Finally - Reporter broke White House rules by streaming live audio of an off-camera briefing...

[HipChick]

..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/07/19/a-reporter-broke-white-house-rules-by-streaming-live-audio-of-an-off-camera-briefing/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.52ded5bca5b2

It was only a matter of time.

At every White House news briefing since June 29 — and many before, too — President Trump's spokesmen have ordered a room full of smartphone-toting journalists not to film the session or even broadcast live audio. On Wednesday, one reporter defied the White House by streaming live sound of the briefing online.

Ksenija Pavlovic, a former political science teaching fellow at Yale who founded a news site called Pavlovic Today, used the Periscope app to stream audio of Wednesday's briefing. She tweeted a link to the feed:

The sound quality was poor, but deputy White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders could be heard introducing Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short, who addressed reporters before Sanders took questions. Pavlovic's feed cut out after about 17 minutes, while Short was still talking, but she quickly resumed streaming and tweeted a new link that carried another 31 minutes.

Yet her act of rebellion marks a significant development in White House-media relations. Reporters have chafed at recent restrictions on coverage of news briefings, urging the president's communications team to allow live broadcasts. Nevertheless, they have complied with the White House's rules, despite carrying devices that can stream video or audio with a few taps of the thumb.

[irisblue]

1. Titanium ovaries on that one.

👏👍

[HipChick]

2. Lol!...Stealing that...

Titanium ovaries...

[volstork]

19. Ovaries are significantly

more durable than testes.

[a kennedy]

31. and DAMN right.....what's that saying????.....if men had to have babies, the human race

would not exist. Titanium ovaries indeed.

[MyOwnPeace]

36. And the famous "grow some balls"..........

answered by Betty White (Snopes says "Not so!):

"Why do people say “grow some balls”? Balls are weak and sensitive! If you really wanna get tough, grow a vagina! Those things take a pounding!"

[volstork]

37. I wear this button on my lapel every day at work:

[MyOwnPeace]

38. WOW!

Lucky HR Dept. hasn't contacted you yet!

[volstork]

40. I'm self-employed

and a gynecologist, so no worries. Patients love it!

[Big_K]

39. Hell, if we had periods, we'd be spending several days per month...

.. running up and down the street screaming.

As a entity with testes, I think a lot more titanium ovaries should be in charge. Testicles and small penii have gotten us into trouble for a long time now (see Trump, Donald J.)

[flibbitygiblets]

23. Yoink! (Sound of me stealing "Titanium Ovaries")

[cwydro]

4. HELL to the yeah!

I just hope they don't shut everything down now.

[NewJeffCT]

44. great expression

but, as I say when somebody uses the term "balls" when discussing toughness/grit, why can't we just use gender neutral terms that mean the same thing. "She has a titanium spine" or "she has guts" or "backbone of steel" - I mean, except for maybe Paul Ryan, all humans have backbones.

[Ms. Toad]

3. They need to take turns and anonymize it.

Because I suspect this is a one-time deal for this reporter, now that her identity has been made known.

[csziggy]

5. Great idea! Or every reporter there stream it live

Sooner or later they would run out of reporters to attend their propaganda fests.

[klook]

30. Exactly - "I am Spartacus!" (nt)

[demmiblue]

6. K&R!

[mountain grammy]

7. Somebody better resist this crap!

[panader0]

8. I don't understand the reasoning behind not allowing video.

Audio only? Why? What's the reason?

[Ligyron]

9. Me either and I've been wondering WTF that accomplishes.

Both their spokespeople are stumbling idiots, maybe they hate looking incompetent?

[rzemanfl]

10. They think it is easier to believe a lie without the visual. Worked for Hitler. n/t

[HipChick]

11. Yep...they have turned the WH briefings into a radio station..

[rzemanfl]

12. Not even radio. Just deniable note-taking.

"I never said that." "Everyone wrote it down." "Fake news, liberal media." The media needs to stop going.

[calimary]

28. They probably understand how most Americans process information visually.

Seeing is believing. If it's audio only, it's not nearly as exciting and doesn't repeat well on TV.

You wanna LOOK at stuff.

Anybody here remember - during the Reagan era - when Leslie Stahl did a 1984 report that was critical of Reagan, that "showed him speaking at the Special Olympics and at a nursing home, and reported that Reagan had cut funding to children with disabilities and opposed funding for public health." Her voice track, voice-over-pictures, detailed the bad news. But what you SAW, as the B-roll WITH her voiceover, were pictures and video of Reagan smiling, waving, and otherwise looking congenial. That's what you SAW. And that, therefore, was the overall takeaway from Leslie Stahl's piece. She described being bewildered when White House PR guy Richard Darman called her about it. He was THRILLED and she was shocked. He explained, basically, what I just described. All those terrific, positive, upbeat pictures of Reagan were what resonated with the public. Didn't matter if she was reading pages of the phone book. Those positive and flattering photos were what sent the message:

STAHL (page 210): I knew the piece would have an impact, if only because it was so long: five minutes and 40 seconds, practically a documentary in Evening News terms. I worried that my sources at the White House would be angry enough to freeze me out. But that isn’t what happened, she says. When the piece aired, Darman called from the White House. “Way to go, kiddo,” he said to Stahl. “What a great piece. We loved it.” Stahl replied, “Didn’t you hear what I said [in the broadcast]?” Darman’s answer has been frequently quoted:

STAHL: [Darman replied,] “Nobody heard what you said.”

Did I hear him right? “Come again?”

“You guys in Televisionland haven’t figured it out, have you? When the pictures are powerful and emotional, they override if not completely drown out the sound. I mean it, Lesley. Nobody heard you.”

