Glimpses of a Leader, Through Chosen Eyes Only

The New York Times ^ | July 12, 2003 | ELISABETH BUMILLER

[ThePythonicCow]

The official White House photograph of President Bush, splashed across the front pages of the nation's newspapers last summer, showed him striding vigorously on a Camp David trail, just hours after he had been sedated for a colonoscopy. It was a flattering portrait of a fit chief executive, ready to take up the nation's business once again.

And no wonder, say photojournalists: the president had selected and approved the photograph's release to the news media.

Eric Draper, the chief White House photographer and the only photographer allowed at Camp David that weekend, had shown Mr. Bush the small image of the picture in the back of his digital camera. "I said, `What do you think about this?"' Mr. Draper recalled in an interview in his West Wing basement office last week. "And he said, `O.K., that's good.' "

[ThePythonicCow]

A predictably negative spin (given its source, the NYTimes). But a subject near and dear to the hearts of us Bush Bots on the Daily Dose.

[Support Free Republic]

Aww man! Enough of the fundraiser posts!!!

Only YOU can make fundraiser posts go away. Please contribute!

[ThePythonicCow]

Not sure if the fascinating subject of this article (pictures of Bush) makes up for the negative spin or not.

Pinging the apprentice Dose Masters; perhaps this is worth a wider mention.

I originally found this off a link from Drudge.

[Paul Atreides]

No matter the type of coverage, it is sickening the amount of coverage the media is giving to Bush "photo ops," given the eight years of the media-hog Clintons.

[Miss Marple]

What does it matter when most of those photos are never used in the papers anyway? Why is there a Dose? Because the papers won't print the pictures and we would like to see what the President is doing!

[ThePythonicCow]

Sorry you find it sickening.

One man's "media hog" is anothers "leading with style". Just as guns, war, and diplomacy can be used for good and evil ends, so can the media.

To my view, it is fitting and proper, and in America's best interest, that W. lead, in a publicly visible manner, using the media to gain the support of as many as possible.

It was, and is, disgusting and improper, and harmful to America, that Clinton abuse his office and station, to use the media to flaunt his sick, inflated ego.

[PoisedWoman]

Mr. Draper is an excellent photographer. I hope he puts out a book soon. And then another. And another.

[Paul Atreides]

I am not faulting Bush on this, just the way that some in the press are portraying it. It has been that way ever since W landed on the carrier. Even when they are being overall positive, there is an under layer of snottiness, as if W's day consists only of posing for photos. I know that what ever he does, the media will try to tear it down, but it still doesn't stop it from being sickening.

[Paul Atreides]

I am talking about the way the media makes it sound when W has his picture taken. It brings to mind some of the articles about Laura Bush, shortly after the Bushes were in the White House. Some of them were overall positive, but there were subtle little undercurrents of snottiness thrown in.

[PoisedWoman]

is sickening the amount of coverage the media is giving to Bush "photo ops," given the eight years of the media-hog Clintons.

Yes. But I think it's a good thing the administration is releasing only the ones they like. The media would never have printed a photo of Clinton scratching his tush, but they'd run a Bush scratch on the front page.

When Dubya went to the opening of the Olympics, he sat in a box with his wife. The only time the cameras trained on him were shown on the screen was when he rubbed his nose, etc.

[Paul Atreides]

I also really have to wonder if they would have shown footage of Bubba and Hillary sitting in the Jeep while the elephants were getting it on.

[william clark]

Sounds like Ms. Bumiller needs to be informed about Hillary's refusal to be photographed with children who were too sick or too disabled to make for cuddly press releases.

[Paul Atreides]

It turned out good for the kids; they had enough problems at the time.

[skr]

The President of the United States is allowed to choose flattering photos of himself?! Gasp!

[ThePythonicCow]

Yeah - it's just not fair.

Not all of us can do that - well, if only I could find a flattering photo of myself ...

[Miss Marple]

You are quite right. I was being a little sarcastic towards Ms. Bumiller.

Since Gannett took over our local paper, I rarely see a picture of President Bush in it, and when I do, it is either the size of a postage stamp or it is an ugly freeze frame from a video capture. I know what they are up to and it makes me angry.

[Rudder]

I find that I'm reading about 1/2, than I would normally, of the articles posted on FR since unecessary exerpting has become a trend. Why did you not post the entire article?

[Paul Atreides]

I think that NYT and Washington Post articles can only be excerpted. However, that doesn't mean that other news sources have to be.

[ThePythonicCow]

Ah - I was remembering wrong. I too was thinking that the NYTimes, from which this posting came, was one of the papers that we had to excerpt. This is why I excerpted it. But according to the Free Republic home page:

Free Republic has settled the alleged copyright infringement suit brought by The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post and has agreed not to post full text articles from their publications or any of their related subsidiaries and affiliates.

I agree with posting entire articles, and except when posting from a source that I think we have to excerpt, I more or less always do so.