Pack Journalism

PACK JOURNALISM IS a term coined by Timothy Crouse to describe the phenomenon of news reporters following political candidates or a story in a “pack,” providing similar coverage of the story. It has become a pejorative term that suggests that, instead of checking facts, reporters follow what other reporters are saying and writing, reflecting laziness on the part of the media and fear of getting the story “wrong.” By reporting what others are reporting, the critics of pack journalism argue, the media limits public knowledge. Further, they argue, when journalists rely on “official sources,” their reports often support the political status quo. Pack journalism occurs because reporters often depend on the same sources of information when reporting a story. They also spend a great deal of time around one another and because they are aware of what each reporter is reporting, eventually a consensus emerges over what the story is about.

The term emerged from the 1972 presidential campaign. Timothy Crouse wrote The Boys on the Bus (1973), which was an expansion of a series of articles about the press covering the election that he wrote for Rolling Stone magazine. The most significant aspect of Crouse's analysis was that the press not only covered the news, but also was part of the news. Crouse suggests that sometimes the pack may get the story wrong because of their isolation. Of the reporters covering Senator George S. McGovern, a group who came to believe that McGovern might win, Crouse wrote:

Crouse explained the phenomenon of pack journalism as follows:

Critics of pack journalism argue that incorrect facts are repeated often enough so that they are believed to be true. During the 2000 presidential campaign, a reporter for the Washington Times claimed that New Hampshire officials friendly to Vice President Al Gore had released, at the vice president's request, four billion gallons of water from a dam into the drought-stricken Connecticut River in order to allow Gore to paddle down the river in [Page 480]a photo opportunity. The story reported that the cost of this event was $7 million. The story was repeated by a number of major media outlets. The facts, later revealed but not extensively reported, were that 500 million gallons (which would have been released later the day of the vice president's visit) were released at virtually no cost as the water passed through hydroelectric turbines and generated electrical power that was sold to consumers.

...