13 ms·
For anyone who has actually watched these press briefings in their entirety: Does anyone else think these are pretty much the worst way to get to the bottom of
by clamprecht 10y ago
For anyone who has actually watched these press briefings in their entirety: Does anyone else think these are pretty much the worst way to get to the bottom of issues? Here's how it seems to work:
* The press secretary (or President, or whoever) makes a statement
* He or she chooses a journalist to ask a question
* Journalist asks question
* Press secretary answers question in as much or as little detail as he/she wants
* Press secretary calls another journalist
* This goes on for maybe 20-30 minutes, and it's over.
How does this even help at all? It's not like the press secretary is going to answer a question that he/she doesn't want to answer anyway.
- sklivvz1971 10y agoIt's not useless at all. Banning CNN and other relatively hostile or left leaning news corps is not really meant to protect Trump from them. After all, their readership is likely in large part against Trump already. No, the move is a warning to the news organizations who stay. It's a message that they will be kicked out if they don't push stuff that the administration likes.
- ZeroGravitas 10y agoNote that TIME and the AP refused to take part if others were excluded.
- notatoad 10y agoin todays non-televised press meeting, not in future press briefings.
- 1337biz 10y agoI don't think that is even the issue. It is essential for him and his followers to brand media as the enemy. As long as they are angry and against him it works for him, ie his followers see any negative repirting as hit jobs by spoiled liberal journos. They don't realize that they are helping him with all the outraging.
- cmdrfred 10y agoI agree. I'd like to see more and more frequent policy debates between the parties even when the election might be years away.
- denzil_correa 10y agoThanks for bringing this up! I would rather expect an anonymous set of questions go up on into a ballot and picked up randomly for the Press Secretary to answer. A follow-up could be decided extempore based on who asked the question.
- the_watcher 10y agoYou're right, the press briefings are absolutely useless. That said, the message sent by this is not a good one.
- oxide 10y agoNo, it isn't a good message at all. In fact, I'd say it's downright ominous. FCC is in the middle of legalizing regional monopolies, DEA is busy banning Kratom in the middle of the worst opiate crisis in decades, and the White House is barring media outlets from press briefings. it doesn't even sound like I'm talking about America, right? something is very, very wrong.
- slededit 10y ago> FCC is in the middle of legalizing regional monopolies, DEA is busy banning Kratom in the middle of the worst opiate crisis in decades, and the White House is barring media outlets from press briefings. Actually everything except the press ban sounds pretty much like the American I can remember since my teenage years. What do you think happened during the crack epidemic? The rules to prevent these large media monopolies have been eroding since the 90s.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- esahione 10y agoHonestly, it's like the Trump administration is trying to undo any social and economic progress since the 80s. When did the US become so complacent to shit policy? We've tried war on drugs before, IT DOES NOT WORK. We created 'bad hombres' down there. The crack epidemic was another racially and politically motivated solution. The fact we still use a law, to this day, that was created to cause destruction to hippie/black communities and break down protests against the war is absurd. And anyone, in 2017, that still considers drug use a law enforcement issue is out of touch with reality and science. So fuck the Republican party right now.
- 10y ago
- viraptor 10y ago"Asked about X, press secretary didn't provide more details." is still interesting information. Well... during more normal times anyways. I do agree it could be more transparent and useful than a reality show however.
- beat 10y agoIndeed. Refusals to answer, evasions, and lies are also valuable information.
- danso 10y agoYep, the best investigative stories involve catching people in their own lies. Reminds me of that comical quote by Hans Landa in Inglourious Basterds, "I love rumors! Facts can be so misleading, where rumors, true or false, are often revealing."
- fictioncircle 10y ago> Indeed. Refusals to answer, evasions, and lies are also valuable information. And people who ask those questions too frequently will be weeded out just like NYT, CNN, and Politico.
- fictioncircle 10y agoThe goal is to only get the questions the President wants asked to be asked. There won't be many "didn't provide more details" type questions if people want to retain access.
- rocky1138 10y agoI feel like the modern Press Briefing in the USA is a form of the completely useless Canadian "Question Period."
- cperciva 10y agoAs a former Speaker commented, "there's a reason it's called Question Period and not Answer Period".
- clamprecht 10y ago(Responding to my own comment) I guess Churchill would say, "Democracy, the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried." That doesn't mean we can't improve. Press briefings just seem broken.
- maxerickson 10y agoMenkin is better on democracy.
- pm90 10y agoThe Press Secretary is the "Official" voice of the White House, and thus is accountable for WH's actions. Now, if nobody knows what was officially said, the WH can deny it and there will be no record of it. I understand that the current press secretary/briefings are pretty much useless. But they are officially recorded as being useless, which is very important for accountability. Seems like another stunt for the current administration to play fast and loose with facts.
- oh_sigh 10y agoThe press meetings are televised...there will be video record of what was said.
- mannykannot 10y agoWhat matters more is what was not said on account of questions not asked. Even an evasion or an alternative fact carries information in its being offered in response.
- bullfightonmars 10y agoThese press briefings provide direct, multilateral, and unmoderated access to the Presidential Administration by the Press Corps. They are incredibly important to holding the administration to account for policy. Can the administration spin their own narrative? Sure, but they can't directly control or audit the questions asked.
