USA Today: Room clear, no elephant found

USA Today found something hilariously ironic about the following scenario.  Can you guess what it was?

President Obama welcomed Daniel Pearl's family to the Oval Office today for the signing of the Freedom of Press Act named in honor of the Wall Street Journal reporter who was killed by terrorists in 2002.

The law requires the State Department to list countries that threaten press freedoms and permit violence against journalists. It "puts us clearly on the side of journalistic freedom," Obama said.

I know what you're thinking: the US establishing a "Freedom of Press" act is like Islamic fundamentalists putting out a "Danish Cartoonist Protection" proclamation, so this has got to be good.  Did they point out Clinton's massacre of 16 RTS employees in Yugoslavia 1999?  Bush's bombing of Al Jazeera's offices in Kabul and Baghdad?  Reporters being arrested at protests and political events?  Mass raids on independent media outlets?  Or did they keep things more current and mention the Wikileaks video of journalists being torn to shreds by 30mm gunfire from a US gunship?  To pick just a few of the dozens of examples that immediately spring to mind.

No, actually it was something else entirely (as hinted at by the title of the article, "Obama signs press freedom act, declines to take questions"):

"Speaking of press freedoms," began Chip Reid of CBS before launching into a question about the Gulf Coast oil spill.

Obama didn't bite.

"You are free to ask them," Obama said. "I'm not doing a press conference today."

Huh.  Well, yes, I suppose with the super-sensitive NASA space rocket technology we have nowadays there must be instruments capable of detecting irony even at that level.

Seriously, though, I'm glad to see the State Department will be preparing a list of countries that threaten press freedoms; it'll make a perfect companion to the list of states that sponsor terrorism.  All we need now is an official list condemning nations that launch military attacks on other countries, and the mote-in-thy-brother's-eye, beam-in-thine-own triumvirate will be complete!

ADDING: I should point out that USA Today was by no means the only media outlet to seize on the one and only noteworthy inconsistency in this official policy statement.

Comments

[Catherine]

Why does Obama hate the press and their freedoms?

Why is Obama mirroring GWB in almost everything he does?

[Duncan]

Oh, it's amusing, maybe even ironic (especially when you recall, as Catherine does, that we are in Bush's third term), but I don't see it as an infringement of press freedom if Obama doesn't want to answer questions. I.F. Stone could tell you that, if he wasn't dead. It needn't stop journalists from actually doing journalism: reading documents closely, getting out there and talking to people (preferably other than the usual Beltway sources), that sort of thing. Instead of asking dumb questions and waiting for the President to give them their soundbyte of the day.

[Catherine]

Duncan, true, but he also could, if he chose (if he thought it important) speak of important things and principles to the journalists. But of course he doesn't and won't, and over time the journalists have learned (those who haven't been killed) not to ask important questions.

Haven't heard anything from Helen Thomas of late. I hope she isn't ill.

[Walter Wit Man]

Let me save them the trouble: Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba.

Instead of taking bold action and simply coming up with a list of enemies like Bush did, Obama is going for the passive-aggressive approach--a list of countries he wants to save by bombing them. Nice touch.

[Duncan]

Walter, there's nothing "passive-aggressive" about bombing. It's more "aggressive-aggressive." (And I think the point of this post was that Obama is following in Bush's "bold" footsteps.)

Catherine, I agree. I just don't see the refusal to answer questions as an infringement of press freedom. For that matter, asking soft questions isn't a violation of press freedom, it's just workers doing their job badly. Remember, though, that I. F. Stone used to say that getting kicked out of the Washington press corps was the best thing that ever happened to him. Still, there's no real reason to expect anything else from corporate media. Lots of good work is being done outside their circle.

[Expat]

"Let me save them the trouble: Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba."

Far more serious problem - The Washington D.C., New York, Chicago School of Economic Phrenology AXIS OF EVIL