D.C. journalists to Scott McClellan: Huh?

The Bush White House wasn't the only crew stung by Scott McClellan's scorching new memoir about his experiences as the president's press secretary.

McClellan also lashed out at the Fourth Estate, saying the national press corps "was probably too deferential to the White House" when it came to questioning whether going to war in Iraq was justified.

An unscientific sampling of Washington journalists expressed puzzlement about McClellan's criticism -- or dissed it as downright hooey.

"It's a stunning and unsupportable statement," pronounced Mark Knoller, CBS Radio correspondent. "Transcripts of McClellan's press briefings provide more than ample evidence of the intense scrutiny imposed on the White House and its policies by members of the press. Most days, McClellan left the briefing room lectern positively spent by the pounding he faced from reporters."

ABC's Ann Compton was perplexed: "Is Scott suggesting the White House press corps can stop, or start wars?"

David Gregory, NBC News' chief White House correspondent, opined: "I think he's wrong." He added: "I think we pushed, I think we prodded. ...The right questions were asked."

The Washington Post's Dana Milbank resorted to a press secretary (McClellanesque?) sort of dodge: "I defer to Scott on this point," he said in an e-mail.

— Stuart Silverstein

Photo Credit: AP

Comments

[Mitchell in New York]

I am glad that McClellan appears to have come clean. But the fact is that many of us did know, or at least knew enough, and were angry and demoralized because there was nothing we could do to stop the war. Through poor judgment or political calculation (or both), our representatives in the House and Senate voted to authorize Bush’s war on October 11, 2002. As many of us as possible now need to say, in as many ways as possible, “we told you so.” And that in this election, we are going use our own good judgment, and elect leaders who will end a war that should never have begun.

"Iraq: It Was Never The Right Choice (and we told you so)"
http://msa4.wordpress.com/

[Monica]

This is the evidence the MSM doesn't want you to know.

http://www.thexreport.com/the_prague_connection1.htm

[Joey]

Talk about biased. I saw it - they WERE softballing him on the war, and they're doing the same to Mister McWar... I mean McCain... Right now. History repeats itself, and yet the actors claim ignorance every time tragedy comes around. How unaware of one's self can one be?

[sidney]

Oh come on Ms/Mr Journalists. Why are you acting so stung when you promoted all the propaganda giving to you by the WHite House at every turn. No one in the press corps did any journalistic research to find out the truth.

Please don't sit there and act perplexed when you know darn well that the entire press ate up the Bush's garbage and still does. The fourth estate is now owned by Murdoch and a few others. No one is reporting anything anymore, it is all garbage and please don't add insult to injury and claim you guys did not

Ari Fleischer acting surprised is a like a monkey trying to not act like a monkey. Ari is one of the biggest liars of them all. Bush lied. The reporters printed, carried it live or talked about it as gospel. We now know he lied. So please stop the lies! I know Murdoch signs most of your paychecks, but please have some integrity

[Dawson]

Nice try, but Scott is right. The media may feel good about themselves because they asked him tough questions, but on the whole, the media bought the story Scott and the administration was selling. Tough questions didn't lead to tough stories. Yes, there were a few tough stories in print, but TV "news" was falling all over themselves trying to out shock and awe us.

[Obama and McClellen 08]

McClellen is absolutely right. Where were the questions?
Our country is not served b a media who offers lip service for the administration. Never mind the media starting and stopping wars, who ask asking where is the proof?

[Doug LaPlante]

I am "STUNNED" by any media comments that deny
" press wimpiness" regarding serious questioning of the Bush administration's motive for going to war in Iraq!

[Dave Miner]

Press secretary to Satan is a thankless task.

[Isabella Clark]

Come ON. The press was completely cowed by the administration's threat of excluding them from press access. The corporate owners of all media rolled over for the administration. Tough questions were not asked. Instead of doing the hard investigation, reporters preferred being scribes. There has been lengthy commentary about the press's abdication of their role. Further, corporate owner's of the press continue to pat the bottom line. They insure that news is low on ideas and full of spectacle and cheap scandal. Look at the coverage of the primaries for guidance. You can't fool us. You failed us.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

Here's what I wrote yesterday on my own web site.

The subtitle of this book should be, "I'm shocked; shocked."

The saddest thing of all about Mr. Scott McClellan Agonistes is that just about anyone with a functioning amount of integrity, a reasonable bit of intelligence and an uncorrupted set of morals, has known all of this from Day One. He's just filling in the dialog.

While it's nice that Mr. McClellan has been able to shrive his soul whilst picking up a nice publisher's cash advance, this kiss and tell ranks (rank is the perfect word) right down there with the Memoirs of Don Juan. He had better not linger too long in the proximity of statues.

You're doin' a heckuva job, Scotty.

