Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

Oh, and for (not off) the record …

by kadyomalley on Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:19am - 27 Comments

ITQ agrees completely with Colleague Wherry on the utter ridiculousness of PMO’s new system of holding regularly scheduled Secret Background Briefings By Unnamed Senior Goverment Sources.

Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Newer Comments →
  • Anon

    Aren’t they all run by Kory 10E?

  • Riley

    What is the role of the Press Secretary to the Prime Minister? Does this person ever conduct briefings similar to what the U.S. Press Secretary does?

  • Andrew

    Of course, there’s absolutely no chance the PPG would boycott these meetings.

  • Rhaine

    I’d suggest the only thing ridiculous around here is that you can honestly complain about a rule you follow willingly; you either name this “Source-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named” or you stop complaining. It’s that simple.

  • Mike T.

    Every time a government official refuses to go on record when he or she should, you should attribute the quote to “Big Bird” , and run a picture of the sesame street character in a suit behind a mic and podium.

  • john g

    I don’t understand this either.

    Is it a different person running the briefing each day or always the same 2-3 people?

    Going on the assumption that the Conservatives consider the press hostile…no, I still don’t get it. What benefit do they think they are getting by providing “official” briefings but demanding that they be from anonymous sources, even though everyone in the press knows who the supposedly anonymous source is?

  • John D

    john g, there is one point: F***ing with people.

  • keith by the Bruce

    Rhaine
    Nov 20, 2008 9:28
    Report Abuse

    I’d suggest the only thing ridiculous around here is that you can honestly complain about a rule you follow willingly; you either name this “Source-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named” or you stop complaining. It’s that simple.

    ———-
    Maybe not quite so simple ? Dion is mensa and mister open nice guy was eaten alive by 2,000 person PMO staff , Ottawa bunker and friends of science council of ceos calgary u . Imagine an editor torn between the steve’s power machine and some reporter ?

  • T. Thwim

    Nah, that’s not the point.
    The point is to remain unaccountable.
    Should the PMO’s stance on anything.. anything at all.. turn out to be the wrong one later on, the gov’t can turn around and say, “Well that was just somebody in gov’t who didn’t really know what was going on. Our stance has been the right one all the time.”

    It’s just set-up for historical revisionism, and is a symptom of the same damn problem, a complete inability to admit or take responsibility for mistakes. Chretien had it (big-time), Martin had it. And Harper has probably the worst case of it I’ve seen.

    This is what leads to reduced transparancy and an increased resentment of the very people that the politicians are supposed to be serving.

    Personally, I think a politician that had the stones to come out and say, “I was wrong. I made a decision based on what information I had at the time and it turns out to have been the wrong one. I apologize for that and I’ll continue to strive to do better,” would see a large and sustained bump in their polling.

    Of course, I also predicted that Harper’s REFOOORM base would be angry at how he’s made basically zero progress in any of the areas that he was elected to do, so what do I know.

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    Anon: I’ve never gone, so I don’t officially know who runs the briefing. In other words, “You may think that, but I couldn’t possibly comment.”

    Riley: Actually, the PM’s press secretary is Carolyn Stewart Olson, but she rarely deals directly with the media; that task falls to her deputy, Dimitri (Of The Wide Array of Ties) Soudas, or Director of Communication-No-S Kory Teneycke and his team. Kory has occasionally held on-camera briefings, mostly during the election, but they aren’t nearly as formal as the White House daily feedings.

    Andrew: Never say never.

    Rhaine: In fairness, I don’t think either Wherry or I are “complaining” so much as pointing out a basic incompatibility with common sense. This is a relatively new innovation in media management; we’ll see if any of our colleagues come forward to confess to similarly ambivalent feelings towards the background briefing system.

    John G – I honestly don’t know, especially when you consider that most of what comes out is either partisan chest-thumping that is summarily dismissed by the media in attendance on the basis that – well, in most cases, we’re not that desperate for access that we’ll act as a direct pipeline for PMO talking points – or comments sufficiently anodyne that they wouldn’t be out of place in an official press release, and, in fact, not infrequently show up in one soon after, virtually unchanged.

  • http://kitchenersown.blogspot.com/ Lord Kitchener’s Own

    Couldn’t this be construed as the PMO/Government using the press as an unofficial vetting process for their announcement of programs, policies, etc.?

    Basically, the PMO tells you all where they stand and what they plan to do in super-secret anonymous background briefings that are “anonymous” but also well attended enough so that everyone can write about it. If the writing/public response is favourable, they can write it all up verbatim in a press release and sign their names to it. If it causes a storm, they can quietly drop it, and/or even suggest that the “anonymous source” didn’t know what they were talking about, and X, Y or Z was never the government’s real plan at all (and why would the public be suspicious of that explanation? WE don’t know that the “anonymous source” isn’t some guy who vaguely overheard something in a hallway but actually the official spokesperson for the PMO giving an official by invitation briefing to the bureau chiefs of all the main media outlets) .

