It’s the dishonesty, stupid

October 14, 2005

I have to admit, I was surprised to see the media smack the White House around with unusual ferocity for the Bush gang’s scripted videoconference with troops in Iraq. We’ve seen these “Bubble Boy” problems before, but reporters acted fed up yesterday. I think there’s a good reason for the change.

To fully appreciate just how embarrassing yesterday was for the White House, one really has to see the media reports. NBC Nightly News made the Bush gang look utterly ridiculous, as did CNN and NPR. The coverage in the major dailies also emphasized the scripted stagecraft, including the Washington Post, NY Times, and the AP. These reports didn’t pull any punches. Kudos to all.

Why was this highly-scripted, overly-manipulated treated differently than all the others? There were two key differences yesterday.

One, unlike Bush’s pre-screened, invitation-only “town hall” meetings, the White House was exploiting men and women in uniform. It’s one thing to tell somebody’s grandmother to read a pre-written question on privatizing Social Security; it’s another to script and rehearse and an “impromptu” discussion with soldiers who are putting their lives on the line. Politicizing a Medicare event is par for the course; politicizing the armed forces is unacceptable.

Two — and here’s the point Bush supporters don’t seem to grasp — the media got aggressive because the White House blatantly lied and got caught.

Scott McClellan said the discussion would be spontaneous. A Pentagon spokeswoman said “the questions were not rehearsed.” The very same morning, the entire White House press corps saw the exact opposite. Indeed, the same spokeswoman who said the teleconference wouldn’t be rehearsed was the same person running the rehearsal.

Apparently, reporters’ tolerance for being lied to has declined considerably. That is what made yesterday so significant.

Post Script: Just as an aside, I wanted to add that my favorite part of yesterday’s fiasco was hearing Scott McClellan pass the buck.

Q: Now, we all saw the event, so without getting into what the President said and what the troops said, can you just talk specifically to the choreography? Did the soldiers know what questions they would be asking? Did they —

McClellan: No, I really can’t, because we coordinate this with the Department of Defense, and you might want to direct questions to the Department of Defense, because when we do these events — we appreciate all the help that they provide — the Department of Defense takes the lead in terms of pulling some troops together so that we can do events like this.

Q: So you, personally, do not know if those soldiers rehearsed their answers before they were on air, live?

McClellan: Well, my understanding is that someone from the Department of Defense was talking to them ahead of time. But I don’t know — I was with the President, so —

Q: Can you find out what the answer is?

McClellan: Yes, I think you might want to talk to the Department of Defense.

Yeah, he’s only the White House press secretary who told reporters directly that it would be a spontaneous discussion. It’s all the Pentagon’s fault. Sure, Scott. Sure it is.

“… the White House was exploiting men and women in uniform. It’s one thing to tell somebody’s grandmother to read a pre-written question on privatizing Social Security; it’s another to script and rehearse and an “impromptu” discussion with soldiers who are putting their lives on the line.”

I saw gaggle clips of the briefing…

None of the reporters came close to asking a question freighted with the moral outrage contained in your italicized quote.

Rather, from what I saw, they merely tried to get Scott McClellan to tell the truth.

The aftermath of Katrina was the first time (and only time) I’ve seen the press package their questions with moral knifes.

So on the one hand, yeah I agree, it was good to see this story go national.

But if none of those reports came packaged with a moral angle… the meaning of this will be lost on the American public as “just politics.”

  • The media has been lied to before and they have ignored it, even when they knew they were being lied to. The only difference now is that Bush’s poll numbers are down so the media suddenly has a spine. If somehow his poll numbers go up again the media will return to their spineless ways.

    The media is supposed to point out the lies and hypocrisy no matter what the polls say, but they are all afraid of being denied access.

  • I don’t think the administration grasps that their media environment has changed dramatically from what it was before. With the President’s polling in the 30’s and much of his senior staff facing indictment, the press isn’t afraid of them anymore.

    WRT revealing the stagecraft behind the photo op: Personally I doubt it’s a question of being morally outraged at the exploitation of servicemen and women (the DC press’s social class is utterly disconnected from the one that recruits come from). I think it’s a matter of no longer being afraid; if Rove et al are headed for the big house, it won’t matter if they try denying reporters access. And whaling on a President who’s this unpopular doesn’t run the risk of alienating viewers.

  • the media are being tougher with the bush administration for two reasons:

    — they have been criticized roundly for five years for their soft coverage of the presidency, including self-serving coverage of the war in iraq and its precursors. this includes many instances of being co-opted by the white house on domestic or foreign policy issues. the judith miller saga is the most prominent example of this, but only one of many.

    — more importantly however, the media are no longer afraid of this administration, specifically of rove. this is because rove has done himself in, i.e., is in serious legal trouble, as well as having his vindictive modus operandi thoroughly exposed. It is also because the president has lost the confidence of many americans, i.e., is low in the polls and in perceived power,.

    reporters, actually editors, rarely attack people or institutions with real power to do them harm. most frequently, they attack the helpless and wounded.

    individual reporters, editors, and even publishers who might have feared retaliation from rove’s white-house based vengance machine now feel that that is less likely to happen.

    reporters don’t have to fear calls to their editors with complaints about a story they’ve done. editors don’t have to fear calls to their managing editor or publisher from the white house complaining about a story and issuing veiled threats. publishers do not have to fear retaliatilon against their corporations from a white house angered by a story or a series critical of the administration.

    as for lying to the media, the bush white hosue has been lying to the media from january, 2001. many reporters and edtiors knew or suspected this. they simply were not willing to attack a president who was deemed popular and who had a very agressive policing unit to deal with wayward journalists. the criticisms came mostly from media fringe elements like web logs.

  • None of the reporters came close to asking a question freighted with the moral outrage contained in your italicized quote.

    Meh, the press is like a dog. First they start out doing something and you toss them a treat. Then you make them do it better next time before they get the treat.

    We need to expect more next time.

  • The Bush White House represents a whole new paradigm in the concept of ‘useless incompetents’. And not in a good way.

  • No, it wasn’t about the lying or who was being used. It was because the conservative media is no longer 100% behind the president, so they’re allowing more honest reporting. It has nothing to do with justice or with the actions of liberals. Just the conservatives beginning to feel some disgust.

    It’s not that we liberals are totally ineffective, it’s just that we’re 95% ineffective.

    When are we going to get our own television station?

  • Folks, this is easy.

    What has changed is that the press SMELLS MONEY.

    Remember, those fuckers are coin-operated. Nothing matters except money. Nothing.

    So we in blogistan, and AAR and a few other pioneers such as Olbermann and Jon Stewart, have indicated a huge MARKET OPPORTUNITY for debunking and exposing this kind of bullshit. The press loves drama, and pathos, and simple, epic, classic story lines. This kind of flagrant abuse of power has all of that.

    Remember, the reason the WaPo went after Watergate was because it SOLD NEWSPAPERS. Duh. That is the only reason the media does anything. Ever. Please keep this in mind.

    Scandals sell. And Americans are starting to demonstrate an appetite for these kinds of stories. Obvious lies and bullshit like Shrub’s fake teleconference make a great, dramatic story. A few media outlets have discovered a market for this stuff, and now they’re all piling on.

    So far, the only person on the left who really, truly, deeply understands how the media works is Michael Moore. But I think the rest of us are starting to catch on.

    Follow the money.

    • Comments are closed.