready to go. we had to squeeze it in to make sure that we gave gingrich time to respond. we contacted him on tuesday, and didn't really get any response until thursday. >> and on that point, brian, during the cnn debate, while gingrich was in the process of unloading on the vicious and destructive media, he made some very particular allegations against abc news. let me play that for you. >> anyone who knew us this that period said the story was false. we offered several at babc to prove it was falless where else. they like to attack any

republican. >> your response? >> that simply is not true. we offered two people, his two daughters from his first marriage, jackie and cathy. i interviewed both of them on thursday afternoon. we included them in our "nightline" report. no one was offered to us at all, and our request to talk with the speaker himself was also declined by the campaign. >> so when speaker gingrich says abc refused to talk to people, we were making available, that is -- >> that is not true. >> what about his point that he added on about abc taking an opportunity to get republicans, make it very partisan point there, trying to suggest that your network had an agenda? >> we don't have an agenda, and it's the same thing we heard from democrats when four years ago i reported on reverend wright and the obama supporters felt we were out to get democrats. we're not out to get anybody. we're out to cover the news and to frame what's going on in this campaign. our viewers and the voertsz in this cult have a right to know

all they can about the candidates, and in this case questions of the moral character, of newt gingrich was one of the campaign issues. >> were there some people who were at abc who were either opposed to running the story or at least felt it shouldn't have run on thursday so close to the primary 1234. >> not that i know of. thursday was the day we ended up scheduling it, and that was the plan. the cruise ship story on monday and tuesday, which i was involved in, sort of disrupted some of our long range planning, but we did want to run both the gingrich story and the romney stories in tandem, and wednesday and thursday it worked out best. >> who made the final decision on that? >> who made the final decision as to when it was t would air? >> to go with the gingrich story? >> it ultimately would have been sherwood, the president of abc news, and the executive producer of "nightline" jean marie condan. >> you talked about trying to get her to come on camera since november. what kind of argument did you make as to why she should sit down in front of a camera and do this interview?

>> well, she recognized that at some point people would be asking her her comments about her husband, and i started the process because we were interested in some of the investigations into gingrich's ethics and fbi investigation that ultimately fizzled out. that was a starting point for us in the abc news investigative unit. as we talked to her more and more, she said she wanted to answer those questions and also talk about what she thought was his inability and a moral level to serve as president. >> you know, in launching the nightline story, i felt that most of what she had to say and she had never done in a television setting, she's done before for print media, washington post, et cetera. what made that news worthy since the allegations themselves, the accusations about open marriage, so forth, were not new, but what was new was that you had video? >> well, what was new was that she was speaking now, as he is a candidate for president.

i don't think she had said that particularly the phrase open marriage had been used before. she had not commented before on the fbi undercover sting, and she also has had things to say about him, i think, in which she defended him and his actions in congress. she said as far as she knew in that context, he was an ethical man. >> actually, the allegation of open marriage, whether those particular words were used didn't appear in this essquare interview. >> those words and that phrase is key. that's outside the norm for most people. >> as you know, brian, newt gingrich has acknowledged his messy marital history. he has publicly asked for forgiveness, so in that sense this is not new, but was abc with this story making a statement that his personal problems, his marital history, his acknowledged sexual misconduct is directly relevant to his presidential campaign? >> i think moral character is a relevant factor for every candidate now running for president. he has campaigned on the

platform involving policies that are family values and the sanctity of marriage, so you think, yes, it is an issue. >> you are saying there's a hint of hypocrisy in the former speaker's public statements slersz his private sukt? >> certainly his ex-wife would say so. >> you mention the story coming a day after your story on the mitt romney campaign. that had to do with some investments by his former firm bain capitol. we'll play ailing of that story. >> airborne has found that millions of dollars in mitt romney's personal wealth is in investment funds set up in the caymen islands, the notorious tax haven where secrecy is the rule. >> you can't talk about it? >> unfortunately not. >> nothing at all? >> nothing at all. >> you didn't get anything from the bain representtives in the caymen islands. the romney says no tax advantages to putting that bain capital money in the off shore accounts, and you don't seem to have anything to dispute that, so what's the story? >> well, first of all, he hasn't answered the question why his money is in off shore accounts.

