# Arranged questions @ White House press conference **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 24, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855 "2009-06-24T17:59:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/41 "2009-06-24T20:44:16Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > Not necessarily, just so long as they don’t [abuse the access](http://mediamatters.org/research/200906170034) for partisan purposes the way other networks have done in the past. Here is the summary from your link - > [@](#): > > SUMMARY: Fox News hosts and guests have criticized a scheduled ABC exclusive broadcast from the White House, but they failed to mention the extraordinary access Fox News had to President Bush and other officials, using those opportunities to lob softball questions and provide a platform for Bush administration talking points. It appears to be basically a _tu quoque_, that is, an attempt to deflect criticism that the ABC show is going to inappropriately assist the President in pushing his agenda by claiming that another network did something similar for a different President. Which does not address the question. If it was inappropriate for Fox to do it for Bush, is it not also inappropriate for ABC to do it for Obama? I heard nothing but complaints from the SDMB that the press did not do its job in the run up to the Iraq war, and now we have a hugely expensive budget-buster that is based on unexamined premises. Why is this now a good thing that Obama wants to implement an even more expensive budget-buster with even less of an exit strategy? If the argument is merely that ABC will be asking the tough questions, I decline to believe that. The press is curling up in Obama’s lap and going to sleep, and has been since he emerged as the front-runner. They are going to softball the whole health care notion. They are helping Obama as much as they can. They will [stack the polls](http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49999). ABC in particular has a history of using its “news” coverage to help push the Democratic agenda ([cite](http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2009/20090622032200.aspx)). [Business as usual, IOW.](http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/10/22/study_coverage_of_mccain_much.html) Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/42 "2009-06-24T21:03:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > ABC in particular has a history of using its “news” coverage to help push the Democratic agenda Then I’m sure you’re just as against Fox manipulating the facts to push their own agenda- [Over](http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/3/fnc_20090624_sanford.jpg) and [over](http://media.photobucket.com/image/mark%20foley%20d/bobgeiger/Fox_Foley_Label.jpg) and [over](http://www3.allaroundphilly.com/blogs/reporter/wesleym/Lamar%20-%20D.jpg) and [over](http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/191280/toomeypartyswitch.jpg) and [over](http://img183.imageshack.us/i/36b7f3386fb7cf7fe5a4248sk4.jpg/) and [over](http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/70436/original.jpg) again. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/43 "2009-06-24T21:08:33Z")
Son of a gun! That’s the second cite I’ve seen today from CNSNews. **Starving** used them to prove that Khalid S. was tortured to save countless lives, and now **Shodan**. Never heard of them before. Who are these people, anyway? Oh, wait, Michelle Malkin. OK, heard of her. Yeppers. Whaddaya think? “The Right News, Right Now” better than “Fair and Balanced”? ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/44 "2009-06-24T21:20:11Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Here is the summary from your link -It appears to be basically a _tu quoque_, that is, an attempt to deflect criticism that the ABC show is going to inappropriately assist the President in pushing his agenda by claiming that another network did something similar for a different President. > > Which does not address the question. If it was inappropriate for Fox to do it for Bush, is it not also inappropriate for ABC to do it for Obama? If they muffle all counterpoint opinions, provide an unapologetically one-sided approach to the issue, and throw the president nothing but softball questions, then yes–it’s equally inappropriate. But since none of that has been demonstrated yet, I’m going to reserve judgment. Simply because Fox has a single-minded and transparent bias doesn’t mean other networks can’t take such an opportunity of increased access more seriously and objectively. Here’s hoping… ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/45 "2009-06-24T21:22:24Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > And by Fox doing things like that, it’s hurt people’s perception of their credibility and given them a reputation for being biased. Likewise, if ABC’s news special is nothing more than a platform for the President to pitch his health care plan, their credibility will be hurt. Yes, if it’s nothing more than a platform to regurgitate the POTUS talking points uncritically, than I agree 100%. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/46 "2009-06-24T21:31:27Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > So this didn’t rise to a big scandal to me - just like I didn’t gripe and moan when Obama waited until this weak to call on a Fox News reporter. You’re lucky you didn’t gripe and moan, since not surprisingly you are [completely](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df8vYTt_Vy4) and utterly [wrong](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2009/mar/24/barack-obama-obama-administration1). That first link is to Obama calling on Fox News at his _first ever_ White House press conference. :smack: (Full transcripts of those press conferences are available [here](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/PressConferencebythePresident/)and [here](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/News-Conference-by-the-President-3-24-2009/)). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/47 "2009-06-24T21:35:30Z")
