Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 60
  1.    #21  
    Here's a great summary of the Bush admin propaganda machine.

    Bush administration blurs media boundary
    Controversy over a 'journalist' adds to the buzz about message control in capital.


    By Gail Russell Chaddock | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

    WASHINGTON - First came video "news releases" produced by the Bush administration using a TV news format. Then came three conservative columnists who got big paychecks from federal agencies. Now, there's Jeff Gannon (not his real name), a journalist (maybe) who gained surprisingly easy access to the president, only to lob a sympathetically slanted question.

    No evidence has surfaced that Mr. Gannon was directed by the White House, but the circumstances ignited a debate over the inner workings of the White House press room.

    Presidents from George Washington on down have struggled with a news corps viewed as hostile. And in the age of television, the art of message management has been increasingly vital to the modern presidency.

    But taken together, these recent controversies suggest that the Bush administration may be pushing that craft into new territory - and testing the limits of presidential public relations.

    "The public has a reason to be concerned about the ways in which political manipulation is influencing journalism," says Larry Gross at the Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Southern California.

    Of course, the line between salesmanship and manipulation can be blurry. The White House's ability to stay "on message" has won respect even from its critics, albeit grudgingly. At the same time, other moves by the administration have raised concern.

    In January came news that commentator Armstrong Williams, a syndicated broadcast host, had received a $240,000 payment from the Education Department to promote the No Child Left Behind Act. On a lesser scale, commentators Maggie Gallagher and Michael McManus were paid $21,500 and $10,200, respectively, to advise the Department of Health and Human Services on its marriage initiatives. Unlike Williams, neither were paid explicitly to promote White House policy in their columns.

    A 2004 video produced by the Health and Human Services Department to promote the administration's new Medicare prescription drug law ended with the tagline in journalese: "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting."

    A number of local TV stations aired this spot and others produced by federal agencies, without disclosing their source.

    Last May, the General Accounting Office ruled that the prepackaged news report segment violated a law prohibiting the use of federal funds for propaganda because it did not identify the government as the source of the news report.

    It is unclear whether such activities occurred with any sanction from within the White House. In the wake of the publicity about Mr. Williams, President Bush has disavowed the practice of paying journalists. "All our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying ... commentators to advance our agenda," he said. The Federal Communications Commission is investigating the payment to Williams.

    Still, the climate of the administration has been one of growing public relations initiatives. Since President Bush took office, contracts for public relations work with the federal government have jumped from $39 million to $88.2 million last year, according to a report by Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee. These contracts cover everything from promoting the newly revised food pyramid to funding major initiatives from schools to Social Security.

    The Bush administration isn't the first to pay journalists to promote their causes. President Jefferson hired journalist James Callender to attack his rival John Adams, only to have Callender later turn on him with reports that he had fathered a child with his slave, Sally Hemings.

    The classic presidential tack for managing the news is to shut off access to journalists. Deeply frustrated by the coverage of the Watergate scandal, President Nixon directed his staff to ban any representative from the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time Magazine, Newsweek, CBS, and a UPI reporter from the press pool - an order his staff largely ignored. But during the 2004 campaign, a New York Times reporter assigned to cover Vice President Cheney was routinely excluded from the press plane.

    And adversarial relations with the media aren't limited to Washington, D.C. In Maryland, a federal judge ruled Monday that Gov. Robert Ehrlich (R) can bar state employees from talking to two reporters for the Baltimore Sun - a move described by Sun editors as "scary."

    While such actions rankle the press, they don't always disturb the public.

    "Over the past several years, the Bush administration has learned that it can engage the press in an adversarial way, and the public won't mind. It's yet another step in managed news," says Tom Hollihan, another journalism expert at USC's Annenberg School.

    These include screening the people who attend meetings that appear to have a town-hall format, and bypassing the national media to go directly to local media where, he says, "there are more softball questions."

    In a preemptive move last month, senior House Democrats called on the White House to halt "use of propaganda" to push the president's plan to create private or personal accounts in Social Security. Democrats are requesting all materials created for radio, TV, or newspapers and other venues to promote the plan.

    "There is a pattern of propaganda by the Bush administration that must be stopped," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi.

    The Gannon case raises the tougher question of who gets to be a journalist. In Washington, credentialing standards vary among the different branches of government. Gannon, who wrote for the GOP-linked Talon News website, was first criticized by liberal Internet bloggers, who objected to the pro-administration slant in his questions, such as "...How are you going to work with [Democrats] who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?"