i do know the "wall street journal" followed up saying there are distinct tax advantages to having money in off shore accounts in the caymens and other places. we can't really know without seeing romney's tax returns, which to this point he has not released or made public. >> did you know about the -- these caymen accounts in the 2008 campaign, or was this news to you? >> this was news to me. the los angeles times did a report on a 2007, but we went back and looked through the most recent disclosure form that all presidential candidates have to file and went through with our investigative unit looking, you know, point by point at all his money and where the funds were. >> and then, of course, you had the hardship assignment of going to the caymen islands yourself. >> it was a one-night tour. left matt back in new york. zoo often seemed to be involved in the controversial stories and at the same time you are always willing to come on this program and talk about it, and we appreciate that. thanks. >> we're proud of what we do. >> thank you. more on the presidential campaign coverage in just a moment. ok! who gets occasional constipation,

diarrhea, gas or bloating? get ahead of it! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap a day helps defend against digestive issues with three strains of goobacteria. hit me! [ female announcer ] live the regular life. phillips'. my high school science teacher made me what i am today. our science teacher helped us build it. ♪ now i'm a geologist at chevron, and i get to help science teachers. it has four servo motors and a wireless microcontroller.

over the last three years we've put nearly 100 million dollars into american education. that's thousands of kids learning to love science. ♪ isn't that cool? and that's pretty cool. ♪

metamucil uses super hard working psyllium fiber, which gels to remove unsexy waste and reduce cholesterol. taking psyllium fiber won't make you a model but you should feel a little more super. metamucil. down with cholesterol.

sfwlirchgts we just heard abc's brian ross talk about the decision by the network to put on that interview with mary ann gingrich, newt gingrich's ex-wife, so let me ask you all very quickly, is that a story you would have run so close to the south carolina voting? >> yes. i think abc and brian ross were on solid ground there. newt gingrich himself says character are legitimate issues. if it was legitimate for newt gingrich to go after bill clinton on the monica lewinsky affair as he did, then this is legitimate as well wrrch. >> does it feel like a late hit? >> would you drive yourself crazy. there are primary from january 3rd to the convention, and then how close -- i think big stories are very, very close to the general election, there's a serious consideration there, but the south carolina primary, i

don't think so. there is after pa the debate. >> brian ross says there wasn't anything new here except she said it in front of a camera. she had made these abbing zags before. >> many people are not familiar with them, and i would argue that there were more interesting, more relevant questions from that esquire interview that she did in 2010 that were not as sensational, but i think abc would have gotten more mileage out of had they asked her about. one that he was giving speeches to morals groups at the time he was having an fair. he told her allegedly i can say whatever i want to say. it doesn't have anything to do with what i do. that i think is a note worthy attitude, and secondly, of course, he is having an affair with calista at the time he is skewering bill clinton, and he at some point should be asked about his risk taking, his recklessness. i think there's plenty that the public doesn't know. >> let me move on, because, as i mentioned at the top, newt gingrich with a huge comeback victory in south carolina. double digits over mitt romney, and fox news to its credit in

its coverage last night played some older clips of some of its panel and pundits talk abouting about the gingrich candidacy. >> he didn't have a big chance from the beginning, but now it's over. >> is newt gingrich in or out for the week? >> look, this campaign is over. it's just a matter of if he announces it. >> it's over. he is done. he is toast, except he won south carolina. no one is talking about this embarrassment. we have buried this guy twice. once last summer. again after iowa. why does the press keep underestimating newt gingrich some. >> we never learn. the press is wrong about everything every four years in politics. now today there are people saying, well, it's over for newt. he won south carolina, but he can never win florida. so, you know, my advice to everyone is just ignore what everyone says right now about what's happening next. we don't know. >> right. really right. we don't ever learn. predictions are a dangerous business. they're usually wrong. >> yet, let me first get jennifer and you're not a fan of newt gingrich, but he does have

