PressStink?
“Off the Bus” was created, in part, to further citizen-journalism. Citizens, not professional reporters, report via blogs at the Huffington Post about the campaign. It is an interesting concept, but most of the posts are more descriptions of what the candidates or their proxies say at campaign events and how the crowd or supporters react. This is the sort of minutia that C-Span broadcast of campaign events has provided for some time in raw form (In 2000, you could watch Karenna Gore – yes, the gorgeous one – chatting with volunteers).
But “Off the Bus” has achieved more fame in the conventional media for its gotcha quotes – Mayhill Flower’s recorded remarks of Obama’s off-the-cuff remarks at a closed-door fundraiser and Bill Clinton’s reply to her query about Todd Purdum’s Vanity Fair “hatchet job” (Flower’s words, not Bill’s). In Obama’s case, Flower was invited by Obama staffers to the event since she was a donor to the campaign and an avowed Obama supporter. They also knew she wrote for “Off the Bus,” but she was not invited in that capacity. By the same token, they did not invite her or others on the condition that they keep Obama’s remarks confidential. Campaign press, however, were not invited. In the past, Flower might have told interested campaign reporters what Obama said at the fundraiser, and they would have reported it via Flower as the anonymous source, if she so demanded. Obama’s staff allowed guests to tape the event, under the mistaken assumption that none of them would disclose anything embarrassing. Flower did. Others present did not.
In Clinton’s case, Flower addressed him at a rope-line and asked him about Purdum’s article. Mayhill Flowers’ transcript is a bit off on a few points compared to the audio she provides. For example, I heard “you noticed he didn’t use a single name” not you know. Flowers then implies she did not read the article – “that’s what I hear,” she replies. She says that her digital recorder was in plain-sight, but again, like Obama and his staff, one does not expect that those who intend to report will disclose embarrassing details.
Do false citizen-journalists have the same status as genuine ones? What if a McCain supporter acts as a citizen-journalist, donates to the Obama campaign, gains access, and then exposes what he or she hears. So long as the person is not paid or solicited by the McCain campaign or the RNC to do so, there is no ethical violation for the citizen, is there? What if the citizen – unlike Flower – secretly records events? Still ethical? (I don’t see why not unless the person is told the recording devices are prohibited; we are just as interested in how a candidate speaks when he or she doesn’t see a mike or camera).
Flower skirts such status. Flower’s Clinton quote was reported the day before the final primaries. She did not tell Clinton who she was, she backed his wife’s rival, she prompted him with a sympathetic question (we don’t know whether she believes the article was a “hatchet job” but she implies that she does to Clinton), recorded his comment, and wrote about it.
Clinton’s comments are not inherently newsworthy. Who cares if he dislikes Purdum? Oddly I’ve seen no discussion of the substance of Clinton’s claim – was the VF article a hatchet job? It did, however, embarrass the Clintons.
What is sad about this citizen-journalism is that it does not differ much from how the conventional media by and large covers the campaigns, waiting for gaffes or unscripted moments. Indeed, it seems that citizen-journalists, confronting the same staged events repeatedly, adopts the same attitudes as the conventional media.
