Around And Around It Goes
David Sanger of The New York Times is the latest to question the value of the daily White House press briefings:
After nearly seven years of covering the White House, stretched over two administrations, four press secretaries, endless hours tinkering with the fractured hinge supporting the New York Times seat in the second row and hundreds of questions that have resulted in artful and artless evasive answers, I have come to a few conclusions.Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," former White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers didn't go so far as to suggest an end to the briefings but wondered if there isn't a way to improve them:One is that the press secretary is not likely to return as a major force on the White House stage anytime soon. The second is that the daily briefings now have less to do with covering the White House than ever, and their value is diminishing every year. At some point between Monica and the missing W.M.D., the sparring came to obscure the imparting of information about how and why decisions were made.
It's worth thinking about how to make that briefing more useful. It's not very useful anymore. Both sides are posturing. There's not a lot of useful information that gets exchanged. The White House spokesman isn't that forthcoming. The press is sometimes just, you know, shouting questions at him for reaction, to show that they're being tough and they're not lapdogs for this Republican administration.When we asked the question earlier this year, CBS correspondent Bill Plante called the briefings "marginally useful" but said he wouldn't do away with them altogether. It's doubtful they will be discontinued at any time in the near future but sentiments like those of Sanger raise an equally interesting question. Might the White House beat lose a little of its traditional luster as a destination for reporters? Might news organizations begin putting their star power elsewhere?