- sidlls 10y agoNow if only an actual Press Corps existed in this country.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- maxerickson 10y agoDepends on if they start excluding organizations and lining up softballs from cranks.
- ___start 10y agoyes but all Presidents do this, including Obama
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- wfo 10y agoPlease name a news organization that was allowed to attend press conferences by Obama, then later banned because he didn't like what they had to say. edit: Since you won't be able to find one by Obama, how about any president in the last 50 years?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- 10y ago
- Jun8 10y agoYou're right in that this does not significantly block NYT, etc.'s ability to gather news (btw you can check the transcripts online: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings) but it's an important symbolic gesture by the White House. Here's a cool post of how the 49 seats assignments have changed over time: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/25/how-the-seating-chart-of-the-white-house-press-room-has-changed-in-1-cool-graphic https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/25/ho...
- sp332 10y agoBlocking only NYT might not change things significantly, but showing that they will ban anyone who asks difficult questions means the ones who are left will think twice. The ones who keep "misbehaving" will also get banned. That will change things for everyone trying to get news.
- methusalasleeps 10y agoThe banned parties should make an alternative venue that asks questions of shadow governments. It will be more interesting and erode the Presidents power to choose how to address the people by overshadowing his useless PR and making the other governments easier to imagine.
- sp332 10y agoShadow? Like this? http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Tampa-town-hall-meeting-cardboard-Marco-Rubio-10954378.php http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Tampa-town-hall-meeti...
- methusalasleeps 10y agoAlso fun, but I didn't mean a cutout of trump.. an actual clinton or sanders, or anyone who has some backing to run next term can build a shadow cabinet and start answering the NYTs questions.
- SonicSoul 10y agoI agree its not optimal, but at least the president gets challenging questions from time to time and his reaction will be analyzed by the press and people. If they choose not to answer that is also an answer. if they choose to ignore hard questions, that is also an answer. in case of Trump he gets tripped up and starts blatantly lying and blaming everyone else. it works
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- cromulent 10y agoThis article was an interesting view on the Putin's annual press conferences. Similar flow to what you described. https://medium.com/@alexey__kovalev/message-to-american-media-from-russia-6e2e76eeae77#.q830k7akj https://medium.com/@alexey__kovalev/message-to-american-medi...
- moomin 10y agoYes, but this isn't about improving on press briefings, it's about making them even worse.
- gizmo686 10y agoI view press briefings (in almost all contexts) as a platform for the speaker to get their message out. That the press gets to ask questions just helps advise the speaker on where there is uncertainty/ambiguity in their statements. Under a "normal" administration, they are a pretty good way to get the official story, but journalism still requires investigation.
- anjc 10y agoComing from a republic in which the president is irrelevant and governance is entirely parliamentary in practice, I think it's highly refreshing to see a press secretary publically shooting the sh*t with journalists in this fashion. The alternative means of getting questions from the public to leaders is to have self-interested politicians grandstanding, asking questions of politicians who are experts in not answering them. It's pointless. They're not perfect, but these press briefings are far less stage-managed and more honest than any other public forum in which questions are asked, imo.
- ComputerGuru 10y agoPeople see the press ask questions and be ignored or be given responses that have nothing to do with what was asked and some of them take note. Not allowing the press because you disagree with them is a step away from only allowing government approved press. Welcome to the way things are/were in Nazi Germany, North Korea, Venezuela, Soviet Russia, and other great places to share company with. Freedom of the press being curtailed to such an extent has /always/ signaled worse things to come in literally every historic precedent, ever.
- soapdog 10y ago> It's not like the press secretary is going to answer a question that he/she doesn't want to answer anyway. Even when the press secretary refuses to answer a question, it is good because it draws attention to the topic at hand and this helps drive public awareness for important issues. Denial of comments is often as revealing as plain answers. Actually it is pretty good when they refuse to comment on something because you can make this a part of a larger article on a subject and then quote their refusal to comment. This helps make pressure on a sensitive topic way after the press event is done and then in the end some answers might be provided if sufficient attention is focused.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> How does this even help at all? It's basically (when run the traditional way) a means for the press corps to apply pressure, if an issue is either emergent or common, a substantive question is likely to be asked and answered on it, and followup can occur on other forums, which are less public and provide less pressure on their own, but far more fertile when the issued been raised based on the public questions and responses (or lack of response) and stories based on that are out or imminent. OTOH, if you bar outlets that tend to ask bothersome questions from the briefing in favor of friendly outlets, that breaks down.
- heygrady 10y agoIt's worth reading about why these things exist [1]. The ability to ask questions is powerful whether or not they are answered [2]. [1] https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-president-the-press-and-proximity https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-president-the-press-an... [2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/111873-1.htm http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/water...
- anigbrowl 10y agoThat's a reasonable question, but also a distraction from the topic of equal access.
- perseusprime11 10y agoI agree- they are useless. We should have a Monthly state of the union where the President is directly answerable to Public via Periscope/Facebook/Twitter. There are no distribution costs on the Internet so Press will eventually be disintermediated.
- maxlybbert 10y agoI've always been jealous of the prime minister's question time. Members of Parliament ask tough questions and demand follow-up, plus it's the prime minister answering instead of a press secretary. I'm sure the prime minister is less enthusiastic about it than I am, but since he is subject to votes of no confidence, he doesn't have much of a choice. The president will never do something similar in front of Congress, but wouldn't it be great?