Today, Politico has a long, much-Twittered-about piece detailing “why reporters are down on Obama,” (for starters, named and unnamed reporters say, the White House plays favorites with reporters, is stingy with access, and “even reporters for major newspapers say they have trouble getting their calls and e-mails returned”).
David Cay Johnston, writing for CJR on January 29, 2009, wondered if “President Obama’s messages about open government” perhaps hadn’t reached press secretary Robert Gibbs and his staff. Wrote Johnston:
I’m still waiting for Gibbs, or someone with authority to speak on the record, to call me back for that interview I wanted to start with—and now for a second one about how the White House press office operates.
More Johnston:
While it is too early to judge just how this will work out, the early signs are troubling. And interviews with a dozen Washington reporters indicate that the Obama press operation tends to embrace friendly questions, while treating skeptical questions as not worth their time or, worse, as coming from an enemy.
From Politico today:
A routine press query can draw a string of vitriolic emails. A negative story can draw a profane high-decibel phone call – or worse. Some reporters feel like they’ve been frozen out after crossing the White House.
From Johnston in January ‘09:
As of now the Obama press office is effectively, if perhaps unintentionally, working against President Obama’s campaign promises of change and transparency. Will that change? Will the disdain of the Bush years give way to open government that understands, and appreciates, society’s watchdogs?We’ll have to wait and see.
From Politico today:
A few days later, Gibbs said at one of his briefings, “This is the most transparent administration in the history of our country.”
Peals of laughter broke out in the briefing room.
What’s so funny? More from Politico:
“The access is much poorer than the Bush administration,” one national newspaper who regularly covers the White House said. “This is wider than just the White House. I feel like the political appointees in a variety of agencies are more difficult to get to. There are people…you could reach in the Bush administration that now they say ‘That position does not speak to the press. We do not give background. We do not give anything.’”
Yet another round of the weekly whinefest from the White House Press Corps. I love reading yet another insider story about how hard it is for these poor, entitled crybabies. Do they ever write any actual news? All I ever see of their product is petulant whining and insiderish water-cooler gossip. I think they must assign the laziest reporters in town to staff the White House briefing room.
Take, for comparison, the reporters on the Congress beat. These reporters are constantly calling, emailing, interviewing, attending pressers, watching hearings and debates, following up, doing all manner of a reporter's job. Their stories turn to be actual solid news: what legislators and policy makers say, what they do, how the bill is making it through the grinder, how they voted, what polls say about public support, maybe some back story, maybe some analysis. Sure, some are better and some are worse, some tend to overwrite, some phone it in, they get it wrong sometimes, but basically what they write is actual news.
Not so the White House Press. For these entitled foofs, the story is all about them and what they think. Well, who really cares what they think? When Obama holds a town hall meeting, I want to know what the actual questions were, and what the answer was. I want to know if the crowd was hostile or friendly. I want to know who was invited and who attended. Of course, I want to know if there were protests, interruptions, anyone tasered -- you know, news.
But no. The White House press types up their snarky, substance-free stories for days and days about how uncomfortable they were, how they didn't have a clear sightline to the podium, how bored they were with the questions, how really, really, bored they were with an exceptionally detailed answer. Opinions about "how it played" and what this might mean for November. Never bothering to report on the substance, of course -- that's too boring for them, and they don't really understand it enough to describe it anyway. That's our White House Press Corps.
I think Ana Marie Cox was on to something. Ana Marie Cox -- Why We Should Get Rid of the White House Press Corps - washingtonpost.com
#1 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 29 Apr 2010 at 12:03 AM