He had his fingers crossed in the classic “King’s X” mode, so it doesn’t count. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/48 "2009-06-24T21:42:53Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > What event is Dan Bartlett referring to? He is quoted without context and the link to the original article in your cite is dead. > > If you’re asserting that he said such-and-such, we should be able to follow your links and find out what he said in its entirety. The Post has deep-archived the article, but [here it is](http://www.takebackthemedia.com/newspro/arc72.html) from the beginning to the quote in question: > [@](#): > > Bush’s Distaste for News Conferences Keeps Them Rare > By Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writer - Friday, March 7, 2003 > > The extended questioning of the presidential news conference was a regular exercise for all presidents of the recent past. But President Bush has turned the tradition into a rarity, both because of his distaste for the format and his staff’s determined message management. > > Bush went before 94 reporters for his eighth solo news conference last night as part of his effort to prepare Americans for a likely war against Iraq as increasingly insistent opposition from allies and skepticism at home grow. > > At the same point in their presidencies, President Bill Clinton had held 30 solo news conferences (that is, without a foreign leader at a twin lectern) and Bush’s father had held 58, according to research by Martha Joynt Kumar, a Towson University political science professor who specializes in presidential communication. > > Communications director Dan Bartlett said this White House uses news conferences more sparingly than other types of presidential events, because “if you have a message you’re trying to deliver, a news conference can go in a different direction.” > > “In this case, we know what the questions are going to be, and those are the ones we want to answer,” Bartlett said. “We think the public will see the thought and care and attention he’s given to a lot of the different questions that are being asked about the diplomatic side and the military side and the potential post-Iraq issue. These are all legitimate questions that he has answers for and wants to talk about.” ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/49 "2009-06-24T21:54:33Z")
> [@Lightnin](#): > > Then I’m sure you’re just as against Fox manipulating the facts to push their own agenda- > [Over](http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/3/fnc_20090624_sanford.jpg) and [over](http://media.photobucket.com/image/mark%20foley%20d/bobgeiger/Fox_Foley_Label.jpg) and [over](http://www3.allaroundphilly.com/blogs/reporter/wesleym/Lamar%20-%20D.jpg) and [over](http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/191280/toomeypartyswitch.jpg) and [over](http://img183.imageshack.us/i/36b7f3386fb7cf7fe5a4248sk4.jpg/) and [over](http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/70436/original.jpg) again. I know I am going to be sorry I asked, but what exactly did you intend to prove by posting a series of images of various politicians? I get the feeling you cut and pasted the wrong Google search. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/50 "2009-06-24T22:01:49Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > The Post has deep-archived the article, but [here it is](http://www.takebackthemedia.com/newspro/arc72.html) from the beginning to the quote in question: Right. But since this was a press conference right before the Iraq War - which started two weeks later, it seems to me that the notion that knowing what the questions are comes less from scripting and more from the fact that nobody would waste a question on anything other than the war. Right? Especially given the strident denials from the press that they didn’t participate in scripting? It seems the more likely explanation to me. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/51 "2009-06-24T22:13:15Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I know I am going to be sorry I asked, but what exactly did you intend to prove by posting a series of images of various politicians? Obviously you didn’t look very closely. Those pictures are of Fox identifying people like Mark Sanford and Mark Foley as Democrats in the chyron. This isn’t just someone at Fox mistyping. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/52 "2009-06-25T00:02:00Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Obviously you didn’t look very closely. Those pictures are of Fox identifying people like Mark Sanford and Mark Foley as Democrats in the chyron. This isn’t just someone at Fox mistyping. It’s so weird that I almost wonder if it is mistyping–has anyone checked to see if they misidentify Democrats as Republicans as often as they do the opposite? This is one of those things where the apparent conclusion (they’re trying to trick people into thinking it’s only Democrats who have scandal) is so ridiculously stupid that I’d prefer to see better evidence of it. Still, it’s remarkable how often they misidentify Republican scandals as D. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/53 "2009-06-25T00:12:06Z")
