Well, not really; I’ve got my own video and audio productions to deal with. Back in 2003 though, the legacy media universally attacked President Bush because he preferred to get the news from his subordinates rather than from the same legacy media that was busy attacking him. (This Michael Kinsley piece is a representative enough sample.) In contrast, their silence over Obama manufacturing his own news is deafening.
It’s perfectly fine, of course, for the White House to put out its own version of events — but is it right to do so by preventing actual reporters from covering something? (Even something like a pickup basketball game).
Do Obama White House officials think their media coverage isn’t flattering enough?
Is the goal to ultimately replace the pesky photographers who film what they want to and not what they’re told to (not to mention the annoying reporters who ask uncomfortable questions about, say, detainee policy and bank bailouts)?
Good questions. Only last month, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave his media pupils an “A” for their hagiographic efforts. Why would his boss want to have his news not just delivered, as President Bush preferred, but now manufactured by his subbordinates?