# White House Press Corps - A Pack of Yipping Lap Dogs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 7, 2003, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751 "2003-03-07T17:13:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Jeu\_D\_esprit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/67e7ee/32.png) [@Jeu\_D\_esprit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jeu_D_esprit)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2003, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/21 "2003-03-08T14:55:19Z")
Here’s a thought for you: What if the yipping lap dogs were deliberately trying to be as moronic as possible in order to paint the President in as bad a light as possible. Kind of like letting Bush doing Antony to his own Brutus: “For they are all _honorable_ men.” Then again it would require the average American to have a sense of irony and the ability to analyze information. Maybe Mencken was right: “No one ever went broke underestimating the taste (or intelligence) of the American public.” ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2003, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/22 "2003-03-08T21:51:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kaylasdad99 \* > \*\*So, where does that leave the concept of accountability to the public? Or the American people having a right to know what their government is doing, and why? Out the window? > > Actually, I’ve considered ever since January 2001 that this is the case. I just want Shrub to have the sack to flat out say that out loud to the nation. \*\* The administration is perfectly accountable to the public. Once every four years. Beyond that it’s up to the public to do the digging. And, even as a media guy, I’ve always wondered about the ‘right to know’. It sounds great on the big screen but why should the government feel a need to tell people anything if they don’t ask for it? That’s why we have the Freedom of Information Act. Don’t get me wrong…I’m all for full disclosure. But that doesn’t mean the administration has to give it up pre-emptively. Presidents will do what they’ve always done…whatever they can get away with. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2003, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/23 "2003-03-09T05:38:53Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Jonathan Chance_ > It sounds great on the big screen but why should the government feel a need to tell people anything if they don’t ask for it? Fair enough, I suppose, when put that way. So does this extrapolate into “the administration is justified in preemptively orchestrating its contact with the public\* to ensure tht the questions don’t get asked”? \*and the questioning voice of the public, as represented (or embodied, if you prefer) by the Fourth Estate ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2003, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/24 "2003-03-09T06:02:55Z")
I like the line that went: “The reason the media hated Monica Lewinsky so much is that she took their place.” Now that Clinton is gone and Bush is President, the White House press corps is back on their knees where they belong again. All is right with the world. And if the press corps allows itself to be controlled by White House refusal to recognize reporters who ask unwanted questions or write unwanted articles … they still are shameless lapdogs. If the press wants the respect they claim as the Firth Estate and guardians of democracy, they have to get out of the President’s lap once in a while and stand up and speak the truth. Otherwise, their rep remains … as it is. ---
**Author:** ![Reuben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/54ee81/32.png) [@Reuben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reuben)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2003, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/25 "2003-03-09T08:13:19Z")
Re press access to the White House - **wow**! At least our own Phony Blair, whom I have come to detest more than any other human, has the guts to face a hostile public audience from time to time. It sounds like you’re missing a check or a balance somewhere. Why does the press corps go along with this? Can’t they see the power they have in their own collective hands?? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/26 "2003-03-10T15:07:09Z")
No, they don’t. The President is capable of getting his message out with or without them. Heck, if he wants to make a speech he can _take_ the primetime airwaves and deliver one. I think it’s primarily two parts: 1. Our news media doesn’t have the cultural antagonism that the UK press does. I listen to BBC Worldservice in my car and I’m astounded that they get access what with, not just the questions, but the dismissive attitude the interviewers have to some of the UK government. 2. The press corps is seen as a _part_ of the ‘non-official’ Washington in the States. When you start getting interviewed yourself it tends to make you conservative. At that point they’re less about getting the truth than maintaining their own position as ‘opinion leaders’ or ‘influence peddlers’. Presidents come and go, after all. But the Washington cocktail circuit can be forever. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/27 "2003-03-10T16:24:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jonathan Chance \* > \*\*That’s a message being sent there, folks. Give this administration a hard time and your access is **gone**. > > And that’s the worst thing on earth for a reporter. Absolutely the worst. \*\* Well, it _shouldn’t_ be the worst. And really, it _isn’t_. But the White House press corps _sees_ it that way, and that’s the problem. They’d hate to lose their cushy ride, and have to do the sort of honest digging that would produce _substantive_ stories about the effects of Administration policies. Political coverage mostly seems to look like what baseball reportage looked like, before Bill James. And that’s pretty sad. ---
