Anita Dunn - Media Controlled by Obama Campaign/Administration – Was the Media “In the Tank” for the Administration or merely duped? Analysis

Anita "I Control the Media" Dunn, with David Axelrod - image daily life

Within the past few weeks, Obama administration officials have been downplaying the role of the Fox News Organization - from Communications Director Anita Dunn to White House Advisor David Axelrod came comments designed to minimize the role of Fox as a legitimate news organization. Additionally, the administration has refrained from providing guests for Fox News shows, outlining the entire organization as one which is opinion driven rather than actual “news”. Anyone who has ever watched Fox programming understands that certain shows are “opinion driven”, but are presented in that manner, while the news segments, are no more or less different than those on CNN, CBS, or NBC, with one minor difference; anchors on Fox report the news, while opinion is interjected into broadcast from the other networks. (Many of which are not designed to be news networks, rather entertainment networks – CBS, ABC, NBC, while CNN is a straight “news” network with similar programming.) The reason: Fox continually questions the administration, which, apparently, is not the way Anita Dunn views the press – as an independent watchdog for the nation. The brouhaha is discussed here at the Detroit Free Press. This article appeared today.

Repeat: The Detroit Free Press

First one must understand that from the lefts perspective, Fox News, although an independent organization is viewed as being “conservative”, while the majority of journalists are seen as holding a left-of-center ideology. This perspective, pushed by the administration and organizations such as the DNC and George Sorros’ Moveon.org, is an attempt to dismiss a point of view contrary to their own, specifically when it comes to the networks pure opinion segments.
When reading the Detroit Free Press Article, one sees the “disdain” for Fox; however, one sees something highly unusual, a defense of the organization – unheard of until recently.

Another article in the Chicago Sun Times which appeared yesterday, is the most scathing attack on the U.S. Media and the administration seen to date. Entitled: “Excuses wearing thin for Obama, media pals”, the piece by Steve Huntley questions why, on so many occasions, has the press not investigated certain aspects of the Obama administrations and goes on to name names, demeaning MSNBC and CNN, as being virtual mouthpieces for the administration. (Note: The Sun Times, has, to date, the best record as far as pieces questioning the administration – which may be why their on-line poll, gives the Obama Presidency such low grades - see screenshot)

Chicago Sun Times On-Line Poll - Obama Approval with Article on Media

What has caused this sudden backlash (two articles – so far), against certain media organizations and the White House by, what one might call, sister organizations?
The knowledge that those who work for and in the news organizations have been duped, used and manipulated by the Obama Campaign and administration, which had previously been held to such high esteem.

In a video that surfaced recently, White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn, while attending a conference on January 12, 2009, laid out how the campaign, and consequently the administration controlled an otherwise witless media. A partial abridged transcript of the video follows, with the complete video, (for verification) which by now, has been seen by a certain percentage of the press that, from what can be surmised by the first salvo of articles today, is none too happy with being “witless servants” of a political campaign, versus, “willing accomplices” as was previously believed by a majority of the nation.

One has to wonder, why it took so long for these journalist to investigate and discover the intent and manipulation of “Team Obama” – understanding that the definitive distrust of the previous administration, by the media, was so engrained, that those journalists, momentarily forgot that their job was to act as a watchdog and report, regardless of the findings; so much did they long to believe in what the media itself, was guilty of perpetuating, the evil of Conservatism versus the good of a progressive candidate who would be President. They were, in simple terms, in denial.

Denial, however, can only last so long, when evidence of being a “useful tool” is brought to light – it is just a question now of which one what is known as the “mainstream media” saw this first. One has to believe it was someone connected with the NBC program “Saturday Night Live”. Although a comedy skit show, the focus on the political has been prevalent for the past 30 years, and often the parodies are predictive (See Ford and Nixon walking hand and hand on SNL before the election that saw, Jimmy Carter enter the White House). It is a part and parcel of American culture, a blend of entertainment and politics.

Now the question is how will the media respond in the coming weeks? Will they continue to deny the fact that they were used by the administration, or will they now stand up and fight for the profession they chose? It is the media that should, regardless of political party, report upon and disclose information regarding both policy and politician in pointed fact, so that the populace may actually receive news (see FOX), and where opinion is printed (or broadcast), note it as such (again see FOX).

Transcription in part of Anita Dunn – on the Obama Campaign Controlling the Press
From: The Movement for Change: Barack Obama Campaign. Part 8 Anita Dunn and Ben Self Auditorio Fundación Global Democracia y Desarrollo January 12, 2009

“We had people assigned to us, after having one too many emails that his candidate and his wife said, isn’t there something more we can do – we had obviously a large department to deal with the traditional media of the united states – and given the international interested in this election, we had a huge press corp to deal with - but the reality a huge part of our press strategy was making the media cover what he was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it what the tactic was – we had a huge premium both on message discipline on people on the camping in leaking to reporters or discussing our strategy or cover what we were saying. Making the Press Cover What we wanted “to get the Message Out without having to actually talk to reporters – so it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlling it. Very rarely did we communicate to the press what we did not absolutely we could control.”