Scott McClellan: The White House Press Briefing is Obsolete
By Matthew Yglesias
Asked by TNR to offer some advice to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, former Press Secretary Scott McClellan makes the provocative suggestion that the whole briefing ritual is passe:
My view is that the press-briefing model that is used now is kind of outdated. It ought to be more along the lines of the Pentagon briefing model, where you’re bringing in on a regular basis–maybe even two to three times a week–key officials from the White House or Cabinet secretaries to participate in these briefings and help educate the press and the public.
I agree with that. In terms of the basic briefing material, this could just as easily be emailed out to everyone on the press list. Meanwhile, the Q&A sessions that exist now are useless as a source of actual information. Reporters ask questions that they know perfectly well won’t be answered, and then the press secretary does his best to dodge him. Nine days out of ten, the result is a not-very-amusing spectacle for mid-day C-SPAN viewers. If the world is lucky, the Press Secretary commits some kind of gaffe. But nothing real is ever learned. McClellan’s idea, by contrast, holds some promise. The White House could bring out whoever they wanted. But the expectation would be clear—you brought these people out to talk about something in particular, and they’re really expected to talk about it.
30 Responses to “Scott McClellan: The White House Press Briefing is Obsolete”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
January 31st, 2009 at 11:04 am
The White House press briefings have had no news content and have been a farce for a long time – it doesn’t take Scott McClennan to realize this. They apparently continue to exist to fill up cable news time and to give face time to media news “personalities”.
January 31st, 2009 at 11:24 am
Wouldn’t you need smarter reporters too? The ones we have now should go back to the jr. high lunchroom.
January 31st, 2009 at 11:42 am
Wouldn’t you need smarter reporters too?
Yeah, it’s time to get past the dedicated ‘White House correspondent’ whose job is basically to stand in the garden or try the theatricals at the briefing. You can understand the BBC, for instance, having a Washington bureau chief with the White House press pass, but NBC and CNN have people who have subject/departmental expertise, and there’s no reason (other than the perceived prestige of the W.H. posting) to rotate the people asking the questions.
January 31st, 2009 at 1:30 pm
In a related vein, why not some version of Prime Minister’s Question Time? And in mentioning that institution, I note that an acquaintance from a Commonwealth country once pointed out to me that while C-SPAN shows just the P.M. getting grilled, the actual Question Time is longer than what gets carried in the US and includes other cabinet members having to look knowledgeable and responsible or face professional embarrassment – no bad thing, if you ask me.
January 31st, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Why can’t we have this, then questions from sharp reporters who can think on their feet well enough to ask intelligent questions after hearing something that hasn’t been spun yet?
January 31st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
This was done one day last week. Ken Salazar Sec. of Interior kicked the briefing off and took questions.
January 31st, 2009 at 8:58 pm
WOW! The whiners on the right can’t seem to find any ground to stand on. As far as the Press Briefing goes you need a REAL press not some cable or NetWork talking head. Personnally I would like to see REAL jouralistic credentials applied to the FOOLS that consider themselves reporters.
As far as McCellum goes he should hang around and find out what a REAL PRESS SECRETARY does? Just maybe he will not be so easily discouraged.
January 31st, 2009 at 9:15 pm
But at the moment it serves as the only push-back against the typical reporter/pundit/republican world-view.
Sometimes the reporters’ questions are just wrong.
January 31st, 2009 at 9:18 pm
The days of reporters like Woodward and Bernstein as they were during Watergate are unfortunately long gone.
January 31st, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Geez, for you Americans it’s “Question Period” Okay?
January 31st, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Educate? Does that strike anyone else as condescending? How about “inform”?
February 1st, 2009 at 3:13 am
It does seem like it would be in keeping with the President’s Constitutional obligation to keep Congress informed from time to time.
February 1st, 2009 at 7:36 am
They are a necessary tool in order for the media, the press, and the folks seeing it. It keeps us up-to-date. Mr. Gibbs is honest, straightforward, and I am impressed at the amount of press conferences he has and never appears rushed.