sort of a knack for out foxing and showing up the press. >> yes. that's his great talent in life. whether that's relevant to the presidency or not, voters are going to have to decide for themselves, but that is what he does. that's his thing. not unlike sarah palin, who made what she called the lamestream media the focus of her ayre. the republicans as a whole, as an electorate, don't really want to make that the primary issue. they want to make the primary issue the president and the president's record. how he is going to be able to translate that into a more workable agenda that's going to appeal to republicans and primary after primary we'll have to see. >> i'm looking at my notes from his acceptance speech last night. newt gingrich referred, again and again, to the elite media, the media elites, the growing anti-religious bigotry of the elites, how it makes the elite media nervous. i mean, he is loving this. >> and then what did he do this morning? he went on three elite media programs. "meet the press" "daily union" and "face the nation."

he uses the media to his advantage, while gripping what we do. i want to come back to your quote, ryan, which is that we are wrong about everything in the press. how much does our reputation, our collective reputation, suffer for it? if we were in the stock picking business, the clients would be bankrupt. >> we're on twitter, on tv all the time if you are in political journalism now, and the pressure is to predict and over analyze things at every moment. people ask you questions, and the pressure is to be unequivocal about things, and it takes a lot of restraint not to do that. >> restrabt, that is in short supply. >> what needs to be done is what fox did. a little bit of shaming of once in a while to remind us all that predictions matter. >> a little humility never hurts. when we come back after this break, mitt romney, who was the frontrunner in the gop nomination race until, what, 24 hours ago, let's talk about the coverage of the former massachusetts governor. stay with us. with some risk, but proven technologies allow natural gas producers to supply affordable, cleaner energy,

while protecting our environment. across america, these technologies protect air - by monitoring air quality and reducing emissions... ...protect water - through conservation and self-contained recycling systems... ... and protect land - by reducing our footprint and respecting wildlife. america's natural gas... domestic, abundant, clean energy to power our lives... that's smarter power today.

the calcium they take because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. [oinking] [hissing] [ding] announcer: cook foods to the right temperature using a food thermometer. 3,000 americans will die from food poisoning this year. check your steps at foodsafety.gov.

the press has pounced on mitt wrom romney has he has given stumbling answers about whether he would release his tax return and he paid a 15% effective tax rate without an elaborati elaboration. i wonder if the media is feeding a narrative. that romney is so rich that he is clue ands out of touch with regular folks? >> they're covering that issue, and he -- every once in a while he will give them something to work with. romney campaign is very shrewd about releasing information at the most opportune times. this is one where they stumbled a little bit. they took care of his health care man take thing with the speech much earlier in the year last year. hasn't been as big an issue as i think people thought it would

be. now with the tax returns, i think they let him comment, said he would maybe do it, that allowed the press to say when, when, when, when. now they've come out with a somewhat unequivocal statement that tuesday he will release last year's. excuse me. he will release 2010. he says he will only release a summary of 2011. that's going to cause the press to come back. >> somewhat unequivocal. isn't it fair game for the media, jennifer, when mitt romney says, oh, yeah, i did some speaking fees, and it was not very much. turns out this was $347,000. maybe there is a narrative here that money doesn't mean to him what it means to most of us, but he seems to be helping. >> well, i think they mishandled this. they've acknowledged that. they're going to release the tax returns on tuesday. i think the response and sort of this defensiveness by the romney camp is going to change. you saw it last night. >> tell me do you think the coverage is fair? >> i think it has been slightly unfair because they have focused on his wealth. there are many wealthy people

who have been in this campaign. they never focused on the wealth that rick perry made off deals when he was in office. newt beginning research, of course, is not in a man in poverty. >> let me get to this. >> i think the issue is legitimate, and has to be explored and what you are seeing is that residual resistance to mitt romney among republican voters. he never goes above 20% to 25%. >> isn't there -- >> and that's what -- >> very briefly, many journalists have a bit of an inherent bias against someone who was a wealthy venture capitalist who made his money like romney did. >> not against you. >> obviously they're feeding into this class -- >> before we turn on the host here, i got to call -- >> i would like to see your tax returns. >> i'll release all my tax returns. maybe. brian, jennifer, terry, thanks for joining us. after the break, should "new york times" reporters challenge lies and exaggerations by the newsmakers they cover? the paper's ombudsman has taken abuse on that subject. he is here in a moment.

