Propagannon: Exposing Government Propaganda

Moving...

2005-05-04T06:51:00.000-07:00

Hello all,

I'll be starting a blog soon which will focus on politics, law, and current events. Much of the propaganda tracking will take place over there, along with other things as well. I'll leave this site up for archive purposes.

In the meantime, if anyone wants this blogspot address (propagannon.blogspot.com), just contact me at g10liberal at yahoo dot com.

I'll be posting the new blog address as soon as it's ready!

Thanks to everyone who visited here. We'll keep exposing the propaganda on the new site, and I hope to see you there soon!

:) georgia

Hiatus

2005-04-01T15:32:00.000-08:00

For a couple weeks from this poster at least while the story simmers and some tasks get done.

Thanks to all those who visited so far.

GannonGuckert In Under Two Minutes

2005-03-25T16:48:00.000-08:00

Over at agitprops.org, you can see a great visual which perfectly encapsulated the whole GannonGuckert saga. Print it, email it, send it as an Easter card...get it around.

TSA Mislead the Public

2005-03-25T16:41:00.000-08:00

More government-sponsored, Grade A propaganda:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Transportation Security Administration misled the public about its role in obtaining personal information about 12 million airline passengers to test a new computerized system that screens for terrorists, according to a government investigation.

The report, released Friday by Homeland Security Department Acting Inspector General Richard Skinner, said the agency deceived individuals, the press and Congress in 2003 and 2004. It stopped short of saying TSA lied.

``TSA officials made inaccurate statements regarding these transfers that undermined public trust in the agency,'' the report said. ``These misstatements were apparently not meant to mischaracterize known facts. Instead, they were premised on an incomplete understanding of the underlying facts.'

GannonGuckert Not A Marine

2005-03-25T16:38:00.000-08:00

Despite his repeated claims to the contrary. So, another lie. If only it were surprising...

What separation of powers?

2005-03-22T06:11:00.000-08:00

GannonGuckert says on his blog he wants the President to issue an Executive Order to "save Terri's life."

An Executive Order.

Just like the one Jesus issued to raise Lazarus from the dead.

Gannon Funnies

2005-03-22T06:07:00.000-08:00

link

Visit Tom Tomorrow's blog here!

Priceless.

Why 21 Republicans Are Stupid -- Or have Something To Hide

2005-03-19T10:50:00.000-08:00

21 members of the House Judiciary Committee decided not to investigate how a male prostitute was granted unprecendented White House access. Now, Gannon/Guckert proves to the world how stupid those 21 men really were. In an interview with the NYT, he admits he tried to get -- and received -- preferential treatment:

[H]e admits that people in the White House press office “probably treated me better than I deserved.”

[...]

He quit his job at GOPUSA/Talon News last month, although in the Times interview he reveals that it was not much of a paying gig, as he only “received a kind of stipend.” He said he earned that stringer arrangement with GOPUSA, with no journalism experience, after “a breakfast meeting” in Washington with owner Bobby Eberle.

Gannon denied gaining access to the White House via a special relationship with the press secretary, Scott McClellan, although he admitted trying to “curry favor with him.”

Click here to see a full list of the 21 Committee members who think it's ok to have a male prostitute "curry favor" with the White House Press Secretary.

Tucker Carlson Interviews Gannon, is a "Dick"

2005-03-19T06:35:00.000-08:00

Do you remember when John Stewart called Tuckert a "dick"? Well, know we know why:

Carlson: You've got a quote in your website that struck me. You said for decades gay difficultists have insisted that government stay out of the bedroom. Now we know they didn't want anyone in their way when they invaded the bedroom. To them, it's a one way street and a principles to -- principle to be easily abandoned when it doesn't suit your agenda. I understand people -- the implications, because may be gay, that you shouldn't have access to the White House.

Gannon: The hypocrisy is stunning. If I were -- hypocrisy is stunning. Because I'm a conservative, it seems to be that there are no rules and we can -- those people can leave their principles behind about personal privacy and sex doesn't matter and diversity and inclusion. They can leave all those things behind if it's useful to attack a conservative.

Tucker, who the fuck said that gays can't have access to the White House? Geez, Tucker sure knows how to throw the no-fact-softballs, maybe he should apply to be a Talon News Correspondent!

The rest of the interview is the same shit, different day. Gannon is still pontificating as if he was God's Gift To Journalism. He's still playing the victim, whining about the "liberal media."

But this interview just proves what so many knew all along. Gannon is a coward. He posted on his "blog" (for which, pathetically, he is his own "Washington Correspondent") that he would be accepting questions from both conservative AND liberal bloggers.

On March 2, members of DailyKos sent him a list of questions. Over two weeks have passed, and no response. Yet that hasn't stopped Gannon from prancing around the internets doing interviews for right-wing blogs...all of them of course framed in the "St. Gannon The Victim" manner.

Gannon likes to pretend he is all tough-talking, but really, James Guckert is just a tiny, tiny little man. He spins away in his own little world, thinking he's the star of the show, but all along, everyone peering into his self-deluded world just shake their heads and think "Poor Gannon. What a pitiful little man."

For if he had any shred of integrity (not that anyone thought he did to begin with), but if he had an iota of self-respect, he would not continue this charade. He would come clean, admit he wasn't a journalist, and stop presenting himself as someone who had the ability, much less the right, to elucidate the public about the state of the press today.

A propagandist, lecturing the public about bias in the media? Spare us the game, Guckert.

Boxer to Introduct Propaganda Amendment

2005-03-18T05:31:00.000-08:00

Via RawStory:

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) will introduce the following amendment to President Bush’s fiscal year 2006 budget tonight, barring any funds for U.S. government agencies that produce prepackaged news without a disclaimer that the release was paid for by the government, RAW STORY has learned.

The amendment follows; it will be introduced tonight, Boxer’s communications director David Sandretti stated.

The amendment comes in the wake of a huge spread in Sunday’s New York Times which documented a massive attempt by the Bush Administration to insert prepackaged news items into television news broadcasts.

Resolution on Gannon/Guckert Today

2005-03-16T05:07:00.000-08:00

It's a simple vote, really. Are you for or against fake reporters and propaganda?

Representative Conyers issued a statement today:

We are here today because we have an Administration that is all too willing to flaunt the law, and a Congress that refuses to investigate even the most serious ethical transgressions. Whether it is torture at Abu Ghraib, sole source contracts with Haliburton, or the outing of a CIA operative, this Congress has been unwilling and unable to ask the hard questions or issue the difficult subpoenas.

We are here today because it simply defies credibility that a phony reporter, operating under an alias, who couldn’t get privileges in the House or Senate press gallery, could receives scores of consecutive White House “day passes,” without the intervention of someone very high up at the White House. Can anyone believe that while Pulitzer Prize winning journalists are being turned down for White House press passes, a fake journalist working for a Republican-controlled media front operation could receive virtually open-ended access to the White House press room in the absence of preferential treatment?

We are here today because the Administration has either rejected or ignored every bona fide request for information concerning Jeff Gannon.

Watch the internet broadcast of the vote here. Broadcast begins today at 10 AM.

Contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee here.

Bush Adm. Says Propaganda A-OK

2005-03-15T07:01:00.000-08:00

The Justice Dept. has declared that propaganda is just fine by the Bush administration.

Meanwhile, those who still think propaganda is, um..Saddam-like, shall we say...are calling the government on it. Apparently, despite numerous articles about the government's deception, the Bush Administration still wants to plow forward with its fake news.

Americans used to laugh at the former Soviet Union, China and Cuba for having government-broadcast news about the successes of government policies. We can't look down on their domestic propaganda machines any more.

Meanwhile, back in California, the Governator is embroiled in his own propaganda controversy.

It seems like the GOP has its talking points lined up. It's not a "news release" or propaganda, it's a press release! Yes, that's what it is! And never mind the fake reporters who end them saying "reporting from D.C., I'm Paul Propaganda." And never mind that they aren't labelled as press releases, but rather as "news segments".

"Press releases"? Yeah.

In related news, Russia's Communist party is undertaking an overhaul of their propaganda. Shhhh. No one tell the GOP they're like Russian Communists...we don't want Cheney having another heart attack.

Bush: No Respect for Press or the People

2005-03-13T08:19:00.000-08:00

David Shaw reflects on the Bush Administration's "screw you" attitude towards the fourth estate:

I'm still not sure what to make of the easy White House access granted to James Guckert (a.k.a. Jeff Gannon), a conservative "pseudo-journalist" (to use Rosen's term) who asked Bush biased, softball questions at news conferences and who doubled as a male escort whose nude photos were posted on the Web. But I'm reasonably certain that any explanation of his easy access will not involve a persuasive argument that the Bush administration is committed to the societal benefits of a free and unfettered press.

Early in Bush's first term, Andrew Card, his chief of staff, said that journalists "don't represent the public any more than other people do."

To the Bush administration, journalists are not surrogates for the American people; they're just another annoying group of lobbyists, special-interest pleaders seeking not the information necessary for citizens to make intelligent decisions but only the journalists' own ego-gratification, career advancement and ideological advantage.

To see just how Bush loves to give the press the finger, let's recall his philosophy about the press: "You're assuming that you represent the public. I don't accept that."

If the press doesn't represent the public, who does? The President? With his ever-shrinking "mandate"? The Bush Administrations "fuck you" attitude towards the Press--and by extension, the American Public--is only now being discussed, as reporters are finally awaking from their stupor to realize they've been conned and scammed into being Presidential lapdogs.

Close, But No Cigar: Article Nails WH Stonewalling, But Misses On GannonGuckert

2005-03-13T07:55:00.000-08:00

Bill Adair writes in the St. Petersburg Times about the scripted White House:

In the White House briefing room, there are lots of questions, but not so many answers. Reporters try to grill McClellan, but he deftly avoids their inquiries and recites lines he has used dozens of times before.

Press secretaries have always ducked questions, but McClellan is particularly adept at it.

"Scott is bound and determined not to be the news," said Roberts, the CBS reporter. "Every time he comes out here and he escapes without making news, I think (White House chief of staff) Andy Card pats him on the back and says, "Good job.' "

Many White House beat reporters have gotten so frustrated with McClellan's repetition that they skip the briefings.

They skip briefings. The Bush administration has turned Press Briefings into a charade, a pointless square dance where McClellan takes the lead and lead the reporters...well, nowhere. Although he does step on quite a few toes along the way.

Adair's article on responsible journalism though ironically makes one critical mistake:

But there's no evidence the White House gave him favorable treatment - or even benefited from his pointed questions.

I assume Ardair has made a full investigation and thus is able to claim that there was no "favorable treatment"? If so, then maybe in his next article he can lay out the explanations for how GOPUSA.com, which isn't even a news site, was initially granted access; or how Talon "News" was created after Ari questioned GOPUSA.com's legitimacy; or how GannonGuckert came to know about the "shock and awe" campaign hours before anyone else in the media did; or how he allegedly was privy to information in a leaked CIA ememo; or how he was subpoenaed for his role in the outing of Valerie Plame; or how his barely-known news outfit secured a much-coveted interview with Karl Rove; or how he got to sit in the fourth row, up front with the major news agencies, while Helen Thomas is shoved to the back row; or how not a single other journalist has been able to bypass hard pass screening for two years; or how he engaged in a smear campaign against Daschle and Kerry and brought his smear campaign into the briefing room...if all this suspicious and preferential treatment has been explained away, then we'd sure like to know how.

NY Times: Propaganda Machine Much Worse Than You Think

2005-03-12T14:35:00.000-08:00

A must read for every citizen. The NY Times has a shocking article detailing the mass deception used by the Bush administration to push its agenda. Read it. Pass it to your friends. It's a huge wake-up call.

Under the Bush administration, the federal government has aggressively used a well-established tool of public relations: the prepackaged, ready-to-serve news report that major corporations have long distributed to TV stations to pitch everything from headache remedies to auto insurance. In all, at least 20 different federal agencies, including the Defense Department and the Census Bureau, have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years, records and interviews show. Many were subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government's role in their production.

