Posted on 07/10/2009 11:07:33 AM PDT by seanmerc
WASHINGTON -- It’s not news when the White House tries to manage the news. That has always been the case.
But it is news when Obama administration officials -- the folks who proclaimed that they would bring unprecedented openness and transparency to government -- fall all over themselves trying to manipulate news briefings and attempting amateurish stagecraft at public meetings.
The president relies on a list of handpicked reporters to call on at his formal news conferences -- and the fortunate few are not necessarily accredited reporters but include new age self-appointed journalists or anyone with a laptop.
The White House staff selects both the professionals and ringers for the call-on list. Some are alerted the night before the news conference that they will be called on. This leaves the impression that the White House is trying to influence the questions the president will be asked-- which may or may not be true.
At his most recent news conference, President Barack Obama recognized a blogger, who had been invited by the Obama staff to attend the briefing and then steered into asking a question about the Iranian election, a topic that Obama was eager to address. I’ve heard of planted questions, but this was a planted questioner, an odd addition to the medley of White House feints designed to manipulate the news.
With the White House pulling all the strings, reporters become their puppets. Those not called upon -- well, they are nothing but props or extras at the big show in the East Room of the White House.
The Obama administration, like many of its predecessors, also has adopted the so-called "town meeting" format to give the president a forum that allows him to market the party line without appearing to do so. Access is limited and questioners are carefully selected so that viewers and readers get the purest form of the president’s message, whatever the topic may be.
Spin and propaganda do eventually become transparent, but sometimes the deception can lead to unjustified war -- as we have seen in the recent past. It’s as if the message managers become deceived by their own spin.
All of this is particularly unfortunate at a time when the nation needs a free and unfettered news media to scrutinize the new administration and its new policies.
The military keeps us safe but the press -- which informs the American people -- keeps us free.
The importance of a free press is best illustrated by its prominence on the to-do list of would-be dictators. The first move by coup supporters is to seize the news media, take over the local broadcast stations and censor the newspapers.
In the U.S. the term "managed news" was coined in the Kennedy era, giving a handy title to a practice that previous presidents had also attempted. Perhaps this practice reached its high water mark during the Ronald Reagan administration when the former Hollywood actor and Michael Deaver, his deputy chief of staff, collaborated to meticulously construct the president’s image. It seemed that not a Reagan wave went unscripted.
Much as White Houses try to control the news, it’s not that easy in a free society.
I think of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s attempt to set up a "disinformation" office at the Pentagon. When it was quickly exposed and dismantled, Rumsfeld indicated he would spread out the bogus news operations to other agencies of the military.
It’s a shame that the Obama administration has discarded his high-sounding rhetoric about transparency and openness. So far, it looks like change we can’t believe in.
I used to be the guy who posted Helen’s weekly column a few years ago, before I got tired of it. I don’t think you need a “HORRIFIC IMAGES!!!” subheader every time you post one. Anybody who made it to FR is already painfully aware of HT’s appearance.
Gee,it hurts to look at that mug.
Exactly.
You wouldn’t believe the messages people send when I don’t include the warning! :-)
she was born August 4, 1920 soon to be 89 years old
Trust me, I’ve been there. I’ve even included warnings in the subheader like you. I’ve come to understand that when you do such things, you make it all about the vile woman’s looks, and not the hateful things that are coming out of her mouth. I’m all about posing things people are going to disagree with, so they can be properly rebutted. I just don’t like seeing it become an excuse to post fifty ugly pictures of a famously ugly woman. She knows she’s ugly.
Trust me, I’ve been there. I’ve even included warnings in the subheader like you. I’ve come to understand that when you do such things, you make it all about the vile woman’s looks, and not the hateful things that are coming out of her mouth. I’m all about posing things people are going to disagree with, so they can be properly rebutted. I just don’t like seeing it become an excuse to post fifty ugly pictures of a famously ugly woman. She knows she’s ugly.
Chortle.
Stopped reading right there. It's much better that way.
BTW, I understand through an email from Accuracy in Media that H.R. 533 is honoring our gal for her "unflagging and honest coverage of every president of the United States since John F. Kennedy."
Sorry if that is what the article is really about. I really did stop reading after your clever by line.
Helen circa 1960's with the Kennedy family nurse:
Whoa! How ironic is this??? An inaccuracy from Accuracy in Media???!!!??? The HR 533 for this term that I looked at isn’t sponsored by the Rep. named in the article at all, and doesn’t seem to be a resolution honoring our star reporter. Well...more to follow...
You probably needed to do a tech refresh anyway. :-)
MY EYES!!
Those images are BURNED onto my retina!!
The HORROR!
Check posting #29- you may want to place that in your personal page.
Is that one of those Irish singers ?
Just add some text and you’ve got yourself a horror movie poster!
I love this Helen Thomas ping list. It never fails to make me laugh and I am always amazed by FReepers’ creativity. Thank you, seanmerc, for making the effort for us. Any way you want to post it is fine with me.
It’s true we are all God’s children; but so was Judas. I think one of the Gospel writers called him a demon. Even Jesus called the pharisees names. Shall we call Helen a “whited wall” or viper instead?
No, I think Helen’s ugly thoughts and writings and all the disrespect she showed to President Bush warrant calling her names and making fun of her. She has done all she could as a “journalist” to damage the war effort and conservatism. If FReepers want to laugh at her expense, it’s okay with me!
“Evidently the software at my office is blocking out the pictures.”
You lucky stiff!
Wow, all three of those women in that photo are “rather plain” and all have substantial noses. Have I said that delicately enough?
I do like the way that little boy is looking at Hellen with his chin out and a defiant look in his eye. Also, I believe that, back then, it was considered disrespectful to have your hands in your pockets when talking to an adult. All in all, I’d say that fine young man has got Hellen’s number.
Back then, boys were little men. I miss those boys. I don’t know how my daughters are going to sift through the sissies of today and find a manly guy.
Great post ,MaggieCarta!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.