[philman_36]

The Bush administration has been rapped at least twice by the Government Accountability Office for producing "video news releases" designed to look like news reports to promote its Medicare prescription drug plan and segments about the effects of drug use among young people.
Oh man, have I got an article for everyone to read here!
Dig where it's from...the World Socialist Web Site. And if anyone should be able to readily recognize propaganda it's them.
How the White House and the media package government propaganda as entertainment
Over the past two years an agency of the Clinton White House, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), has secretly worked with all of the commercial television networks to broadcast anti-drug propaganda as part of the story lines of popular, prime time programs.
The networks agreed to weave the government's anti-drug message into TV scripts, in lieu of their legal obligation to broadcast, free of charge, government-sponsored public service ads against drug use.

LOL...too ironic!

[madfly]

Propping Up NCLB

This General Accounting Office report on the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s propaganda activities has some info (legal citations omitted here -- if you want them, follow the link above):

"No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress."

Our research indicates that Congress has imposed this same prohibition, using identical language, on the use of all appropriations for publicity or propaganda purposes annually since 1951. So far, Congress has not defined the phrase "publicity or propaganda." Over the years, we have struggled to give meaning to this limitation while simultaneously balancing the right and duty of agencies to inform the public regarding their activities and programs. We have previously identified a number of activities that are subject to this restriction, including covert propaganda and self-aggrandizement.

One of the activities banned under the publicity or propaganda prohibition involves what is referred to as covert propaganda, that is, an agency's production and distribution of materials that do not identify the agency, or indeed the government, as their source, thereby misleading those who refer to these materials. For example, in 1987, the State Department violated the prohibition when it paid consultants to prepare and publish newspaper articles and op-ed pieces supporting the administration's Central America policy, and presented these materials "as the ostensible position of persons not associated with the government." These publications violated the restriction because they were "misleading as to their origin."

Sounds a bit similar to the Armstrong case, no?

Now, I’m not sure what the GAO or Congress as a whole can do, other than embarrass the administration and tell them to cut it out. But an investigation is certainly warranted.

Also, it’s hardly likely that this is an isolated incident. Who else is on the government payroll? They may want to come clean before the witch-hunt.

And, lastly, shouldn’t Williams give the money back?