The Media Stovepipe
We've seen this pattern before. A non-sourced, anonymous story enters the right-wing blogosphere and gets picked up by mainstream media, allowing the right to stovepipe their insanity. This one began with a post at the Chicago Tribune Swamp page:
One Democratic strategist said that shortly after an appearance on Fox he got a phone call from a White House official telling him not to be a guest on the show again. The call had an intimidating tone, he said.
The message was, "We better not see you on again," said the strategist, who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to run afoul of the White House. An implicit suggestion, he said, was that "clients might stop using you if you continue." (Emphasis mine)
Just to be clear, the story cites one anonymous Democratic strategist. Administration officials immediately denied the report:
“While we have our disagreements with FOX, administration officials appear on the network and we have no issue with others who choose to do so,” White House senior communications adviser Dan Pfeiffer emails me.
[...]Needless to say, such a claim is gold for those looking to paint the White House pushback against Fox as a Nixonian campaign of intimidation designed to squelch Fox’s legitimate journalistic scrutiny of the administration. Right wing bloggers have been all over the story.
But Pfeiffer argues that the evidence proves the story false. “This is simply not true,” he emails. “At the same time the reporter was writing this story, David Plouffe was appearing on FOX and David Axelrod was on the day before.” (Emphasis mine)
But on Sunday, the LA Times played a willing patsy for this scheme , complete with the same source presented in a misleading way:
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn said that she had checked with colleagues who "deal with TV issues" and that they had not told people to avoid Fox. On the contrary, they had urged people to appear on the network, Dunn wrote in an e-mail.
But Patrick Caddell, a Fox News contributor and former pollster for President Carter, said he had spoken to Democratic consultants who said they were told by the White House to avoid appearances on Fox. He declined to give their names.
Caddell said he had not gotten that message himself from the White House. (Emphasis mine)
Get that? Patrick Caddell, cited in both articles as a witness, cites anonymous sources about something he hasn't experienced. And "former pollster for President Carter" sounds alright until you know Caddell's long history of pissing off Democrats, channeling talk-radio memes about Bill Clinton, adopting conservative talking points, calling the New York Times "the czar's secret police," supporting Swift Boat Veterans, accusing Obama of "gangster politics," and going on Glenn Beck's show to promote a bizarre theory that Obama is a George Soros sock-puppet:
Curiously, it's not clear that Caddell has many connections in the Obama administration. I'm not sure how much a member of Obama's administration would want to speak with him, given his track record.
Dollars to donuts, Caddell is making it up to hype his own role on Faux Noise. With breathless anticipation, Beck can now introduce him as 'the Democrat Obama doesn't want you to see!' The LA Times story will serve as his citation, even though he is the only named or quoted source in either the LA Times story or the Swamp story.
We have been here before.
The career of Patrick Caddell has never been about Democrats or a progressive agenda; it has always been about Patrick Caddell. He wants revenge on a political party that disowned him years ago. None of it matters, however, as long as the LA Times can print "former pollster for President Carter" and pass him off as an unbiased respondent. See how that works?
The Times' utter failure to do even cursory source-checking turns his exercise in self-promotion into fodder for the wingnutosphere. It adds to the mass delusion of the Glenn Beck Cult that Obama is a dangerous tyrant, a self-feeding process in what I call "the Samsara of Wacky."
While Caddell stuffs the heads of Beck's audience with nonsense, just how many viewers do you think will do their own fact-checking on the media stovepipe where he gets his hot air?
Osborne Ink is a Weapon of Media Deconstruction
Follow Matt Osborne on Twitter: www.twitter.com/OsborneInk
James Rucker: An Open Letter to Rupert Murdoch: What Exactly Do You Mean?
It's becoming increasingly clear that Fox News and News Corp have a problem with race. It is also becoming clear that the problem starts at the top with you.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
One thing that is missing in this discussion is that FOX Noise is an extension to the RNC. President Obama said it as such and should be treated that way. JonStewart did an excellent piece showing how discussions on FOX opinion hours get reported up during FOX news hours as people are talking about or that the American are concerned about. So when it is reported as news then other media outlets report the items as news. It is an insidious move on FOX's part. They control what all of us are hearing on the airwaves, whether you tune in to FOX or not. This is what President Obama and JonStewart were alerting us about. The 'war on FOX News' is a macho term perpetuated by little men to make them look like victims of the system that they control.
The problem is the Obama administrations open war against Fox gives this story a degree of creditability. During the age of the Newspaper it was said "Never get into a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel" .
