Posted on 08/13/2010 10:02:48 AM PDT by Nachum
White House reporters are keeping quiet about an off-the-record lunch today with President Obama — even those at news organizations who've advocated in the past for the White House to release the names of visitors.
But the identities of the lunch's attendees won't remain secret forever: Their names will eventually appear on the White House's periodically updated public database of visitor logs. The White House posts them with a three-month lag, so records of August visits won't be available until late November. (Although, since many of those invited already work in the White House every day, their lunch visit may not register.)
The Obama White House began posting the logs in order to settle a lawsuit, begun under the Bush administration, from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which sought the Secret Service's White House visitor logs under the Freedom of Information Act.
The Bush White House argued that the logs were technically owned by the White House, which isn't subject to FOIA. CREW attacked that view in federal court, arguing that the logs are subject to FOIA both because they are created by the Secret Service -- not the White House -- and because the public has a right to know who the president and White House staffers are conferring with.
And guess who filed briefs supporting that argument? Virtually every newspaper that covers the White House.
The Washington Post filed an amicus brief in in February 2008 arguing that the names of White House visitors should be released, and it was joined by the Associated Press, Reuters, the Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal owner Dow Jones, USA Today, the Hearst Corporation, the New York Daily News, the Newspaper Guild, the Society of Professional Journalists, and a host of other news outlets.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Maybe the details will appear on Wikileaks.
You’re almost as likely to see the details of the next Harry Potter novel on Wikileaks before it reaches street date than THIS information before election day.
The media embargos “certain” things but spills the beans on matters of national intelligence.
You can search Youtube for the clip of Mike Wallace and Peter Jennings saying that they would keep mum if they learned of an impending attack against US soldiers. A journalist “must remain neutral” after all.
Interesting. I have thought that the coverage in the WSJ was suddenly turning very pro-government and pro-Obama. I guess this explains why.
Puting out the Party line. “Here is what you tell your readers/viewers. Nothing more.”
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.