WaPo: For Obama, a Changed Tone in Presidential Humor

Paul Farhi of the Washington Post had a great insight on last night's annual White House Correspondents' Association dinner in that President Obama, for the second year in a row, would not target himself as a butt of his own jokes. Other presidents have often used the event to diffuse ongoing political tensions.

Except for a mild joke pegged to his falling approval ratings, Obama mostly spared Obama during his 14-minute standup routine. (The jokes were unofficially credited Sunday to Axelrod, Jon Favreau and Tommy Vietor.)

[Snip]

Obama's derisive tone surprises and dismays some of the people who've written jokes for presidents past.

"With these dinners you want the audience to like you more when you sit down than when you stood up," says Landon Parvin, an author and speechwriter for politicians in both parties, and a gag writer for three Republican presidents (Reagan and Bushes I and II). "Something in [Obama's] humor didn't do that," he said Sunday.

Parvin advises his political clients to practice a little partisan self-deprecation when they make lighthearted remarks: "If you're a Democrat, you make fun of Democrats and go easy on the Republicans; if you're a Republican, you do the opposite," he says.

Presidents past have generally hewed to that tradition, even when they were under intense criticism or were deeply unpopular.

Obama Sneaks Out of the White House Without the Press, Breaking Protocol

President Barack Obama broke away from the White House press corps today by leaving the White House without the reporters with him, the Associated Press reports:

About two hours before reporters were supposed to be in position to leave with the president, Obama left the grounds of the White House. Members of the press were told he was attending one of his daughter's soccer games in northwest Washington, D.C.

The White House press corps traditionally travels with the president anywhere he goes, inside and outside the country, to report on the president's activities for the benefit of informing the public and for historical record.

After Obama left, a press aide hastily gathered members of the media who happened to be at the White House early or working on other matters. They rushed to a van and left the White House to catch up with the president.

Too late. By the time, the press van appeared to arrive at the president's location, the press was told he was already departing. Time to go back to the White House.

Reporters and photographers didn't have a chance to see him or his vehicle to verify his presence at any location.

Although nobody outside the White House or the press may have noticed, Obama broke years of tradition.

The small press "pool" that accompanies the president had been told to gather at the White House at 11:30 a.m. He left about 9:20 a.m.

Asked what happened, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said: "The president decided this morning to attend his daughter's soccer game. The pool was assembled as soon as possible to be there as well."

Obama eventually left the White House again on Saturday for a round of golf. This time, the press was with him.

Gibbs Losing Laughs During His White House Briefings

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs played the crowd during a recent White House press briefing for writing notes on her hand at last week's Tea Party Convention, with a grocery list and the words change and hope in case he "forgot".

But as Patrick Gavin, Vivyan Tran and Luke Freedman report in POLITICO, the laughter has started to die down:

Back in May, POLITICO analyzed the press briefings and found that the instances of laughter — as indicated by "(Laughter)" being noted in the official transcript — occurred more than 10 times per day during press secretary Robert Gibbs's briefings.

But the laughter has been reduced by half in recent months: In the first six months of the Obama administration, briefings produced an average of 179 laughs per month. Over the past six months, the average has dropped down to 89.

Chalk it up to the close of any administration's initial honeymoon — and the Obama administration's tough second half of 2009, as it wrestled with health care and saw the late Ted Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat filled by a Republican.

"The tone is one reason for less laughter," says American Urban Radio's April Ryan. "There are lots of serious questions begging for serious answers. Those questions do not meld with laughter and light banter."

But there's also some frustration a-brewing among press corps members.

"There definitely aren't a lot of laughs around the briefing room these days," says Washington Examiner White House correspondent Julie Mason. "Robert's little digs and evasions have lost their power to amuse — particularly since we haven't had a presser since July."

Mason also reports frustration in the ranks: "Reporters know how close the press secretary is to the president, and yet the quality of the information we get doesn't often reflect that."

Obama Makes Surprise Visit to Daily White House Press Conference

President Barack Obama made a surprise visit during today's daily White House Press Conference. He said that a meeting between him and Democrat and Republican congressional leaders went well.

Reporters even moaned when he wanted to get a balance of questions and then called on MSNBC's Chuck Todd.

Obama Moves Press Conference Inside, TelePrompter and All

It was a mad scramble yesterday as President Barack Obama decided at the last moment to move the press conference from the Rose Garden to the White House briefing room.

Flags and podiums had to be moved back and forth. But most importantly, Obama’s TelePrompters were relocated so the president would know what to say in his opening remarks.

The hot, humid weather prompted the move. Presidential aides said it was uncomfortable for everyone, but it's also sure that they didn't want any images of Obama with sweat stains on a white shirt.

Obama's Words: What He Doesn't Mention Is Just as Important

So, what did President Barack Obama fail to mention during his 55-minute press conference yesterday? Mike Allen of POLITICO has an interesting take this morning:

A couple of surprising words were missing from President Barack Obama’s 55-minute news conference on Wednesday: “Iraq” — and “Afghanistan.”

Also MIA: “Korea,” “Pakistan,” “soldiers,” “surge” and “war” — as well as the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines.

