People are so mad at the governor of Indiana

Wherever he is, George Creel is laughing.

(and on a side note, how creepy-sounding a name is "George Creel"?)

 

I'd be willing to bet people in Indiana are madder at Tom Crean right now......

 

well, not in Tippecanoe County. They are quite happy at the moment.

 

It IS partisan. I specifically mentioned the Obama administration as an example of the same sort of thing.

Why are the same Republicans circling the wagons around Pence when they were screaming at the top of their lungs a few years ago to defund NPR?

How are the two things different, other than the political leanings, perceived or otherwise, of the principals?

 

Ah, the "T" word. It's our "Hitler."

Go back and read the context of that comment. Yes, Pence's execution was bad. He misread the media.

But as a matter of first principle, it's a "smart move" for a governor to convince constituents that his propaganda is on an equal credibility footing with the adversarial press. Yes, it is. I was responding to the contention that this goal, as a matter of principle, was somehow objectionable.

 

People will believe all kinds of BS thrown at them, but they don't seem to believe that a government agency, university or corporation will report fully and honestly about itself.

 

When did you lose your mind?

All this is is a packaging of what they've always put out for the media in a format that is (or will attempt to be) appealing to the consumer.

So, instead of simply listing press releases chronologically, it will look more like a news site.

If it's going to do anything, it's going to embarrass members of the media when the public realizes that reporters have just been simply reformatting press releases for years.

And, it is because the media doesn't report on a lot of the programs/initiatives/events that happen. And, that's not even a criticism. Many of the events that go unreported don't have broad appeal, and would make no sense for a political reporter to waste his/her precious space on.

And, I could give you a million examples of this. When I worked for Giuliani, he held a press conference nearly every single day. He might start the press conference with some announcement of things like a program to collect used cellphones to be given to victims of domestic violence, or a program to collect used winter coats for the homeless, or something like an event to highlight the fashion industry in New York City, or events surrounding the celebration of Columbus Day, or Asian Pacific Heritage Month.

Now, most of those stories have no relevance to the political reporters in the room, and as soon as it was opened up for questions, the reporters were on to the news/scandal of the day. And, that makes sense.

This allows them to put out the news about the other stuff to the public, rather than to just load a press release onto a website, that the average person would never find.

 

I don't disagree. At the same time, the agency, university or corporation does have an interest in seeming credible, as close to credible as they can.

 

Indiana government people: We shouldn't have used words like "stories."

Gov. Mike Pence will reject 'Just IN' if it's state-run news

She's right. No one's ever used that terminology before.

The White House Blog | The White House

 

Yes. I completely understand that's the rationale Pence used to walk back his original intention.

I've said as much. I said the media struggles and shortcuts have emboldened governments to do just this sort of thing as a method of circumvention.

 

I still don't understand the outrage. If he can pull it off, why should Mike Pence feel obligated to use a middle man?

I think news stories put out by an entity covering itself obviously lack the independence necessary for full credibility. That's why I rail against Tom Verducci working for MLB Network and writing for Sports Illustrated.

But it's not some affront on a free press. Damn, journalists are addicted to access, aren't they?