A Conversation with a White House Journalist

http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2007/03/20/a-conversation-with-a-white-house-journalist/

A Conversation with a White House Journalist
By CorrenteWire.

So I have a friend who is a Real, Live MSM Journalist. He gets to be part of the White House Gaggle, and is also a long time blog reader. He and I have had many conversations about the press, the era of Bush, and blogs, and one thing we agree upon is that there should be more of a two way conversation between bloggers/citizen journalists and the paid members of the mainstream press. In that spirit, here is the first of what I hope be to be series of conversations between bloggers and journalists. Obviously, he speaks for himself and I don’t agree with everything he says. Some of the questions refer to previous conversations we’ve had privately. Mr. Knox has agreed to come by and answer questions in the comments, give him a little time to respond as he’s a busy guy. The AFP journalists will soon have their own blog, so let’s all give him a chance to practice with the rabid lambs.

Olivier Knox: At the outset, I should emphasize that I only speak for myself, not for my colleagues. Please, if I don’t answer something, don’t assume I’m ducking the question. Just follow up. I will make a good faith effort to answer any serious question sent to Olivier.KNOX@afp.com Just put “Media Question” in the subject line.

Chicago Dyke: You say that I and other bloggers are “dead wrong” in how we critique and understand what MSM access (to politicians and newsmakers) is all about. Tell readers more about this. How does access work? Does the desire for regular or increased access ever compromise the product (that is, what is written about those to whom you’ve acheived access)?

Knox:”Dead wrong” was the frustration talking. I think that you guys sometimes use “access” and “chumminess” and “social contact with sources” interchangeably, indiscriminately.

I do have periodic social interaction with some of the folks I cover: Lunches, dinners, drinks, coffees. But these are not really social events. They’re off the record, for the most part, but the reporter/source dance continues. It is extremely rare not to ask, even hound, these folks for information. It is also undeniable that these kinds of outings can help build trust between reporters and sources. It may mean that so-and-so picks up the phone, or returns the call, or the email, a bit more quickly. It may mean that I get a heads-up about something I’m interested in before it gets formally announced. There really isn’t much of a quo for that quid, though. I think I’m probably more likely to listen to a source scream at me about something if I respect their opinion on, say, blogs.

more...

journalists and so-called journalists who are paid by the five biggies, which I refer to as GE/Microsoft, Murdoch, TIme-Warner, Disney, etc. Your are an AFP journalist. How far away from the five biggies, plus the four paper biggies (WP, NYT, WSJ, LAT) and some of the other paper people are you?

Perhaps we may not rant at you the way we would rant against a person who calls him or herself a journalist, but really comments and (pardon my language) pimps for one Party no matter which Party is in the White House.

I am one who has lost respect for nearly every 'journalist' whose face I've seen and whose propaganda I've listened to on tv and the radio. In fact, I often say that their parents wasted their money if they paid for their education. That is how low I hold some of these people.

On the other hand - I appreciate some journalists (right now - Dana Priest).

Educate us. Help us appreciate where we can appreciate.

Maybe you could provide a quick paragraph of groupings, plus tell us who writes your check? We might want to go easier on you - as we understand your answers in context more clearly. Maybe, we won't even fight with you the way we do with each other.

Yes, educate us. Thanks.