The omissions were partly a result of the short attention span of the press, which did not ask about those topics after the president did not mention them in his opening statement.

But the silence on those subjects also provides a striking illustration of one of the singular differences between Obama and his predecessor.

Whereas President George W. Bush invoked his status as wartime commander in chief so often that it seemed like a crutch, Obama has much more of a domestic focus, and resists rhetorical calls to arms like “war on terror.”

It’s the Mars and Venus of the 43rd and 44th presidencies.

David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, said the president’s aides have never had a conversation about balancing the role of commander in chief with domestic-policy priorities.

“He feels equally comfortable on each role,” Axelrod said. “His focus isn’t just solving the problems as we find them, but hopefully forestalling some for the future.”

Obama aides say that the attack of 9/11 made war central to Bush’s presidency, whereas a twice-in-a-century recession has forced them to multitask — restoring the economy at the same time the president was engineering a surge of troops into Afghanistan.

Gibbs in Phone-Gate! Ringing Cell Phones at WH Briefing

A few light moments as cell phones went off during Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' breifing yesterday.

WH Correspondents, Obama Chuckle at Wanda Sykes' Joke About Limbaugh's Kidney Failing

Wanda Sykes had some supposedly funny remarks at last night's White House Correspondents' Association Dinner in Washington. Having been diagnosed with End Stage Renal Failure, I wouldn't wish kidney failure on anyone. This is tasteless. But, apparently it's funny if your a liberal president or a Washington journalist.

Rush Limbaugh, one of your big critics, boy, Rush Limbaugh said he hopes this administration fails. So, you're saying "I hope America fails," it's like, I don't care about people losing their homes, or their jobs, our soldiers in Iraq. He just wants the country to fail. To me, that's treason. He's not saying anything differently than what Osama bin Laden is saying. You know, you might want to look into this, Sir, because I think maybe Rush Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker, but he was just so strung out on oxycontin he missed his flight.

Rush Limbaugh, I hope the country fails, I hope his kidneys fail, how 'bout that? Needs a little waterboarding, that's what he needs.

Some other examples of Sykes' humor last night:

"I know Governor Palin, she's not here tonight. She pulled out at the last minute. You know, somebody should tell her that's not really how you practice abstinence.

"Sean Hannity, Sean Hannity said he's going to get waterboarded for charity, for our armed forces. He hasn't done it yet, I see. You know, talking about how he can take a waterboarding. Please. Okay, he can take a waterboarding by someone you know and trust, but let somebody from Pakistan waterboard, or Keith Olbermann. Let Keith Olbermann waterboard him. He can't take a waterboarding. I can break Sean Hannity just by giving him a middle seat in coach.

"Dick Cheney, oh my God, he's a scary man, scares me to death. I tell my kids, I says, "Look, if two cars pull up, and one has a stranger, and the other car has Dick Cheney, you get in the car with the stranger."

For the record, Obama took some jabs at himself and the administration, as told by Richard Leiby of the Washington Post, describing who was safe:

Not Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton: "The minute she got back from Mexico, she pulled me into a hug and said I should go down there myself."

Not Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel: "This is a tough holiday for Rahm. He's not used to saying the word 'day' after 'mother.' "

Not even, it turned out, himself: "During the second 100 days, we will design, build and open a library dedicated to my first 100 days."

And: "My next 100 days will be so successful, I will complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day, I will rest."

Does the Press Show More Respect for Obama Than It Did for Bush?

There was a stir this weekend over a YouTube video that showed how journalists in the White House press room rose from their seats when President Barack Obama entered the room but remained seated when President Bush had entered the room. Conservatives saw it as evidence of not only disrespect to the former president, but its favoritism toward Obama.

CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller sees it more as a rookie mistake by members of the press corps who were in the front row. In his blog, Knoller writes today that there is a different protocol in the press briefing room than at an East Room news conference.

It’s a long-standing practice for reporters to rise when the president enters the East Room for a news conference, but that hasn’t been the case in the briefing room.

I checked with two colleagues who served as senior wire service reporters during the Bush Presidency and who, in matters of press protocol, the rest of us followed.

“The briefing room is always a more informal place,” says Steve Holland of Reuters.

But the principal reason reporters remained in their seats, he said, was not to block the shot of TV cameramen and still photographers in the back of the room who were trying to make a picture of the president’s walk-in.

No disrespect was intended for President Bush and to the best of my knowledge none was taken.

Tim Graham of NewsBusters.org seems to concur that the practice is to remain seated, but I'm not sure if he thinks this is just newfound respect for the office of president:

This could be a rather mild outbreak of old-fashioned politeness to the chief. But in my two years in the White House press corps, I never saw reporters in the informal all-business setting of the briefing room stand up to greet the president (unless we were already standing, of course.)

I also noticed that reporters and cameramen were not really comfortable participating in patriotic rituals like the Pledge of Allegiance in the Bush years in East Room ceremonies -- perhaps they equated patriotism with being a Bush supporter?

White House Press Office Dials Up an Odd Briefing

The White House press office gave reporters a little more than what they were expecting yesterday when it distributed a phone number that was meant to be a conference call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit.

