Debating The Iran Question On CNN's Reliable Sources
This morning, Dana Milbank, Amanda Carpenter, and I appeared on CNN's Reliable Sources, hosted by Howard Kurtz.
It was a spirited affair and folks can draw their own conclusions. Here's the video:
The only thing that surprised me was when Dana turned to me after our initial sparring and called me a "dick" in a whispered tone (the specific phrase was, I believe, "You're such a dick"). Howie Kurtz wrote on Twitter that he didn't hear it, which is understandable -- he was doing the lead-in for the next part of the segment on the ABC White House special. But it happened (I urge Howie to watch the video of the panel during the ABC intro) and it was frankly pretty odd.
For those interested, here are the citations for some of the points I made:
-- Greg Sargent's piece on Milbank's write-up of the "Mission Accomplished" moment.
-- Lynn Sweet's reporting on Milbank's questions to Obama about bathing suit pictures:
"The problem is that that's not what you guys have been reporting on. You've been reporting on how I look in a swimsuit," said Obama.
A small gut check here. An often-used Obama rhetorical technique is to set up a straw-man argument, only to knock it down.Accuse me, as Team Obama might, of being nitpicking and literal, but it is hard to see where the swimsuit story ate up the time or space of congressional reporters -- or other journalists outside of Washington who may be doing serious reporting on Obama's policy proposals and legislative record.
The circle of reporters who actually did the work of following up on the People Magazine picture of Obama in his trunks includes only myself and Dana Milbank of The Washington Post.
We cornered Obama outside the Senate radio-TV gallery after a press conference. Milbank asked a few leading questions and we both wrote columns based on his reply that ran the next day. Between the Chicago Sun-Times running the Obama photo on the front page hyping my column and the reach of The Washington Post, the attention inspired other outlets to do derivative feature stories. Of course, it also made great gab for the cable news shows.
Follow Nico Pitney on Twitter: www.twitter.com/nicopitney
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
haha... Nicophyte.
Cute.
Owned him.
Dana Milbank is very confused. Thinks he can audition for the Daily Show and 60 Minutes at the same time. He's just a joke of a new reporter.
Laura Flanders has an interesting discussion of this press conference moment on a Grit TV segment. It is quite clear to anyone who actually listens to what Obama says that he is merely asking for an Iranian perspective on the issue and Nico was in the best position to provide the question (not HIS question, BTW). As someone on Grit commented, it was perhaps the most difficult question during the press conference and Obama's answer was not good, so if it had all been orchestrated, it wasn't done very well.
What i find bothersome in this clip is Nico's leaping into making things personal, which is unfortunately what public debate has become in the US.
There was this Iranian on Countdown (forgive me for not recalling his name at the moment) who called the question silly. He gave an interesting analogy: was it up to France to recognize Bush as the American president in 2000 given the circumstances of that controversy? Jon Stewart says it best, we (Americans) need to get away from our it's all about our mentality.
By the way, Nico needs to get over Milbanks' hard feelings about him; after all, it's not personal. TV men don't like bloggers, just like newspapermen didn't like TV men. Nobody likes sitting next to their replacement.
>>> Nobody likes sitting next to their replacement.
Really? Milbank stoops to off-air name-calling, and it's not personal?
Does anyone really think this was a proud moment for journalism? I think the whole dust-up provides further support for Ana-Marie Cox's assertion that the WH press corps should be disbanded.
I have always wondered, why any self' respecting journalist would want to work at the WH.
I understand the glamor part, but if your hero is on this list
http://www
Then why?
No, I would not expect an independently distinguished journalist in the field to necessarily be the most experienced or proficient at asking incisive questions at W H news conferences. They don't involve the same set of skills. I would not want anybody else to replace or shut out Helen Thomas, for instance. She most certainly has distinguished herself in asking incisive question, often to the great discomfort of presidents.
For the rest of them, well, there're the "peacock symdrome", and the "Stockholm syndrome" among the selective clique of W H correspondents and journalists. But I would not want to see the W H press corp disbanded, and be replaced by amateurs with no continuity who drift in and out of very compressed (and sometimes staged) W H news conferences.
I really don't understand what the uss is about. I think this is more a case of jealousy towards a very young and talented reporter. Nico's coverage of the Iranian crisis was absolutely outstanding and by far the most informative in the written media. He was called upon based on his journalism merit in covering the election fallout in Iran and asked to pose a question from an Iranian citizen. It wasn't like he threw a softball that Obama could have hit out of the park. Milbank comes across as an ivory tower journalist who thinks he deserves to be front and center. Fact is, Milbank is in no way a compelling journalist and comes across as a spoiled brat and fails to make his case. Nico Pitney is a dynamic young reporter who uses the latest technology to cover a difficult story that many Americans were anxiously watching.