to supply affordable, cleaner energy, while protecting our environment. across america, these technologies protect air - by monitoring air quality and reducing emissions... ...protect water - through conservation and self-contained recycling systems... ... and protect land - by reducing our footprint and respecting wildlife. america's natural gas... domestic, abundant, clean energy to power our lives... that's smarter power today. i'm going to own my own restaurant. i want to be a volunteer firefighter. when i grow up, i want to write a novel. i want to go on a road trip. when i grow up, i'm going to go there. i want to fix up old houses. [ female announcer ] at aarp we believe you're never done growing. i want to fall in love again. [ female announcer ] discover what's next in your life. get this free travel bag when you join at aarp.org/jointoday. c'mon, michael! get in the game!

[ male announcer ] don't have the hops for hoops with your buddies? lost your appetite for romance? and your mood is on its way down. you might not just be getting older. you might have a treatable condition called low testosterone or low t. millions of men, forty-five or older, may have low t. so talk to your doctor about low t. hey, michael! [ male announcer ] and step out of the shadows. hi! how are you? [ male announcer ] learn more at isitlowt.com. [ laughs ] hey!

have more fiber than other leading brands. they're the better way to enjoy your fiber. arthur brisbane thought he would kick off a high-minded debate about whether the "new york times" should work as a truth vigilante. most folks responded with comments along these lines. yes, you moron. brisbane clearly touched a nerve in questioning whether reporters should challenge so-called facts offered by public figures when it could be hard to prove or disprove them. art brisbane joins me from boston. welcome. i have to ask you the reaction to this column was so fierce and so negative that do you regret writing it or wording it as you did? >> well, there's a certain regret in that maybe i could have worded my question differently, but i feel like the subject itself is worthwhile,

and i think that if you look at a lot of what has been written, there's been a lot of good discussion about the topic, so, yeah, i ended up as a pinata on this one, but the subject is important, and i think it's a reasonable thing for the public editor to have raised it. >> certainly a fascinating question with people with strong opinions. you've been painted as the guy who thinks it's fine and dandy to passively publish the misstatements of pole tigs without challenging them. based on what you wrote this morning in a follow-up column, i don't think that's where you are, but that essential is a way you have been portrayed. has the media coverage made of you and the column made you think at all that 345ib the press doesn't always get it right when writing about its own? >> well, i have been on the opposite end of an interviewer in a number of circumstances, so i know what it's like for news makers who scratch their heads about stories that have been published about them. you know, i do feel as if my

initial effort to raise the question translated into a very strange response, one that i was not expecting, especially when you consider, howard, that what i did in my initial blog post was to raise the question, and i really didn't expect that asking a question would translate into a lot of people making assumptions about what i believe and attacking me for notices summings, which largely were false. as you mentioned, you know, in the column, which i produced in today's "new york times", i offered my opinion which, you know, i think would probably surprise some of the people who reacted to my earlier post because, no, i didn't think the "new york times" was a truth vigilante as some people assumed i did, and no, i wasn't asking , you know -- i wasn't saying i thought it was a question whether "the times" should do any fact checking. of course, "the times" should check facts and claims by politicians, but it was a question of degree and i was

looking for reader opinion. >> right. >> and, you know -- >> you do write this morning you think that "the times" should do even more and devote more resources perhaps to fact check blog post you threw this out. mitt romney routinely accuses president obama of apologizing for america. it's not a slam dunk to contradict that. "the washington post" fact checking column said that in every instance, obama's speeches were either misquoted or taken out of context. the point is whether or not it seems tendentious for journalists in straight news stories to be vigorously challenging the premises of what politicians say. >> i think it can get that way. everyone loves the word tendentious. i like the word argumentative. if you argue things that are fairly subjective and argue things constantly in your straight news coverage, you come across as a combatant, to use