Some reports were produced to support the administration's most cherished policy objectives, like regime change in Iraq or Medicare reform. Others focused on less prominent matters, such as the administration's efforts to offer free after-school tutoring, its campaign to curb childhood obesity, its initiatives to preserve forests and wetlands, its plans to fight computer viruses, even its attempts to fight holiday drunken driving. They often feature "interviews" with senior administration officials in which questions are scripted and answers rehearsed. Critics, though, are excluded, as are any hints of mismanagement, waste or controversy.

Yet in three separate opinions in the past year, the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress that studies the federal government and its expenditures, has held that government-made news segments may constitute improper "covert propaganda" even if their origin is made clear to the television stations. The point, the office said, is whether viewers know the origin. Last month, in its most recent finding, the G.A.O. said federal agencies may not produce prepackaged news reports "that conceal or do not clearly identify for the television viewing audience that the agency was the source of those materials."

If the Press Doesn't Seek the Truth, Who Will?

2005-03-11T11:02:00.000-08:00

From the Financial Times:

Journalism never was a sentimental profession. A good journalist, in whatever medium, must be sceptical, but never cynical. The current climate, created by technology and political manipulation, has become soaked in cynicism. When the government of a democratic nation fakes the news and discredits journalism as another form of PR, the public can only conclude that nobody is interested in the truth any more, or worse, that there is no such thing as truth, but only spin and opinion. This is the traditional view of tyrants, for whom all that counts is propaganda.

Gannon/Gucker Proves His Ineptitude

2005-03-11T10:41:00.000-08:00

JamesJeff GuckertGannon continues his freefall decent into absurdity by showing off his mad journalism skillz on his website, www.jeffgannon.com.

In his fake "briefing room", he asks (himself?) a question that he thinks should be asked in the White House Briefing Room.

Today's "question":

"Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman in Florida is due to be starved to death now that a judge will allow her husband to remove the feeding tube that has been keeping her alive. The President's brother, Gov. Jeb Bush has been trying to prevent this from happening. The President has the absolute power to grant pardons. Will he intervene to save Terri Schiavo from what is essentially a death sentence?"

Maybe he didn't learn this in his $50 weekend stint at the right-wing Leadership Institute, but Presidential pardons are reserved for felony convictions or military court martials, not for civil cases. Schiavo's case is a civil case, therefore, the assertion that President Bush could sweep down and use his power to pardon to interfere is not only absurd, but unconstitutional as well.

Now, GannonGuckert may think that the President is above the law, but us here in the reality-based community know full well that he isn't. And it's the job of the press to keep the President in check, not to egg him on and urge him to violate the Constitution. But then again, no one ever claimed GannonGuckert was a responsible "journalist."

Hypocrisy: A True Republican Value

2005-03-11T05:01:00.000-08:00

Missing the Point Becomes an Art Form

2005-03-09T22:09:00.000-08:00

Scott Hogenson, executive editor of Cybercast News Service, is disappointed that the "Left" hasn't made an all-out effort to discredit Garrett Graff, a college newspaper reporter-turned-blogger who was issued a day pass to the White House Press Corps.

He seems to be trying to imply that there's some kind of special "Lefty Hypocrisy(tm)," because Mr. Graff has little journalism experience:

As for journalism experience, an issue of grave concern among liberal critics, The New York Times reports that Graff's news background includes editing the Harvard Crimson and being the progeny of an AP reporter. Whoop-de-do.

The implication here is that a complete lack of any journalism experience (Gannon/Guckert) is the same as college journalism. The missed point: becoming editor of the premiere publication of Harvard University is not exactly the same cake-walk as paying a few bucks for a propaganda class.

In order to make his point sound more impressive than it is, the author has left out some critical details about Mr. Graff's credentials. Mr. Graff:

Was deputy national press secretary on Howard Dean's presidential campaign.
Was both a news writer and executive editor at the Harvard Crimson, where he wrote more news articles than any other writer in half-a-century.
Interned at ABCNews' Political Unit.
Interned at the Atlantic Monthly.

In contrast, Mr. Gannon/Guckert paid for a propaganda course.

Let's go back to the Cybercast News Service story:

The much larger issue here is one that reveals the staggering duplicity of liberal media watchers. Will the hatred that chased Gannon from his job manifest itself in manufactured outrage over the fact that Graff's professional background is paper thin? Will obsessed liberals scour the Internet for clues as to whether Graff likes boys or girls? Will anguished cries be raised over Graff's connections with the head of the Democratic Party?

... Instead of simply toasting themselves after eradicating a conservative from the White House Press Corps, the Left Wing went into full destruction mode. Rather than extolling the virtues of the alternate lifestyle Gannon allegedly embraced, he was vilified for it by those who traffic in phony pleas for diversity, inclusion and tolerance.

There's a frame-a-palooza here. Did you see these Keywords?

"staggering,"
"duplicity,"
"hatred,"
"manufactured,"
"obsessed,"
"anguished"
"phony"

Overall, these paragraphs attempt to paint the investigation of Mr. Gannon/Guckert's 2-plus year propaganda-perma-pass to the White House Press pool as an illegitimate vendetta driven by anger. Mr. Hogenson also tries to paint Mr. Gannon/Guckert's professional role as escort and porn site webmaster as irrelevant to the question of how he got his press pass. The points missed:

Mr. Graff has honestly stated his credentials, which include several roles, albeit unpaid, doing legitimate journalism. Both Mr. Gannon/Guckert and the White House misrepresented Mr. Gannon/Guckert's credentials.
Mr. Gannon/Guckert got daily access to the White House for years. Mr. Graff got access for a single day.
Mr. Gannon/Guckert participated, professionally, in two activities which should have prevented him from passing a basic FBI background check, calling into question the security of our White House.

One would think that a journalist with credentials like Mr. Hogenson's, would be more concerned about the impact that the presence of fake journalists like Mr. Gannon/Guckert may have on his profession. Treating fakes as legitimate reduces the credibility of real journalists.

CONFIRMED: Jeff Gannon was an adult porn webmaster

2005-03-08T07:25:00.000-08:00

While Jeff Gannon's colleagues at the "conservative" news website GOPUSA.com were writing about pornography in this manner -

April Shenandoah...We are allowing the devil to vomit all over our children, and we elect political officials who gladly swim in the same puke. We should be doing everything humanly and spiritually possible to drown pornography in its own vomit... link

Jeff "Bulldog" Gannon was using pornograhic pictures of himself to sell gay porn on the internet.

Thanks to the excellent investigative work of blogslut, here , we now have definite confirmation that James Dale Guckert aka "Jeff Gannon" was an adult porn webmaster. Read her entire post for the background, but here is the official statement of MALECORPS, one of the sites to which James Guckert signed up as an affiliate.

For entire article, click here

James D. Guckert and his republican associates are, once again, setting record heights for political hypocrisy.

Instapundit Can't Differentiate Between Journalism & Plagiarism

2005-03-07T08:43:00.000-08:00

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.com calls Mediabistro's Garrett Graff "another Jeff Gannon." Graff has extensive journalism experience:

[He was] news writer and executive editor at the Harvard Crimson, Harvard University's daily newspaper, where he wrote more news articles than any other writer in half-a-century and held internships at ABCNews' Political Unit and at the Atlantic Monthly.

Another Jeff Gannon? Gannon/Guckert's "experience" was a $50 seminar at a right-wing propaganda institute. As you can tell from Guckert's biography....oh...wait. You can't find it . For some reason, Guckert's biographies have been scrubbed off the internet. Why? Perhaps because he doesn't want people to see how woefully unqualified he was and how his affiliation with Talon News was merely a pretense?

Reynolds is being a Guckert apologist. If he wants to be an apologist for a fraud and a possible criminal, so be it. But no one is buying the false equivalency he and his collegues on the right are trying to sell.

We're Still Waiting, Mr. Guckert

2005-03-06T09:35:00.000-08:00

Last Wednesday (March 2), the investigators at dailykos and propagannon.com submitted a list of questions to James D. Guckert in response to his offer to answer questions submitted to him by "liberal" blogs. See the list here.

As of Sunday, March 6, 12:38 PM EST, there has been no reply from Mr. Gannon.

A Badge is not Security

2005-03-06T07:44:00.000-08:00

Words of wisdom from Fred Brown at the Denver Post, a paper known for its Fox News-style version of "fair and balanced":

Compare that with Washington, D.C., where the credentialing of James Guckert, aka Jeff Gannon, has become an issue of great moment. Or at least some would like to make it an issue of great moment.

...

Come on, now. This flap is more amusing than threatening.

As a question of ethics and standards, it's hardly on a par with, say, the inaccuracies in Dan Rather's report on President Bush's National Guard record.

It seems that Mr. Brown may be jumping to conclusions. He knows that a situation in which a paid escort, owing $20K in evaded taxes and penalties, who was given access to classified documents, was instrumental in the Dan Rather take-down, and was the national-stage "seed" for right-wing talking points against members of congress and democrats in general couldn't involve a serious ethics issue?

Even though there hasn't been any investigation, he is certain. But beyond that, he equates any investigation with media self-absorption:

It's worse than inside politics; it's inside journalism. It lacks the relevance, usefulness and interest of a good news story. What could be more boring and insignificant? Thank goodness that journalism, which has been painfully self-absorbed recently, isn't consumed with this story, too.

Well, isn't he right? Not really.

See, in order for the media to be self-absorbed, Gannon/Guckert would have to be a member of the media, which he isn't. This man who couldn't possibly pass a basic FBI screen, who was allowed to sit within 20 feet of the President of the United States, was unable to get a press pass to cover the U.S. House and Senate, because he the vetting process for Congressional coverage determined that he was not a member of the media.

In this next paragraph from the article, see if you can find the right-wing framing [emphasis added]:

And it raises broader questions about credentialing, which is a dilemma for journalists, or at least should be. Reporters ought to resist the notion of licensing or regulation by the government, and yet we accept some laws that set us apart - such as shield laws to protect sources, or press parking spots or badges that allow us to go places the hoi polloi can't.

One of those places is the White House. Others include the press galleries of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives - and the press tables in the Colorado legislature.

There's an important issue being glossed over here: there is already a credentialing process for White House Press Pool access. With Mr. Gannon/Guckert, that process may not have been followed, or worse, the results may have been ignored. In the former case, work needs to be done to make sure it is followed in the future. The White House Press Pool allows people to get too close to the President for lax security to be excused. If the results were ignored, there may be reasons that are worth investigating.

If you read the full text of the article, you'll find that the reporter is trying to equate the presence of a press badge with security. Ordinarily, that should be true. But if the normal security protocols were not followed, or their results were ignored, then Mr. Gannon/Guckert's badge provided a false sense of security to those with whom he shared the Press Room for more than 2 years.

You may want contact Denver Post and Mr. Brown to help them understand the inaccurate assumptions in this article. Remember: politely worded letters will be read, nasty ones will be dismissed. Be nice, but firm.

Media Swarms Over Gannon/Guckert Controversy

2005-03-06T06:00:00.000-08:00

It looks like the national and local media is finally starting to understand the severity of the story. A media swarm? It took them a month, but better late than never. Here is a sampling of what the media is saying:

Edward Cone explains ties between GOPUSA.com and the Transylvania County Republican Party:

The Soviets called their party newspaper Pravda -- "Truth." Americans used to laugh at that kind of phony journalism. But more and more, the joke is on us.

Think it can't happen here? Click to the Web site of the Transylvania County Republican Party for a look at things to come. The official page for this western North Carolina political organization carries national news from an outfit called GOPUSA....It's a tidy little news network, hewing close to the party line, self-contained and free from the impure thoughts so common to the mainstream press.

Ed Quillen of the Denver Post opines on the Bush Administration's addiction to paying off journalists, and offers a price list of his own:

For a mere $10,000 per occurrence, I will pretend that No Child Left Behind is not an unfunded federal mandate. For the same fee, I'll contend that the Healthy Forests Initiative means healthy forests, and that the Clear Skies Initiative is connected to better air quality.

