As conditions in Iraq improve to the point where even adamant Iraq War opponents concede the surge has worked, the press seems less interested in questioning the Bush administration on the war. On the March 6 edition of "Fox and Friends," co-host Brian Kilmeade asked White House press secretary Dana Perino when she last received a question about Iraq. Perino responded that she does not remember "having sustained questions about Iraq...since probably early December," and added "I think that’s as a result of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker in conjunction with the Iraqis really making some progress on the ground."
Does the media only want to report the bad news in Iraq? A recent MRC study suggests just that, noting "their zeal for reporting on Iraq declined as the violence and casualties did." The MRC documented that the number of stories declined in 2007 from 178 in September, 108 in October, to 68 in November.
Kilmeade followed up questioning "do you think it’s simply because there’s progress in Iraq or is the election taking over? Do people not want to report the good news?" Perino felt "it could be a little bit of both," but quickly added "I think the good news is getting out there, actually."
The transcript is below.
BRIAN KILMEADE: Dana, when’s the last time you got a question about Iraq when you’re in the press briefing?
DANA PERINO, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I don’t know if this is precise, but I don’t remember having sustained questions about Iraq, maybe there would be one off, but really since probably early December. And I think that’s as a result of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker in conjunction with the Iraqis really making some progress on the ground.
KILMEADE: Do you think it’s simply because there’s progress in Iraq or is it because the election is taking over? Do people not want to report good news?
PERINO: It could be a little bit of both. And I do think that we, I think the good news is getting out there, actually. I think that reporters that are on the ground in Iraq who are seeing for themselves what’s happening. They’re able to get that news out and so there’s not been a lot of controversy. We are heading into a conversation with Capitol Hill on funding for the troops. And we’re going, we need $108 billion that they’ve been waiting to act on. And we’re going to need that money fairly soon. So I expect that battle to start.
—Justin McCarthy is a news analyst at Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Iraq
March 6, 2008 - 12:58 ET by iveseenitallThey only "question" that which they feel will help the Democrates win back the White House. As we know, the media are the cheerleaders in the "war" against those evil Republicans. Sadly, their zeal for their ideology has made them nothing but left-wing propagandists.No more freedom of the press in America. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
This are the type of
March 6, 2008 - 12:04 ET by futbolisgreat1These are the type of comments by the Bush administration that drive me up the wall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PERINO: It could be a little bit of both. And I do think that we, I think the good news is getting out there, actually. I think that reporters that are on the ground in Iraq who are seeing for themselves what’s happening. They’re able to get that news out and so there’s not been a lot of controversy.
Democrats are much better at media relations than the freaking Republicans. If it would have been the Bill Clinton's press secretary you know that he would have attacked the media and the Republicans.
Why don't Republicans fight back? I just don't get it. For 8 years the media and Democrats have attacked the White House and all we get is "Oh, they are nice. We need to play nice." I am so sick and tired of Republicans not fighting back!
Perino should have gone after the media and the Democrats, but no, we need to be nice, while the Democrats are planning how to destroy Republicans.
RIDICULOUS!!!
And why Dims are better
March 6, 2008 - 12:14 ET by PawpawNFor your statement "Democrats are much better at media relations than the freaking Republicans. If it would have been the Bill Clinton's press secretary you know that he would have attacked the media and the Republicans.", well who owns the MEDIA!! That's your answer. Even if everything told, it would never be printed, shown on news programs, etc. Only live TV would catch!
PawPawN,You are right,
March 6, 2008 - 12:19 ET by futbolisgreat1PawPawN,
You are right, the media is owned by left wing zealots....that is why if Perino has an opening like the one Foxnews provided for her, she needs to take it....instead what does she do? She defends the freaking media.
She is on live, people are watching her and does she take the knife to the media and the Demoncrats? no!
You know that if this would have been a Democrat he/she would have thrown the kitchen sink at the media and at the Republicans, espcially because she was on live.
ARGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
FUT, Even this won't get MSM run very long!
March 6, 2008 - 12:22 ET by PawpawNSee what's happening in Texas-CNN just running stories on VOTER FRAUD, MISSING CAUCUS SHEETS, ILLEGAL VOTES, Etc., in TEXAS & that both OBEWAN & SHILLARY are planning lawsuits! & the plot thickens. Can't wait for RUSH on this!!
No, I hadn't seen that on
March 6, 2008 - 12:30 ET by futbolisgreat1No, I hadn't seen that on CNN.
Wait, left wingers and Democrats have been telling us for 8 years that it is only Republicans that do voter fraud. That only Republicans play games at the ballot.
Will Hillary and Obama place law suits against Republicans? :)
I am sure some left winger swears that Republicans are the ones that have caused all this great trouble in Texas.
I kid you not, I was switching between Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh yesterday during my lunch hour. A Democrat called Laura Ingraham and blamed Republicans for Obama's loss on Tuesday. Laura had a field day with the college age caller.
the caller said it had nothing to do with Democrats voting for Hillary, but rather the few Republicans that crossed over and voted for her. Finally, Laura got tired of her and asked the caller to name one policy that Obama had accomplished, somthinng that Obama had accomplished that qualified him to make him President. Predictably the caller answered, "Well, he stands for hope and change." It would be hillarious if it wasn't for the fact that the caller was completly serious.