**Author:** ![booka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e0b2c6/32.png) [@booka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/booka)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/28 "2003-03-10T17:07:15Z")
I watched the whole thing, and came away feeling a little queasy about it. It was all so controlled. Pre-defined questioning order. Predefined questions. WH press people acting like they are at the feet of god. It was nothing except a way for Bush to stand there and repeat his mantra, but without actually explaining it in any degree of detail. “Must kill Saddam, him bad, took oath to protect American people.” The press conference was a sham. I don’t want to see things like this in the U.S… FWIW, I’m a Republican. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/29 "2003-03-10T19:41:05Z")
The weekend _[Globe & Mail](http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20030308/UHOUSN//)_ printed a nice op/ed piece on the White House Press Corps and Thursday’s press conference. Some nice imagery: > [@](#): > > Nor should the impact on reporters of a rigidly controlled setting be underestimated. Mr. Thompson compared it to an elementary-school teacher lecturing children. > > “I mean, Bush was up there with a seating chart,” Mr. Thompson said. “It reminded me of when I was in the fourth grade and you have a teacher calling on people individually. There was no raising the hand, ‘Mr. President, Mr. President, Mr. President.’ Bush was setting the tone. He was in charge and this was going to go the way he wanted it to go.” > > In this environment, said Peter Buitenhuis, a media expert at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C., it would have been unthinkable for a reporter to breach decorum by aggressively pursuing an answer. Mr. Bush, after all, was delivering a sermon. “You don’t get up in church and contradict the preacher,” he said. Me, I’m willing to cut the reporters a little slack-- giving them the entire blame for the tone is like blaming a carton of eggs for not making a big enough dent in a brick wall. Whenever hard questions (and by “hard,” I mean “obvious,”) were asked, they were either completely evaded or answered with drivel that can’t be published without alienating your readers by insulting their intelligence. Example: > [@](#): > > **QUESTION:** As you know, not everyone shares your optimistic vision of how this might play out. Do you ever worry, maybe in the wee, small hours, that you might be wrong and they might be right in thinking that this could lead to more terrorism, more anti-American sentiment, more instability in the Middle East? > **BUSH:** I think, first of all, it’s hard to envision more terror on America than September the 11th, 2001. We did nothing to provoke that terrorist attack. It came upon us because there is an enemy which hates America. They hate what we stand for. We love freedom, and we’re not changing. Ain’t no rolleyes big enough. An aside: I liked the treatment that BCTV news gave Bush’s conference as it was happening. The introduction was something along the lines of “U.S. President George W. Bush has called a rare evening press conference to prepare the American people for the possibility of an attack on Iraq.” Then they cut live to the conference for about twenty seconds, and then back to the anchor-- and I’ll remember her wrap, _verbatim_, forever: “If he says anything we haven’t heard before, we’ll let you know.” Priceless. ---
**Author:** ![CuriousCanuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@CuriousCanuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CuriousCanuck)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/30 "2003-03-10T20:21:29Z")
> [@](#): > > “If he says anything we haven’t heard before, we’ll let you know.” Priceless. Indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/31 "2003-03-10T20:34:10Z")
But wouldn’t that apply to just about anyone’s speeches at this point? ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/32 "2003-03-10T22:00:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jonathan Chance \* > 2) The press corps is seen as a _part_ of the ‘non-official’ Washington in the States. When you start getting interviewed yourself it tends to make you conservative. At that point they’re less about getting the truth than maintaining their own position as ‘opinion leaders’ or ‘influence peddlers’. Presidents come and go, after all. But the Washington cocktail circuit can be forever. This is the part of it that disturbs me most of all. In my view, the importance of the press is that it is independent of the political establishment and there on behalf of the readers/viewers to shine a light on what our government officials are doing. Indeed, it seems that the priorities of the press are reversed these days, with challenging officials on their sexual indiscretions highly regarded, while challenging the spin put out by the administriation or Congressional leaders is not really done. The only analysis seems to be collecting two talking heads on either side of the issue and letting them scream at each other. To have the most serious Washington press calmly and knowingly act without protest as part of the political spin machine is, quite frankly, disgusting. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/33 "2003-03-10T22:35:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Larry Mudd \* > \*\*“If he says anything we haven’t heard before, we’ll let you know.” Priceless. \*\* I couldn’t agree more. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2003, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/34 "2003-03-11T13:41:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Billdo \* > **Indeed, it seems that the priorities of the press are reversed these days, with challenging officials on their sexual indiscretions highly regarded, while challenging the spin put out by the administriation or Congressional leaders is not really done. The only analysis seems to be collecting two talking heads on either side of the issue and letting them scream at each other.