It was people like Scott McClellan, Tony Snow, Ari Fleischer, who were a bunch of hot air and no substance.
Mr. Gibbs stands true to Obama’s honesty and want to tell the American people what is going on.
Keep those press conferences going Mr. Gibbs. I believe what you say is “true and factual:.
February 1st, 2009 at 8:47 am
Funny how YOU were just fine with standing up in front of cameras and telling us nothing. But now that someone else is there, it’s archaic, and uninformative, and a waste of everyone’s time.
And there are a lot more reporters filling chairs and filing substansive stories than YOU ever saw in YOUR briefing room.
Sour grapes? How gauche.
You wasted everyone’s time for years. Get stuffed.
February 1st, 2009 at 11:02 am
This is a welcome and admirable plan. Still, I can’t help but get queasy when I hear a political figure say he wants to “educate” the media and the public. Please lose that word.
February 1st, 2009 at 12:39 pm
The Whitehouse spokesliar of the Bush years is obsolete Scott, because yours and tony snowjob, dana purina, ari fliescher’s style of lying for the liars is what did your style in. Hey Scott, read your own book you idiot!
February 1st, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Its not the media that is obsolete, its the message.
The ability now to fact check makes spin and BS a hard sell.
Not your fault Scott.
February 1st, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Three cheers for Scott’s validation of the pretty long-running critique of the present shtick. It’s useless. But only two cheers for the specific-briefing model: more substance would be good, hearing from people who understand the substance would be good. But there still needs to be a place where spin (or framing, probably a more accurate as well as a less cynical term) gets to happen. A place where the President or his authoritative spokesperson tells the public how the President is looking at this, that, or the other issue. That has to be there, for healthy politics to happen. Otherwise, we either behave as if everything could be technocratically settled (it can’t), or we are always hearing from subordinates and are never in contact with the office where the buck stops.
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:14 am
What America needs is to replace the “gotcha and spin” mentality with facts. There are too few reporters who are real journalists. Most are media actors. And as a result, Americans have become non-thinking, reactionary voyeurs. It’s frustrating.
February 2nd, 2009 at 10:01 am
McClatchy is Bernstein-Woodward Journalism.
February 2nd, 2009 at 10:04 am
Maybe so, but I’d watch a Dana Perino show where she came out and answered weird questions for a while. Nothing personal, just weird questions.
February 2nd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I just read the whole interview with McLellan. It sounds reasonable. He talks about moving beyond the spin and making the briefings about “informing” the public. Makes sense to me. Why else have a briefing.
February 2nd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
For the record: Prime Minister’s question time in parliaments of the Commonwealth is for MPs, not the press, though it’s open to the public. Having the president answer questions in public from members of Congress is a novel idea, but would probably conflict with our presidential system, which holds the head of state accountable to voters, not the legislature.
February 2nd, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Joh Kennedy was humorous and non evasive. He was the best and I think the one the press looked forward to hearing from. I doubt if Obama has enough time to do it but he would be embraced by the press.
February 5th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
I wish Mr. Gibbs could take a clue from President Obama. The president has given interviews to numerous news organizations since being sworn in. He always comes across as honest and direct regardless of what he’s asked. Reading the transcripts of the press briefings is great way to get a laugh, because no matter what question is asked Mr. Gibbs finds a way to give absolutely no useful answer. If you want to put out platitudes do so in a statement released to the press. There needs to be some forum (hopefully the press briefings) where government is responsive and answers basic questions that the public has.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:23 am
Great site. Good info
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:59 am
tramadol
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 8th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
The style of writing is quite familiar to me. Did you write guest posts for other bloggers?
April 15th, 2009 at 9:26 am
If you want to see a reader’s feedback
, I rate this post for four from five. Detailed info, but I have to go to that damn msn to find the missed bits. Thanks, anyway!