The number was a porn line.

Reporters were greeted with a woman's voice that was most definitely not the secretary of state. The Washington Post has the audio.

This is not the first misstep for the new press office, but unlike some of the others, this seems to fall under the "oops, my bad" category.

Obama Press Conferences: More Show, Less Transparency

President Barack Obama has had two press conferences so far, and both of them were more of an exercise in public relations than they were a demonstration of a free and aggressive press seeking answers to tough questions from the leader of the free world.

As a campaigner, then-Sen. Barack Obama was a master at conveying his message, one of hope for Democrats and change for everybody during the next four years. One of the cornerstones of his campaign was that he pledged to open up the White House and be a more transparent president than his predecessor. But the reality of the first two months of his administration has not borne that out.

His own web site is a head scratcher. The page that listed his transparency promises now has the message "The page you requested is not available right now." His press office has stonewalled journalists from offering up basic information such as the president's daily schedule and the spelling of a press officer's name. During the first week on the job he did a walk-through of the White House press room and was stunned that reporters fired questions at him. A reporter had to audacity to ask about the deputy defense secretary whom Obama has appointed. The appointee had lobbied for Raytheon, but Obama' had just issued new rules against lobbyists coming to work for him. Obama responded: "I came down here to visit. I didn't come down here -- this is what happens. I can't end up visiting you guys and shaking hands if I am going to grilled every time I come down here."

Well, that accelerated his learning curb. Stay away from reporters who are trained to ask tough questions, and limit appearances to "web town-hall meetings" or news outlets that are either friendly or not accustomed to dealing with the president and willing to accept any condition to get an interview. This policy has been so fruitful for Obama that he is constantly avoiding White House Press Corps reporters. He originally cancelled the traditional head-of-state photo-op-and-question session when British Prime Minister Gordon Brown visited, only to arrange a short Oval Office opportunity when Brown requested it. Recently he was given a "Newsmaker of the Year Award" by a newspaper association during a White House ceremony that was, ironically, closed off to working journalists.

It all plays into his communication strategy that was developed during the campaign: Bypass the media when you can and go straight to the public via the Internet or other methods. It worked like a charmed as he ran for president because he was not challenged on it. Candidates can do that, it's their choice. It was brilliant, and he pulled it off flawlessly.

But presidents need to be accountable. If the last eight years taught us anything it should be that.

So the communication strategy now continues at press conferences. Reporters are preselected. Traditionally, reporters at a press conference, especially at the White House, aggressively raise their hands to be called upon. Generally they are allowed a follow-up question. These follow-ups are often tougher questions than the first because they zero in on a point that the president may have slipped up on while answering the first question.

But now as reporters are preselected, aggressive questioning is minimized. There is no need to be forceful when asking a question if you know your time will come. The questions then tend to be softer, easier for the president to handle. (Reporters with tougher questions tend to be more aggressive in getting answers, this method of lining up the questions eliminates that). Heck, if you're not on the preselect list, your actually playing into his hands. The image of a full room of reporters is a plus, even if 90 percent of them have not business being there except to sit in a chair and stay quiet.

He also has the advantage of picking questions from reporters he knows are not going to upset his message too much. By picking B-list agencies such as cable outlets and magazines, he further increases the chances he can stay on message. In his first press conference he got a question about A-Rod for goodness's sake. Robert Gibbs couldn't have been more pleased.

The president promised transparency. The American public deserves transparency in a time when trillions of their money are being spent on questionable bailouts. Manipulating the press and dragging your feet on the basic release of information is not the way to go about it. It's time Obama kept his promise and provided an open and robust opportunity to face sound, tough questions from journalists who know how to ask them.

Obama Avoids Leading Newspapers at Press Conference

In keeping with his overall news management strategy, President Barack Obama avoided taking questions last night from the traditional major newspapers such as The Washington Post and The New York Times at his second news conference of his term. It's clearly an effort to control the message, not answer the questions.

Not that the 13 journalists who did have an opportunity to ask a question come from unknown organizations. But there is a clear pattern to skip over "the elite" media in favor of others in order to try to control the message. He did hit the Associated Press, the three major networks, CNN and FOX.

And no, there was no question from Helen Thomas this time around.

In order, here is the list of people he called on:

Jennifer Loven of The Associated Press, Chuck Todd of NBC, Jake Tapper of ABC, Chip Reid of CBS, Lourdes Meluza of Univision, Kevin Baron of Stars and Stripes, Ed Henry of CNN, Major Garrett of FOX News, Mike Allen of POLITICO, Kevin Chappell of Ebony, Ann Compton of ABC Radio), Jon Ward of the Washington Times and Stephen Collinson of Agence France-Presse.

Obama told reporters that he expects the American public to strongly support his efforts for unprecedented regulatory authority over financial institutions that are not banks. He also said Americans "cannot afford to demonize every investor who seeks to make a profit." The natural follow-up question would have been: Is there any other kind of investor other than one who seeks a profit?

He is currently asking for broad new powers to regulate nonbank entities such as troubled insurer American International Group. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testified Tuesday about the plan.

