UPDATED: Beck, Drudge, WND, Fox Nation falsely accuse Dunn of admitting White House "control" over news media
WorldNetDaily, followed by the Drudge Report and Fox Nation, falsely claimed that during a January 12 speech, White House communications director Anita Dunn boasted about the White House's "control" over the media. In fact, Dunn was discussing the Obama campaign's strategy for controlling the campaign's message, not the media; moreover, her comments were made before Obama had taken office and before she became communications director.
UPDATE:
On his October 19 Fox News show, Glenn Beck played the Dunn clip and linked it to his attacks on Dunn's past comments about Mao. Beck said that "Mao did like to control the media."
WND, Drudge, Fox Nation falsely claim Dunn admitted, "We 'control' news media"
WND headline: "White House boasts: We 'control' news media." The WorldNetDaily article was subtitled, "Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government," and claimed that "President Obama's presidential campaign focused on 'making' the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was 'controlled,' White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference." The article quoted Dunn as saying, "Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control." [WorldNetDaily, 10/18/09]
Drudge headline: "White House admits: We 'control' news media ..." The Drudge Report linked to the WorldNetDaily article with the following headline:
Fox Nation headline: "WH Admits: We 'Control' News Media." Fox Nation linked to a video of Dunn's comments and to the WorldNetDaily article with the following headline:
Beck cited WND report in his ongoing smear campaign against Dunn. On his October 19 radio program, Glenn Beck highlighted the clip to continue smearing Dunn, who he has previously falsely claimed "worships" "her hero" Mao Zedong. While Beck stated that "every candidate tries" to "control the press" and that "there's no problem with that," he added: "Here is a problem that I do have, is that they -- she used the -- if I may quote her, 'A huge part of our press strategy was to make the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it and the strategy.' Hmm. ... Why wouldn't you want -- is it possible that you didn't want anybody looking at your tactics because they're all Saul Alinsky tactics?"
Dunn was discussing how the Obama campaign "controlled" its message, not the media
Dunn was describing the campaign's direct video method. In her speech, Dunn discussed ways in which the Obama campaign attempted to disseminate its message directly to the media. One of those methods was by recording its own videos and sending them directly to supporters. She said of that strategy:
DUNN: A huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to, you know, why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was, that we -- we had a huge premium both on message discipline, on people in the campaign not leaking to reporters and people in the campaign not discussing our strategy, and also on making the press cover what we were saying.
So we, you know, one of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters; we just put that out there and make them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it.
Dunn's speech given before Obama took office, and before Dunn was named communications director. Dunn's comments reportedly came during an event hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development on January 12, before Obama had taken office. Dunn was named the White House's interim communications director in April.
Transcript
From the October 19 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Now here's the latest from Anita. She was at a conference, and she was talking about the strategy and how Obama won, and what they did with the press. Now I want you to listen to this carefully and tell me what sticks out at you.
DUNN [audio clip]: That a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to, you know, why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was, that we -- we had a huge premium both on message discipline, on people in the campaign not leaking to reporters and people in the campaign not discussing our strategy, and also on making the press cover what we were saying.
So we, you know, one of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters; we just put that out there and make them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it.
BECK: OK. So this one has come out this weekend, that we controlled the press. And what people are saying about this is that, see? They're controlling the press. Well, let's be honest here. Isn't that what every candidate tries to do? If you don't control the press, if you don't get your hands around the press, they're going to have their hands around your throat. It is a struggle to the death -- not for Obama. I mean, they would have their hands all over you stroking your smooth pecs and saying, "Oh, you are just so hot." So it's never been that problem for Barack Obama, but that's what you do.
STEVE "STU" BURGUIERE (producer): Right, you try to define -- you try to define your message, don't let them define you.
BECK: Don't let them define you.
BURGUIERE: Right.
BECK: So there's no problem with that. Here is a problem that I do have, is that they -- she used the -- if I may quote her, "A huge part of our press strategy was to make the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it and the strategy." Hmm.
Well, there's a couple of ways of looking at that. First, what was Obama saying as opposed to why. There's no more important and no more basic question than "Why?" Why do we need health care right now, even though the benefits don't kick in till 2013? Why? Why did they hire Van Jones, an avowed communist who also worshipped Mao? Why? Why did they brush him out in the middle of the night? Why? Why won't they disavow any of the communist ties that they're -- the administration seems to have? Why? Why is ACORN funding starting back up again on October 31? Why? Why won't they do an investigation? Why is SEIU the one that is actually doing all of the health care work? Why?
You see, if you just focus on what he's saying, and not why he's saying it, well, you miss an awful lot of the story, don't you? Is -- is the journalist -- isn't the one of the main things that you learn is who, what, where, when, and why? Are we just now taking out the why are they asking? The other part of it is, we just want to, if I may quote, "huge part of our press strategy was to make sure the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why and what tactics we were using."
OK. Well, what tactics are you using? Why wouldn't you want anybody using that? Why wouldn't you want -- is it possible that you didn't want anybody looking at your tactics because they're all Saul Alinsky tactics?
Nice try on this one, MM, but you should have left this one alone.
Not a clue.
FYI - "we just put that out there and make them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it."
"as opposed to the press controlled it" so what we have learned more is that the current Main Stream Media is too lazy to do a real job and just accept what is being said to them.
I suppose one could come to that conclusion if one had an almost complete lack of reading comprehension. You have my sympathy. With some effort you may be able to partially overcome your disability.
And politicians wonder why people like Beck and other ultra cynics have any traction in the media. They are partly to blame for creating people like him.
And they're running with their own interpretation.