    Turned down for a congressional press pass because he did not meet the standards set for a journalist, James Guckert (Gannon's real name) has had access to the White House briefing room for more than two years on day passes. "Many seasoned journalists have not had the honor of attending the events or enjoying the access Mr. Guckert has," said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D) of New York. This week she asked for release of information on Gannon's credentialing.
  2. #22  
    ALL MY BASE ARE BELONG TO BUSH FOR FOUR MORE YEARS.

    Hereís to you and many like you posting liberal dribble during that time, that will make no difference. Be like me during the Clinton years and jump on for the ride instead of complaining every day.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Here's a great summary of the Bush admin propaganda machine.
  3.    #23  
    Hereís to you and many like you posting liberal dribble during that time, that will make no difference. Be like me during the Clinton years and jump on for the ride instead of complaining every day.
    No.
  4. #24  
    Enjoy being miserable for this four years, and an additional 8 years with whichever Repub wins in 2008. I predict in 2008 and 2012 you will still be talking about Gore's loss in 2000.
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    No I'm an *****.
  5.    #25  
    Do not alter a quote of my post. Cripes you're childish.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Do not alter a quote of my post. Cripes you're childish.
    It is the nature of a republican to alter the truth as it suits them.
  7.    #27  
    Apparently "Gannon" had a 'hard' press pass, meaning more permanent than the day pass claimed until now:
    Milbank said on Keith Olbermannís MSNBC show last week that he thought he had seen Guckert/Gannon with a hard pass. Both the disgraced ex-reporter for Talon News and White House press Secretary Scott McClellan have denied this.
    And it appears "Gannon" was not even a journalist for Talon News or any other 'News' source when he was given access to the Press Pool:
    From Salon.
    Thanks to the continued digging by online sleuths, there's now documented evidence that Guckert attended White House briefings as early as February 2003. Guckert, using his alias "Jeff Gannon," once boasted online about asking then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer a question at the Feb. 28, 2003, briefing. The date is significant because in order to receive a White House press pass, Guckert would have needed to prove that he worked for a news organization that, in the words of White House press secretary Scott McClellan, "published regularly," in itself an extraordinarily low threshold. Critics have charged that while Talon News may publish regularly, it boasts a nearly all-volunteer news team which includes not a single person with actual journalism experience. (The team does, though, have quite a bit of experience working on Republican campaigns.) In other words, the outfit is not legitimate nor independent, two criteria often used in Washington, D.C., to receive press credentials.

    But what's significant about the February 2003 date is that Talon did not even exist then. The organization was created in late March 2003, and began publishing online in early April 2003. Gannon, a jack of all trades who spent time in the military as well as working at an auto repair shop (not to mention escorting), has already stated publicly that Talon News was his first job in journalism. That means he wasn't working for any other news outlet in February 2003 when he was spotted by C-Span cameras inside the White House briefing room. And that means Guckert was ushered into the White House press room in February 2003 for a briefing despite the fact he was not a journalist.
  8. #28  
    Lighten up Francis!

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Do not alter a quote of my post. Cripes you're childish.
  9. #29  
    The nature of all Dems on OT is to Google the internet until they find some liberal rag that they can copy or quote two pages of sh!t that no one here reads. Enjoy your president, George W. Bush for four more years!

    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    It is the nature of a republican to alter the truth as it suits them.
  10.    #30  
    The nature of all Dems on OT is to Google the internet until they find some liberal rag that they can copy or quote two pages of sh!t that no one here reads. Enjoy your president, George W. Bush for four more years!
    If you think the Christian Science Monitor is a liberal rag, you'd be very alone in that opinion.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    If you think the Christian Science Monitor is a liberal rag, you'd be very alone in that opinion.

    You should call yourself "daGoogle"
    Here's what I was referencing...

    "Jeff Gannon" is not quietly going away Bush.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Why was this bizarre person given a White House press pass ?

    Why haven't more of the main stream media picked up this story?

    How did someone get a press pass with a fake name?



    Quote:
    Online Nude Photos Are Latest Chapter In Jeff Gannon Saga

    By Howard Kurtz
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, February 16, 2005; Page C01

    The Jeff Gannon story is still bouncing around the Internet, and now there are pictures.

    The kind you shouldn't open up in the office.

    The X-rated twist has made for a lot of clandestine clicking in a town where Deep Throat conjures images not of a porn star but of a man in a parking garage. But it has also deepened the debate over blogging and the tactics used to drive a conservative reporter from his job as White House correspondent for two Web sites owned by a Republican activist.

    In most Beltway melodramas, the resignation ends the story. The problem for Gannon, whose real name is James Dale Guckert, is that he told The Washington Post and CNN's Wolf Blitzer last week that he never launched the Web sites whose provocative names he had registered, such as hotmilitarystud.com. But a Web designer in California said yesterday that he had designed a gay escort site for Gannon and had posted naked pictures of Gannon at the client's request.