** I disagree. There’s a pack-like nature (wave-like, if you prefer) to the political press in Washington. It’s as if most of the upper level press are convinced that because they cover politics they are qualified to be politicians are run the country. They assume their knowledge and experience _observing_ lends equal weight to their policy opinions as those of lifetime politicians. I should note that this is a disease common to reporters and media of all stripes. I’ve worked in publishing in several industries and in ALL of them the editors felt that what they had seen gave them enough knowledge to do better at what they covered than the people they covered. I should name that syndrome sometime. Anyway, when I speak of the ‘pack-like’ quality of media coverage and the arrogance of media knowledge I intend to say that with each of those newsies believing they can do as good a job they’re perfectly entitled to tear down a political player when he shows weakness (of any sort)…political weakness most of all. And, given the competitive nature or the corporate media if one starts getting viewer-traction with a tear-down story the others will jump on board. You watch, folks. If the war goes less-than-well and American kids start coming home in body bags _en masse_ you’ll begin to see stories about how the President was ‘unprepared’ or ‘not up to the task’ or similar cutting remarks. [And here’s something from David Broder on the subject.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8031-2003Mar10.html) ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2003, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/35 "2003-03-11T18:33:13Z")
What, if anything, is to be made of CNN’s omitting this comment of Bush’s, directed at their own senior White House correspondent? > [@](#): > > We’ll be there in a minute. King, John King. This is a scripted – (laughter.) (From the [White House’s own transcript](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.html).) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2003, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/36 "2003-03-11T22:08:46Z")
**Jonathan** , I read Broder’s column (speaking of the old cocktail circuit hands). Neither he, nor anyone else, has mentioned any messages (explicit or implicit) from the White House limiting the appropriate areas of questioning. If you are right, Broder _et al._ are doing the nation a disservice by not spilling the beans - especially when Broder blames the limited focus of the questions on the press corps itself. I mean, if the White House wants to limit the areas of questioning at a news conference, that’s their business, but if so, it ought to be out in the open that that’s what happening, and Broder shouldn’t be carrying their water for them. Thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/37 "2003-03-13T00:09:53Z")
I wouldn’t be surprised if Broder simply assumes that people know it. I know NPR mentioned the question limitations. Let me be clear that this doesn’t only happen in politics. I know entertainers do the same thing (and for that matter so do business executives). But I don’t want to excuse Broder, God knows he _is_ a part of the cocktail circuit. Such things should be made clear…but I doubt the will be. As an addenda… Just a few posts up I said: “Anyway, when I speak of the ‘pack-like’ quality of media coverage and the arrogance of media knowledge I intend to say that with each of those newsies believing they can do as good a job they’re perfectly entitled to tear down a political player when he shows weakness (of any sort)…political weakness most of all. And, given the competitive nature or the corporate media if one starts getting viewer-traction with a tear-down story the others will jump on board.” Now take a look at Howard Kurtz’ media column today: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14455-2003Mar12.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14455-2003Mar12.html) This could be the beginning folks. If these stories start being reflected on the call-in shows and letters to the editor the WHPC will start to smell blood in the water. And if that happens that could destroy this administration or at least render it ineffective. I **know** there’s resentment from the press on the tight media rules this administration subscribes to. And the only thing the Press Corps enjoys more that building up is tearing down. They all know they did it to Nixon. They’d love to do it again. I can’t tell you if it’s starting. But watch for it. Watch for signs of desperation on the part of the White House. Increased access for the senior media people…more press conferences. Good spin from the press contacts. They’ll all be pushing a conciliatory line. Whether it works is up to the press and the American people. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/38 "2003-03-23T16:37:55Z")
The US media needs a strong dose of [Jeremy Paxman](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/2732979.stm). ---
**Author:** ![SanibelMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@SanibelMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanibelMan)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/39 "2003-03-23T19:32:50Z")
I liked that article. But I doubt we’d ever see Bush being “cross-examined” on anything. The media is way, way more controlled here, if not by direct force, then by a refusal on the part of the administration to have the president be held accountable to what he says. ---
**Author:** ![SanibelMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@SanibelMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanibelMan)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751/40 "2003-03-23T19:33:57Z")
And when I say “that article,” I’m referring to **jjimm** ’s link to a BBC interview with Tony Blair. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-press-corps-a-pack-of-yipping-lap-dogs/159751.md?page=1)