Add to that, directly addressing the suddenly outraged and uncharacteristically skeptical press corp . . . you were the ones who enabled this gang of criminals and liars. Now you are upset that one of them is telling the truth. You didn't challenge Bush, Chaney and Rove then. At least have the decent to do so now.

[Garth]

When the war was starting, those of us against the war were dismayed that the media would eventually accept what the White House was saying, and move on to the next story.

It is strange that McClellan is complaining about the media believing what the White House press secretary says, but please don't act like the media didn't have a short attention span back then.

[EU MAN]

Jornalists are mostly "for hire" , plenty of them if fired...fear prevails...How sad to see the ex-soviet system replay for the last 8 yrs in US...That is why dollar is weak, finances are a bust, and gas is "through the roof..." The unintelligent minority ruled by means of fear and deception...US will be lucky if OB gets the job...
Al Eurock

[Travis]

Of course the White House press corps can have a hand in stopping a war. Without the journalists, who else is there to hold a government to account? I believe that Scott McClellan acted very professionally, if reluctantly, for an openly dishonest administration. The press is partly to blame because they allowed Scott to run circles around them. Did any of you actually watch this stuff on CSPAN?? Scott certainly has the devil to pay for his own part in it. I hope that this revelation inspires others to come forward.

[Saxxon Domela]

Scott's the Man!
He won't be muzzled
He speaks the truth
It leaves them puzzled

Scott dear friend
You've made us blue
You're not the Scott
We thought we knew!

Damn you Scott
Now everyone Knows
Emperor Bush
Has no clothes!

[thekk]

The forth estate failed the American people by confusing objectivity with treating both sides equally, even though one side was presenting often fraudulent, thinly supported idealogy. White House statements were presented as credible when for many, simple fact checking would have revealed otherwise.

I'm sure the journalists you talked to did feel confused or sideswiped--much better than feeling the true guilt of your networks complicity.

Ratings, ratings, ratings!

[KYJurisDoctor]

I don't care to know why Scott told the truth in his book; I just want to read the facts REVEALED in in it to know "what happened" to the George Bush I voted for in 2000!

[adrock]

are they kidding? the press is absolutely obliged to bring to light the ignorance of our leaders when the times demand it. the press does have the power to stop wars by providing images and arguments that support anti-war movements, which were broadly suppressed by corporate and political powers in the lead-up to iraq. those that disobeyed were posted elsewhere or outright fired (ie dan rather). the fact that we live in a corporatocracy is no surprise, but the denial is still shocking.

[HoraceManoor]

scott's right -- american journalists are propagandists -- scott was working as a propagandist -- the journalists covering him let him get away with it because they were at ease dealing with a fellow propagandist

the proof is that american journalists only ask questions that fall within the system -- they don't know how to stand back & look at the system -- they lack awareness

[MyName]

they can't be serious. they can't possibly expect anyone to believe the right questions were asked. the press wrote what they were spoon fed, and nothing more. and, i suspect, this comment will not appear among the moderated comments.

[EricT]

Let the character assassination begin. By the time the White House propaganda machine is done with him, it will be clear that McClellan is one step above child molester. Of course, they'll fail to mention the fact that he was a respected colleague up until the moment he dared speak out against them.

[JohnW]

Good Lord. "ABC's Ann Compton says: 'Is Scott suggesting the White House press corps can stop, or start wars?'" Of course they can!! Does anyone seriously think competent investigative reporting *can't* stop a war, if propaganda and misrepresentation is what's starting it? How pathetic.

[kurt wieting]

The press are acting soooooo stupid on this one. They act like asking the press the secretary of the white house tough questions is investigative reporting. Of course the press secretary is going to give the press the line of crap the white house gives to him.. That's his job! Your job(the press) is to INVESTIGATE the truth. Not just pay dodge balll with a press secretary. Gregory's comentary on this one again proves he's the biggesy ego centric buffoon in the corps.

[G Gardiner]

Sorry to say, especially since I was often in disbelief that McClellan could stand at the podium and say such clear fabrications; but he is right on the complicity of the press. The Whitehouse was exceptionally sucessful at setting the terminology used in the media and at controlling access to personalities. While I'm sure the average reporter still had their heart in the right place the facts are what they are: By adopting the administration's lingo, flying flags on screen, treating very suspicious information with "respect" in order to secure what amounts to softball interviews on popular tv shows, the media made the prospect of war with Iraq a bit unbelievable, but acceptable. The desire to interview Colin Powell or Dick Cheny was far greater than the desire to demonstrate how clearly wrong they were and how misleading their statements. The fear of looking unpatriotic was no doubt much more powerful than the concept of objectivity.

Journalists are essential to our democracy and way of life, but the mainstream journalists from every side were out gunned and out manuevered by a power machine - of which McClellan was an integral part. He clearly took part in misleading and controlling language and thus messages, but as an outsider to the whole charade it seem very obvious. Object as they might in the press conferences, those journalist left with the language of the adminstration and thus the message. Hopefully this will be reviewed over and over in J schools around the world and the lessons will be learned.

