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 »
‘PULLING A TRUMP’
GOP Budget Chiefs Won’t Invite Administration to Testify
17 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The administration will release its 2017 budget blueprint tomorrow, but the House and Senate budget committees won’t be inviting anyone from the White House to come talk about it. “The chairmen of the House and Senate Budget committees released a joint statement saying it simply wasn’t worth their time” to hear from OMB Director Shaun Donovan. Accusing the members of pulling a “Donald Trump,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the move “raises some questions about how confident they are about the kinds of arguments that they could make.”

Source:
A DARK CLOUD OVER TRUMP?
Snowstorm Could Impact Primary Turnout
13 hours ago
THE LATEST

A snowstorm is supposed to hit New Hampshire today and “linger into Primary Tuesday.” GOP consultant Ron Kaufman said lower turnout should help candidates who have spent a lot of time in the state tending to retail politicking. Donald Trump “has acknowledged that he needs to step up his ground-game, and a heavy snowfall could depress his figures relative to more organized candidates.”

Source:
IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
A Shake-Up in the Offing in the Clinton Camp?
8 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Anticipating a primary loss in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Hillary and Bill Clinton “are considering staffing and strategy changes” to their campaign. Sources tell Politico that the Clintons are likely to layer over top officials with experienced talent, rather than fire their staff en masse.

Source:
×