Bad Television
When even a left-leaning reporter like Helen Thomas chides the Whitehouse for staging press events, you know it must be pretty bad:
“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”
Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site. The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.
“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going to ask to control you,” Thomas said.
“I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried to fare-thee-well–for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said. “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”
She’s got a point about them not giving a damn. Here we learn that a “town hall meeting” was actually packed with supporters:
The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be members of groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence.
I know, I know, let’s hear it: “Bush did it too!”
Maybe Bernie Goldberg has a point?
You have to admire the chutzpa. Or maybe not. This is not a problem for the White House, they are just doing what they feel they need to in order to control the message. This is a problem for the “press” those guardians of liberty that are supposed to speak truth to power.
Ha!
Ah yes. The Democrats and Republicans have switched sides of the room on yet another issue. Yaaaaawn. SSDD.
Helen Thomas is the best, by the way. It’s not that shes “left-leaning”, as you so blithely assert. I know it appears that way to you. She’s merely assertive and inquisitive. Always has been. It’s an aspect of journalism so rare in the Beltway that it makes her look like a priest at an orgy.
You can watch video of the exchange written about here.
After watching the video, all is not as CNSNews would have us believe. First off, the conversation starts off about screening the questions that arrive via “Youtube and Twitter and such”. Quite frankly, I have no problems with the Administration screening questions that come in by those means. I don’t want them filtering out hard questions for the Administration, but I also don’t want anybody’s time wasted by morons yelling “San Dimas High School football rules!” That may not be what the entire exchange is about. Since we’re not privy to the majority of the conversation, we don’t know.
Gregg Smith:
This is true, but not really relevant. I doubt you can name a President that hasn’t done it to some extent. Bush did it, Clinton did it, Bush did it, even the Great and Powerful Reagan did it. What’s more relevant is your response to it. I’m not going to go article by article through your archive, but I imagine if I did, I wouldn’t see anything in there where you complain about Bush attempting to control the Press. To you, Bush attempting to control the Press only warrants mention to preempt future comments, not because you consider it a “Bad Thing”, or a “Bad Enough Thing” to comment on. Because of that fact, your “concern” about Obama controlling the Press is revealed to be nothing more than a Republican complaining about a Democrat.
I agree with Mihalis, to a point. I can’t think of a President –with the obvious and usual exception of William Henry Harrison– who didn’t attempt to control media coverage of his administration.
But what I find interesting and dangerous –even under Republican Presidents, on occasion– is the media’s frequent willingness to allow themselves to be controlled. We heard an awful lot of chatter about “speaking truth to power” in the last few years, but since November it’s been such a rarity that when it does happen, that becomes the news.
Since Clinton-era deregulation of media markets, the Bigs are simply making sure no competition chips away at their “news” monopolies. Like most things today, it’s about making money, not reporting news. They’re all in the same ratings business, which for sure’s got little to do with the people’s business.
I was always wondering what would happen if somebody messed up and and let an outsider ask a “real question”?
Then I saw this.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/obamas42strip.jpg
Mihalis, the “Bush did it too” thing was tongue in cheek. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear. You’re right. I was a lot easier on George Bush than I should have been. Doesn’t mean I disagree with him on everything, but I did not squawk as much as I should have.
Do you think that President Bush was treated as favorably by the mainstream media as President Obama is treated?
Gregg Smith:
That’s a really interesting question, and one that’s more complex than yes or no.
I would say that at the beginning of the Bush Administration, he was not treated as favorably as Obama is currently being treated. Then, one day, four airplanes crashed. Two crashed into the Twin Towers, one into the Pentagon, and one in a field in Pennsylvania. For a very long time after that, Bush was given carte blanche by pretty much everybody, including the mainstream media. Obama couldn’t buy coverage from the media that friendly.
Those attacks brought about a great deal of Nationalism, and Bush greatly benefited from it. Obama is getting a good deal of positive press right now, but America is also coming off of a very unpopular (at the end) President. Coupling that with the current economic situation in our country, it’s creating a wave similar to the one that Bush rode after 9/11. As we saw with the Bush Administration, that wave doesn’t last forever.
Speaking of which, I’ve never heard the expression “Obama bashing” used to quell criticism of the president, nor have I heard anyone suggesting it is unpatriotic to criticize a sitting president during war time.
But then we’re always at war, so I guess they have to open the door a crack there.
Mihalis, thanks for a thoughtful response.
I think Helen Thomas is just whining. It’s understandable that Obama would want to answer a question from an Iranian. The question was no softball, and judging from Obama’s awkward response, it wasn’t one he was prepared for. So big deal.
Taking questions from Iranians? Totally stupid.
It was at best one small step for the dying press pool. This may have also been a staged event to look tough and grab some viewers back from their comas.