[pamela]

No, the press did not push and prod. The media buried stories on the back pages, and did not do their job in challenging the President. I think that is the conclusion of most of us regular folks. You guys have become all about the bottom line. It has been a very sad seven years. Even during this election you've been more about scandal than issues. You have not served us well.

[Mark]

Good god, Entertainment Tonight asks more proddinq questions than the White House Press corp. Do they not realize how completely tame and complacent they are? Anyone asking a truly probing question will never be called upon again.

[Mark]

We are all guilty of failing to function as a democracy in the run-up to the war. In the interest of unity, the whole country fell into lockstep behind the President. Those who questioned or raised doubts, even around the water cooler, were seen as un-American. McClellan is right; we all share responsibility for not getting the right answers, regardless of what questions were or were not asked.

[josephfromsantafe]

I remember watching the Afghanistan onslaught and then the Iraq "shock and awe" sports cast with my jaw on the ground in disbelief that a press corp could be so transparently complicit in the affairs of state. I am just a simple high school grad who happens to pay attention, but even I could see through the Bush BS.

Y'all will know the truth, and the truth WILL set y'all free.

YOUR UNDERWEAR IS SHOWING!!

[BB]

Does Ann Compton remember how press coverage was a great influence in pulling out of Vietnam? Certainly, the White House press corps can stop wars.

[Opa2]

No doubt Mr. McClellan is telling the truth about the circumstances related to the start of the Iraq war. Only those of us not totally blind would disagree with the way he describes how this war got started. On the other hand, what does it say about him to bite the hand that fed him for all those years. Who would read, or buy, his books if he had NOT held that position. One can only surmise that he must be really mad at the way he was shown the door at the White House. If I remember, he was blamed for Bush not getting good reviews from the press and they thought that Tony Snow could do a better job. It turns out that nobody can repair Bush his reputation. He is, and always will be, the worst President ever.

[Adrian Brooks Collins]

How can any red blooded human being be surprised at McClellan's revelations or question their veracity? People: George Bush is the worst president in the history of the modern world. The Iraq war was roundly criticized by world powers from the get go. Bush lied at every turn to fuel the flames of fear mongering in order to justify his actions. No one misinformed Bush, if you believe that you've been tricked by Bush. Wake up!

[Rory Talbot]

"We asked the right questions"...?!?!?! Are you people drinking the punch?!?! You asked nothing of the sort! I did read the transcripts. After every lousy WH Press briefing. Never did you ask the WHPS or the President the hard questions! Never once! It's lunacy to make such a claim. Quite frankly, the country is in the sorry shape it's in because YOU GUYS FAILED DO TO YOUR JOBS! At least own up it! That anyone from the press corps would make such a ridiculous assertion speaks volumes about where the so-called Fourth Estate is located...that is, squarely in the pockets of the Big Corporations. You guys are a joke. Your coverage has been a joke. And your soft peddle was, ultimately, a joke on us. SHAME ON YOU ALL FOR ABANDONING YOUR POSTS in exchange for the opportunity to get cozy with the Bushies.

[Michael McGowan]

With the exception of the former Knight Ridder crew, there was little hard reportage leading up to the war. People asked questions, but they didn't dig up answers. KRT did, but its papers were in the heartland and not on the coasts. Thus, the drumbeat of lies and misinformation fed to the biggest papers was all that most people ever heard or saw. Check the excellent PBS documentary about those voices crying in the wilderness.

[Leon A Davis]

Kind of reminds me of David Stockman, head of the OMB in the Reagan administration. After he left his position, just like McClellan, he totally flipped out. And wrote a book as well, which included some fairly hateful things about the president and others in the administration. . Stockman said it was all about greed, and "hogs at the trough" and yada, yada, yada. Everybody knew he had reversed his opinions, but why be so nasty about it? So I hit Wikipedia on Mr Stockman, and guess what? Manhattan federal prosecuters have brought a case against him for fraud and the usual associated crimes. And the SEC has filed a civil suit for the same set of alleged crimes. If convicted, Stockman's looking at 30 years in the slammer. Why am I not surprised? I hope nothing like this happens to Mr McClellan, but there's no upside to gratituous attacks of this nature. Probably severed a hundred friendships at one whack, so he may as well throw away his Roldex and Blackberry.

[Jennifer in MO]

I tried to think of a polite way to say this, but are those puzzling over McClellan's comments about the press corps as dense as the administration?

There were far more pointed questions asked to Clinton about his sexual exploits. As I watched the WH press corps during the Bush Administration I wondered if there was an tacit understanding that those who push too hard would not be welcomed back. There is obviously a delicate balance which must be maintained for the press corps to do its job. I mostly blame the press in general for failing to dig deep, find out the truth and report facts, but the WH press corps is at the source and must push hard.

