President Bush is being criticized today for a carefully choreographed teleconference with U.S. soldiers in Iraq on the eve of that country's national election. The Associated Press reports that soldiers were coached on how to answer specific questions from the president. According to the report:
Before it began, a Pentagon official coached the troops, telling them the president planned to ask questions on three topics: The overall security in Iraq, how they were preparing for the vote on Saturday and how much progress had been made in the training of Iraqi troops.
Allison Barber, a Pentagon official, said Bush would ask them specifically, "In the last 10 months, what kind of progress have we seen?"
She asked who was prepared to answer the question. "Master Sgt. Lombardo," one said.
After Bush asked just that question, Master Sgt. Corine Lombardo responded: "Over the past 10 months, the capabilities of the Iraqi security forces are improving ... They continue to develop and grow into a sustainable force."
Why is this news?
Every U.S. president, especially since television, has tested the balance between battling for hearts and minds and mediating messages through the media.
The telegeniety of the presidential image is a way of life today in this country. Few people question how powerful images are in the making of a president.
Manipulating public opinion with images and words through the media is a way of life. It is part of doing business in a visually saturated culture.
Does anyone really believe that this is the first time one of Bush's speeches or public appearances was choreographed in order to shape public perception?
The image that the Bush administration wants to send out to the American people is that the president is still in control of the situation in Iraq, despite the seeming mounting pressure to end the war.
How much freedom do soldiers honestly have in answering questions from their commander and chief?
Zero, Zilch, Nada -- Soldiers are hardly set free to express personal concerns and perspectives in front of a national audience. Soldiers do what soldiers do - they carry out orders.
Did the soldiers selected to answer Bush's questions on the teleconference have any choice in the matter?
Were the soldiers performing for the camera and acting from a prearranged script, because that is the way the president wanted it to be?
What's wrong with this picture?
It certainly appears that White House is not particularly interested in deviating from what the message of the day. Further, I don't think the White House wanted any repeats of what happened a few years back when one solider dared to asked a few years back about why their military vehicles were so poorly protected.
For the White House the message has always been about looking strong and determined. Albeit a huge generalization, many people feel that anything short of complete agreement with White House policy is perceived as treasonous and a threat to national security.
There is nothing new about how the White House manufactures consent in this country. Both Democratic and Republican presidents understand how to work a crowd with reporters around. No mystery there.
What is interesting about this latest incident is that now reporters are beginning to feel a little more comfortable turning a critical lens on the Bush administration. In other words, the "media" smells blood and don't want to get caught missing a story that leads to an administration's humiliation or downfall. Ever since Nixon, or even before then, the press has turned newsgathering into a blood sport when there is enough critical mass leaning one way or another.
Naturally, the White House must blame the "media" for any dissent generated from this incident. Naturally,the White House must blame the press for pointing out short-comings that continue to contribute to dividing up this nation into colors -- blue and red -- black and white -- you are either with us or against us.
Naturally, the White House must blame the "liberal" press for seeing through its mediated message making machinery.
Shame on the press.
Shame on the press for giving Americans the information they need to evaluate the blind ambitions of our chosen leaders.
Shame on them.