Obama said his reasoning is that the absence of such authority contributed to AIG's current difficulties. He compared such oversight to the federal government's regulation of the banks.

He also suggested he could agree to a short-term compromise concerning a middle-class tax cut and a carbon-emissions cap.

Here is part one of the text of the press conference, here is part two, and here is part three.

White House Bans Press From Award Ceremony by News Group for Obama

See if you can discover the irony here.

President Barack Obama was scheduled receive an award for "Newsmaker of the Year" from the National Newspaper Publishers Association this afternoon. He was scheduled from the federation of black community newspapers in a ceremony at the White House.

But the press is banned from covering the event.

The president's official schedule states:

"Later in the afternoon, the President and the First Lady will attend a reception with the National Newspaper Publisher Association in the State Dining Room, where they will be presented the Newsmaker of the Year award. This event is closed press."

Why would any news organization even participate in a ceremony that bars the press? So much for transparency. Maybe there is a reason?

Well, there appears to be a quid pro quo involved. FOX News is reporting that Josh Earnest, deputy White House press secretary, has told it that Obama's reception is a "special access" event that the representatives of African-American community newspapers will cover as participants, and as such is not open to daily White House reporters.

The trouble with that is the normal journalistic standard would be that participants not cover themselves in any kind of events. That's what public relations directors are for.

Stories of the event, Earnest told FOX, will be published in African-American community newspapers across the country and in that sense the event will be "covered."

Well, covered by participants, who have an interest in positive coverage. Why not skip the middle man and have Robert Gibbs write the copy?

Earnest also said the White House says the National Newspaper Publishers Association is giving the award to the president and is therefore being given its own event because of its historical focus on African-American issues.

For its part, the National Newspaper Publishers Association has not commented on its lack of knowledge of how a news organization is supposed to operate. It's bad enough when corporations and government hide behind close doors, it's worse when the very groups that are entrusted to advocate on behalf of the public for more transparency participate in such antics.

I would not, by the way, expect much concern from the usual mainstream media. Now, if President George Bush had received an award for "Newsmaker of the Year" from FOX News and closed off the ceremony from the White House Press Corps, I'm sure The New York Times and MSNBC would have had a field day. (Which, under that scenario, they would had been justified.)

This manipulation of the press is growing day by day at the White House. The Obama administration has a running feud with traditional news-gathering techniques. Yes, this is a small event of no great importance to many people. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of award ceremonies at the White House every year, few of which get any kind of notice. But the trend of this administration is to tightly control the message. See here, here, here and here. This is not change in Washington that benefits a democracy, and it's a trend that needs to be reversed.

Calderone: White House Press Corps Making Nice-Nice to Obama's Staff

Michael Calderone of Politico writes tonight of the White House Press Corps' ritual in gaining a welcoming ear in the West Wing: When a new administration gains power, write glowing features about the players, and hope that a soft feature now will pay dividends down the road when you need a source.

It's a great read into the inner workings of the White House press crops and how it operates:

In the early days of any administration, reporters reach out to the men and women who might become their sources over the next four years — then slather them with glowing profiles suitable for framing in their mothers’ bedrooms.

Even garden-variety government officials become political superheroes, each one harder-working and more down-to-earth than the last — and all of them enjoying the ear of the president.

Reading once again about Gibbs’ folksy ways, his pastel ties and his Alabama roots, a part-time political junkie might question the need for yet another profile of the hard-working press secretary who’s always within earshot when the president weighs a big decision.

But this proliferation of profiles isn’t about the reader’s need to know, or at least not entirely. It’s also about reporters’ need to introduce themselves to and ingratiate themselves with the White House officials they’ll need as sources over the next four years.

It’s far easier for a reporter to get time with a key staffer when both parties know that a flattering profile is coming. And it’s a lot easier to get calls returned from the staffer’s colleagues — especially subordinates — if they know it’s an opportunity to suck up to the subject.

Can Reporters Ethically Join the Obama Administration?

UPDATE, 11 p.m. Eastern, Feb. 18: Calderone defends his story against charges that it was slanted against Democrats.

A number of people are starting to question the latest craze for mainstream media veterans of jumping to the Dark Side to work for government, specially the Obama administration and the Democrat leadership on the Hill. Once considered a suicidal leap in journalism, the trend is growing in light of the fact that so many newspapers are cutting staff (see list to your right, for example) as well as the fact that most journalists are in-tune with what the new president is trying to accomplish.

Michael Calderone of Politico explored this phenomenon extensively:

In an interview, [Jill Zuckman] said that she began looking around for a new job last month, motivated by the grim state of the industry — her employer, the Tribune Co., recently slashed its D.C. bureau — and also by her own feeling that she’d accomplished what she’d set out to do covering politics.

She said she had no plans to go to the administration — until she heard about an opening under Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, a former Republican representative she’s long respected for reaching across the aisle.

So, would Zuckman have taken — or even been offered — such a job if [Sen. John] McCain were president?

“I have a great deal of respect for [McCain] and have thoroughly enjoyed covering him over the years,” Zuckman said. “But there’s no way I can answer your hypothetical because I wouldn’t know who he would have chosen for secretary of transportation. My decision to go to work for the Obama administration is tied up in my relationship with Ray LaHood and his focus on getting the economy back on track.”