At a loss for what's happened. Reality about November 3rd. The administration is running around seeking to repair damage. It's damage control. For Ft. Hood, for Main vote, for the unemployed. There is a hope that if they can sway FOX and it's viewers that there will be some sort of allegiance. Possibly a moment of relaxation, to ponce on an agenda that is destroying the nation. FOX continues to be number 1, indicating peoples unhappiness and uneasiness with the administration and their blatant refusal to deal with what is really important, thieves in New York, corruption in corporate america and jobs. The fights over. People are tired. They are not gonna tune in, they are going to ride out the next year and vote. The posted silence is evidence. The only saving grace is going to be action not words. Money jingling in peoples pockets and the silence of rich corporate brats who are paying out the nose to return what they stole. Fox would be fools to change the agenda. Jobs first and everything else get in line!
Hm. Interesting take. So Obama and Faux Noise need each other?
This entire tactic was perfected by our old friend, Newt Gingrich. It's how he got to be the Speaker of the House. If anyone recalls, there was a book deal scandal relating to Rep. Byrd, who was Speaker at the time. The way it worked was that Newt commented to a small Georgia newspaper that Byrd was doing something crooked with his new book (he was doing what they all do, selling them on the stump for campaign donations, as I recall). That paper ran a small story that the wires picked up, which then got commented on in larger venues. Newt then said that, lo and behold, the NYTimes was reporting that Byrd was a crook. And on and on it went until Byrd was forced out and Newt was elected Speaker. There was a book about all this. I read it, but I don't remember the title. Deja vu all over again, folks.
I got it slightly wrong. He was fighting Byrd for the Speaker position. Nonetheless, the tactic remains.
It has been in the playbook for much longer than that, but thanks for the reminder!
these human greasestains actually believe that pat cadell represents the dem party.
which makes sense...they also consider greta van susterin the "liberal voice" on fox.
its amazing how conservatives absolutely zero concept of where thelines of ideological extremism are drawn...
obama is a communist...pat cadell is a liberal...lindsay graham is almost a democrat
dede scozzafava is a liberal...michelle bachman is a regular old conservative representing "real americans"...nobody is far enough to the right for them to consider "fringe" or "extreme"...
its a foxnews/AM hate radio anti-obama wet dream..."see,even LIBERALS know how tyrannical obama is..."
as much as i disagree with the adm. whole "war on fox" strategy in the first place,the idea that they wouldnt want random,unassociated dem strategists on fox is nonsensical.even the michelle malkins and drudge ilk would have to see that,no?
random dem talking heads going on fnc can only benefit the adm.
"A non-sourced, anonymous story enters the right-wing blogosphere and gets picked up by mainstream media"
That's how it works.
Drudge prints it, then it gets talked about by Limbaugh or Hannity, next thing you know it's on Fox and then the rest of the media pretty much has to discuss it.
I have 8 grandchildren that are of the age that they can tell the truth from a lie.
When they get out of hand,I threaten them with having to watch 15 min. of Faux Noise in the
spare bedroom.i really wouldn't make them stay more than 6-7 min.at the most.Brain damage and all, you know.
Wow i had not heard about the Administration threatening Democrats from going on fox. I do not care what affiliation you are, this is a freedom of speech issue and the LA times has never been a conservative paper. You have to think twice before you just ignore them.
No you don't.If Faux Noise has anything to do with it.You can bet they can't substantiate it.
nolookpass, so far we have only the unsubstantiated word of anonymous sources as reported by one very self-interested professional pundit with a track record of pandering to the wacky fringe. Your reaction about "thinking twice before ignoring" the LA Times reminds me of the way Dick Cheney held up Judith Miller's reporting for the NYT as "proof" that Iraq's WMD program was a present danger to the United States. Miller's report was based entirely on information leaked by his office. That's the same pattern we're seeing here.
"just how many viewers do you think will do their own fact-checking on the media stovepipe where he gets his hot air?"
Example of redundant question when asked about the fox propaganda channels. None. Not one, they don't watch those channels to stimulate their brains, it's visual cocaine. Tell them what they want to hear and they are in bliss.
QED!
Excellent stuff, but I think you ask too much of the modern mainstream media when you ask that they actually check facts and sources. They don't have time for all that! They've gotta get the news out NOW!
I've grown very weary of all these "anonymous source" stories. . .
They represent an all too-predictable pattern.
Weary is too weak a word, but not sure what word will fit. Disillusioned would indicate you had a belief in their "fair & balanced" meme. Disenchanted ditto added to don't remember ever being "enchanted" with any news channel. Fed up? equal to weary. Jaded, I hope not. Worn down is close. Despondent, even closer, at the outright ignorance and stupidity of a block of people who so easily allow themselves to be brain washed. Disconsolate probably getting very very close. Enough so I have not had the news of any kind, tv or internet since just before Congressional vote on health bill. But I do celebrate at it's passage, but again, now more work to do as senators are notoriously more out to get something for a vote.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