We jump all over any small mis-statement, no matter how silly. We jumped all over Biden for suggesting that Obama is eloquent (or whatever he said) and we attack Trent Lott for saying nice things about a 200-year old man as if this should have any bearing on their political statments or their leadership skills.
I think we all remember how the media handled Howard Dean shouting to his own people after his primary loss and how the people responded to the media's handling of the non-issue. We pretend as if we are tired of the polished, professional, communcation-handling duties of every successful politican, but as soon as they step out and say or do anything outside the expected we make it into a scandal. I am just saying - we, and the media, share the blame for the politicians we have created.
I wish campaigns did not have to do this stuff, but it is how successful ones work. If you look at winning campaigns, the ones that stay on message usually win.
During the campaign, I don't think I heard this revelation discussed more than three or four times.
As I recall, it was characterized more as how well Obama's campaign team was maintaining message discipline than how the Corporate Controlled Media was being manipulated.
I'm sure the McCain/Palin campaign would've killed to have anything approaching this degree of message discipline. Their version was to prevent Sarah The Dim from speaking (post-Couric) to almost anyone except FOX NEWS, the defacto communications wing of the RNC.
Mr. Beck should take care when flinging those commie sickles all about - they can sometimes act like boomerangs.
The Bush Misadministration also avoided facts, the truth, and reality....
"A huge part of our press strategy was to make the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it..."
He then deduces that this is the reason why the media (excluding FOX) isn't following up on his paranoid theories as opposed to the reason being that he's a rambling psycho.
Thank you Media Matters for your "AWESOME" research to show how FoxNation, WND, Drudge and FoxNews Channel's Host, Glenn Beck are ALL on a political witch hunt to "smear" an American President by ANY means necessary. This is so pathetic, it's shameful - LOL.
Even more important she said they wanted to focus the media on the MESSAGE instead of politics and strategy. The media wants to focus on the horse race but not on the horses.
That's where the dishonest spin comes into play. If you read the rest of what Dunn says it's very clear the by tactics she was referring to media analysis of campaign strategy. In other words, the media had shown a clear tendency to analyze everything in terms of how it affected the campaign and didn't tend to analyze what the policies being presented meant for the country. The Obama campaign was working to exercise some control over how their message was treated by maintaining tight control over what the media was fed. They tried to keep the focus on policy.
It's not that hard to understand and, frankly, I think Beckie does understand it. He's just perfectly happy to dishonestly twist it, because that's the kind of guy he is.
What a miserable life Beck must lead, having to think up all this hate all day every day...very tiresome.
Also if Beck was a "journalist" he would know that the most important questions and info in news stories are Who, What, When, Where then Why and occasionally How. It's called the five W's of journalism listed in order of importance. Read any lead of a legitimate news story and those elements are usually listed in that order. They don't lead with "Why." You can't ask why until you know who is doing what where and when. Its basic stuff Beck.
How does this guy even have a TV show and why is Fox News still able to call themselves a "news" network?
I did say in my post that Beck isn't a journalist. So his credibility in trying to say the most important question is "Why" when it comes to news is zero. In fact his credibility in anything he says is zero.
And your credibility in responding to my post is zero since all you did was try to refute my post by saying something I already stated in it. Thank you, come again.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
and more about the illegal psyops on steroid csmpaign carried out against the American people:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pentagon_military_analyst_program
and on Armstrong Williams being paid by the whitehouse to promote NCLB
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/08/bush.journalist/index.html
and:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200810030024
You really need to turn off the television.
The WH isn't "quarantining" Fox, they just stated the obvious. Fox is NOT a news network and never has been. Murdoch admitted in January 2007 at the World Economic Forum that Fox tried to shape opinion regarding Bush's agenda in Iraq.
Where kydem09 is lacking in logic, he more than compensates by excelling in propaganda and unparalleled depths of stupidity.
To quote AC/DC: For those about to lie, WE SALUTE YOU!
Just the other day I cited a quote by Hitler( "The communists are the purest of socialism"), but that is a far different thing from saying he was my favorite dictator. Mr. Gingrich or I weren't fawning over Mao or Hitler when we cited their quotes. I could also favorably cite the brilliant tactics of Hitler's General Rommel without being an advocate of National Socialism. This is not what Mrs. Dunn did(to an assembly of high schoolers no less). Mrs.(Over?) Dunn was obviously fawning over Mao and not just for his effective strategies and tactics for seizing power.
The point is that even Mother Theresa and Mao both agree that to be truly great you have to be willing to make your own path. What is remarkable is that you come on here attempting to speak as if you are above the political fray. As if you have some deeper understanding of today's political labels and today's political prism. Yet, the high school kids actually got the ironic joke she was so clearly stating and you did not. What does that tell us about you?
So, not only was she going for irony in the pairing of Mao and Mother Teresa, she restricted the use of Mao as a philosopher to his use in making that one particular point. She wasn't seriously calling him one of her favorite philosophers AND any use at all was restricted to the one life lesson.
These facts are as clear as could be and I'll be very surprised if you grant their reality. It wouldn't match up with the narrative as you wish it were.
Correction - Fox has the most UN-balanced audience, the most paranoid audience, the most un-informed audience, the audience that most responds to eye-candy (cue bleached blond in a short dress or an endless loop of strippers or bikini beach babes).
You should read John Dean's book. You'd like it. It's all about you.
Did Dunn NOT say Mao was one of her favorite 2 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHERS? Please, break that down for us MM and refute it. There are plenty of 'philosophers', such as John Adams for example, that followed their own path. Why not cite him? Is he not worthy of that honor?