A Clash of the Titans It Ain't
The job of Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary, is to provide as little substantive information with as much regime spin during briefings as possible. The job of the White House press corps is to slice through that obfuscation and to get as much information as possible. Given the competing interests, fireworks are to be expected, especially with live cameras rolling. However, to blame the presence of cameras for the lack of real journalism reeks of the worst kind of excuse making, and yet that is what the NY Times suggests in an article appearing in today's edition.
By its nature, the relationship between the White House and the press has historically held an inherent tension. And many say it has been eroding since the Vietnam War and Watergate, when reporters had reason to distrust everything the White House said and made a scandalous "gate" out of every murky act.
But today, those on both sides say, the relationship has deteriorated further, exacerbated by the live briefings.
"It's constantly getting worse," said Ari Fleischer, who preceded Mr. McClellan as Mr. Bush's spokesman. Perhaps surprisingly for a Bush defender, he attributed the soured relationship in part to what he said was a secretiveness within the White House.
"It's accented and compounded now because this administration is more secretive," he said.
...Reporters say they are sometimes driven to aggressive behavior because the White House is so tightfisted with information. But there is a larger context to their frustration.
Two caricatures of the White House press corps have emerged as the nation has watched the sausage-making in the briefing room and then seen it analyzed in the blogosphere. Commentators on the left say that the press is manipulated, and that it failed to challenge the administration enough after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the ramp-up to the Iraq war in March 2003. The right says the press is petty, irrelevant and politically biased against President Bush. [emphasis added]
Oh, please.
For the past five years, with few exceptions, the White House press corps has been sleep-walking. Reporter Helen Thomas, in an interview given to NPR last year, suggested that the press appeared to be in a coma. Live cameras sure didn't set off fireworks in the lead-up to the Iraq Invasion. It wasn't until McClellan got caught actually lying during his regular briefing that press spines began to stiffen. Up until that point, when hard questions were asked, and the response was a non-answer, the press could be counted on to nod briefly and shut-up.
Look, when the White House is as imperiously secretive as this one is, and as mendacious as this one is, I don't care if the press resorts to rudeness to get the information the public deserves and needs. Live camera or no camera, the job of the press is to get the story, even if that story is no more than "Once again the White House refused to answer questions about 'X'."
I suppose that's asking for too much these days.
By its nature, the relationship between the White House and the press has historically held an inherent tension. And many say it has been eroding since the Vietnam War and Watergate, when reporters had reason to distrust everything the White House said and made a scandalous "gate" out of every murky act.
But today, those on both sides say, the relationship has deteriorated further, exacerbated by the live briefings.
"It's constantly getting worse," said Ari Fleischer, who preceded Mr. McClellan as Mr. Bush's spokesman. Perhaps surprisingly for a Bush defender, he attributed the soured relationship in part to what he said was a secretiveness within the White House.
"It's accented and compounded now because this administration is more secretive," he said.
...Reporters say they are sometimes driven to aggressive behavior because the White House is so tightfisted with information. But there is a larger context to their frustration.
Two caricatures of the White House press corps have emerged as the nation has watched the sausage-making in the briefing room and then seen it analyzed in the blogosphere. Commentators on the left say that the press is manipulated, and that it failed to challenge the administration enough after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the ramp-up to the Iraq war in March 2003. The right says the press is petty, irrelevant and politically biased against President Bush. [emphasis added]
Oh, please.
For the past five years, with few exceptions, the White House press corps has been sleep-walking. Reporter Helen Thomas, in an interview given to NPR last year, suggested that the press appeared to be in a coma. Live cameras sure didn't set off fireworks in the lead-up to the Iraq Invasion. It wasn't until McClellan got caught actually lying during his regular briefing that press spines began to stiffen. Up until that point, when hard questions were asked, and the response was a non-answer, the press could be counted on to nod briefly and shut-up.
Look, when the White House is as imperiously secretive as this one is, and as mendacious as this one is, I don't care if the press resorts to rudeness to get the information the public deserves and needs. Live camera or no camera, the job of the press is to get the story, even if that story is no more than "Once again the White House refused to answer questions about 'X'."
I suppose that's asking for too much these days.
posted by Diane at 4:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home