IMO...Milb
Exactly.
Spot on.
I agree with Amanda Carpenter. No media outlet should have privileged status. I notice Obama basically calls on the same reporters over and over. That isn't fair. I think if they ask stupid questions or irrelevant questions, then that should be cause to not call on them for future questions. And those reporters that Obama keeps calling on from the mainstream media do ask dumb or irrelevant questions.
Way to go Nico! Dana is a fool.
Simply put, there is no longer just 1 kind of journalism in today's world, just as like there's no longer just 1 form of media, or 1 way to get today's news. Seeing this as an honest debate about what the future of journalism really is, honestly here Dana comes across as a tremendously bitter, upset old Washington Post journalist who was scooped by a guy (Nico). Then Pitney began to receive exciting, 1st hand accounts, in both audio and at times, video. Despite audio break-ups and poor video quality, it was clear something new and exciting had been occurring and was continuing throughout Iran.
However, throughout this all, Dana Millbank seems to believe that those like Pitney, are getting the scoop on one of the Decades most intriguing news events .... the WRONG WAY.
What he, and others fail to realize is that the world... and that includes precious Washington.
As H.G. Wells, "Adapt or perish,, is nature's inexorable imperative
Millbank needs to take heed, stop whining like a baby and Adapt... or fade away into oblivion.
He was there to answer the appearence of a plant, and he knocked it out of the ball park. Nico did quite well.
Milbank, not so much. It is difficult to attack someone who is sitting RIGHT next to you, almost in your lap. Humans are not "made up that way" to generally fight a non-phyiscally aggressive person that close to you goes most of our survival and cooperative instinct. His looking shifts to the left and right, his downward cast eyes...he was trying to engage but kept choking up.
It was actually hard to watch, and even made me feel sorry for Milbank, even though he was totally wrong, and out of line.
Amazing how planting a question at a press conference, something that would have resulted in outrage if it occurred under Bush, is looked upon unfavorably by some journalists.
It's not amazing it's huffpo land.
See everything that Obama does that isn't really any different than Bush is just great.
But when Bush did it he was the devil.
It's exactly what we expect from the Huffstars.
Really? Remember Jeff Gannon, the planted Gay website operator who was given White House Press credentials ? AKA James Guckert, who prefers the nom de plume of Jeff Gannon, is the ex-hooker and sometime White House "reporter " who got rejected for press credentials by Congress but somehow enjoyed extraordinary access to the Bush White House, where he was given daily passes to enter the White House press center on more than 200 occasions??
This guy operated under a false name and got access to the White House.
I find the hypocrisy of the Right trying to whine about calling on a specific reporter ridiculous in light of what went on under the Bush Administration.
I'm sure you have some good examples.
"If" it occurred???
That was a joke, right?
sad but true
How awful to force people to debate sitting shoulder to shoulder!
Dana is looking VERY agitated..
I guess some in the conventional press have reverted to third grade antics, because the President didn't give them the proverbial second question. Boo-woo.
I can't believe Dana is acting like this! Is this the best "reptuable" journalism has to provide. I'm glad the President put aside these ridiculous practics and customs that have made the Press Corps not a place where the people go to get the news but an insular hoard of people that essentially gloat about each other, and bitch and moan when someone upsets their order.
Nice work, Nico.
What unbelievable hypocrisy. When the Bush admiinistration was accused of doing this same exact thing, planting questions, the people on this site went crazy.
There was no planted question here. Pay attention. Go back and re-read if you have to.
You are misstating the issue. While there may be some ego here, the issue is whether or not informing the administration what question you are going to ask is true journalism.
While I have no doubt there was no intent to throw a soft-ball question, precious time was wasted because he knew exactly what question was coming. That is not journalist integrity. Nico should acknowledge the perception, and rethink that process in the future.
News blogs are here to stay, and I imagine that WP has more on-line readers than people receiving the actual newspaper. I don''t know how much of Milbank's complaint is based on ego, but he is right- a true journalist doesn't allow his questions to be reviewed before they are asked.
It creates the same perception as having a male prostitute with fake press credentials asking soft ball questions.
You have misstated what actually happened, if HuffPo was accurate when reporting this. The White House was aware that Nico had a question from an Iranian. They wanted to call on Nico, and did. They did not know the specific question Nico was going to ask.
This would all be a problem if Nico had been there just to ask a question that they could use to further their agenda, and it was all predetermined. This was not the case. While the WH probably wanted to look good and engaged by taking a question from the "poor Iraninans", this wasn't a question of journalistic integrity. Nico was not planted in the audience secretively to ask a softball question.
And, as an aside, since when does a press briefing happen that the WH DOESN'T know who it's going to call on? Are we all SHOCKED that they plan this stuff ahead of time?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