With some near heroic exceptions, the WH press corps let us down consistently with respect to the start of the war, the lack of progress of the war as well as during the aftermath of Katrina, the Valerie Plame scandal and at countless other times.

For those of you in the WH press corps who are "puzzled" about McClellen's comments take a look at your own performance and that of your colleagues instead of just being confused.

[Gavin]

The press is shocked. Shocked! To be told they weren't doing their job, being critical, checking the facts. "Balderdash!" they scream. "Hooey!" Well, had they been tuned in to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, they would have known they were asleep at the wheel and complacent in the crimes of the Bush administration. For God sakes, these two comedians ask more incissive questions and show more revealing footage than the mainstream press! Colbert spoke truth to Bush's face at the White House Correspondents Press Dinner, and the press didn't get the joke. Because it wasn't a joke - he was dead-pan and dead-on. Now, Scott McClellan is saying the same thing, without the tongue in cheek. Wake up, journalists. Start being responsible for informing us and not just being tools of the politicos in Washington D.C.!!

[ted in pdx]

All four of the journalists you quoted disputed McClellan's assertions blaming the press corps for not pushing hard enough on this story. CBS Mark Knoller characterized it as "stunning and unsupportable". Together, all four, by their answers fullly substantiated the point McClellan was making.

My guess is that these are among the most highly compensated reporters in Washington D.C. And what a great job they've got: show up for the White House news briefings and ask tough questions; make the White House press secretary sweat. Never mind that he or she is the one person in the federal government who's primary function is to reveal absolutely nothing other than the carefully worded, rehearsed party line. Never mind that the rules of the game are such that troublemakers don't get called on to even ask questions.

The point has been made already: only Knight-Ridder actually investigated the factual basis for the administration's claims concerning WMD. The Washington Press Corps equates reporting on what various spokespersons have to say, and showing up for photo-ops as journalism. Why? Maybe because it's easy. Maybe because it's more enjoyable to hob-nob with the Washington elite than to actually go out and prospect for hard facts, risk a series of 'no-comments' or no-call-backs. Maybe it's because their bosses don't want them actually investigating the really rotten stuff that goes on back there, because there are limits on the amount of turmoil the members of the Washington DC Club can tolerate, and the members of the press corps are also members of that club.

Mr. Knoller, methinks they doth protest too much...

[greg]

Shocked! Shocked I say! Stuart, there is a difference in asking questions in a press conferenced and following the strings of evidence and writing a good piece. Scandal after scandal, lie after lie, the press would just let things go, drifting off. Just like all of those "retired"generals that the pentagon spoonfed the fourth estate with lies, and where is the LA Times follow up on that fiasco.

[Gregg P]

Bush Administration PART 2

Why Bush Keeps Bringing Up Hitler and WWII

Hitler wanted to make his perfect world by rule/war (The SS Etc.)
Bush wants to make his perfect world by rule/war (Democracy-Christianity)

Iran to Bush is like the United States to Hitler.
Both have stopped an evil Nazi thinker from creating his world rule.

The terrorist’s main objective was not to kill Americans during 911
The terrorist’s have stated that their main objective is to create economic downfalls for the United States !

This was not accomplished alone
.
Bush handed them this VICTORY by spending/borrowing money from China etc. for a false pretense war/revenge/Nazi movement in the middle east.

WE LOST OVER 4 YEARS AGO

Now he wants to attack the country that has been the success in stopping him. (Iran)
Just as Hitler wanted to attack the United States and anyone else in his way
.
The biggest problem with Americans is most Americans actually think we are the good guys.
Hitler had his countries minds in the palm of his hands also.

I am saddened to be an American ruled by this evil Dictator/Republican/Administration
When did Republicans turn to Nazism ?
31% approval rating (Who are these people ?)
Let me guess ! ( Mostly misguided American Christians and Jews ) Plus the easily manipulated !

Pathetic

[Gary Haden]

David Gregory, NBC News' chief White House correspondent, opined: "I think he's wrong." He added: "I think we pushed, I think we prodded. ...The right questions were asked."
What? The right questions were asked? Give me a break. David Gregory once affectionately referred to Bush as a goofball. He threw many of the stupidest softballs thrown Bush's way. I know the Press thinks only it can evaluate itself but that's not true. They were lousy at their jobs for the entirety of the Bush years. They contributed to the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. They were cowards. Plain and simple.

[TM]

They know they gave the Bush administration a free pass. The only real scrutiny applied was by a couple of reporters at Knight Ridder.

The falsity of the administration's claims should have been easy to confirm with a minimum of competent research. And it was confirmed pretty clearly by late 2002.

