Scott McClellan: White House Fed Fox News Talking Points

"I've been here from the beginning, and have never seen a White House "talking points." -- And I don't know anyone else who's seen one either. I asked senior management if they have ever seen a White House talking points. No one had." Bill O'Reilly reacting to Dan Rather's accusation that FoxNews gets White House Talking Points. 12/06.

"There were (FOX) commentators and pundits who were useful to the White House." Former Bush White House Press Secretary, Scott McClellan, Hardball, 7/24/08

Talking Point: An idea which may or may not be factual, meant to provide the most effective attack to saturate discourse and frame a debate. When used politically, the purpose is to propagandize by continuous repetition within media outlets until accepted as fact.

Similar to how the Communist news outlet, Pravda, and Nazi propaganda chief, Josef Goebbels, offered information to the Folks™, Scott McClellan admitted that Bush White House used Fox commentators as their spokespeople feeding them what they wanted the Folks™ to believe. At least that's what Scott McClellan now has acknowledeged.

For those of you not as politically savvy as your typical FoxNews viewer, here's the technical way talking points work: The Bush White House told Fox News what to say and Fox News said it.

For example, let's say the Bush White House wanted to lead the Folks™ to believe that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9-11. They would send a note to Fox News and...READ THE REST OF THE STORY HERE.

Steve Young blogs at steveyoungonpolitics.com

Comments

[iswideopen]

"Fed", don't you mean contiues to "feed" Fox News the George W. Bush & Co talking points. It was known years ago, however, the very people's whose intelligence they insult remain clueless as they tune in each evening and Fox News laughs at how "controllable" their minds are. You see, it's the ratings, stupid. Wise up, people.

[JaseAllen]

This isn't news. This was obvious for years.

[Heavy]

Obviously not just fed to faux news

AP: "In a speech that risked being seen as presumptuous..."

TIME Magazine: "capable to become the Commander in Chief of a superpower -- without seeming presumptuous..."

The National Journal: "He is well aware voters here at home might see that as presumptuous..."

Washington Post: "Whether by the end of this week he will be seen as presumptuous or overly cocky..."

Chicago Tribune: "That means walking the fine line between looking presidential and appearing arrogant and presumptuous..."

Boston Globe: "plus the growing sense in some quarters that the presumptive Democratic nominee is getting a little presumptuous..."

[anon004]

Wow, that's scary! No wonder things like the Swiftboat campaign stick in people's heads. It just gets picked up and repeated. It also is offensive because readers/viewers aren't told where this came from (i.e., how about telling readers that the White House said it). Also, it's lazy reporting (or not reporting at all). Disgusting.

[CrankyCurmudgeon]

What's really amazing is they didn't use the word "Uppity".

[Raymondf]

What he didn't tell, that all news organizations where fed the same stuff, they just chose what they wanted to run and didn't run some things.

[Heavy]

That would seem to be the problem. Fox Misinformation Ministry is told what to run,and does. Even if it is always one sided or blatantly biased or false. That is called propoganda and is illegal.

[ann1]

Uh, thanks Scott but this is OLD news to me......real OLD news!

[Heavy]

Big surprise eh? Faux News, the new Ministry of Disinformation.

[vietveter]

This is not news.

Anyone that has not figured out the fact that

Faux news is part of the Bu$h administration

Has been sleeping for the last 8 years.

Like the kids say; "Well Duh!"

[SMP]

This information should be broadcast in every news media...mag. and news papers.


Not this year...Not this time


We are a smarter America


"Change" is in the air.....:)