    It’s institutionalized plausible deniability, isn’t it?

    I don’t know. This feels to me like the government having the press proof read their policies and run them by the public before they’re willing to claim authorship of them.

  • velveeta

    >>>>Maybe not quite so simple ? Dion is mensa and mister open nice guy was eaten alive by 2,000 person PMO staff , Ottawa bunker and friends of science council of ceos calgary u . Imagine an editor torn between the steve’s power machine and some reporter ?

    This is gibberish. What is this even saying?

  • keith by the Bruce

    Its cheese for steve who refused to debate Dion on the environment . Rae won’t be such a gentleman as he will chase harper into a corner with his tail tucked between his legs .

  • Baloneyman

    I had n idea this was going on. While I rely on MacLeans for a lot of the tuff that is not covered by the mainstream media, this does make me wonder how much else goes on in Ottawa that even you guys don’t report on? I don’t need to lecuture you guys on the role that an independant media plays in an open democracy, but just how far will even you at Macleans go to censor what you report? How much will you allow this government to do without reporting it? What is the worst penalty – lack of access?
    This is not an accusation, by the way, I am seriously interested in knowing this. Is there not a danger of a slow creep towards ever more secrecy and unaccountability.
    How far could this go, ultimately?

  • Dr Riff

    velveeta – it’s saying don’t worry we’ll fix it just go spend some money

  • dan in van

    I think its just another avenue of their ‘throw things that stick’ theory… if they can peddle some inane snark or opinion that doesn’t have to be pinned on anyone, or if their own policy pronouncements/ideas need some pre-rinsing, let the more-friendly members of the media, or the more desperate, since the gov’t knows that its the editors and uppity-ups above the reporters who are their real friends, sift for things ‘unique and useable’.
    There are so many reporters/columnists here from the major media outlets who turn unsourced or unnamed comments into copy/tape that it seems to be a wise means to filter a different angle out to the masses.

  • John D

    Personally, I think a politician that had the stones to come out and say, “I was wrong. I made a decision based on what information I had at the time and it turns out to have been the wrong one. I apologize for that and I’ll continue to strive to do better,” would see a large and sustained bump in their polling.

    I’d like to believe that, but we’ll see what the reception is to Bob Rae if he admits mistakes in running Ontario and talks about what he’s learned from those mistakes.

  • Riley

    Ok next question,

    Imagine if Carolyn Stewart Olsen held daily press-briefings monday-friday, at 9AM and 4PM. Would anyone from the PPG show up, and where could these be held? Would they involve the PM’s reactions to world events, Canadian economic news, daily backgrounders, opposition attacks?

    I’m wondering really if the Press gallery would appreciate such a move, or find it overkill.

  • http://kitchenersown.blogspot.com/ Lord Kitchener’s Own

    Riley,

    I’m not sure people are expecting twice daily press briefings. Just a regular on the record press briefing every once in a while would be nice. Just someone willing to speak officially, on the record, once in a while. The press apparently shows up to the “you can quote me, just don’t tell anyone it’s me your quoting” briefings, why wouldn’t they show up to briefings where the briefer is willing to be publicly associated with the things he or she is telling the press (Of course, I may have just answered my own question. Perhaps the PM’s staff are only willing to say things when there’s no risk of anyone finding out they were the one’s who said it).

    Forget daily breifings at 9 and 4, I’d imagine the press would consider a WEEKLY press briefing (on the record for attribution) to be a HUGE improvement over what they have now.

  • JK

    If you don’t like it don’t go. And don’t print off the record comments, I am sure you will get real far with that, being a liberal blogger.

  • Dr Riff

    Riley: its has been suggested by a friend and colleague that these such occasions forego the pomp and ceremony of official events and instead occur in google chat and similar forums

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    JK: I’m not sure how many times I have to say this, but apparently, at least once more: I haven’t gone to any of the briefings so far, and have no plan to start.

  • Dr Riff

    why get it second hand, eh?

  • http://www.truemuse.wordpress.com truemuse

    Baloneyman,
    “…how much else goes on in Ottawa that even you guys don’t report on?”

    <a href=”http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/11/10/stephen-harper-and-the-death-for-now-of-executive-federalism”One sign of Canada’s slow progression away from its worst excesses is that Ottawa reporters no longer even pay much attention to the functioning of our federal processes and institutions.” – Paul Wells

  • http://www.truemuse.wordpress.com truemuse
Newer Comments →

Previous

Next

From Macleans