»→ Standing for change
March 6, 2008 - 12:35 ET by Cool ArrowIn most municipalities "Standing for Change" is called panhandling.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, hahaha...good
March 6, 2008 - 12:55 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
hahaha...good one, but you are right, Barack Obama is no diffirent than most politician, he is a whore-selling himself to the special interests.
Of course try to convince an Obama supporter of this. These people are like zombies. Obama is their Messiah.....I live in chicago and I run into these zombies way too often.
»→ Well, fut
March 6, 2008 - 13:01 ET by Cool ArrowI guess I can't say much, having pimped out my vote this past Tuesday for Hillary.
♣ a seal
The media has been reporting
March 6, 2008 - 13:25 ET by marpelThe media has been reporting that us Texas GOPs were either voting for Hillary or Obama in order to stop the other. I voted for Hillary in early voting almost 2 weeks ago. It was the most painful thing I've had to do for my party. After I voted, I ran home and took another shower. So, yeah, I admit it, I whored myself... :o)
Ms Perino should be
March 6, 2008 - 12:06 ET by Jack BauerMs Perino should be proactive..
She should begin every conference with the question..
Jack, I am sorry, I am a
March 6, 2008 - 12:11 ET by futbolisgreat1Jack, I am sorry, I am a Bush supporter, but I think this is too much to ask from Perino.
I have never understood why the Bush administration and in fact Republicans have been so slow and so bad at combating the media and the Democrats.
Honestly, during the Clinton years, clinton and his administraton were constantly infront of the cameras and leaking out "news" to the newspaper media always taking credit for the smallest good news America had....
Now you have Perino defending the freaking media and their current coverage, or lack thereof of Iraq.
RIDICULOUS!
Agree
March 6, 2008 - 12:35 ET by iveseenitallI agree. The reason for the President's low "approval " rating is directly proportional to the type of media coverage he gets, along with the lack of support he gets from the RINOS. As I've often written here, I've never seen a sustained speech anywhere touting the wonderful economy we've had, the real reasons for the war in Iraq, the fact that we have been so safe in America, etc. from any RINOS. I find it almost laughable that McCain is now looking for support from the Republicans. I don't find it at all admirable that he has been a "maverick". If anything, the dirty Dems stick together with the help of the media. The RINOS continue to believe that the "liberals" can be dealt with in a "gentlemanly" manner. The "liberals" are the enemy within, but the RINOS refuse to see it. And Republicans always lose when they refuse to fight.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
iveseenitall -
March 6, 2008 - 12:39 ET by Mica the Magnificentiveseenitall saiditall.
Excellent post
Mica
March 6, 2008 - 12:46 ET by iveseenitallThank you.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
iveseenitall, Yes, well
March 6, 2008 - 12:53 ET by futbolisgreat1iveseenitall,
Yes, well said and very true.
The reason for President Bush's low approval rating is because he has a terrible PR machine. Unlike Clinton who was able to get reporters to print stories of how cheating and lying were actually good things for America. I mean geez, Clinton took credit for the American economy of the 1990s and the American public bought it, even though as stated in the Constitution it is Congress who holds the power of the purse!!!! but why did the American people buy it? Because the Clinton administration had an incredible PR machine.
It just aggrevates me how the Bush administration PR machine is so terrible.
Not the whole story
March 6, 2008 - 15:48 ET by nkviking75Futbol, I think you have a point, but I don't think that's the whole explanation. The media hate Bush because he beat Algore in 2000; because he occasionally lets it be known that he's Christian; because he doesn't talk like an anchorman; because he doesn't cave to them; and because his PR operation stinks.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
"Honestly, during the
March 6, 2008 - 15:58 ET by ckc1227"Honestly, during the Clinton years, clinton and his administraton were
constantly infront of the cameras and leaking out "news" to the
newspaper media always taking credit for the smallest good news America
had..."
The difference is the media cooperated with and liked the Clintons. Heck, most of them voted for Bill. The current administration can give all the good news they want to the media, but it won't matter one iota if the media doesn't put it out, which they won't(and don't), unless it has a hint of scandal attached to it.
MSM and Bush
March 6, 2008 - 22:13 ET by CobraMan"I have never understood why the Bush administration and in fact
Republicans have been so slow and so bad at combating the media and the Democrats. "
I think the President Bush and the Republicans have been trying to "combat" the MSM and the Democrats for the last 7 years. But you never get a chance to hear it as the MSM is not going to print or broadcast anything which may tend to show Bush and the Republicans in a good light. The MSM isn't going to let people know that they and the Democrats have been wrong about Bush for the last 7 years, and since there is an election going on, they're going to be in "full press" mode to highlight the Democrats as much as possible while minimizing Bush and the Republicans.
The MSM in general is biased against the President and all of his policies. No matter what he or the Republicans say and no matter how often they say it, the MSM and the Democrats are not going to let good news get out. That’s not the fault of the President or the Republicans, that’s the fault of the MSM and their Democratic idols.
When we catch this guy, can we finally prosecute someone for tre
March 7, 2008 - 07:19 ET by BDIt is official. THe guy who tried blosing up the Tmes Square recruiting station sent an 'Anti war in Iraq" manifesto to the eight democratice representatives in Congress from New York.
How long before we start seeing evidence of the press ignoring this and simply calling it a case of vandalism?
Next question. When we catch this guy, can we finally prosecute someone for treason, PLEASE!!!!!