    The latest developments were first reported by John Aravosis, a liberal political consultant and gay activist who has a Web site called americablog.org. "What struck me initially was the hypocrisy angle," Aravosis said. He said he was offended by what he called Gannon's "antigay" writing.

    Gannon became a target of liberal bloggers after he asked President Bush at a news conference last month a loaded and inaccurate question about how he could deal with Senate Democrats "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality." They pointed to articles such as one last year in which Gannon wrote that John Kerry "might someday be known as 'the first gay president' " because he "has enjoyed a 100 percent rating from the homosexual advocacy group, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), since 1995 in recognition of his support for the pro-gay agenda." Saying his family was being harassed, the reporter quit last week after online critics began digging into his background.

    Gannon, who worked for Talon News and GOPUSA, denied any antigay writing last week, but did not return calls for comment yesterday and has told other journalists he will not comment on the racy Web sites. The contretemps sparked questions about why the White House had regularly cleared him for briefings, especially since he had been denied a press pass on Capitol Hill, where reporters control the credentialing process.

    Ana Marie Cox, who has been joking about the Gannon photos on her satirical site, wonkette.com, said they are creating a buzz because "obviously pictures of naked people are titillating." But, she added, "bloggers are wrong to bring that into the mix of things of why he shouldn't be a White House correspondent. Aren't we bloggers in favor of a lower bar of access, not a higher one?

    "I'd like to be able to go to the White House briefing room, and I haven't even posed naked -- just been asked."

    Paul Leddy, the Web designer, said Gannon contacted him in an America Online chat room in 1999 and wound up paying him $200, plus $50 in monthly maintenance, into the following year to create a gay escort site. He said the checks came from Bedrock Corp., which Gannon has confirmed that he worked for at the time. Leddy, who has helped design a variety of Web sites, including porn sites, provided Microsoft Word files of several of his invoices to Bedrock, a Delaware-based company. At first, Leddy said, Gannon sent him nude pictures with the heads cropped out, or asked him not to post the faces. He said he had no doubt, after seeing Gannon in the news recently, that the explicit pictures were of the same man. Leddy said Gannon's postings later moved to another gay escort site, which Aravosis says remained active until March 2003, or shortly before Gannon began covering the White House.

    In one of the Web sites found by Aravosis, a man who Leddy said is Gannon was offering his escort services for $200 an hour, or $1,200 a weekend. Another describes him as "military, muscular, masculine and discrete [sic]" and provides an America Online e-mail address that matches the initials on a logo used by Gannon on several of the sites, including the one Leddy said he designed. Bedrock, Gannon's company, is listed as the owner of JeffGannon.com, as well as three sites with such names as hotmilitarystud.com. Aravosis posted the pictures with strategically placed gray boxes, although he provided links to the unexpurgated versions.

    Gannon is also embroiled in the Valerie Plame story. In 2003 he interviewed Plame's husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson, after unnamed administration officials leaked her role as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak. According to his Talon News story, Gannon asked Wilson about "an internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel [detailing] a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports."

    House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) this week questioned how Gannon got access to the documents and asked the special prosecutor investigating the Plame leak to include Gannon in his probe.

    To top things off, the Wilmington News-Journal, citing court records, reported Saturday that Gannon -- or Guckert actually -- failed to pay Delaware more than $20,700 in personal income tax from 1991 through 1994.

    More than anything, though, it is Gannon's personal online activities that has kept the story churning. Cliff Kincaid, editor of the Accuracy in Media report, wrote on the conservative group's Web site: "The Gannon 'scandal' would be laughable, were it not for the fact that Gannon's personal privacy has been invaded and his mother, in her 70s, had to endure harassing telephone calls from those on the political left trying to dig up dirt. The campaign against Gannon demonstrates the paranoid mentality and mean-spirited nature of the political left."

    But Aravosis said: "If you were just looking at this as a matter of his hypocrisy, the story's over now that he's gone. The larger issue is how did someone like this get access to the White House."

    White House spokesman Scott McClellan told the trade publication Editor & Publisher that he didn't know Gannon was using a pseudonym until recent weeks and that he was cleared into the White House on a daily basis using his real name. "People use aliases all the time in life, from journalists to actors," McClellan said. He said he has discussed the Gannon matter only "briefly" with the president.


    AND

    From Maureen Dowd, NYT:


    Bush's Barberini Faun
    By MAUREEN DOWD

    Published: February 17, 2005



    WASHINGTON

    I am very impressed with James Guckert, a k a Jeff Gannon.