In fact, the foreign media had passed accurate judgment by then. The US media rolled over. "I think we pushed, I think we prodded. ...The right questions were asked." No. There came a point when questions were no longer necessary, when the responsibility of the media was to make a verifiable judgmnent, to tell their viewers bluntly: "The administration is lying. Their case is based on bad or outright fabricated information." And they should have kept on that story, for it was the factual one.

"Is Scott suggesting the White House press corps can stop, or start wars?" If he isn't, I am.

[Brian Concannon]

I wasn't in the White House Press room, but I did read, listen to and watch U.S. media coverage leading up to the war. The press as a whole certainly was far to deferential to the White House, failing in its responsibility to question whether the war was justified. I can't say whether the blame lies principally with the reporters or the editors, but there is certainly is blame to be laid at the feet of the U.S. press.

I also followed the foreign press, including British and French press. They did a much better job at reporting the weaknesses in the White House's case for war, so the problem wasn't an absence of available critical information, it was an absence if courage.

[Amanda]

Maybe the press should have actually done some journalism and not just taken McClellan's words for it. Scrutiny of a liar still only gets you lies. Millions of people in this country realized this *before* the war started.

The facts were there. The press failed to find them. The press failed.

[m.c.rove]

...and then David Gregory resumed his "hip hop" stylin' with K. Rove and the rest of the WH Crew.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdvHwtRdg_I

What a complete terd.

Of course the press was complicit--do we relly need the former press clown to tell us that?

[SandraL]

The problem isn't that the press didn't ask the right questions. The problem is that they accepted and "reported" the answers without proper analysis and investigation. They ignored and/or actively suppressed opposing points of view. In other words, they didn't do their jobs and simply acted as a propaganda outlet for the administration.

That doesn't excuse Scotty and the rest of the criminals in the White House. Blaming the media for not stopping the war is akin to a gang of bank robbers blaming the cops in the donut shop for not stopping them.

[Steve J.]

Does the name Judith Miller ring a bell? What about Tom Friedman?

Both those "journalists" share some of the responsibility for this Fiasco.

(And both of them work(ed) for another news organization called the Times.)

[Gerald Shields]

Oh oh. Looks like the spin is in!

[Jones]

Who are these American journalists kidding?
There were so many tell tale signs that the US was going to invade Iraq without justification that most of the citizens (in Europe) were against the war in Iraq, before the invasion began.
You didn't need to be a UN inspector on site to see the Bush administration was bluffing about the alleged 9/11 connection they hinted at repeatedly,
the WMD they blatantly lied about,
and of course,
the rosy Spread Freedom and Democracy song-and-dance that followed when the previous two reasons imploded.
Any self respecting journalist and many observant citizens could have easily embarrased Cheney, Bush or any other White House spokesman by just asking the right questions.
Instead, the "journalists" showed themselves to be little more than media harlots. God Bless Rupert Murdoch.

[Richard Watters]

Get real.

The press corp of America were and are a bunch of dupes.

No one asked tough questions. You people were complicite in the war. Cheerleaders if you will.

Best thing for you to do is shut up.

[Aerin]

Oh, that's really funny! "Who, us?"

IMHO, the press collectively bears PLENTY of blame for Iraq, for failing to seriously challenge the disinformation being put out by the administration. I remember complaining at the time that no serious reporting was being done, just the usual "he said, she said" stories so typical of today's substance-free journalism. And even those who expressed doubt about the grounds for war were afraid to be accused of being "unpatriotic," in the wake of 9/11. Every excerpt I've seen from McClellan's book is spot on! I might even buy it! Too bad he didn't see the light sooner.

[Eric]

Uhhhh, sorry Press. You guys don't get a free pass here -- it's pretty obvious that the Media did NOT do its job as the White House beat its war drums. Scott is absolutely right, but it's obviously fairly ironic, coming from the guy who was selling and defending the war.

The Iraq war is what happened when the People put a schmuck in office, and when the Press is too fearful of Uncle Sam and Corporate America to push back.

They were too busy following Paris Hilton around, and dancing around the White House's spin.

[LR Cook]

Agree with McClellan on deferential treatment. This issues is not about how tired you can make the press secretary by pounding them with questions. That is not investigative journalism....that journalism by remote control... it's plain lazy. I am 60 and have witnessed the steay decline in in our corportate news media. BUT...this Bush White House hijacked our democracy and put the iron curtain around the house like no other administration. Oversight by congress didnt work either. Our next President and Congress must right this terrible wrong to our country. The so called media has a bigger problem on its hands to regain respect of the people. Our press has not adapted to the politics of intimidation nutured by this administration and created by very smart chief attack dogs like Carl Rove.

[toby]

McClellan is right.

The Press was a total no show after 9/11 and up until Katrina.