Conservative Michelle Malkin calls it "Obama's own little MSM bailout program."

Zuckman isn't alone. She's the latest of a number of high profile journalists who have crossed sides. Calderone provide this following rundown:

*Scott Shepard of Cox is now Sen. John Kerry’s speechwriter.
*Doug Frantz, formerly an investigative reporter, is now chief investigator for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is chaired by Kerry.
*Tribune's Peter Gosselin is now a speechwriter for Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.
*Time's Washington Bureau Chief Jay Carney is now Vice President Joe Biden’s communications director.
*Warren Bass left the Washington Post’s Outlook section to write speeches and advise Dr. Susan Rice at the United Nations.
*Daniel W. Reilly left Politico to become communications director for Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
*Linda Douglass left the National Journal for the Obama campaign in May and is expected to become assistant secretary for public affairs in the department of Health and Human Services.

The ethical question is once you have jumped over that fence, can you jump back and expected to at least pretend you are covering politics down the middle of the road? The political question is whether this is a sign of a glaring media bias during the campaign or just economic realities?

Of the journalists flocking to government jobs, Pew Project Director Tom Rosenstiel told Calderone that: “There’s no mystery here, and I don’t think the key to this is ideological as much as economic. The newspaper industry, in Washington in particular, is suffering mightily.” The Pew’s Project for Excellence in Journalism recently published a report on “The New Washington Press Corps,” describing the decline of the Washington Press Corps.

But Brent Bozell had a different take for Calderone:

“If you are in journalism, and you can so easily fit in the world of politics, it tells you something,” Bozell said, “that you were not that detached from it when you were in journalism.”

Perhaps proving Bozell’s point, journalists say that there used to be more stigma attached when a reporter crossed over to cover someone he’s covered. Now, they say, it’s hard to consider a colleague a sell-out when the alternative to a government job could be the unemployment line.

Obama's First Press Conference and Its Message to the Media

True to his nickname, President Barack Obama provided no drama at Monday night's prime time news conference in the White House. He gave his opening remarks in favor of the stimulus plan, and then took 13 questions from a list of predetermined reporters.

But while the public was paying attention to what the president was saying concerning the economy, reporters and journalists inside the Beltway were focused on the new world order within the White House press corps.

First, there was a signal of the changing of the guard. Helen Thomas, who has covered every president since John Kennedy, asked the new president if any Middle Eastern country possessed nuclear weapons and whether Pakistan and Afghanistan were havens for "these so-called terrorists." And while conservative pundits jumped all over that odd phrasing (what, there are no terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan?), there was an interesting window into how President Obama is going to handle reporters at press conferences. As she tried to ask a follow-up question, seen at the end of this clip, the microphone was taken away from her.


Traditionally, reporters at a press conference raise their hands to be called upon. Generally they are allowed a follow-up question. These follow-ups are often tougher questions than the first because they zero in on a point that the person who is holding the press conference may have slipped up on while answering the first question.

But it appears the new president will continue to operate just as he did during the transition, controlling not only who gets to ask a question, but maintaining a grip over limiting the tougher questions by eliminating follow-ups. Obama's main goal during his press conferences is not to be transparent and answer tough question, it's to relay a message.

By the way, Thomas thought that the president did a good job in his first press conference and was well prepared. But she said she thought Obama was evasive in some of his answers, especially in the area of foreign affairs.


There were also some fresh faces in the East Room. Sam Stein of the Huffington Post was one of the chosen few to ask a question. That was the first time a blogger had that level of access.

Belinda Luscombe of Time had this to say about Stein's groundbreaking appearance:

By calling on Stein on such a big stage, Obama is continuing to work the message that this is not a traditional presidency, that he is not averse to working with those outside the establishment. The Huffington Post's readers are likelier to be younger, leftier and more politically engaged than most of the consumers of the old-school media outlets, so it's also a way of reaching straight into his base. Stein's question was whether Obama would consider instituting a Truth and Reconciliation Committee for Republicans — similar to the one established after apartheid in South Africa — as had been suggested earlier that day by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy. Good question, but not a hard one to deflect.

Ironically, Stein's bosses debated whether he should go to the conference, since it's easier to blog in real time when you're watching an event on TV. "You can put your computer in front of the TV and post much quicker," Stein says. But it was decided that he should attend, a decision that seemed all the wiser when he got a call from the press office confirming his appearance and letting him know he had a good seat. "I knew then that I'd probably get to ask a question," he says. (At the daily briefings, which happen at the other end of the White House in the Briefing Room, he isn't assigned a seat at all.)

In case you didn't keep score, Time was not called on to ask a question.

And to the surprise to many and the dismay to conservatives, liberal radio host Ed Schultz was front-row center at the press conference. The obvious juxtaposition would be wondering how it would have looked had Rush Limbaugh was offered such a prominent seat at President George Bush's press conferences. Schultz was not called upon to ask a question, but Obama's signal was clear to many journalists: He's a supporter, he'll help deliver my message, he'll get a good seat.