For only $5,000 per usage, I will learn to write in the Republican dialect. That means that the administration's proposed Social Security changes will involve "personal accounts" rather than "private accounts." I shall never write treasonous phrases like "the occupation of Iraq" when I could be patriotic and upbeat with "the liberation of Iraq."

And I will always refer to that partisan farrago of collectivists and traitors as "the Democrat Party," rather than use proper grammar with "the Democratic Party."

William O'Rouke of the Sun-Times discusses Gannon/Guckert in the context of the President's desparate attempt to sell his privatization scheme:

But salesmanship has been weak from both the president and other officials of the Bush administration. The White House successfully sold the Iraq war and weapons of mass destruction to the public, but is stumbling badly trying to sell Social Security privatization. That is because, given the tragic tones of the war, with its grand themes of life and death, fear was fomented, and mistakes and exaggerations were -- and remain -- muffled.

Stateside, though, distortions and missteps appear exactly as they are: inept, often sophomoric, along the lines of the paying so-called pundits and journalists for favorable coverage, even to the point of allowing a shill from a Republican-sponsored Web site, GOPUSA, into White House press briefings, where he was addressed on a first-name basis by both Bush's press secretary and the president.

Michael Tackett of the Chicago Tribune write about the "free" press:

The Bush campaign put this into practice with great precision with its "Ask President Bush" forums across the country. The president would roll up his sleeves, walk and talk with a microphone, and put on the pose of a politician willing to answer any question thrown at him by the citizenry.

But those who managed to get a seat in the audience had most likely either written a check to support the campaign or signed some form of loyalty oath, virtually ensuring a dissent-free environment and offering the rest of the media only the canned event to write about. Great strategy if you can get away with it.

Sex, Lies, and Spies: Aravosis Blasts The LA Times

2005-03-06T05:54:00.000-08:00

Ouch.

I can think of three possible reasons The Times didn't cover this obviously major story with any vigor:

(1) Trepidation about gays, sex and power. In the age of wardrobe malfunctions, news organizations are extra cautious about covering anything involving s-e-x. And a gay angle only makes things more confusing. Would you be anti-gay or pro-gay if you wrote about an allegedly homophobic journalist who happened to be gay? Answer: Allegations of prostitution aren't just about someone's private life, they're about a crime that can lead to blackmail, especially if state secrets are involved. And in any case, your readers are adults — give them the facts and let them decide for themselves.

(2) Reverse liberal guilt. Too sensitive to right-wing accusations of being liberal, traditional media have overcompensated by becoming too timid in covering certain stories. They seem loath to aggressively report on scandals involving Republican politicians, in general, and this White House in particular.

(3) Blogophobia. Liberal bloggers scare the mainstream media. Media critics fret over our supposed lack of professional credentials, even though many of us are journalists. They doubt our facts but don't independently investigate the stories.
The lack of coverage plays into the hands of the White House. Mainstream media editors act as if our investigation of Guckert is about prurience and lacks merit. But there is more than enough evidence to make any reporter want to check out the possibilities of White House deception and media manipulation.

The Times' editors shouldn't allow themselves to think they are above the fray. In truth, they are failing to speak truth to power.

Schwarzenegger Follows Bush Admin. Lead; Paid Reporters For Story

2005-03-05T06:29:00.000-08:00

Schwarzenegger takes a cue from the federal government's propaganda playbook:

Using taxpayer money, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration has sent television stations statewide a mock news story extolling a proposal that would benefit political boosters in the business community by ending mandatory lunch breaks for many hourly workers.

The tape looks like a news report and is narrated by a former television reporter who now works for the state. But unlike an actual news report, it does not provide views critical of the proposed changes. Democrats have denounced it as propaganda. Snippets aired on as many as 18 stations earlier this month, the administration said.

Sound familiar?

May 20—When the Bush administration distributed mock news videos to promote its Medicare prescription drug law, it violated federal restrictions against using taxpayer money for propaganda, according to a May 19 report from the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO).

After the prescription drug bill passed last fall, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) distributed video “news releases” to television stations around the country praising the drug program. In the videos, actors portray reporters. The GAO report found because viewers couldn’t tell the message came from the government, the video news releases violated restrictions against using federal funds for publicity or propaganda.

Congresswoman Kaptur Joins the Fray

2005-03-04T22:41:00.000-08:00

According to an AP story published on the Toledo, Ohio ABC 13 news site, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur "gets" the significance of Gannon/Guckert:

The Toledo congresswoman calls Gannon a double agent and a phony plant.

The Congresswoman, who Gannon/Guckert blasted during a White House Press conference in March 2003 [CSPAN video, real media, starting at minute 36:35], has joined the call for an investigation of how and why he ended up in the White House Press pool. According to the Toledo Blade:

Miss Kaptur, though, believes there's more to the story, and she's joining calls by fellow Democrats for an investigation into Mr. Gannon's relationship with the White House. She said political opponents - including Mr. Gannon - "twisted" her words published in The Blade in 2003 as part of a well-orchestrated scheme to intimidate her.

Regarding Gannon/Guckert's statement in that press conference, Representative Kaptur had this to say:

"It lit the fuse for the entire network of Bush propagandists around the country and their media affiliates to commit a backlash based on a lie," said Miss Kaptur, who later apologized to those offended, saying she meant to draw an analogy between the motivating forces behind rebellions. "They twisted it and turned it into something I never said."

Fishbowl Blog Granted Access-- Thanks to Pressure, that is

2005-03-04T18:56:00.000-08:00

Fishbowl D.C., a D.C. blog, was finally granted access to attend a White House Press Briefing. This after quite a few days of wrangling. Oh, and a good word from the President of the White House Coorespondent's Association, that is. And the foreboding threat of blogosphere blowback if they were denied after Gannon/Guckert, fake reporter extraordinare, was allowed in.

One-Party Government Requires A More Responsible Press

2005-03-04T18:00:00.000-08:00

Phil Tajitsu Nash, from AsianWeek.com, puts things into perspective:

Our nation’s founders wanted the separation of power so that the president, Congress, the Supreme Court, the independent press and state governments could each serve as a brake on the power of the others. Unfortunately, the Republican cover-up of the Gannon/Guckert story is the latest example of the dangers of one-party rule in our federal government and the complicity of our corporate-controlled press in allowing one party to dominate.

The Bush administration already has been proven to have paid reporters to report favorably on its education and social policies. Did it go so far as to use a phony reporter from a phony news agency so that the administration’s press releases could be presented as news stories?

Many Asian Pacific Americans came to this country to escape one-party states where government accountability and press freedom were not strong. Some of us suffered from incarceration behind barbed wires because of our national origin during World War II. We understand how fear of an outside enemy can be used as a reason to limit civil liberties and quell dissent at home.

All of us should be calling for an independent inquiry into the Gannon/Guckert situation. Our most cherished constitutional rights depend on an administration that is accountable to the people and a press that is free of government control.

His entire article is quite good, and it reiterates the critical issue here: accountability. The GOP purports to have a monopoly on the value of personal responsibility and government accountability, yet not a single Republican has stepped forwarded asking how a fake reporter was granted access to the White House to spew forth propaganda. Not a single Republican has stepped forward, on behalf of the American people, and asked the White House to disclose all its ties to Gannon/Guckert. A party of accountability? Yeah. Right. And Guckert was a "real journalist." Read more...

Ignoring Guckert= Dangerous for the Media

2005-03-04T13:29:00.000-08:00

John Aravosis at Americablog.com states it perfectly: by allowing Guckert/Gannon to continue to claim he is a "legitimate journalist" debases the entire profession:

And every single one of you journalists out there who has sat back and written nothing about the GannonGuckert story has helped the rightwing further create an environment in which the definition of "journalism" now includes partisan propaganda hacks whose only goal is to corrupt the truth for political (and monetary) gain. GannonGuckert is being depicted as the conservative counterpart, counterweight, to YOU. I.e., he's equal to you in every way, simply that you're a liberal and he's a conservative. And they're getting away with it. He not only diminishes you, he diminishes the entire profession.

And your wonderful little correspodents' association couldn't care less. If you guys can't define who you are, what you are, what qualifications it takes to become one of you, then why are you even there in the first place? You would be the first profession on the planet that can't - or is afraid to - define what you are and what you do.

Think about that the next time you take a pass on this story.

"Is US Ministry of Propaganda Next?"

2005-03-04T12:06:00.000-08:00

Mike Barry at the Washington Dispatch sums it up well. When other nations engage in propaganda, they're labeled undemocratic. When the Bush Administration does it, it's accepted without resistance:

It is needless to say that this is not the first presidential administration to produce news broadcasts extolling its own policies. Governments around the world—Putin’s Russia, North Korea, China, Afghanistan, Cuba, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and others--have also been involved in this unsavory activity, but where those undemocratic governments are concerned the practice is correctly identified as "misleading propaganda."

Furthermore, the Bush-Cheney administration has not been content merely to make up its own bogus news. It has paid off ostensibly legitimate opinion makers who were trusted by many to be truthful in their dissemination of crucial information to the public. As example, earlier this year, it was revealed that agencies connected to the executive branch paid columnists--with taxpayer money--to adopt certain favorable stances on selected issues the Rush-Cheney administration was pushing.

[...]

None of the columnists and journalists involved in this scam against the public trust revealed the unethical and corrupt payoffs they received until after the wrongdoing had been brought to light, thereby illuminating their--and their paymasters’--total lack of regard for the canons of ethics legitimate journalists follow to guarantee unswerving veracity and fidelity to the truth.

And by using filthy lucre rather than the truth to make its case, the Bush-Cheney administration strongly suggests to all objective observers that its policies are bankrupt on their face. Why else would such underhanded methods be employed?

The article goes on to discuss Gannon/Guckert and how he is another sad example of media manipulation and public deception. Berry gets it right when he talks about an erosion of journalistic ethics. If Guckert, as he claims, represents the "New Media", then that "New Media" is hollow, cheap, sensationalistic, devoid of integrity, and dedicated more to the dollar than to the truth. Read more...

The Daily Show Uses Comedy To Get Propagannon Message Out

2005-03-04T10:58:00.000-08:00

Video available via Crook & Liars.

Founder of GOPUSA.com/Talon News Chairman in Republican Party

2005-03-04T09:08:00.000-08:00

In the midst of all the coverage (and non-coverage) of the Gannon/Guckert story, one fact that has gone remarkably unreported by both liberal and conservative news outlets is the ties between GOPUSA.com, Talon News, and the Republican Party.

We've heard the parties implicated in the scandal repeat time and time again that, despite its name and the fact it spits out GOP talking points on a daily basis, GOPUSA.com is not connected to the Republican Party.

But how credible does that sound in light of the fact that William Fairbrother, co-founder of GOPUSA.com (which created Talon News) is a County Chairman for the Republican Party of Texas?

Indeed, Fairbrother has been Chairman of the Williamson County GOP for about the last five years. Which, incidently, is the same amount of time GOPUSA.com has been in business.
Fairbrother's contact address for official GOP correspondence? bill.fairbrother@gopusa.com. Indeed, GOPUSA.com has its own logo displayed prominently on the Williamson County Republican Party Menu. GOPUSA.com is where Fairbrother directed his party members to go in order to keep up to date on the Republican National Convention (I wonder if he disclosed that he owned the site?)

When GOPUSA.com was founded, it had the same mailing address as the Williamson County Republican Party:

2915 Pioneer Way
Round Rock, TX 78664

That address is still listed as GOPUSA.com's primary place of business.

The Texas Republican County Chairman's Association even links to GOPUSA.com, snuggling the link between the Texas Legislature and the National Republican Congressional Committee (GOPUSA.com, by the way, seems oddly out of place on a list?).

So what are to make of the fact that the co-founder of GOPUSA.com is a Chairman for the Republican Party of Texas? It obviously smacks of something shady...and is certainly worthy of further investigation.

*Image: Bill Fairbrother, left, pictured with Bobby Eberle. Fairbrother and Eberle started GOPUSA.com to "bring the conservative message to the Internet". Photo from dkos.
Read more...

Getting No Pass

2005-03-03T17:32:00.000-08:00

Starting this past Monday, the folks at Fishbowl decided to follow the steps Jeff Gannon/James Gurkert says he took to get a day pass to the press briefing. The Fishbowl attempts test Scott McClellan's claim that Jeff Gannon received no favoritism.

In the Fishbowl blog, they have filed a daily chronology, at times witty and increasily frustrating, of their efforts. So far, they have endured four days of repeated phone calls with no replies, repeated phone calls in which they got the same non-helpful interns, phone calls where "everyone is in a meeting," an actual trip to the White House with similar non-success, and finally, complete stonewalling and failure to answer ANY calls. So now Fishbowl has written an "Open Letter" beseeching someone....anyone.....in the WH to at least tell them WHY they can't get a reason why they are being stonewalled and effectively denied a daily pass.

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/

New Gannon Interview

2005-03-03T13:45:00.000-08:00

Same spin, different day.

High School Papers Give Propagannon More Coverage Than National News

2005-03-03T13:09:00.000-08:00

What a sad state of affairs when a high school paper devotes more ink to GannonGuckert than the national media: Come Clean About Gannongate

Rove: "Genius" Propagandist

2005-03-03T06:42:00.000-08:00

Sylvester Brown of the Post-Dispatch has a must-read column about how Karl Rove, Deputy Chief of Staff to the President, has a history of media manipulation, dirty tricks, and is likely a key figure behing the Gannon scandal:

It would take an audacious genius to create fake news and slip it under the radar of seasoned journalists...

No one knows definitively if the [CBS/TANG] documents were forged. We do know, however, that media attention shifted away from Bush's dubious military record to the origination of dubious documents.

Some wonder whether Rove somehow leaked dummied documents to CBS? Hmmmm.

That's old news. New news came to mind as I watched the Rove documentary. Everyone probably knows about the fake reporter allowed to be part of the White House press corps for almost two years. Jeff Gannon (whose real name is James D. Guckert) tossed warm and fuzzy questions when called on by Bush or his press secretary, Scott McClellan. Gannon was later linked to a partisan, phony news organization and (gasp) gay military porn and escort service Web sites.

McClellan, who called on "Jeff" frequently, claims he knew nothing about the man's past. Who has the power to grant White House access to a fake reporter with an alias and "questionable" social habits?

Hmmmm?

Gannon, who went silent for a while, is back and on the attack. He's emerged to battle the "well-funded liberal attack machine," he writes on his relaunched Web site www.jeffgannon.com. Gannon vows to fight the fine fight to keep the sexual lives of fellow journalists private. Yes, it may take "many columns and a book deal" but, by golly the "Old Media" will rue the day they picked a fight with Jeff Gannon!

Wow! Forget about a breach of national security. No need for the media to explore the hypocrisy of a gay porn escort who parroted conservative "values" and their anti-gay agenda. I don't know who helped the fake news man flip the script, but Grandpa Pickles again comes to mind:

"Brilliance, sheer brilliance . . ."

Bloggers & Gonzo Journalism

2005-03-03T06:23:00.000-08:00

Dotty Lynch has a decent article at CBSnews.com about how bloggers should be taken seriously.

Gonzo journalism rules cyberspace. And, as Martha Stewart used to say, that’s a good thing.

The passion, energy, anger, paranoia, obsessive focus, innovation and sophistication of the blogs on the left, right and in between are shaking up the MSM. Frank Mankiewicz has referred to "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72," Thompson's book on the McGovern-Nixon presidential race, as "the most accurate and least factual" account of the campaign." That insight also applies, for good and ill, to many of today's blogs.

There has been lots of babble in journalism circles about the war between bloggers and journalists, but what is clear is that change is in the air. NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen wrote a paper for a Harvard conference on "Blogging, Journalism and Credibility" in January declaring the war over and suggesting five interesting points for discussion, which I've summarized here:

1. "Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one and blogging means that practically anyone can own one. That's why bloggers matter."
2. The issue of trust is paramount in journalism. Credibility and ethics emanate from there. As trust in the msm declines (Pew found the number who said there was "no bias in political reporting" dropping from 58 percent in 1988 to 38 percent in 2004) bloggers are building their reputations from the ground up.
3. "Bloggers partake in a resurgent sprit of amateurism now showing in many fields earlier colonized by professionals."
4. "If news as 'lecture' could yield to news as 'conversation'… it might transform the credibility puzzle and enhance the trust."
5. Blogging isn't just about conveying information – it is about communication. Stand-alone bloggers may be easier to trust than corporate providers.[..]

But, as Rosen says, bloggers are more than information providers. Their anger toward and distrust of the traditional media and the political establishment are palpable. After the Gannon column ran, I received hundreds of e-mails demanding to know why the msm was ignoring the story.

One of the ways the mainstream has dissed the blogs has been to label them as having agendas and not being "objective." But that doesn't make their information wrong or their points of view irrelevant. Many bloggers are people who care passionately about public issues and who are frustrated that their viewpoints aren't expressed in public debate. The frustration became so great on the right that The Washington Times and Fox News were created and found a readymade audience.

The only disappoint ing part of this article is that Lynch spends more time repeated the tired claims of Zephyr Teachout than focusing on the real reason why bloggers have become such a palable force as of late: because the "msm" isn't doing it's job.

The Gonzo journalism, the spirit of Woodward & Bernstein, that loyalty to the truth rather to ratings has slowly faded away from the national scene. Thus, bloggers had to step in to fill the void. Someone had to keep talking about Abu Ghraib, long after the morning shows stopped covering it. There's been no mention of Rumsfeld being sued for war crimes, so yeah, the blogs have to step in and report it.

But perhaps the most compelling argument for why blogs have become such a force is because they not only step in and hold the government accountable, as the Fourth Estate should be doing, but they also hold the Fourth Estate itself accountable. Not only do we do the research which exposes government propaganda, but we challenge the media to report on it. And when they don't...well, that just further proves that it may be the blogs, rather than the media, which have the true interests of the American people at heart.
Read more...

NY Times: Guckert/Gannon an "Airhead", Would Send Thompson Spinning In His Grave

2005-03-03T06:05:00.000-08:00

Frank Rich has a spot-on article in the NY Times, highlighting the low points of the Propagannon saga--Guckert's inistance on remaining a spectacle, even though he has embarassed journalists across the nation, his hypocritical self-martydom, and more:

Though a few remain on the case - Eric Boehlert of Salon, mediamatters.org, Joe Strupp of Editor and Publisher - the Gannon story is fast receding. In some major news venues, including ABC and CBS, it never surfaced at all. Yet even as Mr. Gannon has quit his "job" as a reporter and his "news organization" has closed up shop, the plot thickens. His own Web site - which only recently shut down with the self-martyring message "The voice goes silent" - has now restarted as a blog with Gonzo pretensions. The title alone of his first entry, "Fear and Loathing in the Press Room," would send Thompson spinning in his grave had he not asked that his remains be shot out of a cannon.

As a blogger, Mr. Gannon's new tactic is to encourage fellow right-wing bloggers to portray him as the victim of a homophobic left-wing witch hunt that destroyed his privacy. Given that it was Mr. Gannon himself who voluntarily exhibited his own private life by appearing on Web sites advertising his services as a $200-per-hour escort, that's a hard case to make. But it is a clever way to deflect attention from an actual sexual witch hunt conducted by his own fake news organization in early 2004. It was none other than Talon News that advanced the fictional story that a young woman "taped an interview with one of the major television networks" substantiating a rumor on the Drudge Report that John F. Kerry had had an extramarital affair with an intern. (Mr. Kerry had to publicly deny the story just as his campaign came out of the gate.) This is the kind of dirty trick only G. Gordon Liddy could dream up. Or maybe did. Mr. Gannon's Texan boss, Bobby Eberle, posted effusive thanks (for "their assistance, guidance and friendship") to both Mr. Liddy and Karl Rove on Talon News's sister site, GOPUSA, last Christmas.

Mr. Gannon, a self-promoting airhead, may well be a pawn of larger forces as the vainglorious Mr. Liddy once was. But to what end? That Kerry "intern" wasn't the only "news" Mr. Gannon helped stuff in the pipeline during an election year. A close reading of the transcripts of televised White House press conferences reveals that at uncannily crucial moments he was called on by the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, to stanch tough questioning on such topics as Abu Ghraib and Mr. Rove's possible involvement in the outing of the C.I.A. spy Valerie Plame. We still don't know how this Zelig, using a false name, was given a daily White House pass every day for two years. Last weekend, Jim Pinkerton, a former official in the Reagan and Bush I White Houses, said on "Fox News Watch," no less, that such a feat "takes an incredible amount of intervention from somebody high up in the White House," that it had to be "conscious" and that "some investigation should proceed and they should find that out."

Democrats may force Republicans Go On Record About Propagannon

2005-03-02T20:10:00.000-08:00

Via Rawstory:

House Democrats will force a vote in four House committees to put the Republican majority on the record with regards to investigating a discredited White House correspondent who allegedly had access to confidential information, including a memorandum naming CIA operative Valerie Plame, RAW STORY has learned.

The procedure, called a Resolution of Inquiry, enjoins the Intelligence, Judiciary, Armed Services and International Relations Committees fourteen legislative days to decide whether to authorize the request for records or refuse to do so.

Democrats expect Republicans to vote down the measure, but feel it might provide leverage in future Congressional elections, as it will force members to go on the record as to whether they support the investigation and its relation to the outed CIA operative.

Kincaid: You kick out Guckert, you may kick out FOX

2005-03-02T15:05:00.000-08:00

Cliff Kincaid has yet another article defending Guckert (um, doesn't he get lonely being pratically the ONLY person willing to support a fake reporter who plagerized his articles?). It's nothing new really, just the usual propaganda about how "fake names" are common (but are they used in conjuction with fake reporting, Kincaid? are they?) how liberals are intolerant against gays (whoa, someone get Kincaid his ACLU card! he actually cares about how gays are treated!), and how Guckert's propaganda and infiltration of the Press Corps should be forgiven because Helen Thomas happens to *gasp* ask questions that hold the President accountable for his actions.

But the most (only) important part of Kincaid's article comes at the end, as he reaches his frantic crescendo of fighting for plagerists and fake news agencies:

Host Chris Wallace piped in, saying that a line had to be drawn in terms of who is a legitimate journalist. He said that if too many on-line journalists get into these White House press briefings, the "real reporters" there wouldn't be able to get any work done. Wallace should rethink his position. That's a slippery slope that will play into the hands of the "real reporters" from the liberal media who want to dominate the White House press corps and exclude from their ranks those with a different political orientation. If they had their way and could get away with it without a controversy, they would probably vote to exclude Fox News.

You think that's far-fetched? Last year, Geneva Overholser, former ombudsman of The Washington Post, resigned from the board of the National Press Foundation because it planned to honor Brit Hume at its annual dinner. As reported by USA Today, she said that Hume didn't deserve the award because he and Fox are guilty of "ideologically connected journalism," Overholser said, "Fox wants to do news from a certain viewpoint, but it wants to claim that it is 'fair and balanced.' That is inaccurate and unfair to other media who engage in a quest, perhaps an imperfect quest, for objectivity."

So there you have it, Chris Wallace. Be careful what you wish for. Once the White House Correspondents Association starts excluding the likes of Jeff Gannon, don't think that Fox News will still be guaranteed a seat at White House briefings and presidential press conferences.

The mere fact that Guckert is placed in the same category as FOX news speaks volumes.

The "liberal Press Corps" line is getting old. Kincaid and Guckert and the rest of those defending unethical practices use it as their rallying cry, as if it is their patriotic duty to rise up and spin, spin, spin against the dying right. The only patriotic duty is loyalty to the truth. The only duty of every "journalist", whether in the Press Corps or online, is allegiance to the truth, and not a partisan agenda.

Here is a reminder to Guckert and Kincaid and everyone else as to the true purpose of the Press Corps. It's not to throw softballs, it's not to ignore facts, it's not to let the President treat the media as lapdogs for his partisan agenda. The true purpose, as stated way back in 1923, is this:

Washington correspondents are a specialized group whose profession is not without its public responsibilities. To them public officials say more than can be judiciously printed in order that what is printed may not lead the public astray. They must keep faith with the public and with men in official places.

This Admistration has colluded with the press to "lead the public astray", and the White House Correspondents should have called him on it.

Are you a member of the media? Ask these questions!

2005-03-02T09:41:00.000-08:00

Guckert has offered to give out interviews to both liberal and conservative bloggers. Members at DailyKos.com have compiled a list of questions for Talon News' #1 Correspondent.

Here is the list:

Questions Posed To James D. Guckert by ePluribus Media volunteers

1. Is James D. Guckert your real name or is it, like "Jeff Gannon," another pseudonym? Have you used other pseudonyms in any of your other business ventures?

2. Were you paid for any of your work for Talon News or GOPUSA? If so, who paid you?

3. How did you begin your association with Bobby Eberle or GOPUSA? Did anyone contact you, or did you volunteer?

4. Have you ever been associated with GOPUSA in any capacity other than as a reporter?

5. In what capacity did you entertain Tony Blair during his visit on July 17, 2003?

6. How did you learn about GOPUSA.com?

7. At one point, you claimed you saw Talon News, liked it and began submitting articles to them. However, Talon News didn't exist until after you were put in the White House by GOPUSA. Do you wish to clarify this contradiction?

8. You claim in your bio that you served in the military. Which branch? Where and when did you serve? Have you worked for the government in any other capacity?

9. Have you ever been a member of a GOP activist group? If so, which one(s)?

10. Were you politically active as a college student or young adult?

11. When did you attend the Leadership Institute's Seminar for Broadcast Journalists?

12. The minutes of the Standing Committee of Correspondents, which accredits journalists to the Senate Press Gallery, makes reference to the fact that you are or were the Executive Director of the "Free Speech Foundation." Registration information for the Free Speech Foundation's web site reveals that the domain is owned by one "J. Daniels," though that information was later changed to list the owner as "I. Christian." Given that your close involvement with the Foundation was something you had no reason to hide from the Standing Committee, why did you use a pseudonym to register the domain name, since "Jeff Gannon," the name by which you were best-known and which would have generated the most positive publicity for the Foundation among your readers and listeners, was itself a pseudonym, thus protecting whatever privacy you used to enjoy?

13. Given the limited number of publications you had been affiliated with (and both publications boast a decidedly conservative slant), coupled with your fairly unknown status among the press corps, how did you arrange the interview with former Ambassador Wilson?

14. As a novice reporter, how did you learn the procedure for obtaining a day pass to the White House?

15. When did you first apply for a hard pass with the White House Press Corps? Did you apply for it or was it arranged through Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com?

16. When did you first apply for a daily pass with the White House Press Corps? Did you apply for it or was it arranged through Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com?

17. Did any members of the press question you on how it was that you were showing up regularly, but on a day pass rather than on a permanent pass?

18. You posted on an online discussion group that you have been subpoenaed to testify in the Valerie Plame case. In the same online discussion, you posted that you had seen the memo regarding Valerie Plame. Recently, however, you have suggested that you found out about this matter through the WSJ and that you were interviewed but not subpoenaed regarding the Plame case. Why have your recent responses not been consistent with your past statements? What is the truth?

19. Did anyone in the administration ever give you advanced information on any subject? Did they show you with a copy of the CIA Plame document?

20. Have you ever met Karl Rove? When? Where? How many times?

21. How did you come to find out about the Mary Mapes scoop with respect to the CBS/TANG documents?

22. What other parts of the White House have you seen or been in, other than the White House press briefing room? Who was your host on these occasions and what were the purposes of these visits?

23. Have you ever been to the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas and, if so, on what occasion and for what purpose?

24. You've used fabricated quotes, reprinted press releases and extensively cribbed from writers for other news publications such as the Yankton Daily Press & Dakotan, Arcspace.com, and Newsquest, all beneath your own byline. Did your training in journalism include any coursework on ethics?

25. Legitimate journalists subscribe to a code of ethics, what do you think about those who violate or ignore that code?

26. Do you think working journalists should take money from anyone other than the professional news organization or publication that employs them for pieces they write? Did you?

27. Which falsehoods have been spread about you that you would like to dispell right now? For example, will you go on record saying that you were not running an escort service? We feel that this is relevant because of your past articles accusing others of behavior that you now consider "private, personal" information.

28. Since you've begun your own blog, do you think of yourself as a "blogger" or a "journalist"? Do you think of yourself as a "professional?" Since most people accept that a professional is someone who earns his living functioning in a known career field, how are you earning your living as a professional? Could you characterize how much monetary income constitutes "a living" in your opinion?

Let's hope we don't hear the sound of *birds chirping* for much longer.

Oh, and if you are a member of the media, feel free to ask these questions, add your own. There's enough muckraking to go around for all of us.

Kerry Blasts Media for atmosphere of "fear" and "lies"

2005-03-02T08:02:00.000-08:00

At the JFK library, John Kerry calls it as he sees it:

Kerry criticized the mainstream media for contributing to an atmosphere of fear and lies.

"There is something wrong with who is arbitrating the truth," he said. "When fear is dominating the discussion, we have a problem."

Kerry said news conglomerates -- particularly of broadcast news -- were a large part of the problem.

"The corporatization of the media has taken away some of the muckraking," he said.

We can think of a few issues that were in desparate need of some old school muckraking: the bogus claim about WMDs, the torture approved by the Bush administration, the bribes given to journalists, allowng a fake reporter in the White House to spit GOP talking points...

Arab World Reacts to Coulter, American Propaganda

2005-03-01T16:09:00.000-08:00

On Arab News' front page, the MidEast's "leading English news daily" there is a link to a story by Barbara Ferguson entitled "Arab Bashing Reaches New Low With Thomas Slur."

WASHINGTON, 2 March 2005 — Arab bashing reached a new low in Washington last week when Ann Coulter, a loudmouthed, mean-spirited, pro-Bush columnist, decided to defend the White House press pass controversy over faux-reporter James Guckert (a.k.a. Jeff Gannon) by writing in her syndicated column: “Press passes can’t be that hard to come by if the White House allows that old Arab Helen Thomas to sit within yards of the president.”

[...]
Coulter was, perhaps, taking a cue from the White House, which has slighted Thomas several times since 2003. During a televised news conference, President George W. Bush deliberately snubbed several reporters he ordinarily calls upon, including journalists from the Washington Post, Newsweek, and USA Today. But the most conspicuous recipient of the Bush freeze-out was Thomas, who has barbed and grilled every president since Kennedy and almost always gets to ask a question. Bush pointedly ignored her.
[...]
There has been disappointingly little reaction in defense of their colleague by White House journalists.
In an article entitled “Lipstick Fascism,” James Wolcott, a Vanity Fair contributing editor, writes: ... “Arabs of course are fair game on talk radio and the trash punditry, of which Ann Coulter is stringbean queen,” says Wolcott. “Presumably Helen Thomas’s very ancestry, about which I know nothing, makes her an incipient terrorist threat, though presumably commando call boy Jeff Gannon would have been coiled to pounce into action if the octogenarian made any sudden violent moves. Coulter’s typically crass wisecrack is the cartoonish version of the hostile profiling of Arabs and Muslims being conducted all over the neoconservative right, as typified by Michelle Malkin’s pioneer work to excuse the Japanese internment in order to justify the preemptive incarceration of Muslims and other suspicious elements.

“I’m sure this sort of thing doesn’t fluster them in the slightest. Conservatism and sadism have become indivisible,” writes Wolcott.

Note to Ann Coulter: Please, keep your mouth shut and stop embarassing us throughout the world.

Reporters fail their duty to investigate Guckert

2005-03-01T15:39:00.000-08:00

Matt Hutaff at The Simon eloquently expresses what all of us are--or should--be thinking: Where is the media on this? Why aren't they investigating? Are they failing us, the American Public, by not performing their duty as the Fourth Estate?

Stop and really think about this for a minute. The Bush Administration has already confessed to counterfeiting news by planting columnists and reporters with party rhetoric and a fat paycheck. The response from the media? A half-assed question: "Do you think it's a proper use of government funds [emphasis mine] to pay commentators to promote your policies?"
That reporter was well rewarded with an equally half-assed reply: "I expect my cabinet secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn’t go forward. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet."
Janus-esque doubletalk, meet propaganda proponents.
With Guckert's outing by weblogs around the world, one would think that the White House would finally have to eat some crow over its relentless bending of the Fourth Estate to its will. After all, the scandal has all the prime elements of a television movie – gay sex, deceit, treachery and politics. It couldn't have come bundled in a better package. And yet once again, this disturbing story of media manipulation has been tucked away with all the mouth-frothing over Iraqi weapons and terror alerts. No indictment for perjury. No ramifications of any kind.
Instead, we're treated to a softball "investigation" into Bush's drug use. Who cares one iota over whether or not Bush did lines or smoked weed or drank himself silly? It doesn't affect me, it doesn't affect you, it's none of our business. All I care about with regards to the President is how he serves his role as leader of the people of the United States. In that, he's a miserable failure and a criminal.
Doctoring press conferences so that "trusted" stooges can spoon-feed ideological questions to a stuttering boob does everyone a disservice. First, it gives the impression that people actually think key Democrats are "divorced from reality." Second, it removes the possibility of a question with real substance. Since press conferences are so few and far between with this administration, and since Bush is such a "handled" individual, catching him unscripted is the public's only chance to see what a dunderhead he really is.
One would think that American journalists would be up in arms over the routine trashing their profession gets from unbiased and international sources. That's why I'm constantly baffled at the prone position they take, bending over and accepting whatever form of denigration Bush and friends pound into them on a daily basis. ..
Making George W. Bush look good isn't the responsibility of a reporter. I've come to expect lies from the government – I shouldn't come to rely on the mainstream press to prop it up.

There are many questions left unanswered about Propagannon. How many passes was Guckert issued? When was the first one issued? Has any other reporter received daily passes for over two years? What connection does Karl Rove and the GOP have to GOPUSA.com? Why was Talon News set up as a fake news agency? And why hasn't anyone, from Bobby Eberle to Scott McClellan to President Bush himself, apologized for the fraud perpetrated on the American Public?

Unfortunately, unliked Guckert, we won't get a fake"journalism" certificate, write for a fake news aganecy, and get the green light to bypass security in order to ask these critical questions of the White House. It is the responsibilty of the press to ask these questions for us.

So why, by their inaction, are they intent on silencing us?

Ari Fleischer Spins Away In New Book

2005-03-01T12:58:00.000-08:00

Former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer has a book out today, titled "Taking Heat". Howard Kurtz from the Washington Post give us a glimpse inside:

Fleischer's book, "Taking Heat," is out today, and while his style isn't to smack people around, he is the first Bush administration insider to offer a sustained indictment of the media. White House correspondents, he says, are mostly liberal. Mostly negative. Mostly opposed to tax cuts. Mostly unwilling to give his president a break. Mostly interested in whipping up conflict.

He portrays journalists as good human beings who, sad to say, are biased and defensive. Even when ripping Hearst columnist Helen Thomas -- "I don't care for her politics one little bit" -- Fleischer hastens to add: "Helen and I could go at each other in the briefing room but in private we really like each other."

Reading Fleisher's description of the "liberal" media interested in "whipping up conflict" sounds eerily Guckert-ish. Fleischer whining about the media "unwilling to give his President a break" is shocking, considering the pass the President was given leading this nation into war. Fleischer played an integral role in shelling out rationale after failed rationale, and the media licked it all up without even second-guessing the President. Only a few journalists has the hutzpa to apologize. Rick Mercier was one of them:

"The media are finished with their big blowouts on the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and there's one thing they forgot to say: We're sorry...."Sorry we let unsubstantiated claims drive our coverage. Sorry we were dismissive of experts who disputed White House charges against Iraq. Sorry we let a band of self-serving Iraqi defectors make fools of us. Sorry we fell for Colin Powell's performance at the United Nations. Sorry we couldn't bring ourselves to hold the administration's feet to the fire before the war, when it really mattered....Maybe we'll do a better job next war."

The NY Times, part of the media Fleischer says should have given the Admistration a break, wrote in May 2004 that it had given the President one break too many:

But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged - or failed to emerge.

Fleischer goes on to include Thomas' questions in his book. Heaven forbid a President should be held accountable for his actions, and Thomas says as much in the Kurtz article:

"The questions I asked should have been asked by 10 more reporters in the run-up to war, which proved that everything they said was not true." She says Fleischer was not only a spokesman for the president but "owed credibility to the American people. I'm sure he got mad at me. He had to defend what was indefensible, in my opinion."

Of course Fleischer got mad. The entire Bush Adminsitration gets frustrated when presented with facts and reality, rather than the likes of Talon News. Fleischer will likely make quite a bit of money dishing out disclosures in his book. What a shame he couldn't be as "honest" when he was in the Briefing Room.

Oh, the sweet irony: FOX criticized for covering Propagannon

2005-02-28T17:12:00.000-08:00

You know you have a story on your hands when even right-wingers are complaining about how FOX news is handling Propagannon.

From today's inaccurate Mens News Daily, we see Cliff Kincaid lamenting Fox News Watch as "one of the most disappointing programs airing on the Fox News Channel." Why? Because the panelists actually thought there is something fishy about a "reporter" with a fake news organization working with the GOP partisan group GOPUSA.com who was granted access on a daily basis to sneak propaganda questions to the Press Secretary and the President.

Now, we here at Propagannon are pleasantly surprised that FOX would dedicate some program time to the issue, and even address it in a decent manner.

Kincaid, who keeps insisting on calling Guckert a "reporter", attempts to defend Guckert's action in a manner highly reminiscent of a fish flailing out of water. Case in point:

He was forced to resign from Talon News, an on-line conservative-backed news operation, when his personal life came under scrutiny and he was linked to homosexual activity. The far left, which claims to respect peoples' privacy, just won't let go of this story.

There are five, count them FIVE lies in these two sentences. That has to be a record, even for Mens News Daily: (1) Guckert was not "forced" to resign, he resigned willingly after he was exposed; (2) Talon News is not a "news" operation. It was more like an Office Depot crossbred with Pravda; (3) he was forced to resign because he wasn't a reporter, not because his "personal life" was scrutinzed; (4) he wasn't "linked to homosexual activity"...he was linked to prostitution & internet porn; and (5) the "far left" didn't invade his privacy...Guckert allegedly advertised his services on public websites (see Tom Tomorrow below--"can't a guy post naked pictures of himself on the internet anymore?!?").

Kincaid is right about one thing. We won't let go of this story(by the way, we're not the "far" left...we're just citizens demanding accountability) . Because this is the last straw in a shocking string of bribes, payoffs, manipulation, and other media control measures perpetrated by this Administration.

In contrast to Gannon, who went through a journalism training program at the Leadership Institute, Mokhiber has never taken a journalism class.

"Journalism training program." Yeah. A weekend seminar. It costs $50, "for which attendees receive 'two days of instruction, meals on Saturday and Sunday and all course materials.'" So let's say there's 48 hours. Take away 16 for sleep (assuming Guckert wasn't busy at night)...a few for eating, getting ready, etc. and Guckert has what, maybe 16 hours of "training"? And what type of "training" is the Leadership Institute known for? Quality training like this:

"In an eight-hour session that bore little resemblance to a traditional journalism class, the students were taught how to start their own conservative newspapers and opinion journals. And how to pick fights with lefty bogeymen on the faculty and in student government."

Meanwhile, Mr. "I'm returning to private life" Guckert couldn't bare being a week out of the spotlight, and has started a blog where he links to various stories about the scandal. But trust us, our site is much cooler. And we write our own stuff. We promise.

Gannon "symptomatic of a broader White House strategy to undermine the traditional media "

2005-02-28T10:21:00.000-08:00

Dick Polman gets it:

But the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert saga is far from over. It remains unclear how a graduate of a conservative training program, someone with no previous journalism experience, someone whose writings were often lifted directly from White House press releases, still managed to gain access to the White House press room, where he spent two years lobbing gentle questions at the press secretary and the President.

And some political analysts who monitor President Bush's relations with the media insist that Gannon (who, referring to Democrats, recently asked Bush, "How are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?") should not be viewed as an isolated case. Rather, they contend that Gannon is symptomatic of a broader White House strategy to undermine the traditional media by disseminating the Bush message in creative new ways.

Every president has sought to manipulate the media. But historians say that Bush, unhappy with what he calls "the filter," is courting controversy in his quest for innovative formats. Several conservative commentators have been paid to trumpet Bush policies in their work; one recipient, Armstrong Williams, is being investigated by the Federal Communications Commission. And two agencies have disseminated pro-Bush videos that look like TV newscasts, without disclosing the Bush sponsorship - a breach of federal law, according to the Government Accountability Office.

The White House has stated that these media decisions were made independently by the agencies. Nevertheless, former Republican strategist Jim Pinkerton, who later worked in the senior George Bush's administration, says: "It's quite clear this White House is exploring radical alternative ways to getting its message out - through the aggressive hiring of flacks like Williams, and the presence, or even planting, of friendly so-called journalists like Gannon.

"The Bush people are challenging all the old assumptions about how to work the press. They are ambitious - visionary, if you will - in ways that Washington has yet to fathom."

Larry Gross, who runs the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Southern California, says: "Richard Nixon hated the press, Bill Clinton hated the press - but they accepted the basic rules of the game. Bush has a strategy of discrediting, end-running, and even faking the news. Those prepackaged videos sent to local TV stations `looked' like news, much the way Gannon `looked' like a reporter. We're seeing something new: Potemkin-village journalism."

And here is the spin:

But Rich Galen, a Republican strategist and Bush ally, scoffs, saying: "The notion of the White House somehow being involved in a conspiracy to control the news by planting someone like Gannon is just laughable. They (critics) are trying to connect the dots, but they're coloring outside the lines."

How "laughable" that White House tried to control the news. Because the Armstrong Williams bribe, the Gallagher payola, the fake news videos, all that was just for fun...not at all an attempt to control the message. Scoff away, Galen. No matter how much you try to minimize this for you "ally", the American Public won't stand to be fooled any longer.

"Nothing to See Here" by Tom Tomorrow

2005-02-28T09:44:00.000-08:00

Click here. Die laughing.

Contact Congress, Urge Them To Investigate

2005-02-27T20:29:00.000-08:00

Ask them to investigate Propagannon. Ask them to have Press Secretary release the White House credentialing standards. Ask them if they think different standards should apply for the Congressional Gallery vs. the Press Corps.

Or, just ask them if they have any connection to GOPUSA.com. Considering GOPUSA.com links to the Republican Study Committee and the National Republican Steering Committee, it should be an interesting question.

Contact them http://www.usalone.org/press.htm.

Hey, while you're at it, send the President an email too and ask him if Guckert represents a "nice, independent relationship with the press."

Guckert Speaks...Again

2005-02-27T16:42:00.000-08:00

What a difference 10 days makes. (No, we're not talking about the 10 day turnaround from Guckert becoming a "reporter" to his being granted White House access.) Ten days ago, Guckert told E&P "I'm no longer talking to anyone [in the press] anymore."

Today, days after re-launching his website, he gave an interview to Roll Call's Mary Ann Akers, RawStory reports.

Guckert keeps playing the repentant "sinner", when in reality, his "past" isn't his "past" at all. At the time he was hired as a White House correspondent, apparently it was his present...

As John Aravosis at Americablog.org pointed out, Guckert's websites, where he allegedly self-promoted his escort services, were live until at least April 17, 2003, months after he was a White House correspondent. His last "customer review" was in November of 2002...not to distant a "past" is it?

In his latest interview, Guckert once again claims he switched to "Jeff Gannon" because it's easier to pronounce than "James Guckert"...or perhaps "James Gannon"? Or Jim Gannon? We here at Propagannon must give Guckert some credit for being able to assert this "Jeff" is easier to pronounce than "James" with a straight face. Bravo, James. Bravo.

Guckert also says "They accused me of throwing softballs. Where does it say that every question has to be hostile?" he asked." Of course not every question has to be "hostile" (read: reality-based). But where does it say that every single question has to be a softball? We've combed through Guckert's questions, and have yet to find one of a truly substantive nature that does not resemble propaganda. "Lifeline-only Questions 101". Must be a Leadership Institute Course.

Apples and Oranges, or The Real "Gannon Standard"

2005-02-27T15:44:00.000-08:00

Mens News Daily continues defending the indefensible by claiming Guckert's infilitration of the White House Press Corps is par course. John Hawkins pens an "article" which equates Guckert with lifetime journalist Helen Thomas. Nice try, but let's see why the comparison falls flat on its face.

Guckert: A degree in Social Studies. Oh, and a $50 weekend seminar at a right-wing propaganda institute.

Thomas: A degree in English, plus 30 other honorary degrees (including doctorates).

Guckert: No awards???

Thomas: "the National Press Club's 4th Estate Award; the Columbia University Journalism Award, the International Media Foundation Lifetime Achievement Award, the Missouri School of Journalism Award, the Peter Zenger Award, the Hearst Newspapers' Bob Considine Award; the Society of Professional Journalists first life-time award and elected to its Hall of Fame, the Allen Neuharth award, the William Allen White Journalism Award, the Wayne University "Spirit of Diversity" award and the Ellis Island American Legend Medal, among others."

Guckert: was a Talon "reporter" for less ten days before being granted access to the Bush White House Press Corps.

Thomas: was a reporter for some 50 years before being granted access to the Bush White House Press Corps.

Guckert: used fake quotes in asking the President softball questions.

Thomas: used facts in asking the President the questions every reporter should be asking. We won't waste valuable pixels reprinting all Thomas questions Mens News Daily found problematic. For your reading pleasure, we provide a series of links which support the questions quoted by Hawkins:

Helen Thomas: "We didn't go in to win the war on terrorism when we invaded Iraq." -- April 29, 2004. As reported by Unknown News.

Question based on the reality that there was no tie between al Qaeda and Saddam.

Helen Thomas: "...following up Ann Compton's question [regarding Saddam Hussein's court hearing], does [President Bush] agree with Saddam that Presidents are above the law?" -- July 1, 2004. As reported by Unknown News.

Question based on the reality that the Bush administration has tried to place the President above the law.

Helen Thomas: "Prime Minister Blair took full personal responsibility for taking his nation into war under falsehoods -- under reasons that have been determined now to be false. Is President Bush also willing to take full, personal responsibility --"

Question based on the reality that the President refuses to apologize.

Helen Thomas: "There was no threat"..."Saddam Hussein did not threaten this country." -- July 19, 2004. As reported by Unknown News.

Link, link, link, link, link, link ...you get the idea.

We would continue here and could cite hundreds of other links supporting Thomas' questions, but we think we'll leave Hawkins to his own research. Simply put, Thomas' questions are based on reality; Guckert's questions are based on a partisan agenda and propaganda.

Thomas is a lifelong, widely-acclaimed journalist. Guckert is a fraud. The President chose to push Thomas to the back row in the briefing room and doesn't ask her questions anymore, while Guckert somehow got prime seats to the sideshow. In typical fashion, Bush distances himself from those that may hold him accountable for his actions while he surrounds himself with propagandists and frauds.

The only "Gannon Standard" that should be applied to the White House Press Corps is this: no person should be allowed to enter the Press Room under false pretenses, under a sham organization, afforded special privileges, and selected to ask questions which are not based on reality. The American Public deserves better than that.

A Cartoon Worth A Thousand Words

2005-02-27T11:15:00.000-08:00

Courtesy of the LA Times editorial section. Also, thanks to Agathena from DailyKos for bringing it to our attention.

Propagannon: This "Simply Ain't News?"

2005-02-26T18:50:00.000-08:00

The Daily Howler today wrote that the Jeff Gannon story is "hopelessly trivial" and that the story "simply ain't news!" We at Propagannon beg to differ.

"Hopelessly Trivial"?

"Ain't News?"

Close your eyes for a minute and let's do some serious imagining. Eyes closed good and tight?

Now, imagine it's February, 1999 and the Clinton Administration had, almost two years earlier, led us into a war based upon the claim that Iraq had WMD and it was later discovered that the WMD never existed. Now, stretch your imagination for a second and pretend that he wasn't somehow impeached over that and still managed to be in office. Okay, still with me here?

Imagine that a Democratic advocacy group named "DemocratsUSA" got a special nod from Clinton's Press Secretary to plant a fake reporter in the White House Press room to ask Bill Clinton softball questions to save him from difficult situations, AND that reporter, who had no previous experience in journalism except for a weekend stint at a place called the "Progressive Institute for Journalism", run by an old Arkansas political buddy, received from White House sources classified, inside information to disseminate the Administration's policies and threaten Clinton's political enemies. No peeking...keep imagining.

Now, picture that it was later discovered that the fake reporter had posted naked pictures of himself on the internet to solicit business as a gay, male prostitute.

Got that? I said, "Gay, male prostitute." Now, imagine the headlines and the reports on cable news. Do you think they would read:

"Hopelessly trivial. This simply ain't news."

I'm imagining that the only regret the Republicans in Congress and the media would have is that they could impeach him only once and that tarring and feathering was illegal.

Now, tell me with a straight face, tell me the press is Liberal.

2005-02-26T15:01:00.000-08:00

“Hopelessly Trivial”?

The Daily Howler today wrote that Propagann is “hopelessly trivial” and that the story “simply ain’t news!” We at Propagannon beg to differ.

Maybe it would be a “non-story”—if Guckert could keep his story straight. But alas, his many inconsistencies and the cover-up employed by his associates reveals that there is, indeed, a much bigger story here desparately in need of attention.

Why is Propagannon not “hopelessly trivial”? Here we go.

(1) Guckert lied about his relationship with GOPUSA.com. In fact, he “denied strongly any tie” to the organization. Non-story? Not when you find out he was on the Board of Directors for GOPUSA.com. Now why would Guckert lie about that? What is there to hide?

(2) GOPUSA.com, of which Guckert was a Director of, is a propaganda outfit. It’s mission is to “promote the conservative, Republican agenda.” It’s “writers” spit out the most vile Republican talking points: Democrats should be renamed “Saddemocrats and they want to “destroy the United States”, anti-war protesters are Stalinists and anti-American, Senators Kerry, Boxer, and Biden are ”racist fools”…you get the idea. Non-story? Not when such a propaganda outfit has a disturbing close tie to the Administration.

(3) Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA.com founder and CEO, personally thanked Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove for his “friendship, guidance, and leadership.” Non-story? Exactly what “guidance” did Karl Rove give to GOPUSA.com?

(4) Is GOPUSA.com “trivial”? How, when as the Daily Howler points out, it is filled with “unknowns”, was GOPUSA.com able to interview the elusive Karl Rove?

Given that Karl Rove is now Deputy Chief of Staff, he owes an explanation to the public as to what his relationship is/was with GOPUSA.com. Exactly what “guidance” did he give to this propaganda outfit?

Where is the Christian Right?

2005-02-26T06:46:00.000-08:00

Bill Berkowitz of the Dissent Report wonders where is the "moral value" party on Propagannon? (see also, Hypocrisy, in the post below). Berkowitz called up the Christrian Righ t:

* The Family Research Council: I spoke with Amber Hildebrand, FRC's Media Director. She said "We haven't made any public comments about this. There have been other pressing issues that have taken precedent, although this came as a shock to FRC."

Other pressing issues, like a cartoon gay marriage on the Simpsons. Because a cartoon character coming out is far more important than having an imposter journalist just few away from the President.

Response to LA Times article on Propagannon

2005-02-25T20:58:00.000-08:00

LA Times writer Johanna Neuman wrote an article, An Identity Crisis Unfolds in a Not-So-Elite Press Corps, that Yahoo is using as its top story. Since so many Yahooligans will be reading it, let's correct it.

And now, a semi-impostor has forced the White House and the mainstream reporters covering it to address a basic question:
What is a journalist?

No, Guckert's presence in the Press Corps has not raised that question, since Guckert is, by his own definition, not a reporter (see posts below.) The "basic question" forced into the public discourse is why a alleged criminal, affiliated with a shady GOP activist organization, with ZERO journalism experience apparently fits some myserious, non-disclosed criteria for White House Press Corps membership.

The openly scornful and seemingly partisan description of congressional Democrats startled some veterans of the White House press room. And they wondered how Bush came to call on the relatively obscure reporter...not just this time, but on previous occasions as well.

"Seemingly" partisan? You know what Guckert questions are even more "seemingly partisan." How about these?

Then gay activists, indulging in what one media critic called "bloglust," posted on the Internet homoerotic photos of Gannon advertising himself as a $200-an-hour gay escort.

Ms. Neuman, "posted on the Internet"? They were already posted on the Internet by Guckert himelf. Guckert posted them on the Internet, not the "gay activists." Guckert made them public. And, interestingly, it seems that James "those sites aren't mine!" Guckert is the one selling the domain names for a pretty penny.

The White House press corps has since attracted an array of unusual personalities. There was Naomi Nover of the Nover News Service. No one ever saw her work published, but Nover — whose coif of white hair somewhat resembled George Washington's wig — got past a security cordon during a Reagan trip to China after a reporter showed guards a U.S. dollar bill as evidence of how important she was.

Was she linked to a shady GOP activist organization?

"If you look at the question Gannon asked, it obviously reflected his conservative views," Fitzwater said.

"But it's no different from the ones Helen Thomas [formerly of United Press International, now of Hearst] asked of Reagan, or Dan Rather [of CBS] asked in his more famous comments about Richard Nixon.

Ah, the false equivalency of Helen Thomas. You know why Helen Thomas deserved to be in the Press Corps for some 30 years? Because she wrote for her high school paper. Because she was a "copy boy." Because she wrote news for radio. Because she dedicated her entire life to journalism. If Guckert had the same credentials, we would be defending his right to be in the Press Corps, regardless of his political affiliation. But equating Guckert's $50 "journalism training" and Xerox reporting with the lifelong commitment of Helen Thomas to a free press is frankly, a huge insult.

"I've always thought it was dangerous for the White House to get into the business of defining who is and is not a member of the press corps," said Clinton White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry. "That is better done by the news media."

If the news media is comfortable with a partisan operative posing as a journalist being a member of the press corps, then we have a bigger problem than little Guckert on our hands. We have the slow death of the Fourth Estate.

Former Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, who gave Gannon a day pass even before Talon News was launched, told the trade magazine Editor & Publisher that at one point he hesitated to call on the reporter, then resumed after being assured he was not a GOP plant.

And who assured him he wasn't a GOP plant? Why, GOP activist Bobby Eberle, who owns Talon News and GOPUSA.com, and who has extremely close ties with the Republican Party. Quite a reassurance.

Still, the impression lingers for some that the Bush White House with its reputation for stage managing the news orchestrated softball questions. Others say the White House is simply a magnet for those eager to usurp its stage.

Let's balance the article a bit and expand on "stage-managing" the news. Let's talk about Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher, or loyalty oaths for audiences, or how the President cancelled a German town hall meeting because he was scared of getting unscripted questions. Let's talk about how Guckert's "softballs" are merely a piece of a much larger scheme of controlling and manipulating the message and hiding the truth from the American people.

"The television lens has brought into the briefing room people who have a political viewpoint and find the briefing a way to express it."

God bless that television lens. If not for it, the American Public would never know how our President lives in a "one question only, no follow up" bubble.

Which is it? Subpoena Or No Subpoena?

2005-02-25T18:34:00.000-08:00

Yet another "inconsistency."

"I wasn't subpoenaed."

Guckert said that contrary to many press reports, he was never subpoenaed by the special prosecutor and has never testified before a grand jury in the case. But he said he was interviewed by two FBI agents in his home for about 90 minutes last year.

"I answered their questions truthfully and honestly, but I would prefer not to say more," he said. "I assume the information was routed back and that is why I was not called to testify."

"I was subpoenaed."

Well, as many of you now know, I have been subpeonaed [sic] by the Federal grand jury for testimony in the CIA leak probe.

Tough to keep the story straight, one would assume.

A Response to David Corn

2005-02-25T17:30:00.000-08:00

David Corn of The Nation writes "two key aspects of the story--that Gannon is a gay GOP hypocrite and that Gannon was handed classified information regarding the Wilson leak investigation--are not fully supported by the known facts."

Mr. Corn has, as he admits, conducted only a "limited inquiry" into the facts of Propagannon. Those who have been investigating this for the better part of a three weeks know that the assertions are indeed supported by the facts.

The Hypocrisy
The fallacy in Mr. Corn's argument is that he first assumes that "Gannon" being a "gay GOP hypocrite" is a "key aspect of the story." It is not. It never was. The sole key aspect of this story has been propaganda and the intentional manipulation of the media by the Bush administration and its allies.

But assuming, arguendo, Mr. Corn's argument that the hypocrisy here is an issue. The hypocrisy of course is not that he is gay. There are many gay Republicans, being gay and member of the GOP are not mutually exclusive concepts. The hypocrisy was that Guckert was apparently engaging in illegal, immoral behavior while boasting about being a member of the "moral majority."

As for Mr. Corn's statement that Guckert is not a "gay-baiter" and that he addressed the issue of gays in a "staightfoward" manner, we direct him to the (now scrubbed) conservativeguy.com website, where Guckert revealed his true feelings which permeated his writings:

On that site, Guckert refers to "gay and lesbian fascists" who engaged in "lies" and "political terrorism" to get conservative Dr. Laura Schlessinger off television.

Yet the hypocrisy at issue with Propagannon is much more disturbing than "gay-baiting." The hypocrisy is that Guckert, self-proclaimed "conservative guy", abandoned any and all of the values that conservatives seem to think they have a monopoly on. While the right complains about individuals ripping off the government through welfare and such, Guckert owed some $20,000 in back taxes and interest. While the right complains about the corruption of our youth, Guckert posted explicit, pornographic images himself on public websites, readily available to anyone surfing the net. While the right complains about the erosion of morals in this country, Guckert was apparently selling himself online, engaging in sex with members of the military. And all of this, of course, is a crime.

A Need For Standards
Mr. Corn misstates the issue at hand when he writes "Yet there is nothing inherently wrong with allowing journalists with identifiable biases to pose questions to the White House press secretary and even the president. And if such a reporter asks a dumb question--as did Gannon/Guckert (which triggered this scandal)--the best response is scorn and further debate."

First, it was not one "dumb question" that "triggered this scandal." It was at least 16 of them, many which are more blatantly propaganda than the one that Mr. Corn believed "triggered" the scandal. Second, no one has ever claimed that the issue here is allowing journalists with identifiable biases into the White House Press Corps. This strawman is merely an echo of the Bush Administration's feeble attempt to deflect attention away from the true issue in this case: the White House Press Corps is the White House PRESS Corps, and there should be minimum standards which must be adhered to. Is that minimum standard non-partisanship? Of course not. Is that minimum standard more than a $50 weekend "seminar" to earn the title of "journalist"? One would hope so.

The White House Press Corps is the sole method of direct, frequent contact the American Public has with the President. As such, all members of the Press Corps, regardless of political affiliation, operate as representatives of the body politic and their duty is to transmit information from the White House to the American Public and to, if necessary, hold the President accountable for his actions. And that is why there must be some minimum standards...because this awesome duty should not be bestowed on those who cannot effectively perform it.

Is a journalism degree necessary? How long does one have to be published? These issues of course are up for debate, but the core issue remains that one who enters the Press Room with his own personal, selfish political agenda...one who seeks to hide the truth rather than expose it...is failing the American people.

Again, Mr. Corn's claim about standards presumes that Guckert was a journalist. Guckert has failed to demonstrate that he published as a reporter prior to joining with GOPUSA.com and being granted White House access a short time later. To be blunt, Guckert joined the republican activist group GOPUSA.com, whose explicit mission is to "provide news, information, and commentary which promote the conservative, Republican agenda", got into the Press Corps, then spent $50 to give himself some cover as the smokescreen of Talon News was established.

To call Guckert a "journalist", when all he did was Xerox White House Press Release and make up facts is an insult to journalists, both conservative and liberal alike.

Hopefully, Mr. Corn will take the time to visit the links on this site and on the Propagannon Investigation site to expand his inquiry and knowledge of the facts before he pens his next article.

Looking for a "good friend"

2005-02-25T17:22:00.000-08:00

In another example of Guckert twisting the truth, he refers to The Nation writer David Corn on his blog as "my good friend David Korn." David Corn appears not have gotten the memo:

Now I appreciate a link and shout-out as much as the next blogger. And I rarely reject the outstretched hand of friendship. But I do have to correct Gannon. We're not "good friends." ...We've met and spoken a few times around Washington during chance encounters...After all, my good friends tend to know how to spell my last name.

The Ultimate Admission of Guilt?

2005-02-25T10:48:00.000-08:00

Three weeks after James D. Guckert, a Talon News Reporter, was revealed to have no journalism training, a questionable past and present, and possible connections to the Plame investigation, Talon News has been taken offline.

Yet that action raises more questions than answers. Over the course of the investigation, bloggers discovered that GOPUSA.com and Talon News began scrubbing their website, not only of the stories by "Jeff Gannon", but also all Talon News stories. GOPUSA.com deleted its Board of Directors page, even though Guckert was not named on it. Pages and files were being deleted, and bloggers could barely keep up with their saves and screenshots.

Disappearing news articles are not the only mystery here. As bloggers closed in on Guckert's connection to various illegal prostitution sites, the registration of these sites was changed overnight, seemingly in an attempt to cover Guckert's own tracks. Additionally, webpages dealings with the Propagannon investigation have been scrubbed from www.webarchive.org.

Thus there remains the central question: Why? Why has there been a massive attempt to hide or remove this critical information from the hands of citizen journalists? What is there to hide?

Guckert allowed to report from Bush's ranch

2005-02-25T10:42:00.000-08:00

On April 21, 2003, a mere month after being granted White House Press Corps access, James Guckert filed a story, seemingly from President Bush's Crawford Ranch in Texas.

But GOPUSA.com and Talon News founder Bobby Eberle told the New York Times that Guckert did not travel with the President.

Either Guckert was allowed to travel with the President, or he has again been proven a liar, similar to Jayson Blair who penned faked locations into his articles.

The White House has yet to answer whether or not Guckert travelled with the President.

By Guckert's own standard, he is not a journalist.

2005-02-25T10:32:00.000-08:00

The Propagannon controversy has generated much discussion about who gets to declare who is a journalist. While there have been interesting perspectives about where to draw the line, with respect to Guckert, he is not a reporter by his own definition.

On his conservativeguy.com website, Guckert belittled Washington Post reporter Jim VendeHei:

No balance is found in this article at all. VendeHei's "story" does little more than express the Democratic opposition to tort reform, probably in the manner in which it was told to him. That's not reporting, that's parroting. So it's business as usual at the Washington Post as it serves a house organ for the Democratic Party.

Yet taking any one of Guckert's articles--for example, his own article on tort reform--proves that Guckert himself was the one who was engaged in "parroting."

Indeed, applying Gucket's own standard of "reporting" to his article, we get this:

No balance is found in this article at all. Guckert's "story" does little more than express the Republican support of tort reform, probably in the manner in which it was told to him. That's not reporting, that's parroting. So it's business as usual at Talon News as it serves a house organ for the Republican Party.

What journalism experience?

2005-02-25T10:17:00.000-08:00

Guckert has defended his status as a "real reporter" by claiming to have written "about 500 articles."

"I still think, despite the bad things being said about me, I am a journalist, I have been one for two years and have written about 500 articles. I paid a big price for the privilege to call myself a journalist."

But how many articles were printed before he was granted access?

A search of Guckert's 430 articles on www.mensnewsdaily.com shows that his earliest article there was printed on April 10, 2003, well after he was granted White House access. Therefore, the "500 articles" Guckert basis his "experience" on cannot be the basis for his credentialing.

Indeed, Guckert has yet to demonstrate that he published anything as a reporter before he joined Talon News and was granted White House Press Corps access a few days later.

His sole journalism experience/training prior to asking the Bush Administration for access remains a $50 weekend seminar at the right-wing Leadership Institute.

Guckert Scoops News of War - Press Release

2005-02-18T08:15:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Brian Kelly at nybri@epluribusmedia.org
Member, DailyKos.com

GUCKERT SCOOPED NEWS OF WAR
BEFORE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT

Feb. 18, 2005-- In a series of rapid developments, bloggers have discovered that James Guckert, embroiled in a White House Press Room scandal, knew of the "Shock and Awe" campaign four hours before President Bush's public announcement that the war with Iraq had begun.

John Aravosis of Americablog.org reports that a producer for a major news network has revealed that Guckert leaked the information about the massive bombing campaign nearly four hours before the president's televised announcement. The source also states that Guckert was the first to deliver other "scoops" to their news outlet including details concerning the Dan Rather/CBS memo scandal.

Guckert's own posts on a right-wing forum clearly state that he was in possession of information regarding the Rather AWOL memos, and that he gave the information to conservative Fox News commentator, Sean Hannity.

In other developments, RawStory.com is reporting that Guckert's own statements suggest he acted as a "plumber" for the Bush Administration, and that he bragged about feeding stories to mainstream media outlets.

Despite these developments, the White House remains silent about how Guckert was granted such unprecedented access to the White House Press Corps.

--###--

White House Scrambles To Explain Fake Reporter In Press Corps - Press Release

2005-02-17T08:18:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Brian Kelly at nybri@epluribusmedia.org
Member, DailyKos.com

WHITE HOUSE SCRAMBLES TO EXPLAIN
FAKE REPORTER IN ITS PRESS CORPS

Feb.17, 2005 -Internet researchers have uncovered new evidence that contradicts the Bush Administration's claims about James Guckert, a Republican activist allegedly involved in criminal activities and linked to an incident involving a major breach of national security. Guckert, operating as "Jeff Gannon," was granted daily access to White House press briefings for more than two years as a "reporter" for Talon News.

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan stated that Guckert was granted access in part because he was affiliated with a news organization that "publishes regularly." But yesterday, bloggers discovered video footage suggesting this standard was not applied to Guckert. Video footage of a Feb. 28, 2003 White House press briefing shows Guckert, apparently unaffiliated with any news organization, asking former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer a question. It is unclear why Guckert was granted any pass at this time, since the Internet-based Talon News did not register its domain name until March 29, 2003.

Maureen Dowd, a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist for the New York Times, reported today she was denied press credentials at the start of the Bush administration in 2001. Yet Guckert, whose only journalistic training was derived from a $50 weekend seminar, was repeatedly granted access.

Despite calls from Congress for the White House to disclose its standards for entrance to the briefing room, the Bush administration has yet to reveal its credentialing standards or details surrounding the scandal, including: specific dates when Guckert was admitted to the briefing room, how many passes he was issued, as well as how he cleared a Secret Service background check while owing the state of Delaware over $20,000 in back taxes (penalties and interest) and possibly engaging in prostitution, as revealed by Americablog.org.

Guckert has also been implicated in a leak of federal classified information that revealed the identity of CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame. Revealing the identity of an undercover agent is a federal crime.

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has insisted that President Bush will do anything he can to assist the Plame investigation. But the White House has not answered questions about the role of Guckert in the Plame investigation or his inexplicable access to White House Press Corps briefings.

-- ###--

PDF version

The Jeff Gannon Controversy : A Primer for the Press or Beginners- Press Release

2005-02-10T08:20:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
From: The DailyKos Diarists
To: National Desk, Political Reporter
Contact : Brian Kelly at nybri@epluribusmedia.org
RE: The Jeff Gannon Controversy - A Primer for the Press or Beginners
_____________________

Feb. 10, 2005 - An unprecedented coalition of citizen DailyKos Diarists have recently investigated and uncovered important details regarding Talon News reporter, James "J.D." Guckert (AKA Jeff Gannon). These details, along with other information reported by Media Matters and other blog sites, have led to Mr. Guckert's resignation from his position as Washington Bureau Chief for Talon News yesterday amid a flurry of controversy.

Prompted by a Jan. 26 report by MediaMatters.org regarding Guckert's "softball" questions to White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan and President Bush, members of DailyKos, an online community, began investigating the matter.

The information discovered by this investigation was in the public domain, readily available to anyone with internet access. Much of the information was derived from Guckert's own sites which he published himself on the internet, or from comments he himself posted on various sites.

In his Talon News profile, Guckert claimed he had a degree in Education from the "Pennsylvania State University System." His only journalistic "experience" was attendance at the Leadership Institute Broadcast Journalism School. The Leadership Institute describes its mission as increasing "the number and effectiveness of conservative public policy leaders" and to "place conservative leaders in the public policy process." Guckert's "training" at the Leadership Institute was a two-day seminar, tuition for which was $50.

Despite his lack of journalistic experience, Guckert used an assumed name and was granted access to the elite White House Press Corps. His application for a press pass to the House and Senate galleries was rejected because Talon News shares ownership with GOPUSA.com and did not meet press pass standards. Yet somehow he was still given a daily press pass to White House Briefings for almost two years.

In a press briefing on Feb. 10th, White House Press Secretary McClellan claimed that Guckert was granted White House access because he "showed that he was representing a news organization that published regularly." (emphasis added).

However, Talon News came into existence on March 29, 2003. It was granted White House Press Corps access just four days (approx. 96 hours) later. During that four-day time period, Talon News published a total of nine "stories."

During briefings, Guckert's questions frequently revealed not only his conservative bias, but also a possible coordination with White House Press Secretary McClellan. Guckert's questions were frequently leading, unabashedly partisan, and at times inflammatory. Moreover, Guckert apparently had unprecedented access, and even claimed at one point to be "entertaining the Prime Minister of Great Britain."

The researchers at DailyKos discovered another issue that suggested close coordination with the administration. According to the Washington Post, Guckert may have had access to a leaked internal CIA memo which revealed the identity of Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife, then an undercover CIA operative. In fact, because of his possible tie to the leak, Guckert was one of a small number to be subpoenaed to testify in the federal grand jury investigation into the matter.

The Guckert incident is part of a larger story involving attempts on the administration's part to "plant" friendly commentators and journalists in the media to advance their political agenda. In the last month, investigations have revealed that in addition to having an illegitimate conservative "reporter" in its Press Corps:

* The Bush Administration paid conservative commentator Armstrong Williams $240,000 to advocate the No Child Left Behind Act , even though previous to the payments, he was publicly critical of the policy. Williams has since admitted that "there are others" paid by the government to promote its agenda.

* The Bush Administration also paid conservative commentator Maggie Gallagher, who claims no credentials as a marriage expert, to promote its traditional marriage agenda.

Recently, in a letter to President Bush, Representative Louise M. Slaughter (NY-28) demanded an explanation, writing that "'Mr. Gannon' is a Republican political operative, uses a false name, has phony or questionable journalistic credentials, is known for plagiarizing much of the `news' he reports, and according to several web reports, may have ties to the promotion of the prostitution of military personnel." Rep. Slaughter asked the President to answer the critical question: "why the individual known as `Mr. Gannon' was repeatedly cleared by your staff to join the legitimate White House press corps?"

Additionally, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) has written a letter to White House Press Secretary McClellan, asking for the immediate release of all documents relating to Guckert's credentials. Senator Lautenberg, echoing the sentiment of many concerned citizens, has asked for an explanation of "how Mr. Guckert/Gannon passed muster for White House press credentials."

DailyKos is an online community, with over 40,000 members. Membership is free, and the site is one of the web's most popular political websites, with an average 470,000 hits per day. The research was conducted and this statement was released by DailyKos Diarists, not officially associated with Markos Moulitsas, but working with his full support.

###

PDF version