“The Bush administration did not
invent ‘managed news’ but
it has tried to perfect it.”
June 2006 | Art & Soul
Watchdogs of Democracy?
Helen Thomas, a 57-year veteran of United Press International (UPI), has been challenging US presidents with tough questions since the Kennedy administration. As White House Bureau Chief for UPI, Thomas became known for closing presidential press conferences with her signature tagline, “Thank you, Mr. President.”
The feisty reporter resigned from UPI in 2000 and since 2003 has been relegated to the back row during White House press conferences. Asked why, Thomas quipped, “Because they don’t like me...”
Due to her tenacity and longevity, Thomas has long been known as the “dean of the White House press corps.” The recipient of more than 30 honorary degrees, she was named one of the 25 Most Influential Women in America by the World Almanac and is the first recipient of a prize established in her name by the White House Correspondents Association: the Helen Thomas Lifetime Achievement Award.
Born in 1920, the inveterate reporter shows no sign of slowing down. She lives in Washington, D.C., where she writes a syndicated column for Hearst and a weekly podcast.
Earlier titles from this groundbreaking female journalist include Front Row at the White House: My Life and Times (Scribner/Simon and Schuster, Inc.) and the follow-up Thanks for the Memories, Mr. President: Wit and Wisdom from the Front Row at the White House. The excerpt below is from Thomas’ new release, Watchdogs of Democracy? The Waning Washington Press Corps and How It Has Failed the Public.
I don’t believe there has been any administration that has not tried to manage, control, censor or “spin” the news from the White House. It goes with the turf, and reflects the efforts of image makers to always try to put the president’s best foot forward. How the press reacts to the manipulation is another story.
The relationship between the government and the press is adversarial—and may it ever be so. Reporters have a right and a duty to suspect the motives of officials, especially those who want to perpetuate themselves in office, as presidents do. Every administration has found that the media sees themselves as “watchdogs,” not lapdogs. Unfortunately, the events surrounding 9/11 and the war in Iraq subdued the natural skepticism of the press, due in part, to its fear of being castigated as “unpatriotic.”
But there are still some reporters around to challenge and buck the White House’s relentless 24/7 attempt to manage and control the news, standard operating procedure in the Bush-2 administration. Some reporters finally learned to push back. In fairness, the Bush administration, on the tailwind of security threats, did not invent “managed news.” But it has tried to perfect it — to the detriment of the public good.
The modern presidency seems especially to believe that trust cannot be placed in the hands of its citizens by giving them objective facts. Thus, “managed news” has become an art form — the symbol of the “imperial presidency.” And, its manifestation results in attempts to present all information in a controlled environment. Its spokespeople presume that its audience has no ability to assimilate, correlate or draw proper conclusions alone, and must be controlled by a pre-structured format. This results in “spin,” and the less access reporters have, the more government controls the message.
While every presidential administration has managed the news in different and unique ways, which have been specifically suited to the particular circumstances and issues surrounding an historical time frame, every modern presidential administration has utilized many of the same techniques. The first, and perhaps easiest, way to manage the news is to simply deny reporters access to information or an event. For instance, in the Spanish-American War, the Vietnam War, and the invasion of Grenada, press accreditation was taken away in an effort to keep the media at a distance from the crisis at hand. During the 2003 Iraq War, the US, through the guise of the Iraqi officials, banned Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based TV network from covering it.
Second, the president and his staff can harass reporters so that they will present the news in a manner acceptable to the Chief Executive. This can be accomplished through any number of different means. One is to create an environment that makes the gathering of information almost impossible. An extreme example of such interference was the brutal police action in Chicago against the anti-war protestors during the 1968 Democratic Convention. The police, on orders from Mayor Richard Daley, released tear gas on demonstrators and reporters who had assembled. The Vietnam War protestors wanted to send a message to the Democrats and presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey, but the presence of 12,000 police officers and the Illinois National Guard resulted in a bloody riot. Over 500 people were arrested and more than 200 were injured.
Other methods of media harassment commonly used by the White House are threatening to take away press privileges, such as accompanying the president on Air Force One, and attempting to have reporters reprimanded by their publishers if they write a piece of which the president disapproves.
Third, members of a presidential administration often tell the media “white lies” in an attempt to control the flow of news. This usually means giving the press only part of the entire story, although sometimes it involves telling actual lies.
Fourth, the president and his staff can try to control the news in such a way as to create favorable
publicity for the White House and its policies. The typical way in which this is accomplished is by managing government leaks. This can entail one of two types of control: The White House can purposely leak information to the press, or the White House can attempt to prevent members of the staff from leaking any information at all. President George W. Bush goes ballistic over leaks — and has laid down the law to his cowed staff. The first type of control is often used as a “trial balloon” to see how a particular policy will “fly,” while the second is simply another method of denying the media information which may prove unfavorable to the president, his policies or members of his staff.
Fifth, White House news management can be accomplished through the timing of news and the way in which it is disseminated. These elements include the use of press releases, the daily briefing, and the presidential news conference. Press releases can be spaced so as to emphasize one story or another, or to divert attention from controversial stories. For example, President Nixon often used the latter to create news as a diversion from his involvement in the Watergate scandal. At daily briefings the press is allowed to ask the presidential press secretary questions, but White House officials still control the issues and when they will be discussed — and the time at which the briefings will (or will not) take place.
And while the presidential press conference appears to be an open forum for questions, it is, in reality, controlled by the White House. It is staged by the White House and the president’s answers are scrutinized, prepared and rehearsed before the actual event ever begins.
© 2006 by Helen Thomas. From the forthcoming book, The Watchdogs of Democracy? by Helen Thomas, to be published by Scribner, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, Inc. Printed by permission. Available at your local bookstore or online at simonsays.com.
Recommend this page to a friend
Top Ten pages recommended to friends:
