McClellan: The White House Sends Talking Points To Fox News Commentators And They Use Them

[DogPoundPup]

On MSNBC’s Hardball last night, host Chris Matthews asked former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan if he saw “FOX television as a tool” to get the White House’s “message out” while he was in the Bush administration. “Certainly there were commentators and other, pundits at FOX News, that were useful to the White House,” replied McClellan, adding that they were given “talking points.”

Making a distinction between journalists like Brit Hume and commentators like Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, McClellan admitted that “certainly” the White House used Fox News talking heads as “spokespeople” with “a script”:

MATTHEWS: So, you wouldn’t use Brit Hume to sell stuff for them, but you’d use some of the nighttime guys?

MCCLELLAN: Yeah, I would separate that out, and certainly I, you know, they’ll say, that’s because they agree with those views in the White House.

MATTHEWS: Well, they didn’t need a script though, did they?

MCCLELLAN: No, well, probably not.

McClellan later told MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann that “it was done frequently, especially on high-profile issues” and that Fox often gave the White House “its desired results.” Current Press Secretary Dana Perino would only tell Olbermann, “I’m not aware of that.” Watch it:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/26/mcclellan-fox-talking-points/

[spanone]

1. faux is the propaganda wing of the white house....blatantly so.

[Blue_In_AK]

2. Scottie looks so relaxed now

that he's not having to spew lies for the administration. I always felt a little sorry for him at those press conferences.

[elleng]

3. Not NEW news;

we heard about this crap some years ago.

[pepperbear]

5. except now, an insider admits it/ n/t

[napi21]

4. What in the world are the FOX folks going to do when Obama wins?

Are they actually going to have to employ writers and stuff?

[spanone]

7. they will continue to lie about obama....trust me

[EV_Ares]

8. Well, you have to remember that the rich love "money" more than anything in the world. They have no

allegiance to their country, or anyone else, only their money. So, Murdoch will swing and start favoring the other guy so to speak or whichever way it makes more money for him. He may always be conservative but he bows, worships his money first. I imagine that is why he held the fundraiser for Hillary at his home, preparing for the election and at that time probably figured she would win over Barack. He figured wrong on that one.

[tsuki]

10. The FOX dingos don't have to employ writers, they lie quite well

on their own. It is rather like breathing to them.

[depakid]

6. I'm sure they pass them on to most of the corporate media outlets

Russert used them all the time-

[bobd0]

9. What a surprise

Who would have ever thought FOX "News" could be a propaganda network for Bush?

And I'm sure you're all well aware they aren't the only one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?hp&ex=1134795600&en=c7596fe0d4798785&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601716.html

At the Times, a Scoop Deferred

The New York Times' revelation yesterday that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct domestic eavesdropping raised eyebrows in political and media circles, for both its stunning disclosures and the circumstances of its publication.

In an unusual note, the Times said in its story that it held off publishing the 3,600-word article for a year after the newspaper's representatives met with White House officials. It said the White House had asked the paper not to publish the story at all, "arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny."

The Times said it agreed to remove information that administration officials said could be "useful" to terrorists and delayed publication for a year "to conduct additional reporting."

The paper offered no explanation to its readers about what had changed in the past year to warrant publication.

The paper of record my ass.

[Riddler]

11. Any baby-boomers here will recall the term "the government news agency TASS"

whose propaganda was often quoted on the nightly news during the cold war. We now have "the government news agency FOA"

[pacalo]

12. Oh, yes, I do. As young students, we learned how shameful their propaganda techniques

were & how their government twisted the truth, & how friends & neighbors were encouraged to inform on each other to the government. We have become them; it's in the Republicans' interest to keep this nation divided (I read that last part somewhere).