Whitehouse demands reporters allows them to edit quotes

Let me summarize this thread. Mitch posted an article that he did not read. He read it as a knock on Biden but didn’t realize it lumped in Trump as well. He is too proud to admit this so now he is arguing with Jon because Jon agrees with the article he himself posted. Yes Mitch is mad at Jon for agreeing with his OP. Welcome to the Baptist Board everybody.

 

I noticed that in the article, which thus leaves me with more questions than answers.

It has long been obvious that reporters use "anonymous" sources not allowed to speak on the record, and not just related to the WH.

To what extent have been and are admin sources limited? That would be a needed clarification.


But Trump had supposed legitimate admin sources lying about him anonymously. That was a real problem, one Biden is highly unlikely to have, given that the Dem MSM serves as state media.

 

Seems like a smart negotiating tactic by sources. When the reporter asks if you are willing to go on the record, the response should be “If you want my name on the article, I get a say in how my quotes appear in the final edit. Otherwise I’m just making an anonymous statement”.

It prevents journalists from blatantly misrepresenting the source. I’m sure folks on all sides of the aisle have been doing this for a long time. I would say any source that doesn’t do this is much too trusting of journalists.

 

Yes exactly. If I agree to give an interview to a reporter and say something that was awkward or that could easily be misconstrued, I would not want my name to go in the article. You don’t want a simple mistake to stay on record forever.

 

Politico is the source of the article you posted in the OP. What you are doing is the definition of cherry picking.

 

This is getting at the heart of the matter. The Dem MSM propensity to lie, especially in favor of the Dem Progressive Left, is notorious. They are already practically deepstate media.

This makes the Biden admin desire to further limit their "freedom" to report all the more laughable, and the Biden admin all the more suspect.

Their blackout during the border crisis is a key indicator of just how nefarious this admin is.

 

If what you say is true, the Trump administration and the right are part of it too since this practice is not unique to the left or Biden administration according to the source that is quoted in the OP.

If the source is lying, they will have their name on record as lying and can be held accountable for it.

 

it wasn't a very clear article IMO, the real Leftico one is better at explaining the origins of this policy:

Reporters fume at White House 'quote approval' rules - POLITICO

I'm no reporter but from that, it sounds like the WH reporters originally did this during the last Obama term in order to get staff "on the record" but then the WH realized it could be used to further control the narrative, as if that's hard for any D WH to do.

This policy has remained in place since 2012, the Trump administration didn't invoke it often. and when they did, the MSM would just go back to "anonymous sources" or "an unnamed top spokesperson".

But Biden did this even when he was a candidate, and seems like you'd want quote approval for somebody in his condition. The press whining about it tells me somebody in the WH is making some money quotes they later have to squash or else be disciplines, as in limited or no access to the WH if they don't obey. Ridin' with Biden/

 

ie cherry picking

 

Sure

Cherry picking - Wikipedia

 

Ignores the source of the OP that says

Reporters fume at White House 'quote approval' rules