Wednesday, May 28, 2008

In The Course of Human Pseudo-Events

Glenn adds two separate posts today about the publication of Scott McClellan's book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception” (Public Affairs, $27.95), in which McLellan confesses to what most everyone already knows about the truth-challenged Bush White House, and blames the 'Liberal Media' for not being aggressive enough with the administration.

As always, there's more than one story here. Headlines around the world echo one story, about McClellan's claims. There isn't really anything new here, but it's notable when a Bush loyalist comes out and admits it. On second thought, after years of insider tell-alls, maybe it isn't that notable after all. But in either case, McClellan has written a book that contains damning information about the Bush's advisors, by whom Bush is said not to have been well served.

The second story is the response. The principals of the story, including Karl Rove, have gone on the network news shows to say how shocked they are, to impugn McClellan's integrity or motives, to say that he should have spoken up at the time if he had all these reservations. They have a point.

But see how phony this entire set-up is. The earth didn't just suddenly rupture and spew McClellan's book out onto the pavement as Mike Allen from Politico walked by. Galleys of the book were circulated months ago for comment and criticism, as noted in Allen's piece.

The staff of Public Affairs Books don't live in a bubble, either. Their business consist largely of publishing books by former administration officials and others in government, the contents of which are sought (and sometimes legally bound) for review by that same government, including the people they write about. They have to arrange publicity for the book, which usually doesn't involve keeping its provocative claims under wraps.

Also, not all of them want to work at PAB the rest of their lives. Others want to maintain good relations with those who might write books about them in the future. Like anywhere else, this is why favors get exchanged.

It would be remarkable if McClellan's book had not been seen months ago by the very people professing shock and outrage now.

But the shock value, the back and forth about McClellan's character, motives, accuracy of his recollections (whether Karl Rove and Scooter Libby did or did not have significant face time on a daily basis) are sufficient to fill the available air time and mind space and squeeze out any substantive examination of what his revelations actually mean.

Daniel Boorstin first wrote about 'pseudo-events' in his 1961 book. Although reporters are supposed to cover events, but government officials often stage 'pseudo events': press conferences, releases of classified documents, media availabilities or exclusives that are covered as 'real' events (and which act as gatekeepers for what are or are not 'real events') to frame the reception of bad news or just to change the subject.

The 'pseudo-event' tactic has become much more sophisticated since that article was first published. Just watch closely as the McClellan shows play itself out, if you want to see precisely how sophisticated it's gotten.

9 comments:

Bill said...

Well, I found the joint so Pedinska can stop worrying about me. I'll keep Czecking in to see what's up.....or what's down.

My wenis hurts.

quickstrategy said...

Um ... does that mean it's 'up' or 'down'?

Unknown said...

This is an interesting backstory, qs. Thanks for putting up and making it available.

quickstrategy said...

bystander ... thanks, and message received!

Pedinska said...

Hi qs!

just checking in to make sure Jebbie found you. It's so hard to herd these old cantankerous guys...good thing I have plently of practice with my cats. ;-}

bamage said...

Way O/T You heard it here first...
It just dawned on me. I've often said there will be no election this year, so here's the scenario.
GWB has everything in place to declare Martial Law. All he needs is a triggering event. So, there'll be a "Terrorist Attack". An assassination. And the target will be... wait for it... John McCain. The Rethugs never wanted him anyway. And such an attack will "prove" the terrists were rootin' fer Barack Hussein Obama. Bingo. Four more Wars.
Please tell me I'm paranoid.

quickstrategy said...

bamage - ok, you're paranoid. :>

Actually, this is a cunning observation. I've been figuring that the massive response to us bombing Iran would be enough of a triggering event, but maybe even the administration doesn't think people will care enough. What you're describing, though ...

I went looking for reassurance that we were both paranoid from some friends, who were no help at all:

"MCain also suggested that he and his rival travel together for the first debate as a symbolic gesture"

http://tinyurl.com/53kstf

Unknown said...

The Rethugs never wanted him anyway. -bamage

I'm not convinced the rethugs want this election. For example, I'd have thought that someone (*anyone*) would have done a better job of staging McCain's speech last night. Digby has been sounding a similar (but tentative) train of thought for the past month.

From where I sit, the next four years are going to be some of the most difficult a president of any party affiliation has ever had to face. I fully expect Obama will sincerely (possibly, severely) disappoint a lot of people who enthusiastically voted for him should he earn the Oval office come November. It would have been the same if it had been Hillary. The personalities don't matter, and I'm not sure their policy positions do either. There is a profound mess (internationally, economically, domestically...) to sort out.

My personal fear is that the rethugs have already chosen to sit this dance out, and will capitalize on all kinds of voter disappointments in four years. I worry that a democratic success could be Jimmy Carter all over again.

In the meantime, Bush is doing everything he can to cement some aspects of his unitary executive, obligate us more deeply in Iraq (if not the whole of the ME), organize to protect his buddies in the administration against judicial review, and clear the decks for his corporate allies.

Until, and unless, Bush launches an air strike on Iran, I continue to see him as someone who is battening down the hatches to withstand a four year "blow."

quickstrategy said...

bystander, yours is turly the golden perspective here: I think, should we dodge a bullet (in many senses) and Obama takes the WH, I too think people can look forward to being severely disappointed.

As you said, any President honestly trying to confront the mess that currently obtains (instead of rolling along with it, riding it for all its worth) is going to be quickly swamped. There aren't going to be any triumphant episodes; success may end up being something very messy and unsatisfying to the general public (if the expectations one reads into their behavior so far is any indication).

Since January, when I started hearing how Obama had magical powers that could change the game, I've been willing to believe it (or suspend my disbelief) and look for some elaboration about how that might happen. None has been forthcoming. That doesn't mean it won't, and I hope it does. One the one hand, I'm reassured that Obama and his people can actually play the game as it lies, and successfully. On the other hand, this undermines the whole transformational idea and the support that goes with it ... which could be a lot more important after January than between now and November.

The thing about HRC was, I never expected her to be any different. I wanted her to fight, hard; I didn't want her to be hobbled by promises of hopeful transformation and (of all things!) bi-partisanship. I think purging the body politic of any particular stem of the rotten virus that infects it is going to be an ugly fight, and I am encouraged by anyone who shows up for the gunfight with a gun, locked and loaded, with bandoliers of ammo strapped across their chest (metaphorically, vs. in a McCain-liek reality) ... instead of a butter knife. I was an early Edwards supporter, for that reason.

And your fear about the GOP battening down the hatches and preparing to play defense ... well, to the extent that they continue to have any discipline at all ... seems validated by some of the statements made by their most odious minions, including Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter, when McCain clinched the nomination. But then again, they might not have the same weight anymore ...