Finally, Michael Fletcher of the Washington Post asked the president about Alex Rodriguez's admission that he had used performance enhancing drugs as a player for the Texas Rangers in 2003. Why Fletcher decided that this was the most important query he could come up with is beyond me. He was only one of 13 reporters in the room granted the opportunity to ask the president a question while the country is still fighting two wars and facing a deep economic crisis. If I were his editor at the Post, I would have pulled my hair out.

If Fletcher, or any other White House reporter for that matter, needs help in crafting questions, here are a few I would ask:

1. Mr. President, you keep referring to "shovel ready projects" to get people to work right away. But usually projects such as bridge repair and construction, home building, road construction and other public works need to go through a myriad of local zoning hearings, engineering studies, environmental studies, historic review boards and other red tape. These hearings and public reviews take anywhere from two to five years to complete before dirt is turned. Does your stimulus package address those issues? Are these layers of red tape and local approvals going to be eliminated in order to get people to work faster?

2. Mr. President, you say that 4 million jobs will be created or saved by the stimulus package. What matrix are you going to use to define a "saved" job? How is anyone to know if their job was targeted to be cut, but was saved by the stimulus package? And is this a way to fudge the numbers to show success?

3. Mr. President, you said in Fort Myers that if your plan does not work, you should be held accountable by the voters four years from now. Does that mean we should expect 1 million jobs to be created each year until 2012?

4. Mr. President, after months of hundreds of thousands of job losses, when exactly should the American public start to see job creations instead of job cuts?

5. Mr. President, during your campaign, you offered to sit down face-to-face with the leading dictators of the world without preconditions during your first year in office. When should the American public expect to see that happen? And as a follow-up, there are media reports from the Caribbean indicating that you are planning to meet with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in April. Can you confirm that?

6. Mr. President, you campaigned on changing the way government works in Washington, yet this stimulus package has followed the same predictable path. House Democrats wanting to spend every dollar they can print, Republicans holding fast to their theories on tax cuts. In the end, only three Republicans on the Hill voted for the package, and even 11 Democrats voted against it in the House. How is this change? And what do you plan to do differently the next time Washington faces a major issue?

7. Mr. President, you have made overtures to Iran to start talks. How do you plan to balance your desire for better relations with that nation with our long time alliance with Israel? Have you discussed your Iranian plans with Israel's leaders yet?

8. Mr. President, exactly where do we have $2 trillion to spend? Can you explain to the American public where this money is coming from?

Any one of those questions would be better than finding out the president's thoughts on A-Rod.

Is the Obama Team Side-Stepping the Media?

David Cay Johnston expressed some frustrations with President Barack Obama's press office today in the Columbia Journalism Review. These are the same concerns I voiced in earlier posts here and here.

It’s 3 p.m. and the phone in the White House press secretary’s office is ringing. It rings and rings and rings. Eventually, a recorded voice asks callers to leave a message — followed by a second voice saying the voicemail box is full.

After a full week of such calls, a human being answers. But Ben Labolt immediately bristles when asked to spell his name, refuses to give his job title, and says he is going “off the record” until I stop him to explain that the reporter grants that privilege, not the other way around — a basic journalistic standard that Labolt seems unaware of. He soon hangs up without even hearing what I called to ask about.

A return call is answered by Priya Singh, who spells her name when asked, but does not know (or will not say) what her job title is and several times describes requests for information about how the Obama administration press office is operating as a “complaint” which she would pass on. She says she is not authorized to comment, though she at one point tells me she is a spokesperson.

This might be the simply the problems of a new administration struggling to cope with a flood of calls and perhaps the complex machinery of the modern office. But it might also indicate that President Obama’s messages about open government have not reached press secretary Robert Gibbs and his staff.

While it is too early to judge just how this will work out, the early signs are troubling. And interviews with a dozen Washington reporters indicate that the Obama press operation tends to embrace friendly questions, while treating skeptical questions as not worth their time or, worse, as coming from an enemy.

This is a troubling sign. There have been indications starting with the campaign that the Obama team views press coverage and questions only to be used as a tool to put out their message in their own way. And it's a philosophy that starts at the top. Obama once told a reporter during the transition to not "waste a question" when asked about a subject that was difficult and not a part of that day's message.

Obama, when touring the White House press room two days after the inauguration, was asked a tough question about the deputy Defense secretary whom Obama has appointed. The appointee had lobbied for Raytheon, but Obama' had just issued new rules against lobbyists coming to work for him. Obama responded: "I came down here to visit. I didn't come down here -- this is what happens.

"I can't end up visiting you guys and shaking hands if I am going to grilled every time I come down here."

Hint to the president ... yes, expect tough questions in the press room at all time.

In addition, Gibbs' relationship with the media has always been a bit cool, as he had limited the access to candidate Obama to only venues that put the senator in a good light. That's a tactic that played out well during a campaign, but may not sell when dealing with the leader of the free world.

There is a difficulty in what had been standard procedures. Transcripts of the gaggle and press briefings are not being released online, only edited snippets. Gibbs at one point did not know that the press wanted the "week ahead", (the president's schedule for the next week), which is traditionally released on Friday.

