3 ms·

From what I understand, these press pools (specifically the White House press pool) began as what the author describes as "stenographers parroting press release

by nickff 1y ago

From what I understand, these press pools (specifically the White House press pool) began as what the author describes as "stenographers parroting press releases, not watchdogs holding government officials accountable". It seems like the administration is trying to mandate what was once the unstated agreement (that has since changed to some debatable degree). I am personally unsure of the value of these press pools in the face of modern 'PR'; as far as I can tell, all they do is generate 'clippable' videos.

nobody9999 1y ago
From TFA: >I've held my Pentagon press pass for 28 years. For most of that time, when I wasn't overseas in combat zones embedding with troops, I walked the halls, talking to and getting to know officers from all over the globe, at times visiting them in their offices. Without press credentials, the above becomes impossible. You seem to be under the impression that these folks sit in waiting areas until a "press conference" is announced, then copy down whatever some talking head says and publishes that and only that. There may well be some who do so, but that's not journalism, friend.
- nickff 1y ago
  The question is how choreographed the rest of their ‘access’ is. This author seems to think they were getting ‘real dirt’, but I suspect that the officers they were talking to were actually walking a highly political tightrope in hopes of advancing their own careers.
  - nobody9999 1y ago
    >I suspect that the officers they were talking to were actually walking a highly political tightrope in hopes of advancing their own careers. Upon what evidence do you base your suspicions? I'd note that Tom Bowman (the author of TFA) has been publishing stories based upon such details for nearly three decades. Can you point to any stories that he published, based on such information from Pentagon-based military personnel, that turned out not to be factual? If so, please share that information. We'd all like to know.
    - nickff 1y ago
      My suspicions are based on listening to many podcasts with ex-military officer guests, and what they’ve said about serving ‘pentagon tours’, being publicity/public affairs/media officers for their units, and speaking with the press in general.
      - nobody9999 1y ago
        >My suspicions are based on listening to many podcasts with ex-military officer guests, and what they’ve said about serving ‘pentagon tours’, being publicity/public affairs/media officers for their units, and speaking with the press in general. Which podcasts? Which ex-military officers? That's not a "gotcha," I want to listen to those myself.
        nickff 1y ago
        The Fighter Pilot Podcast is probably the best of them, both in terms of production and content, though recent episodes have drifted away from the ‘core content’ where it really shone. War on the Rocks has had some good ones as well, but not as interesting (in my opinion). There are many other military-focused and leadership-focused podcasts where you can glean something interesting every once in a while, but not really enough that I’d actually recommend following them. edit: some NASA astronaut interviews contain interesting info about (retired) military astronauts’ careers, which tend to be interesting as well.
        nobody9999 1y ago
        And these podcasts prominently feature ex-military officers saying they lied to reporters on a regular basis? Can you be just slightly more specific? The two podcasts you actually named have ~650 episodes between them. Heaven knows how many are in the podcasts you didn't name.
        nickff 1y ago
        I never said that I'd heard any officer state that they'd lied to a reporter. I said that I believe that access is/was choreographed (to present a certain narrative to the reporter), and that I don't think the reporters get the 'real dirt' from Pentagon access that they think they do (because most officers doing a desk tour there know they are walking a political tightrope). There are definitely counter-examples (of officers who do spill real dirt to reporters), such as United States Air Force Colonel James G. Burton, but they are uncommon, don't seem exclusive to Pentagon-pool reporters, and there don't seem to be many these days. I don't take notes on the podcasts I listen to, so I don't have episode-specific citations for you.
legitster 1y ago
> I am personally unsure of the value of these press pools in the face of modern 'PR'; as far as I can tell, all they do is generate 'clippable' videos. Very much the opposite - the press pool generates a massive amount of cross-verified content for distribution to all news agencies. The agencies then clip and edit and nip and tuck the press pool coverage as they see fit. Obviously the press pool only gets all the talking points they want them to, but also the press pool is literally there following around the president all day, so it's also really hard to hide things from the press pool. For example, the press pool knew of Obama's smoking or FDR's wheelchair or RFK's... indulgences. As part of the unwritten gentleman's agreement they never broke news on this stuff, but they were also witness to it and recorded it for later.