[Ken Mackie]

Uh. Sorry journalists. You can't slide your way out of this one. McClellan is in no way the first person to bring this issue up. Many have spoken out about the pre- and post-war leniency of the press corps. McClellan just confirmed it and now you're squirming. You may not be able to prevent a war, but you bear the responsibility of asking the right questions so that the public can.

[Jan D]

Scott McClellan in his book, revealing nothing new. People have known the stuff for years. But exposing Bush’s lies and deception over the illegal invasion of Iraq to the world in this manner is helfull to the case of those who want him brought to justice for his war crimes against humanity.

[Carl]

Scott McClellan is certainly not the only one to accuse the national press of not being hard enough on the administration prior to its attack on Iraq. If it is in fact true that "Most days, McClellan left the briefing room lectern positively spent by the pounding he faced from reporters" and that the press "pushed" and "prodded" and that "the right questions were asked" it leaves me wondering where and why most of that seems to have been lost between the briefing room and the actual reporting. Why did the press come off as being "too deferential to the White House" and sometimes even as serving as cheer leaders for our misguided president? I can understand a reluctance on the part of the press to face up to realities when those realities include their failings and shortcomings but, hay, if the shoe fits, wear it - even if it pinches a little. Maybe it's your "feet" that have changed, perhaps due to not hitting the pavement enough to do a really good job.

[Ben]

I am disappointed that the media's reaction to Scott McClellan's
criticism is a collective, "Huh?"

How can journalists still be in denial about their role in the
build-up to the Iraq war? They let themselves be played, most
egregiously with "military experts" parroting pentagon propaganda.
(You'd be forgiven for not knowing about that since the media hasn't
been covering it).

I'm not saying Bush's war is the media's fault. However, the media is
not blameless. Public perception is largely based on what's chosen to
be reported in the news. In the run-up to the Iraq invasion, the media
passively transmitted a lie to the people of America. If the media had
done a better job, more Americans would have opposed the war from the
start, and it might not even have begun.

[alansky]

Washington journalists expressed puzzlement because they are lost in denial. Unbelievable! The mainstream media, for the most part, swallowed the rush to war hook, line and sinker. It was a shocking and pitiful performance in the eyes of anyone awake enough to see what a load of rubbish the administration was dishing out.

[T-Prop]

Press is stung, huh? Truth hurts...

[amar]

i wish he had done this earlier.

i want to acknowledge what he's done is not easy.

[JacF]

The press corps are surprised?? For everyone outside the US, we were amazed as to the amount and gravity of misinformation and fear mongering that was being spewed by the White House amply supported by the fourth estate. Has any of the reasons the US went to war proved founded? Where's the Al-Qaeda-Saddam link? Where the WMDs? The US media added to the state of war. Everybody who opposed was a conspiracy theorist or ignorant or worse still, a TRAITOR!! How convenient.

[Henk from Amsterdam]

Hypocrites EVERYWHERE! Scott, the press, and all you commenters here. If Scott had been a MAN, he would have jumped ship after being told what lies to tell. If the press would have been MEN/WOMEN they had done their job right. If you commenters here would have been real people in a real democracy you would have gone to the streets untill you would have stopped the onslaught of unjustice. TALK, TALK, TALK!

DO SOMETHING!

[amar]

one more glaring omission of the MSM holding the administration accountable.

why isn't the MSM not talking abt the administration's do nothing, just talk/oppose policy on rogue contries like burma, sudan, zimbabwe?

to the extent that, recent articles on the detention extension of aung san suu kyi from the MSM like nyt, post etc don't even provide/ask for reader's comments on it. how does one explain this? i don't get it.

[Raci]

It's stunning to me that the press corps still does not realize they did not do their job before the Iraq war. It's horrifying to me that they continue to cover our current wars aggressively. The current presidential election is a national fixation, yet the press continues to treat it as a personality contest, and fails to ask serious questions about Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Dr. Banks]

McClellan's was fired from his press secretary job. His mother was not supported by Pres. Bush in her desire to run for governor of Texas and this is his family's payback. When the war with Saddam was contemplated he only was a spokesman on domestic affairs and had no access to foreign policy officials and leaders. He is inflating his role in history. Therefore his comments about the content of many meetings where he was not in attendance is troubling. How could not know what was said by Rove to Libby in private meetings? Was he spying on them? Is there proof of the dialogue of these coversations. It appears to be all conjecture.

A shame. When Pres. Clinton, Mrs. Clinton, John Kerry and all the other democrats told us of their certainty that Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction, I believed them. After all, these public servants had long histories of "truthtelling". But it turned out they lied. Democrats lied and people died.

[dotmafia]

Hans Fritzsche, Chief of the Nazi Propaganda Ministry's Radio Division.

Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, 1946

"Between these criminals and myself there is only one connection: they merely
misused me in a different way than they misused those who became their physical
victims."

"In really serious questions of policy and the conduct of war I did not commit a single falsification and did not consciously tell a single lie."