    How often does an enterprising young man, heralded in press reports as both a reporter and a contributor to such sites as Hotmilitarystud.com, Workingboys.net, Militaryescorts .com, MilitaryescortsM4M.com and Meetlocalmen.com, get to question the president of the United States?

    Who knew that a hotmilitarystud wanting to meetlocalmen could so easily get to be face2face with the commander in chief?

    It's hard to believe the White House could hit rock bottom on credibility again, but it has, in a bizarre maelstrom that plays like a dark comedy. How does it credential a man with a double life and a secret past?

    "Jeff Gannon" was waved into the press room nearly every day for two years as the conservative correspondent for two political Web sites operated by a wealthy Texas Republican. Scott McClellan often called on the pseudoreporter for softball questions.

    Howard Kurtz reported in The Washington Post yesterday that although Mr. Guckert had denied launching the provocative Web sites - one described him as " 'military, muscular, masculine and discrete' (sic)" - a Web designer in California said "that he had designed a gay escort site for Gannon and had posted naked pictures of Gannon at the client's request."

    And The Wilmington News-Journal in Delaware reported that Mr. Guckert was delinquent in $20,700 in personal income tax from 1991 to 1994.

    I'm still mystified by this story. I was rejected for a White House press pass at the start of the Bush administration, but someone with an alias, a tax evasion problem and Internet pictures where he posed like the "Barberini Faun" is credentialed to cover a White House that won a second term by mining homophobia and preaching family values?

    At first when I tried to complain about not getting my pass renewed, even though I'd been covering presidents and first ladies since 1986, no one called me back. Finally, when Mr. McClellan replaced Ari Fleischer, he said he'd renew the pass - after a new Secret Service background check that would last several months.

    In an era when security concerns are paramount, what kind of Secret Service background check did James Guckert get so he could saunter into the West Wing every day under an assumed name while he was doing full-frontal advertising for stud services for $1,200 a weekend? He used a driver's license that said James Guckert to get into the White House, then, once inside, switched to his alter ego, asking questions as Jeff Gannon.

    Mr. McClellan shrugged this off to Editor & Publisher magazine, oddly noting, "People use aliases all the time in life, from journalists to actors."

    I know the F.B.I. computers don't work, but this is ridiculous. After getting gobsmacked by the louche sagas of Mr. Guckert and Bernard Kerik, the White House vetters should consider adding someone with some blogging experience.

    Does the Bush team love everything military so much that even a military-stud Web site is a recommendation?

    Or maybe Gannon/Guckert's willingness to shill free for the White House, even on gay issues, was endearing. One of his stories mocked John Kerry's "pro-homosexual platform" with the headline "Kerry Could Become First Gay President."

    With the Bushies, if you're their friend, anything goes. If you're their critic, nothing goes. They're waging a jihad against journalists - buying them off so they'll promote administration programs, trying to put them in jail for doing their jobs and replacing them with ringers.

    At last month's press conference, Jeff Gannon asked Mr. Bush how he could work with Democrats "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality." But Bush officials have divorced themselves from reality.

    They flipped TV's in the West Wing and Air Force One to Fox News. They paid conservative columnists handsomely to promote administration programs. Federal agencies distributed packaged "news" video releases with faux anchors so local news outlets would run them. As CNN reported, the Pentagon produces Web sites with "news" articles intended to influence opinion abroad and at home, but you have to look hard for the disclaimer: "Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense." The agencies spent a whopping $88 million spinning reality in 2004, splurging on P.R. contracts.

    Even the Nixon White House didn't do anything this creepy. It's worse than hating the press. It's an attempt to reinvent it.

    AND
    Apparently "Gannon" had a 'hard' press pass, meaning more permanent than the day pass claimed until now:

    Quote:
    Milbank said on Keith Olbermannís MSNBC show last week that he thought he had seen Guckert/Gannon with a hard pass. Both the disgraced ex-reporter for Talon News and White House press Secretary Scott McClellan have denied this.



    And it appears "Gannon" was not even a journalist for Talon News or any other 'News' source when he was given access to the Press Pool:
    From Salon.

    Quote:
    Thanks to the continued digging by online sleuths, there's now documented evidence that Guckert attended White House briefings as early as February 2003. Guckert, using his alias "Jeff Gannon," once boasted online about asking then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer a question at the Feb. 28, 2003, briefing. The date is significant because in order to receive a White House press pass, Guckert would have needed to prove that he worked for a news organization that, in the words of White House press secretary Scott McClellan, "published regularly," in itself an extraordinarily low threshold. Critics have charged that while Talon News may publish regularly, it boasts a nearly all-volunteer news team which includes not a single person with actual journalism experience. (The team does, though, have quite a bit of experience working on Republican campaigns.) In other words, the outfit is not legitimate nor independent, two criteria often used in Washington, D.C., to receive press credentials.