It's all about managing the message (and the press) for the Obama team right now, spoon-feeding only what it wants to spoon-feed, and not dealing with the difficult day-to-day questions from reporters. But why should it be difficult to spell your name or give your title? Many other reporters have describe similar difficulties in dealing with the press office. The question is whether this these missteps are a matter of getting your feet wet or is it a matter of policy? Could they be acting this way on purpose?

On the podium, Gibbs is also struggling to find his way in the early going. His answers have been evasive, and not very enlightening. Here is an exchange from an earlier press briefing:

... Among the lessons that Gibbs will learn from his predecessors is the necessity of having an answer when the tough questions start coming.

That lesson started unfolding today.

On Pakistan, was Obama consulted before the newest missile strikes or did he consult with Pakistan on that?

"I'm not going to speak about these matters today,'' Gibbs said.

"I was just a little confused because you took the question,'' said a reporter, who had asked a two-parter about this and the economic stimulus bill's job creation and got his jobs answer but not his Pakistan answer.

"I gave you my answer,'' Gibbs said.

"Second question,'' the reporter pressed.

"My answer was I wasn't going to talk about that.''

A little later, a reporter asked: "Other U.S. officials have confirmed these Predator drone airstrikes in Pakistan. What is it about not confirming whether the president was consulted?''

"I'm not going to get into these matters,'' Gibbs said.
"How does that compromise operational... ?''

"I'm not going to get into these matters,'' Gibbs said. "There are many things that you should be justifiably curious about. But I'm not going to get into talking about....''

"If other members of the U.S. government are confirming this, why is it that you can't comment?

"I'm not going to get into these matters,'' Gibbs repeated...

"There was a report today that the president is withdrawing Jim Jones and Larry Summers from the World Economic Forum at Davos,'' another reporter asked later, after a number of questions were answered at length. "Is there a reason for that? Is there some message that's trying to be sent for the fact that the two of them are not going, as originally planned?

"I don't know anything about that, so I don't have anything for you on that,'' Gibbs said. "I apologize. ''

And later, why has the White House asked for the resignation of Mark Dybul, the Global AIDS coordinator in the Bush administration, after first indicating that he might stay on the job.

"I don't have anything on the AIDS office,'' Gibbs said. "I have not read anything on that.''

Johnston's conclusion is right on the nose:

Talking to working reporters is not the only way to communicate with the people. The Obama administration seems to be embracing direct delivery of its messages via the whitehouse.gov website and YouTube. They seem to be saying “We don’t need the press to communicate our messages to the people. We can talk to the people ourselves.”

That’s entirely appropriate. But it doesn’t mean that the press should be cut out of the loop—for one thing, most Americans still get their news via traditional sources. So far the Obama administration appears to be treating its political opponents with more grace, and smarts, than journalists.

Reporters' Frustration With Obama Team Growing

There are signs that any honeymoon period between President Barack Obama and the White House press corps is morphing into a first quarrel.

White House reporters at Press Secretary Robert Gibbs briefing expressed their frustrations today at a number of issues that have cropped up in the first hours of the Obama administration. Namely a re-do on the presidential oath that had no pool reporter or video representation, and a question over why ABC got exclusive access to the president after it sponsored one of the inaugural balls.

Michael Calderone of Politico reports tonight:

Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.

He also asked new press secretary Robert Gibbs why ABC, which paid millions to host the DC Neighborhood Ball, was granted the only inauguration day interview with President Obama – a move he equated to “pay to play.”

“We have a tradition here of covering the president,” said Plante, who is covering his fourth administration.

Gibbs defended the White House’s moves, insisting aides acted in a “way that was upfront and transparent” in allowing the standard pool into the swearing-in. And Obama himself seemed mindful of making a good impression, paying a surprise visit to the White House pressroom a few hours after the briefing.

Transparency was one of Obama's campaign mantras. But there have been problems in the first few hours of the administration. If the chief justice was invited back to re-administer the oath of office over an abundance of caution, why not allow a pool reporter and video? Only still images from White House photographer Pete Souza were released, and The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse refused to use them in protest.

Wasn't the idea to show the world that the president said the words in correct order? Not that it legally matters much, but taking the oath again does squelch any loon lawsuits. So why not make it public? Gibbs' answer to the question of why not show the world was "well, I was there." That doesn't cut it.

The ABC question is a good one, and the Obama team has to come up with an explanation. Are future interviews going to granted to news organizations that make some kind of financial contribution?

Calderone also points out confusion about background briefings:

Before Gibbs took the podium, reporters were given a background briefing under an agreement to only attribute information to “senior administration officials” — a policy some news organizations object to as a matter of policy.

But when Gibbs let slip the name of one briefer, Greg Craig, a couple times, The Wall Street Journal’s Jonathan Weisman asked, “Are we allowed to repeat that name?”

During the earliest days of the Clinton administration, such abrupt changes in the traditional press access were often met with harsh criticism from the briefing room pack, most notably, the blocking off of access to the office of then press secretary George Stephanopoulos.

Former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers, who succeeded Stephanopoulos, said in PBS’s “The Clinton Years” that the move “made the press very angry because they lost access to a part of the building that they had had access to.”