Especially because in 2 of those cases, there doesn’t seem to be a scandal attached (Toomey and Alexander), and in one, it seems like a conflation (Michael Brown, who really is a Democratic strategist and frequent Fox News talking head, but is a different Michael Brown from the former FEMA head). So I don’t know if it is intentional, but it’s certainly strange. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/54 "2009-06-25T00:30:24Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Especially because in 2 of those cases, there doesn’t seem to be a scandal attached (Toomey and Alexander), and in one, it seems like a conflation (Michael Brown, who really is a Democratic strategist and frequent Fox News talking head, but is a different Michael Brown from the former FEMA head). > > So I don’t know if it is intentional, but it’s certainly strange. Hey, incompetence and deliberate malfeasance aren’t mutually exclusive. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/55 "2009-06-25T01:44:45Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s so weird that I almost wonder if it is mistyping–has anyone checked to see if they misidentify Democrats as Republicans as often as they do the opposite? This is one of those things where the apparent conclusion (they’re trying to trick people into thinking it’s only Democrats who have scandal) is so ridiculously stupid that I’d prefer to see better evidence of it. Still, it’s remarkable how often they misidentify Republican scandals as D. Well, [here’s one instance](http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/9/142958/336) of them labeling a Dem as R; however, it’s part of a swap while reporting on an election, so the winning Democrat was labeled R and the losing Republican was labeled D. So it’s still not an entirely innocent context. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/56 "2009-06-25T03:25:11Z")
Its quite funny. Mark Sanford has been on Fox News dozens of times talking out his ass about how he was going to refuse the stimulus money, and guess what? Fox always correctly labeled him as a Republican. But when he gets nailed boning some South American tail, guess what? Now he is a Democrat. Coincidence? If you say so. [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/24/746384/-UPDATED-(x2)-Fox-NewsMark-Sanford-Is-A-Republican](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/24/746384/-UPDATED-(x2)-Fox-NewsMark-Sanford-Is-A-Republican) ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/57 "2009-06-25T04:29:54Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Though I realize the classic Victorian Christmas never really existed, it does not stop me from quasi-nostalgic pining for the good ‘ol days. > > Similarly, I’d like to believe — _really believe_ — that when the President is holding a press conference he is facing a hostile audience (not hostile in a room of Pubbies sort of way, but hostile in the adversarial, checks-n-balances sort of way). I get photo ops. I get arranged meetings. I get a lot of propaganda techniques. Fine. But in my heart I want the line between the White House and the Press Corps to be as sacrosanct as possible. > > I don’t know how far Bush went in making it a gray area. I certainly didn’t think he was the first to do so, but popular conception that between pre-scripted Town Hall meetings, rehersed interviews with soldiers in Iraq (or was it Afghanistan?), planted stories made to look like ‘real’ news, etc., and shill journalists he pushed the boundaries quite far. I think that’s a tragedy. > > Was Obama’s pseudo-plant nearly as egregious? Of course not. But it’s a step in that direction. > > Above all, I get the pragmatics of politics and realize that such a line may never have existed. But I’m still irked. Network news journalism had been on life support since Cronkite and officially died with Tim Russert. In this instance, the President was getting pinged on Iran and needed a question on the current situation to launch into a prepared speech. When a President lines up a topic to discuss in advance then the event becomes more political rally and less press conference. I don’t blame Presidents for doing this but I blame news outlets for passing it off as news. This may explain why the major news outlets are losing audience share. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/58 "2009-06-25T05:14:29Z")
Perhaps you would have a point if there was any chance whatsoever that BHO might not have been obliged to take a question on the most urgent topic of the day. Even if he didn’t want to talk about Iran, it was a lead-pipe cinch he was going to. And if by some miracle it didn’t come up (!)… “Well, Sean, did you see today where that craven, spinelss wussy ducked questions about Iran?” “Well, nobody asked one, just a coincidence they say, sure, uh huh…” ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/59 "2009-06-25T05:22:38Z")
What exactly does ‘getting pinged on Iran’ mean? He was asked questions, and answered them. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855/60 "2009-06-25T12:27:14Z")
IF the President simply used the situation to ensure that some unknown (to him) person in Iran got to ask an unknown (to him) question, which he then answered to the best of his ability without some pre-arranged speech, then it’s of minor consequence. A shrug moment. IF the President used the situation to try and show that he’s going to provide non-mainstream press with access, while at the same time taking some question on a topic that he’s already got a prepared statement for, and will give with little variation regardless of the actual question asked, then that’s a wrong thing to do. If the President wants to start off a press conference with a statement on a subject, he is free to do so. Making it look like it’s the response to some random question on the subject while manipulating the conference so that you get to make the point first, and at the same time appear to be sensitive to the need for non-traditional press to have access to you is turning the conference into a staged event. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arranged-questions-white-house-press-conference/500855.md?page=4)