by nickff 1y ago

nobody9999 1y ago

From TFA: >I've held my Pentagon press pass for 28 years. For most of that time, when I wasn't overseas in combat zones embedding with troops, I walked the halls, talking to and getting to know officers from all over the globe, at times visiting them in their offices. Without press credentials, the above becomes impossible. You seem to be under the impression that these folks sit in waiting areas until a "press conference" is announced, then copy down whatever some talking head says and publishes that and only that. There may well be some who do so, but that's not journalism, friend.

nickff 1y ago
The question is how choreographed the rest of their ‘access’ is. This author seems to think they were getting ‘real dirt’, but I suspect that the officers they were talking to were actually walking a highly political tightrope in hopes of advancing their own careers.
- nobody9999 1y ago
  >I suspect that the officers they were talking to were actually walking a highly political tightrope in hopes of advancing their own careers. Upon what evidence do you base your suspicions? I'd note that Tom Bowman (the author of TFA) has been publishing stories based upon such details for nearly three decades. Can you point to any stories that he published, based on such information from Pentagon-based military personnel, that turned out not to be factual? If so, please share that information. We'd all like to know.
  - nickff 1y ago
    My suspicions are based on listening to many podcasts with ex-military officer guests, and what they’ve said about serving ‘pentagon tours’, being publicity/public affairs/media officers for their units, and speaking with the press in general.
    - nobody9999 1y ago
      >My suspicions are based on listening to many podcasts with ex-military officer guests, and what they’ve said about serving ‘pentagon tours’, being publicity/public affairs/media officers for their units, and speaking with the press in general. Which podcasts? Which ex-military officers? That's not a "gotcha," I want to listen to those myself.
      - nickff 1y ago
        The Fighter Pilot Podcast is probably the best of them, both in terms of production and content, though recent episodes have drifted away from the ‘core content’ where it really shone. War on the Rocks has had some good ones as well, but not as interesting (in my opinion). There are many other military-focused and leadership-focused podcasts where you can glean something interesting every once in a while, but not really enough that I’d actually recommend following them. edit: some NASA astronaut interviews contain interesting info about (retired) military astronauts’ careers, which tend to be interesting as well.
        nobody9999 1y ago
        And these podcasts prominently feature ex-military officers saying they lied to reporters on a regular basis? Can you be just slightly more specific? The two podcasts you actually named have ~650 episodes between them. Heaven knows how many are in the podcasts you didn't name.
        nickff 1y ago
        I never said that I'd heard any officer state that they'd lied to a reporter. I said that I believe that access is/was choreographed (to present a certain narrative to the reporter), and that I don't think the reporters get the 'real dirt' from Pentagon access that they think they do (because most officers doing a desk tour there know they are walking a political tightrope). There are definitely counter-examples (of officers who do spill real dirt to reporters), such as United States Air Force Colonel James G. Burton, but they are uncommon, don't seem exclusive to Pentagon-pool reporters, and there don't seem to be many these days. I don't take notes on the podcasts I listen to, so I don't have episode-specific citations for you.

legitster 1y ago

> I am personally unsure of the value of these press pools in the face of modern 'PR'; as far as I can tell, all they do is generate 'clippable' videos. Very much the opposite - the press pool generates a massive amount of cross-verified content for distribution to all news agencies. The agencies then clip and edit and nip and tuck the press pool coverage as they see fit. Obviously the press pool only gets all the talking points they want them to, but also the press pool is literally there following around the president all day, so it's also really hard to hide things from the press pool. For example, the press pool knew of Obama's smoking or FDR's wheelchair or RFK's... indulgences. As part of the unwritten gentleman's agreement they never broke news on this stuff, but they were also witness to it and recorded it for later.