The Wolffe at the Door

When Richard Wolffe went to work for Austin-based Public Strategies, he was merely keeping viable a tradition whereby those of us formerly in journalism make transitions to more lucrative careers. The former Newsweek correspondent, however, has been caught attempting to change the game. Both Wolffe and his employer seem to see no contradiction between his allegedly unbiased analysis on MSNBC and his "senior counsel" to corporate interests represented by PSI. He's wrong. They're wrong. And MSNBC is wrong if it allows Wolffe to diminish the stature of Keith Olbermann's program with any further appearances.

PSI needs Wolffe. The consulting company runs various types of campaigns for multi-national corporations. These are generally communications efforts that affect brand and image. PSI, during the eight years of the B**h administration, was quite well-positioned to get rich. The former president's communications adviser, Mark McKinnon, became a principal in PSI when his video company, Maverick Media, was purchased by PSI. Through McKinnon, a one-time Democrat who jumped the fence to become what he described as a "Bush guy," PSI had linkage to the B**h White House. What might be more attractive to a corporation seeking to influence policy and public opinion than hiring a company owned by a guy who works for the president? Not much.

Politics and economics, however, shifted a bit with the overwhelming election of President Obama. PSI had already hired Dan Bartlett, another B**h communications counsel from the White House, and he was yet another high-profile Republican executive sitting in a glass-walled office staring out at Lady Bird Lake in downtown Austin. (PSI's most senior executive with a Democratic background worked for a short tenure in the Clinton administration.) In short, PSI needed to send a message to Democratically-controlled Washington and potential corporate clients that it was connected to the new bosses on the Potomac.

Unfortunately, there just weren't that many progressives or journalists looking to hook up with PSI. McKinnon, who has shown a great facility for transitioning from Democrat to Republican, undoubtedly looked at Richard Wolffe and saw potential. Wolffe was on the press plane almost full time during the Obama campaign and has established professional relationships with the president's staff. Of course, he has also written a love letter of a book about the new president called Renegade. Chances are pretty good that Wolffe's calls are still answered when he dials the White House. But he is no longer a journalist and neither MSNBC nor Olbermann ought to facilitate his masquerade. No matter how often Wolffe is labeled as an "analyst," he is still gathering information and interpreting the material for political effect and if he voices an opinion that runs counter to the interests of PSI's clients he's not likely to remain employed.

Think of all the large corporate brands that exist in America and chances are quite good that you have just thought of a company represented by PSI. When Bridgestone/Firestone got sued for exploding tires, they called PSI for strategic crisis communications counsel and to media train its executives. Obviously, I believe that every company, just as every person, has a right to tell its side of a story. However, I do not believe that Richard Wolffe can be considered an analyst by MSNBC when he works for a company offering counsel to corporations that can reasonably be expected to benefit from his perspective stated on network television. Is it fair, for example, for Wolffe to provide insight on the political fight over health care if PSI is representing big pharma? MSNBC can disclose the companies that Wolffe is working with for PSI at this precise moment in time but its client list changes and grows regularly. What Wolffe says during his employ at PSI cannot, under any circumstances, be expected to be unbiased. Perception is reality in politics.

And the reality is that Richard Wolffe is now being paid to present a specific point of view that serves PSI's clients.

Also at www.moorethink.com

Follow James Moore on Twitter: www.twitter.com/moorethink

Comments

[kewl2713]

lol. seconded!

[jealousmonk]

I agree that Wolffe's non-attribution is a bad thing. How is this different, though, from all the other talking heads? Maybe we know they belong to a party. Maybe we know they write a column for a certain publication. There are a lot of different conflicts of interest. Should we also know what boards they are on? What stocks do they own? We should. Will we? Or is this worse because Wolffe's analysis is supposedly unbiased? How do we distinguished who is biased or not? Should they wear red and blue? Ridiculous questions I know but, still... I don't know.

[NoPCZone]

You can either honestly report on the news or attempt to influence the news. You cannot do both.

[americanwhocares]

Great article Mr. Moore, thanks for your insights.

[frankel1205]

I really like Richard Wolffe's commentary and appearances on MSNBC and enjoyed his fabulous book on the presidential election; however, Mr. Wolffe must quit the lobbying job for PSI if he's going to go on air and editorialize. The problem with media, especially television media, is that the presenters are owned by the corporations and thus, filter their comments through the prism of the corporation they represent. I hope Mr. Wolffe will resign from PSI so he can have face time on television.

[Project4NuBostonTeaParty]

We need to call Wolffe's new job what it is: Marketing.

His ego won't let him give up his high-profile MSNBC gig, but if he feels conflicted over losing his television face time, he needs to seriously figure out which side of the communications coin he wants to use his skills on. From here, knowing he and his wife just had a baby last year, it looks like he's deeply attracted to the BIG $$$. That means a marketing job.

BUT, he can't be a marketer and a journalist at the same time. One position has to be relinquished. Since he obviously can't decide, Olbermann is smart to do it for him.

