Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The recent articulation of the Post-Washington Consensus within the most prominent development institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, has been met with two fundamentally opposed responses. One the one hand, critics of the development establishment maintain that the Post-Washington Consensus and the policy changes that it involves do not represent a shift away from neoliberal policy practices but have rather tightened the grip of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) over developing countries, foreclosing social and political alternatives to neoliberal practice. On the other hand, supporters of the IFIs argue that the Post-Washington Consensus represents a fundamental rupture in development thinking and a progressive move away from policy conditionality towards country ownership and the acknowledgement of the importance of home-grown institutions and policies. This paper presents a different interpretation of this recent shift in development discourse and practice. It will argue that the bifurcation in the literature has led to a significant impasse in understanding the relevance of this policy shift. The paper will show that Post-Washington Consensus neither represents a fundamental rupture with the Washington Consensus nor an attempt to reproduce the same neoliberal policy regime. In order to capture this ambiguity, the paper introduces the concept of inclusive neoliberalism and argues that the Post-Washington Consensus is the first step towards the tendential emergence of an inclusive-neoliberal regime of development in the global economy. The paper is based on a reading of IFI publications and interviews with Bank and Fund officials.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Research on the media coverage of war and major foreign policy issues assumes a unitary press with so-called “national media”—primarily those with full-time correspondents based in Washington, DC—setting the agenda and framing issues for all subsequent coverage. Increasingly, however, Washington journalists have been criticized for “pack” behavior, shallow coverage marked more by clash and conflict than analysis, and excessive deference to potential news sources.In 2006, the independent Iraq Study Group (also known as the Baker-Hamilton Commission) researched and presented an extensive, comprehensively assessment of the Iraq War with specific policy recommendations. Prior to the release of the ISG’s final report, Washington journalists were reporting (largely inaccurately) the Commission’s recommendations and predicting its failure to influence the national policy debate. The final release of the report did not result in any visible correction of early, inaccurate reports and the ISG quickly dropped from the headlines. If past media patterns are predictive, news outlets beyond the Beltway would have followed suit in their coverage of the ISG. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that media outside DC were skeptical of the coverage of the ISG. This paper will explore the contrasting news reporting. Anecdotal events will be studied for their validity. Results will be analyzed to determine whether this is a unique, one-time phenomena or representative of changing trends in the relationship between national and local news outlets coverage. The paper’s author served as an advisor to the Iraq Study Group and assisted with the ISG’s media relations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper is part of a larger project in which we explore the nature and consequences of media coverage of hate crime. Here we present the results of the first part of the project, an analysis of media coverage of hate crime from 1990 to 2000. We analyze coverage of hate crime in the Washington Post to begin to understand the information that is available to readers of mainstream news. Specifically, we examine the frames and causal attributions offered for making sense of hate crime. As a point of comparison, we also analyze coverage in the Washington Blade, the gay newspaper in Washington DC, to understand how the gay community frames this issue. One test of whether mainstream media help their audience to see anti-gay hate crime as gays do is to see if they invoke the same frames as the gay press. We find that the gay press is much more likely to cover hate crime across the decade. Readers of the Washington Blade are much more likely to encounter articles dealing with hate crime than readers of the Washington Post. For the Washington Post, substantial coverage only comes with the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard. On the other hand, the Post does include many of the same frames invoked on behalf of hate crime legislation. The perspective of the gay community in this respect is present in Washington Post coverage.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper is part of a larger project in which we explore the nature and consequences of media coverage of hate crime. Here we present the results of the first part of the project, an analysis of media coverage of hate crime from 1990 to 2000. We analyze coverage of hate crime in the Washington Post and New York Times to begin to understand the information that is available to readers of mainstream news. Specifically, we examine the frames and causal attributions offered for making sense of hate crime. As a point of comparison, we also analyze coverage in the Washington Blade, the gay newspaper in Washington DC, to understand how the gay community frames this issue. One test of whether mainstream media help their audience to see anti-gay hate crime as gays do is to see if they invoke the same frames as the gay press. We find that the gay press is much more likely to cover hate crime across the decade. Readers of the Washington Blade are much more likely to encounter articles dealing with hate crime than readers of either the Washington Post or New York Times. For the Mainstream papers, substantial coverage only comes with the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard. On the other hand, the Post and Times do include many of the same frames invoked on behalf of hate crime legislation. The perspective of the gay community in this respect is present in mainstream coverage.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: I examine Senate candidates utilizing a Washington outsider campaign strategy. My analysis seeks to understand why certain candidates will pursue this strategy.