Sniveling weasels at HHS and the media lackeys who don't question

[SanibelMan]

From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON, March 14 — Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines.

The videos are intended for use in local television news programs. Several include pictures of President Bush receiving a standing ovation from a crowd cheering as he signed the Medicare law on Dec. 8.

The materials were produced by the Department of Health and Human Services, which called them video news releases, but the source is not identified. Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, “In Washington, I’m Karen Ryan reporting.”

But the production company, Home Front Communications, said it had hired her to read a script prepared by the government.

…

The government also prepared scripts that can be used by news anchors introducing what the administration describes as a made-for-television “story package.”

In one script, the administration suggests that anchors use this language: “In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare. Since then, there have been a lot of questions about how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details.”

The “reporter” then explains the benefits of the new law.

…

One question is whether the government might mislead viewers by concealing the source of the Medicare videos, which have been broadcast by stations in Oklahoma, Louisiana and other states.

Okay, so on one hand we have the government handing out propoganda disguised as news clips, and on the other hand we have TV lazy news stations lapping it up like mother’s milk. While I would expect underhanded tactics from this administration, I’m upset and disappointed that apathy runs so deep in American media that some news director in Oklahoma could say, “Hey, look what Health and Human Services just sent us! A perfectly edited, ready-to-air package explaining how the new Medicare bill works! Should we edit it any further before we air it? Should we question anyone else about it, or question anything at all about it? Nah, why bother? I can skip out of here early - this fills a few minutes I was gonna have to work to fill.”

I’ve seen apathy in my time as a student journalist. I’ve seen press releases printed word-for-word in the paper, without attribution. But I’ve never seen such blatant laziness on the part of an institution that should be watching and reporting on exactly this (which, thankfully, the Times has done). I think I’ll pass this on to my advisor and mention that lessons saying “this is wrong” need to be reinforced in J-school. If there’s a bias in the media today, it isn’t right- or left-wing - it’s simply apathy and a lack of any desire to look at what’s given to you prepackaged and ready to air or print with a critical eye.

[rjung]

Tell me the fairy tale about the “liberal media” again, Daddy!

[Jackmannii]

@SanibelMan

But I’ve never seen such blatant laziness on the part of an institution that should be watching and reporting on exactly this (which, thankfully, the Times has done).

I have, actually. There is nothing really new about this practice (it was not invented by the Bush Administration), and it’s typically aimed at medium to small market stations with limited budgets, which may want to give the appearance of having a national reporting staff. As the HHS flack said:

“The use of video news releases is a common, routine practice in government and the private sector,” Mr. Keane said. “Anyone who has questions about this practice needs to do some research on modern public information tools.”

It is a questionable practice when stations use unfiltered handouts.
But its existence has nothing to do with bias in the major media.

[treis]

“Hey, look what Health and Human Services just sent us! A perfectly edited, ready-to-air package explaining how the new Medicare bill works! Should we edit it any further before we air it? Should we question anyone else about it, or question anything at all about it? Nah, why bother? I can skip out of here early - this fills a few minutes I was gonna have to work to fill.”

Do you have any evidence that this is what happened? Is it possible that the news stations reviewed the material found it accurate and decided to air it as is?

The Chairmen of the Commitee of Concerned Journalist doesn’t think so.

Bill Kovach, chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists, expressed disbelief that any television stations would present the Medicare videos as real news segments, considering the current debate about the merits of the new law.

[treis]

Erhm I didn’t word that right. He doesn’t think that stations would air it as a regular news piece.

[Cervaise]

@SanibelMan

propoganda disguised as news clips

This is common practice in the private sector: Newsrooms are inundated with material produced by HMOs, mining outfits, aerospace firms, biotech companies, ad nauseum, slickly produced and ready to be excerpted to fill up the yawning void of time in the nightly newscast. And of course there’s the “entertainment minute,” which is just a press release for the studios and music labels.

It isn’t even new in the public sector. The only difference here, of course, is the high art to which the Bush Administration is raising the technique. That shouldn’t be a surprise, of course, given the big-business private-sector mindset of these guys.

It’s a page out of the Haliburton handbook. This is shocking to somebody?

[county]

>It’s a page out of the Haliburton handbook. This is shocking to somebody?<

Well, no, but it is irritating.