[jealousmonk]

It could be that he got the PSI gig precisely because of his television appearances. That would be distressing for him.

[Heartlight3]

I always liked Richard Wolffe. I haven't noticed that he demonstrates any particular bias toward corporations as you would expect from this article. I can see that people might think he would be biased, and that may be enough to keep him off of Countdown, but I don't think that he has actually demonstrated a bias. (yet)

[jeg]

Personally, I find the fact that Mr. Moore is so biased against the Bush administration that he apparently cannot bring himself to type the word "Bush" in full and instead must pretend it's a profane word, suggests that Mr. Moore has an unhealthy bias against all things vaguely related to the Bush family and/or the administration.

Apparently in Mr. Moore's estimation, you're either with us or against us, and he has firmly made up his mind that PSI, and therefore Richard Wolffe, is against "us".

I've been watching Countdown for some time now, including Richard's two guest host stints, and at no time do I recall him being asked to comment on, say, corporations (actually, he may have commented on defense spending-- but if so, was decidedly in favor of the Gates defense cuts, something that his clientele probably disagree with).

Mostly, Richard's analysis has been on White House and/or Congressional politics-- I'd be somewhat surprised if PSI is representing members of the White House or Congress. I don't blame Keith for being careful though, especially with the current hatchet job started by the NYT.

Aside from ludicrously bad comedic delivery, I've seen no evidence of Mr. Wolffe's bias, but I suppose after 8 years of the Bush Administration, it's far too easy to be paranoid.

[karinova]

You summed up my take on this ALMOST exactly.
I like Richard Wolffe, and I haven't seen any bias. Plus, he's only had the job for 3 months, so there hasn't really been time for him to say much.

Not that I'm giving Wolffe a free pass, though. He doesn't have to comment on corporations directly to go over the line. For example, PSI works (PR and lobbying) for the Chamber of Commerce and Bristol-Me­yers-Squib­b, both of whom oppose healthcare reform. That could conceivably matter when he talks about it in the future. (So far, what little I've found him saying on that subject has actually been AGAINST their interests. Still, you see the potential for conflict.)

If MSNBC continues to use him (and I kinda hope they do), I think they should go above and beyond with any disclaimer they come up with. Not just a quick "btw, Richard Wolffe works for PSI," but more like: "He words for PSI, and PSI works for XYZ, which has an interest in the following subject." (And obviously he can't comment on anything related to the companies he personally works with for PSI.)

[jeg]

After some lengthy thought, the question is, what does PSI get from Mr. Wolffe? He's not a weapons expert, he's not a marketing genius... But he is a rather good political analyst, who knows the current administration well, and has contacts within that administration.

I suspect PSI relies on him for the exact same type of analysis that Keith Olbermann relies on him for-- razor sharp insight into the Obama White House. I have no basis for this other than a bit of logic, but it's a far cry from the "OMG! Richard Wolffe is teh Evil!" guilt-by-a­ssociation that seems to be circulating.

Still though, it's perfectly reasonable for Keith Olbermann to sit down and establish ground rules to make sure there's no conflict, and I hope they sort it out soon.

[1088]

Jealously is a beautiful thing, isn't it?

[HillaryGoAway]

Ohhh, Richard, Daammmnnn yyoooou!!! *shaking fist in the air* Does your evil know no bounds? Commenting on and hosting an entertainment news show while working for a PR firm? I..I..I can't believe it. I know the Prince of Darkness can take on many forms but I never suspected he'd emerge as a smart, skinny British guy on my TV? O.M.G...now that's scary.

[darker]

CORPORATE profiteers want to continue using
working & middle class AMERICANS as their CASH COW FOREVER!
They want no competition from anybody.
And they hire guys like Wolffe as their mouthpiece.

Americans cannot be "accused " of having ANY COMMON SENSE
to see through what's going on.

Corporations want no reform, just want STATUS-QUO HUGE PROFITEERING
at YOUR EXPENSE to go on forever!

[pizzmoe]

He's one of the few analysts that seemed very smart and level headed and knew what he was talking about. I understand why KO has to do this, but Wolffe will be missed from the show.

[Chumleysmom]

Jim, thanks for writing this. The more people who are made aware of questions concerning Wolffe's motivation, the less likely he'll be able to spin things his way IF he's ever invited back as a guest on Countdown -- or elsewhere.

[PaiaGirl]

But there is absolutely no evidence he spun ANYTHING.

[CollegeConservative86]

I mean, when you're on MSNBC, I guess the spin bar is already so low...

[JustLucky]

I've found that people hate to be bothered with reality when they're busy being righteously indignant.

[SlappHappy]

Dump the Wolffe in sheep's clothing, Keith. Do it now!

[AnglScarlett]

Am I the only one who sees the irony in attacking Wolffe because he works for a communications firm and goes on a television show that is a wholly owned subsidiary for G.E?

I think the problem is a bit more systemic, in other words.