You know what I think about the revelations found in Scott McClellan's new book?
Yawn.
Is there anything revelatory in this thing? The only surprise is that someone who worked as an insider in the Bush administration would actually admit to the stuff they pulled.
The most interesting part of book from the reports so far, are the following passages excerpted in yesterday's Politico report:
McClellan repeatedly embraces the rhetoric of Bush's liberal critics and even charges: "If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.
"The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. ... In this case, the 'liberal media' didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."
That's right; Bush's former spokesflack just called out the media for not being hard enough on the administration!
Press secretaries of all types instinctively view the media as adversaries and typically feel besieged by what they perceive to be the media's unfair hostility. So if even Scott McClellan recognizes the mythical nature of the "liberal media" cliche and sees political journalists as meek little handmaidens for government propaganda, how much longer can this myth be maintained?
Oh, and be sure to catch Greenwald's commentary on this morning's "discussion" by network anchors, Gibson, Couric, and Williams, on what a great job they did covering the war. (While failing to mention, curiously, the fact they had Pentagon propagandists prominently featured on their broadcasts.)
"The press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings," Yellin said.
"And my own experience at the White House was that the higher the president's approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives - and I was not at this network at the time - but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president, I think over time...."
But then a shocked Cooper jumped in, asking, "You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the president?"
"Not in that exact.... They wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces," Yellin said. "They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical, and try to put on pieces that were more positive. Yes, that was my experience."
Yellin better polish up that resume.
I'm betting this is a scandal that won't make it to the nightly news broadcasts.
And you wonder why blogs are so popular...
Update: You must read the McClatchy correspondents' reaction to this story. You might remember them; Knight-Ridder at the time, they were the only news organization that, well, investigated the claims of the Bush administration during the run-up to the war and reported on what they found.