the word jill abramson, the executive editor at "the times" used. you come across as a combatant when that's not the role for the straight news reporter. so if you take the apologizing for america thing, multiple fact checking outfits weighed in on that. you cited politifact. there were others. i think each had a different sense. i have spoken to other people. there's a point of view that while it's true the president didn't use the word apologize. so in that sense it's not correct to say he apologized. there's a broader sense of apologizing for something. and it was clear the president did weigh in on some of the very controversial aspects of the bush administration and try to set a different tone. try to establish a departure from how things were done. maybe that wasn't apologizing but it was something. >> right. i understand. >> and just state it's not apologizing maybe goes too -- maybe misses the larger point. >> i've got about a half a

minute. jill abramson saying "the times" does a lot of fact checking. you think the paper should do more. explain what you mean briefly. >> i think "the times" has a fact check feature that applies to the debates and occasionally to advertising. i think broadening it to issues outside of the debates to the campaign at large and possibly to public affairs more generally i think is a sound move to make. but i am saying that ubiquitous argument in daily news coverage, i think, risks creating the appearance of fighting with your newsmakers and your sources. >> art brisbane, public editor of "the new york times." thanks for stopping by. and the media monitor is straight ahead. ♪ sea bass... ♪ ooohhh! ♪ i like it. yeah, i love the kitchen.

[ male announcer ] the epa-estimated 42 mpg highway chevy cruze eco. from looking for your perfect home to finding it. chevy runs deep.

diarrhea, gas or bloating? get ahead of it! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap a day helps defend against digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. hit me! [ female announcer ] live the regular life. phillips'.

time for the "media monitor" our looks at the hits and errors in the news business. south carolina's largest newspaper got hosed. it was just last sunday the state endorsed its pick in the presidential primary, jon huntsman as a man of honor and old-fashioned decency. it was that night their man got out of the race. how did that play at the paper? "it is rather like having gone through a courtship for some period of time and finally making love with a man for him to suddenly turn around and say, you know what? i think i'm gay." classic case study on how journalists feel like scorned lovers. the congressional debate was transformed into something that was impossible to miss. >> gone blank. tonight, the big fight behind what happened to some big names on the web today and why they went away. >> you may have noticed today if you happened to go to google or

wikipedia, the popular websites were blacked out in protest over proposed new crackdown on the internet. >> these and other opponents say the heavy hand of government regulation could ruin the internet. they say new restrictions are needed to crack down on online piracy. and it worked. public pressure forced congressional leaders to put the bill on hold. when "good morning america" credit bs this morning and "today" show covered it, they didn't mention abc, cbs and nbc have lobbied hard for the -- it. they' this is an important story about online freedom and thievery. it's embarrassing the networks didn't fess bup the very clear financial interests of the companies that own them. rupert murdoch's company is still feeling the fallout from

the phone hacking scandal that led him to shut his news of the world tabloid. news corp. agreed to shell out more than $1 million to settle lawsuits with 37 hacking victims, including such celebrities as actor jude law, sports stars, lawmakers and others. here's how we know the cover-up isn't over. the victim' lawyers said senior company officials and directors, quote, knew about the wrongdoing and sought to conceal it by delivering deceiving investigators -- deliberately deceiving investigators and destroying evidence. what a bloody mess. brian williams it turns out is a fan of the gossipy website gawker. he nbc anchor complained during the christmas break that weekends have been allowed to grow awfully fallow and it was a fallow holiday period for those of white house check your stuff ten times a day by iphone. he has opinions about "saturday night live" saying lana delray had one of the worst outings in snl history. gawker posted williams' e-mail.

the nbc press office demanded the story be taken down. that was sent in confidence as friends and absolutely never intended to be public. a speedy removal would go a long way in maintaining the trust and respect we have for your site. well, nbc may be a little less trusting these days. the story is still up. and now we know what brian williams does with his iphone in his spare time. that's it for this edition of "reliable sources." i'm howard kurtz. cnn will continue to follow the breaking news story of the death of joe paterno, the former penn state football coach. stay tuned for more on that. as for our program, join us next sunday morning at 11:00 a.m. eastern for another critical look at the media. you can also download the podcast on itunes or follow us on facebook or twitter. that's it for us. "state of the union with candy crowley" begins right now. good morning from the campus of the university of south