“And it didn't serve us,” she continued. “And it was stupid and didn't last very long. I can't remember when the decision was made and the door was finally reopened but it was a complete waste of energy. It alienated people for no purpose. It served nothing. It served no one. And it was a rookie, rookie mistake.”

Myers said Thursday that the Obama’s decision to bar widespread access to the re-do of the oath wasn’t in the same category as shutting access to the press office, but wouldn’t help in relations with the media.

The Bush White House would normally post transcripts to press briefings here. The whitehouse.gov site now has a few PR links, including the pdfs of the executive orders and a partial list of appointees (here is a more complete list), but no sign of where to get the official transcripts. CQPolitics.com is publishing the transcripts. It's not a good sign early on if the Bush White House was more transparent than Obama's. Ellen Moran, director of communications, and Gibbs have a bit of a learning curve ahead of him.

Obama Meets White House Press Corps, Fends Off Tough Questions

President Barack Obama made a surprise appearance during the daily White House briefing today to chat with reporters. But what he wanted to chat about wasn't what the reporters wanted to discuss.

Here's what Ben Feller of The Associated Press wrote this evening:

When a reporter tried to quiz him about a lobbyist chosen for a top Defense Department job, Obama begged off. "I came down here to visit. I didn't come down here — this is what happens. I can't end up visiting you guys and shaking hands if I am going to get grilled every time I come down here."

Obama was willing to field some lighter questions. Yes, he's discovered the gym in the White House residence. No, he hasn't played basketball yet on the outdoor White House court because it's been too cold.

Obama may have to get used to reporters firing tough questions any chance they get. It's a White House tradition. If you don't want to answer tough questions, don't put yourself in that position.

Obama Limits Access to Questions at Press Conferences

Have you noticed how president-elect Barack Obama is conducting his press conferences? After he finishes reading off his statement of the day, he looks down at a notepad and calls out the names of three of four journalists who have been preselected to ask questions. These journalists have been notified in advance that they are the lucky few who have been selected to pose a question. In addition, many are not from the regular White House pres corps. They are usually local journalists who are not so much interested in broad policy issues but instead want to know something about their local person who was just appointed to a post in the administration.

This is not how a press conference is supposed to be conducted. The traditional method is a political makes a statement, then opens the floor to questions. Journalists raise their hands, or in some cases, start shouting out the questions that need to be answered. This has been gnawing at me for weeks. How does he select the reporters who are allowed to ask questions? Why has the media followed this program like sheep?

Carol Marin of the Chicago Sun-Times had the same thoughts today:

The Obama news conferences tell that story, making one yearn for the return of the always-irritating Sam Donaldson to awaken the slumbering press to the notion that decorum isn't all it's cracked up to be.

The press corps, most of us, don't even bother raising our hands any more to ask questions because Obama always has before him a list of correspondents who've been advised they will be called upon that day.

We reporters have earned our own membership in the Bizarro universe.

Who are we, after all? The ones rapid-firing at Rod Blagojevich with tough questions until we drive him from the room? Or the Miss Manners crowd, silent until called upon, quietly accepting that only a handful of questions will be taken at a time?

President Bush took a beating in the main stream media for trying to control the press. But soon-to-be President Obama's taking it one step further. All of this should not be a surprise. Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post saw 12 months ago the aloof nature of the Obama campaign towards the press and its desire to keep the senator isolated from the media. On Jan. 28, 2008, Kurtz wrote:

When reporters filed onto Barack Obama's press plane after his acrimonious debate with Hillary Rodham Clinton last week, one thing was noticeably missing amid the wine and snacks on the Boeing 737.

There was no high-level campaign spinner to argue that Obama had gotten the better of the exchanges or that the verbal fisticuffs were part of some precisely calculated strategy. On the press bus the next day, mid-level aides dealt with travel logistics but made no attempt to shape the coverage.

In an age of all-out political warfare, the Obama campaign is a bit of an odd duck: It is not obsessed with winning each news cycle. The Illinois senator remains a remote figure to those covering him, and his team, while competent and professional, makes only spotty attempts to drive its preferred story lines in the press.

"There is no charm offensive from the candidate toward the press corps," says Newsweek correspondent Richard Wolffe. "The contact is limited. . . . They see the national media more as a logistical problem than a channel for getting stuff out."

As Obama's blowout victory in Saturday's South Carolina primary shows, an aloof attitude toward the media may not be a liability for a candidate with his oratorical gifts. Even the pundits' attempts to minimize his win by focusing on Obama's capturing a quarter of the white vote -- no small achievement in a three-way contest -- came after a week in which journalists talked about race far more than he did. But the contrast in his press strategy is striking, not just with Clinton's campaign -- which aggressively lobbies journalists around the clock -- but also with the Bush White House and the Clinton White House before that. And that, Obama aides say, is by design.

It will be interesting to see as the new administration takes power if it intends to keep the president on message by limiting the access to the media, especially reporters who are interested in tougher questions. It will also be interesting to see if the media pushes back against a popular president as much as it pushed backed against an unpopular one.