Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 10-14-2005, 10:39 AM

here is a longer piece on this latest bushdebacle.

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...401016_pf.html

it is from one of the many curious blog-like features that dailies seem to imagine make them more "relevant" in the present information climate--but as an overview of the fallout from this, it is instructive....

Quote:

Caught on Tape

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, October 14, 2005; 12:51 PM

White House spokesman Scott McClellan repeatedly insisted that the troops participating in a video conference from Iraq with President Bush yesterday morning hadn't been coached.

But the satellite feed of painstaking rehearsals led by a senior Pentagon official said otherwise.

And as a result, television journalists for once had a field day exposing the sleight of hand to which they are more often accessories.

Up until now, the degree to which most Bush events are meticulously choreographed has not been a great story for TV. That's because the elaborate preparations -- the stage-setting, the screening and prepping of participants, and any number of steps to insure that nothing remotely like dissent intrudes upon the president -- all typically happen behind the curtain.

In fact, TV tends to lap up precisely the kind of stirring, spotless imagery the White House normally cranks out for public consumption.

But yesterday, all that changed when an errant satellite feed fell in their laps.

Suddenly, instead of covering a highly artificial and largely newsless event the normal way -- broadcasting the desired images, playing the hoary sound bytes and making it seem like something new was said -- pretty much everyone today led with the artifice.
On TV

It was extraordinary. Brian Williams and Andrea Mitchell spent four full minutes at the top of the NBC Nightly News talking about yesterday's videoconference and the staged nature of so many White House events.

Here's Williams:

"It was billed as a chance for the president to hear directly from the troops in Iraq. The White House called it a 'back and forth,' a 'give and take,' and so reporters who cover the White House were summoned this morning to witness a live video link between the commander in chief and the U.S. soldiers in the field, as the elections approach in Iraq.

"The problem was, before the event was broadcast live on cable TV, the satellite picture from Iraq was being beamed back to television newsrooms here in the U.S. It showed a full-blown rehearsal of the president's questions, in advance, along with the soldiers' answers and coaching from the administration.

"While we should quickly point out this was hardly the first staged political event we have covered -- and we've seen a lot of them in the past -- today's encounter was billed as spontaneous. Instead, it appeared to follow a script."

Williams then turned things over to Mitchell, who showed a brief clip of deputy assistant defense secretary Allison Barber coaching the troops:

"If he gives us a question that is not something that we have scripted, Captain Kennedy, you are going to have that mike and that's your chance to impress us all. Master Sergeant Lombardo, when you are talking about the president coming to see you in New York, take a little breath before that so you can be talking directly to him. You got a real message there, ok?"

Says Mitchell, showing video of Bush on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln: "This isn't the first time the administration used troops to help sell the Iraq war.

"In fact, the Bush White House has choreographed everything from town hall meetings on Social Security to campaign events with planted questions. Many administrations, Democrat and Republican, stage-manage events. Often the news media ignore the choreography."

But the satellite feed, Mitchell concluded, offered "a rare look behind the curtain of a White House trying to sell an increasingly unpopular war."

Here's Terry Moran on ABC last night: "Well, as you know, this is a White House that's prided itself on expert stage managing and polished events of Mr. Bush's public appearances. Today, we got a glimpse behind the scenes.

"It was billed as a simple, straightforward back and forth conversation, a video teleconference between the president and a group of soldiers in Iraq. . . . But those questions, it turns out, came as no surprise to the soldiers. . . .

"Before the president appeared, Allison Barber, a senior Pentagon official, prepped the troops thoroughly, and in a rare White House slip-up, was caught on camera."

Lara Logan reported on the CBS Evening News that Bush's message "was overshadowed by questions about how much staging went into the event."

And even Fox News was in high dudgeon.

Here's Shepard Smith : "At least one senior military official tells Fox News that he is livid over the handling of U.S. troops in Iraq before their talk by satellite live with the president. . . .

"As the White House tries to prop up support for an increasingly unpopular war, today -- to hear it from military brass -- it used soldiers as props on stage.

"One commander tells Fox it was scripted and rehearsed -- the troops were told what to say to the president and how to say it. And that, says another senior officer today, is outrageous.

"It's certainly not the first time a photo op has been staged for the president -- far from it -- but it's the first time we know of that such a staging has touched off such anger."

On comes Carl Cameron: "First, the White House and the Pentagon claimed it was not rehearsed. But for 45 minutes before the event, the hand-picked soldiers practiced their answers with the Pentagon official from D.C. who, in her own words, drilled them on the president's likely questions and their, quote, scripted responses.

"There are folks here at the White House now walking around shaking their heads about how badly it appears to have gone."

On CNN this morning, Miles O'Brien amused himself by apparently reading from a transcript of what Barber said during the rehearsal.