    But what's significant about the February 2003 date is that Talon did not even exist then. The organization was created in late March 2003, and began publishing online in early April 2003. Gannon, a jack of all trades who spent time in the military as well as working at an auto repair shop (not to mention escorting), has already stated publicly that Talon News was his first job in journalism. That means he wasn't working for any other news outlet in February 2003 when he was spotted by C-Span cameras inside the White House briefing room. And that means Guckert was ushered into the White House press room in February 2003 for a briefing despite the fact he was not a journalist.
  12. #32  
    "it is the nature of a republican to alter the truth as it suits them."

    never before have I seen a democrat so blind or more appropriately naive to the nature of how his or her own party operate distortion of truth is the rallying cry of the democratic party.

    exhibit A - dan rather, an anchorman, not a politician, yet clearly a democratic sympathizer.. just one fine example.

    and you claim to be the shining examples of fair representation, do you?

    you make me laugh. these claims simply show just how woefully out of touch with reality the democratic party truly is.

    no worries in 2008.
  13.    #33  
    If Republicans are the bastions of truth, please explain the Propaganda? Why is it necessary if truth is on the Republican side?
  14. Talldog's Avatar
    Posts
    157 Posts
    Global Posts
    291 Global Posts
    #34  
    It's funny (yes, ha ha funny) watching the left try to flog this story into a major Bush scandal. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures, but jeez!
    Talldog
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Lighten up Francis!
    That's NOT going to happen!

    During the Clinton inquisition, there was an attempt to "censure and move on", but your side wouldn't hear of it. You investigated, bashed, and impeached the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, who was overwhelmingly ELECTED!

    You taught us to CLAMP DOWN and not let go. Keep digging, beating, and exposing, no matter if its true or not. Your side did it, so expect it in return.

    We are going to continue to do that... digging, posting EVERYTHING that this admistration fails at. Get used to it.

    GET USED TO IT!

    If you don't like it, **** out.

    (By the way, I am not miserable. I am going to relish the next 4 years of showing what an ***** this "president" is. Its so easy!!!)
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    I am going to relish the next 4 years of showing what an ***** this "president" is. Its so easy!!!)
    Where did you say you got your MBA...I forgot.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  17. #37  
    the point im making here is that far too often we hear democrats try to paint republicans as the great manipulators of truth, when in truth upon reviewing the past practices of the democrats, we find countless examples of just that - manipulation and distortion of truth and fact - to serve their own agenda.
    one would think after reading the level of protest with such faults, that that critical party would be free of it, would you not? we find in actuality that the party is renowned for the very behavior they accuse the republicans of. that's ridiculous, and how do you take that seriously?
    regarding this particular question of propaganda, I will have to look into this a bit more to get a good understanding of the whole situation. ill answer this a little later after I've checked it out.
  18.    #38  
    It's funny (yes, ha ha funny) watching the left try to flog this story into a major Bush scandal. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures, but jeez!
    It's sad that you simply shrug your shoulders at this type of blatant manipulation and propaganda. Truth has no place in your belief system like facts have no place in religion.

    And even if you accept this kind of machiavellianism, certainly you have to cringe at the level of stupidity in which it was carried out, no?
  19. #39  
    Not only do liberals sound crazy on tv they appear crazy when I read their posts!

    Democrats are like the Arizona Cardinals to the NFL, Vanderbilt to the SEC in sports, the Prairie View College football team of the 90's, the Jamaican Bobsled team, etc. Losers.

    You spit out thoughts of plagiarism, with no originality. Only copy and paste from what you find on Google. Congrats. Catch me on another thread, Iím done with this one.


    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    GET USED TO IT!

    If you don't like it, **** out.

    (By the way, I am not miserable. I am going to relish the next 4 years of showing what an ***** this "president" is. Its so easy!!!)
  20.    #40  
    we find countless examples of just that - manipulation and distortion of truth and fact - to serve their own agenda.
    site. Oh, I think you'll find that the use of deceptive tactics by Republicans far out weighs that of the Dems. But good luck try ing to disprove that.

    I will have to look into this a bit more to get a good understanding of the whole situation. ill answer this a little later after I've checked it out.
    I believe if you refer to the Christian Science Monitor article I posted, you will see a fairly reported review of this Administrations record in this regard.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions