Progressive Bloggers Are Doing the White House’s Job

This administration enjoys an advantage afforded no other: a partisan media that has its back, minute-by-minute.

US President Barack Obama speaks with traveling journalists on board Air Force One on April 28, 2010. Obama met more Americans yet to feel the nascent economic recovery, on a heartland tour to fire up the Democratic campaign to avoid a drubbing in November's mid-term elections. 
AFP/Getty Images
James Oliphant
See more stories about...
James Oliphant
May 9, 2014, 1 a.m.

When Jay Car­ney was grilled at length by Jonath­an Karl of ABC News over an email out­lining ad­min­is­tra­tion talk­ing points in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi at­tack, it was not, by the reck­on­ing of many ob­serv­ers, the White House press sec­ret­ary’s finest hour. Car­ney was al­tern­ately de­fens­ive and dis­missive, ar­gu­ably fuel­ing a bon­fire he was try­ing to tamp down.

But Car­ney needn’t have wor­ried. He had plenty of backup.

He had The New Re­pub­lic‘s Bri­an Beut­ler dis­miss­ing Benghazi as “non­sense.” He had Slate‘s Dav­id Wei­gel, along with The Wash­ing­ton Post’s Plum Line blog, de­bunk­ing any claim that the new email was a “smoking gun.” Me­dia Mat­ters for Amer­ica labeled Benghazi a “hoax.” Salon wrote that the GOP had a “de­men­ted Benghazi dis­ease.” Daily Kos fea­tured the head­line: “Here’s Why the GOP Is Fired Up About Benghazi — and Here’s Why They’re Wrong.” The Huff­ing­ton Post offered “Three Reas­ons Why Re­viv­ing Benghazi Is Stu­pid — for the GOP.”

It’s been a fa­mil­i­ar pat­tern since Pres­id­ent Obama took of­fice in 2009: When crit­ics at­tack, the White House can count on a posse of pro­gress­ive writers to ride to its res­cue. Pick an is­sue, from the Af­ford­able Care Act to Ukraine to the eco­nomy to con­tro­ver­sies in­volving the In­tern­al Rev­en­ue Ser­vice and Benghazi, and you’ll find the same voices again and again, on the Web and on Twit­ter, giv­ing the pres­id­ent cov­er while savaging the op­pos­i­tion. And typ­ic­ally do­ing it with sharp­er tongues and tight­er ar­gu­ments than the White House it­self.

While the bond between pres­id­en­tial ad­min­is­tra­tions and friendly opin­ion-shapers goes back as far as the na­tion it­self, no White House has ever en­joyed the lux­ury that this one has, in which its ar­gu­ments and talk­ing points can be ad­vanced on a day-by-day, minute-by-minute basis. No longer must it await the even­ing news or the morn­ing op-ed page to wit­ness the fruits of its mes­saging ef­forts.

Cred­it the ex­plo­sion of so­cial me­dia, the frag­ment­a­tion of news, the erosion of the in­sti­tu­tion­al press. For­tu­it­ously for the pres­id­ent, the mod­ern me­dia land­scape not only provides ample space for the ex­pres­sion of pure par­tis­an­ship, it act­ively en­cour­ages it. Back­ing your friends and be­littling your en­emies is a healthy busi­ness mod­el, one re­war­ded by a tor­rent of clicks, retweets, “likes,” and links. “The in­cent­ives are to play ball,” says one former lib­er­al blog­ger, “not to speak truth to power. More clicks. More ac­tion. Par­tis­an­ship drives clicks.”

The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion had the good for­tune to come to power just when the forces un­der­min­ing the tra­di­tion­al me­dia be­came truly dis­rupt­ive, cre­at­ing a Web-based roy­alty. And those who came of age, who mastered the new tools, were largely in step with the ad­min­is­tra­tion — in many re­spects mir­ror­ing the young Turks in Obama’s ranks who used those tools in sim­il­ar ways to get the pres­id­ent elec­ted.

The new land­scape has al­lowed the White House com­mu­nic­a­tions shop do what it does best: Fig­ure out new ways to by­pass the main­stream me­dia. It holds off-the-re­cord brief­ings, some­times with Obama in the room, for se­lect pro­gress­ive blog­gers from out­lets such as TPM and Think­Pro­gress. (More than once, a Na­tion­al Journ­al re­port­er who pre­vi­ously worked at a lib­er­al out­let has been in­vited as well.)

The out­reach to pro­gress­ive blog­gers is part of a mul­ti­pronged White House me­dia strategy that also in­volves brief­ings with the likes of bur­eau chiefs, prom­in­ent colum­nists, even con­ser­vat­ive writers such as Byron York and Dav­id Brooks, al­though cer­tainly with each group, the mileage var­ies. 

Con­sider: A search of White House re­cords shows Ezra Klein, then with The Wash­ing­ton Post’s Wonkblog, vis­it­ing more than 25 times since 2009; last week, a Post story de­tailed the trav­ails of Les­ley Clark, a White House re­port­er for Mc­Clatchy who has been to the Oval Of­fice three times in the last three years, and has asked one ques­tion dir­ectly to Obama in all that time.

The hope, from the White House’s per­spect­ive, is that pro­gress­ive me­dia elites sway the main­stream press. “Ob­vi­ously, all journ­al­ists are read­ing each oth­er on Twit­ter,” says Tim Miller, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the con­ser­vat­ive Amer­ica Rising PAC and a former spokes­man for Jon Hunts­man. “If you’ve got very ar­tic­u­late, pas­sion­ate blog­gers on the left who are mak­ing ar­gu­ments why something shouldn’t be news, that might have a sham­ing ef­fect on oth­er journ­al­ists who might not want to be mocked or who might be con­vinced by their ar­gu­ments.”

Cer­tainly, the writers don’t al­ways do the Demo­crats’ dirty work. Zaid Jilani, a former blog­ger for Think­Pro­gress, an arm of the pro­gress­ive Cen­ter for Amer­ic­an Pro­gress, said the White House re­acted an­grily when he wrote a post crit­ic­al of the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s Afgh­anistan policy. Oth­er pro­gress­ive writers say they have got­ten push­back from Obama aides when they haven’t toed the line on is­sues such as sur­veil­lance and im­mig­ra­tion.

Still, Jilani wor­ries that some en­dorse the White House’s po­s­i­tions not be­cause they al­ways agree with them, but be­cause they don’t want to give the GOP any fod­der. “That’s a hard thing to sep­ar­ate,” he says.

Joan Walsh, an ed­it­or-at-large at Salon, brought this ten­sion to a head last year when she slammed Klein for be­ing too crit­ic­al of the Obama­care rol­lout and, in es­sence, giv­ing aid and com­fort to the en­emy. “On one hand, yes, it’s im­port­ant for Demo­crats to ac­know­ledge when gov­ern­ment screws up, and to fix it,” Walsh wrote. “On the oth­er hand, when lib­er­als rush con­scien­tiously to do that, they only en­cour­age the com­pletely un­bal­anced and un­hinged cov­er­age of whatever the prob­lem might be.”

Un­bal­anced. In­ter­est­ing word for a card-car­ry­ing mem­ber of the pro­gress­ive me­dia to use.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×