"But decisive for such a news machine is not the detail but the final fundamental basis on which propaganda is built. Decisive is the belief in the incorruptibility of the leaders of the State, on which every journalist must rely, and this basis is shaken by what has become known today of mass murders, of senseless atrocities and by the doubt in the honesty of Hitler's protestations for peace."

"I am convinced that Hitler and at least some of his colleagues had deliberately lied to the people, in some important instances, right from the beginning of their political career, and, something that is not so important to history, I personally consider that, on these points, I have been deceived."

"The main guilt of people such as Fritzsche is that they did know the actual state of affairs, but despite this, proceeding according to the criminal intentions of the Hitler Government, intentionally fed the people with lies or, to use an everyday expression, 'threw dust in their eyes.'" ~ Ferdinand Schoerner

[KS2 Problema]

It's time for the so-called journalists at the Washington Post and the New York Times to realize that they are little better than the hacks and propagandists at Fox News.

I was a McCain Supporter and contributor in 2000, but seeing the way the old line media allowed themselves to be a tool of the people who had been planning and scheming for an invasion of Iraq since long before 9-11, I've learned to dig harder for the real facts.

When I found the US media reporting a VERY different war from that being reported by their professional counterparts in our ally, Britain, or by journalists in the mainstream international press, it became clear that, for whatever reasons, the truth about Iraq -- a truth readily available in the mainstream journalistic media in the UK, in Australia, in Europe and elsewhere in the English speaking world -- that truth was being distorted and filtered by much of the US media.

[Dr. Banks]

To dotmafia:
Equating the Clinton Administration with Hitler's Third Reich is a little extreme, don't you think?

[PulSamsara]

'the Forth Estates' - the Media most certainly DID drop the ball in covering the lead up to the IRAQ war. Most of the American public, as well as the press, were still pathetically wrapped up in an American flag following 9-11 and an 'easy' Afghanistan invasion.

It's funny to hear so many in the media and the general public claim that the stood up against this war 'EARLY' - lol
Unfortunately - by early - most are referring to late in 2003.
Sorry ! By late 2003 (or 2003 at all) it was far too late ! The car had been driven off the cliff.

The MEDIA did drop the ball ! And so did the American public - You had all the pertinent information (the same that we have now), you knew all the characters involved and the psychology that motivates them - YOU JUST CHOSE TO DO NOTHING !

[fromer]

the press bleating that they were doing their job is as credible as Jeff Gannon.

FOR SHAME!

the thousands dead are on the heads of every journalist who sheepishly smiled while this Administration shoveled lies on a daily basis.

[ted in pdx]

When I made my post last night there were zero posts here. What a breath of fresh air: intelligent commentary on-line!

May I suggest that the press has another failure-in-progress, namely the question of why the House Judiciary Committee has failed to hold hearings on impeachment. McClellan's book constitutes a credible, first-hand account of a deliberate strategy (which succeeded) by the President to lie to the American people and Congress, in order to obtain war powers under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. But we already new that, McClellan has merely provided more compelling and graphic testimony as to it's content.

Here's the story the news media won't pursue:

The Republican congress determined that Bill Clinton lying to a grand-jury about his sexual misconduct with Monica Lewinski rose to the level of "high-crimes and misdemeanors", and not only impeached Clinton, they held a trial in the Senate. If lying to a grand-jury qualifies, why doesn't lying to Congress in order to send American military personnel to their deaths on foreign soil (4084 so far)? Does anyone believe the public would have supported this war if the Bush administration had said, "we strongly suspect Saddam Hussein is building weapons of mass destruction, but we have no hard evidence that he is..."? This is an unsupportable contradiction in their stewardship of the single most important power of Congress, as the sole branch of government capable of sanctioning the actions of the President.

I think it's possible a case for the war could have been made based on the verifiable facts, but the public and Congress was denied the option of considering it on that basis because George W. Bush convinced himself that we could sweep in to Iraq, remove Saddam Hussein, and go home as heroes. (If you doubt that, please review the President's "Mission Accomplished" performance on May 2, 2003). The consequences of his deception and incompetence have been a continuing disaster for this country, and for thousands of military families in particular. That this nation, the world's greatest democracy (we like to believe), has failed to hold George Bush accountable for his malfeasance in office, is a failure of all of us, the Congress, the press, and we the people.

[kat]

After 9/11 when both the New York Times and the Washington Post were having love fests with Bush, I wrote both papers every day. I couldn't beleive the genuflecting and hands off attitude both publications extended to Bush in post 9/11. While our civil liberties were being attacked and Bush was marching to war, none of the major publications in this country were questioning what he was doing. I remember being stung. I felt like I was in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Even the Times and Post were one of "them."

The media was every bit as bad as the pie eyed flag wavers. It's all a matter of record. If the media is puzzled then they are either lying or they're stupid.