"Here's the part I like," he said. " 'OK, so let's work on that answer a little bit, Captain Kennedy. Why don't you work on -- "We're working with the Iraqi soldiers and to my right is Master Sergeant." ' And then a little later, she says, 'You know, a few smiles wouldn't hurt back here on the TV.' A few smiles."

But it's doubtful that anyone has had as much fun with this story as MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, who under the rubric "White House follies" last night paired what he called "the president's choreographed satellite back-slapping session with the troops" with "the press secretary's knee-capping session with the White House press corps."

"It's like watching the Jesse Ventura show," he said after showing extensive clips of the troop rehearsal, and the ensuing event.

Olbermann asked Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank to explain what happened.

"It really is inexplicable," Milbank said. "This was a White House that did everything right, in terms of imagery, and now they just seem to have completely lost their mojo on fairly simple things. . . .

"It is tempting to say that none of this would have happened if Karl Rove were still alive, but that is oversimplifying. . . .

"I think what you are seeing here is a White House now sitting at 38 percent in the polls, and it has never been there before, and there's a bit of a panic setting in. They don't really know how to get out of this. They have always operated being out in front before and they don't know how to run it from behind."

David Greene of NPR offers listeners four and a half minutes of audio from the rehearsal. He explains: "While it's common to use a trial run to ensure things go smoothly when the president arrives, the event, recorded by NPR, offered some insights into the meticulous nature of advance work."
In the Papers

Thomas M. DeFrank and Corky Siemaszko write in the New York Daily News: "President Bush's supposedly unscripted Q&A session with the troops in Iraq yesterday was unmasked as a sham when a Pentagon official was caught coaching the soldiers Bush was going to question. . . .

"The White House is notorious for stage-managing Bush's events, notably the town hall meetings where prepicked participants ask Bush carefully screened questions. But it's rare that Bush's handlers get caught doing it so brazenly."

Jim VandeHei , writing in The Washington Post, describes it as "one of the stranger and most awkwardly staged publicity events of the Bush presidency. . . .

"Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) was not impressed. 'The American people and our brave troops deserve better than a photo-op for the president and a pep rally about Iraq,' he said. 'They deserve a plan. Unfortunately, today's event only served to highlight the fact that the president refuses to engage in a frank conversation about the realities on the ground.' . . .

"After a day of White House damage control, Pentagon spokesman Lawrence T. Di Rita put out a statement last night apologizing for 'any perception that [the soldiers] were told what to say' at the event. 'It is not the case,' he said. Di Rita said technological challenges prompted government officials to advise the soldiers what questions they would be asked 'solely to help the troops feel at ease during an obviously unique experience.' He said the soldiers decided who would answer."

Warren Vieth and Mark Mazzetti write in the Los Angeles Times: "President Bush touched off a new round of controversy over his policies in Iraq on Thursday when he conducted a videoconference interview about this weekend's constitutional referendum with a small group of handpicked troops stationed in Iraq who reinforced his upbeat view of the conflict."
The Event

The ultimate irony was that after all that rehearsing -- and maybe because of that rehearsing -- the event seemed awkward at best. It was choreographed, as Olbermann put it, "like your fifth grade class play was choreographed."

Pay close attention -- here's the transcript , here's the video -- and you'll notice that the answers Bush gets to his questions are not very responsive, as if Bush didn't ask the questions in the order the troops were expecting.

Bush asks if the Iraqi troops have improved, and Captain Steven Pratt tells him about all the rehearsals for voting day.

Bush asks what the locals think, and Captain David Williams explains that voter registration is up -- and then describes what someone else has heard from the locals, since he himself evidently hasn't spoken to any.

Bush asks how life has changed since the troops first got there, and Master Sergeant Corine Lombardo tells him about the time she met Bush before in New York after 9/11 -- and then answers his earlier question about whether Iraqi troops have improved.

Bush's own delivery was awkward, and his attempts at bonhomie were stymied by the time-lag.

as for the fox reporting, it is hard to say why they were not true to form in this case, that is why they did not try to spin this to the administration's advantage--perhaps because (1) there was no way to do it or (2) because no matter how far to the right fox is, the folk who work for it are officially journalists and themselves have to put up with the white house's riefenstahl-like obsession with generating the illusion of support for bush (when in fact little remains)---and so in all probability they have their own professional axes to grind with being complicit in the farce that is "information" delivered to you and i, fresh brown and steaming, from the white house.

i do find it more than a little amazing, however, that the white house--following the tradition of propaganda as information developed under reagan--has not been held to account for the way in which it operates until now. why did it take a satellitle feed of rehearsal to bring up the fact of the matter concerning how rove operates, how the white house operates? none of this information about staging, rehearsing etc. and their correlates of distortion etc. is new...this particular feed is, but the pattern it shows in action is as old as this administration. why have the networks played along with it?