[kat]

p.s. Being from West Virginia, I have the same attitutude towards the press that L.A. blacks have toward the police. If you ever want to study media whores at their worst, pull up a lawn chair and watch the media hyenas when they come to West Virginia. We here call it the "coonskin on the barn door" treatment. When the media comes, they travel far and wide to hunt down the gap tooth, backwater incest product who has a racoon skin nailed to he barn door. That's when they whip out their microphone and ask them who they are voting for.

The media decides what's news. They decide what the story will be then they seek out the information to create the story. When Jason Blair was busted, he was not outed by one of his subjects who knew he was lying. He was outed by someone he plagerized - a fellow reporter. The Times interviewed several of Blair's subjects and they all said that they considered his falshoods to be par for the course and did not find it unusual for a media member to lie and exaggerate. Not one of them (among them Jessica Lynch's family) considered Blair's concoctions to be unusual enough to bring to the attention of the Times management.

But not one single, solitary media member commented on the fact that it was the general consensus of the public that such falsehoods were simply a normal part of media coverage. The Jason Blair story was by, for and about media people and those were the only people it was news too. The rest of us yawned. The media are the only profession besdies lawyers where the generally held attitutude is that lying is a intergral part of the job.

That is why it is so utterly amazing to me that any media member would be "stung" by McClellons's book. The media is comprised mostly of ego maniacs who care more about their byline and careers than actually reporting the news. It's all a matter of record too. Why don't they go back and read the collective fellating Bush received on their editorial pages and 9/11 coverage?

[WeeFree]

White House press corps can't stop wars, but they can very well tell the public that the whole case stinks.
I can very well remember that the majority of the press were helping to beat the drum (NYT, FOX etc) and excitedly wetting the appertite of the public for a good war.

Please quit justifying sloppy, lap dog journalistic work, the press is as guilty as the Bush administration.

[08vote]

History will reveal the truth, if it hasn't already come out in various books by ex-Presidential staffers (George Tenant, Gen Sanchez, and now WH ex-Press Sec Scott McClellan)..

[Dr. Banks]

Just why would we beloieve unsourced media reports parroting what Saddam was saying before the war? I believed all the democrats who told us Saddam had WMDs, Clinton, Hillary, Kerry, Kennedy and all democrats who voted for the war. Bush was not alone in his beliefs. Most democrats were right there with him. If he lied, so did they. Perhaps incorrect intelligence reports are not lies, just incorrect. Did Clinto purposley set out to bomb an aspirin factory to cover up Monica? I don't think so. Just incorrect intelligence.

[john shermer]

I never thought I'd ever say this but..........THANK YOU FOR YOUR HONESTY SCOTT MCCLELLAN.

and OF COURSE...the media is complicit.

I think there may be hope for the US after all.

Go Barack

[gill]

David Gregory, NBC News' chief White House correspondent, opined: "I think he's wrong." He added: "I think we pushed, I think we prodded. ...The right questions were asked."

And *I* think David should put down the crack pipe or get help for his selective amensia.

[Chrysta]

Not only is the Administration on the "attack" so are the reporters, who, OMG, are part of corporate conglomerate media outlets.

Look. He wrote it. Better late than never. They lied. We know. He was not an "advisor" he was a "mouthpiece" and he did his job. Does it REALLY surprise anyone that he shared his observations and opinions? Sure! This administration is all about secrecy-- but surely others would love to "expose" a previous employer somewhere along the lines.

This is a BIG deal. He's going against all the Spin Doctors and historical revisionists now surfacing to make Bushy's so-called "legacy" out of this horrible war.

[Susan]

In the run up to the war on Iraq, the US corporate press FAILED MISERABLY.... time and time again. And for failing to do their job, they helped put over a million (and counting) people in an early grave.

And they are still failing - none of the US corporate media covered Winter Soldier in March, while the rest of the world DID.

SHAME, SHAME, SHAME..... on our "press"

[Robert Cunningham]

Its incredible how smart McClellan got when he agreed with most of the posters here. He went from idiot to truth-teller. Of course the press was often cited as a model of truth-telling when its bashed as being biased , too liberal. Now they are as bad as Fox. Of course when it was popular to bash Fox , then the rest of the media was held up once again as paragons of truth-telling. Then there were people on the Left and Right who regarded the missle attack on the Sudan pharma factory being based on a lie too.

[Dan Osterman]

the dirty underwear is showing and we still haven't heard from the Democratic side of the aisle who aided and abetted the criminals. who will come out of the "they made me do it" closet?
thankyou LA Times for this blog!

[dawkrod]

Scott McClellan was the one answering the press' questions. Basically McClellan is saying they were too easy on him. If they were, he should have said so WHILE SCOTT HIMSELF WAS ANSWERING THEIR QUESTIONS