Stahl’s critical report about President Reagan had been accompanied by generally upbeat visuals. According to Darman’s theory, the pictures registered more with viewers than anything Stahl had said.

http://archive.pressthink.org/2004/06/09/reagan_words.html

It's the visuals. VISUALS are EVERYTHING. In television, they're the ONLY thing. It's why the local news leads with the big apartment house fire or grizzly car crash rather than a big local expose where you see people walking into and out of court buildings and sitting there on panels, speaking into microphones.

I heard that same thing later about the mug shot of former Texas Congressman Tom DeLay after he got into trouble years ago.

In 2005, DeLay was indicted on criminal charges of conspiracy to violate election law in 2002 by a Travis County grand jury after having waived his rights under the statutes of limitations. In accordance with Republican Caucus rules, DeLay temporarily resigned from his position as House Majority Leader, and later, after pressure from fellow Republicans, announced that he would not seek to return to the position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLay

But his mug shot could have been his passport photo or his ID photo on a backstage pass at a Justin Bieber concert. There he was, dressed in a nice suit 'n' tie, well-groomed, smiling ear to ear! As though he didn't have a care in the world! I heard some TV pundit point that out - that you'll see that photo and the last thing you'll think is "mug shot!" Makes it look like - "guilt? WHAT guilt? Do I look like I'm guilty?"

Ironically, that mug shot is the photo of Tom DeLay that's used at the top of his Wikipedia page.

It's the visuals.

[Hekate]

32. Amazing and dispiriting

[eppur_se_muova]

41. Radio listeners said Nixon won the debate; TV viewers said Kennedy.

Couldn't see Nixon's shifty eyes and flop-sweat on the radio.

[gordianot]

14. Doing the video gives too much material for satire.

Where could you find a more odious couple than Huckabee-Sanders and Spicer? Besides no worry about dressing up rubes cutting a few dollars. I imagine Trump rates Huckabee-Sanders low so no video. He does not have view them with a paper bag on their head.

[flibbitygiblets]

25. That's what THEY think. I predict SNL is going to have a field day with this

Perhaps it will be the "Unknown WH Press Spokesperson" (with a paper shopping bag on his/her head)?

or

Courtroom sketch artist renderings done in caricature (not to mention the double-meaning that one way soon we'll see these folks in court defending themselves for crimes against their own country)?

or

New versions of "Spicy hiding in the bushes"?

The possibilities are endless!!

[HurricaneWarning]

15. I have a theory

that Trump merely doesn't like their looks, especially Sara's. He's very concerned about how people appear and she's not the best dresser and I'm sure she's not close to being a 10 in his eyes. She also appears to have a lazy eye so I'm sure that adds to the anxiety for Trump. He has remarked about the fit of Sean's clothes and made other comments about his looks. I think it's just that simple.

[mainstreetonce]

27. I agree

He had no idea how bad she looked on camera when he hired her.

[nikatnyte]

16. Easier to lie

Without video you can't see their stress and discomfort as they try to find some way to make the administration's latest outrage sound half-way rational.

[gordianot]

20. Right Huckabee-Sanders often looks like she is about to cry.

It takes guts and grit to spout that nonsense.

[BannonsLiver]

24. Its a mind fuck. That's the purpose.

[gratuitous]

48. There are many possible reasons

What I don't understand is why the media are going along with it. Set up the cameras, and have them rolling when Sarah or Sean come in. Then record their efforts to stop you, if they dare.

[onit2day]

49. Deniability

[Puzzler]

13. Ditto! K&R

-Puzzler

[annabanana]

17. Will they take to confiscating reporters phones?

Would the press corps acquiesce?

[Skidmore]

18. Don't have subscription.nt

[left-of-center2012]

21. Expect her to lose her W.H. credentials

And on the first plane to Guantanamo.

[dem4decades]

22. So she persisted. Good for her. Good for us.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

26. I don't understand why the press has been willing to

go along with the no filming bullshit. They should, to a reporter and a media outlet, just say, "Well then, we won't be there."

[mainstreetonce]

29. No,he would love that.

That would just give him an excuse for no briefings.

It would be better to play the audio with the worst pics of Trump on screen.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

43. Who he?

And have the reporters been playing the audio all along? I'm thinking not. I'm thinking that they've gone along with the no video, no audio bullshit and haven't begun to push back.

I'm genuinely ashamed of this press. They need to get a grip, to understand to what extent a free and independent press is vital. And yes, they should have long ago told the White House that not broadcasting the daily briefings is a no go. They either broadcast or tell the WH to suck eggs.

We Boomers got it. These younger folks just don't get it.

[maxsolomon]

34. They should stand together

but you've got Brietbart, Gateway Pundit, Fox, etc. all in the room, too. They're at war with the MSM.

The Trump House would be pleased as punch for the NYT & the WaPo to go on strike.

[Hekate]

33. KnR

[iluvtennis]

35. Love it, bout time one of the media showed some chutzpah

[eppur_se_muova]

42. Feeds from multiple phones could be computer-processed to give better-quality audio ...

than a single phone, especially if the positions of the phones relative to the podium are known. Hell, you could get quadrophonic sound !

[chwaliszewski]

46. Wouldn't that be something if our reporters started getting arrested for doing their jobs?

So much for the 1st amendment.

[SDJay]

47. They Should ALL Show Up

with their cameras and force these assholes to choose one of the finite number of responses available:

1. Walk off stage and refuse to hold press briefings - the cameras would catch Sphincter or Ms. "Christian" stomping off in a huff, which would be great video.

2. Kick the press with cameras out of the room - more great and compelling video.

3. What? Arrest them? Not sure that's even possible, but I wouldn't put anything past this freaking clown car.

Regardless, it'd be a powerful message, especially when one of the responses occurs.

Too bad it'll never happen.

Kudos to this brave reporter for refusing to accept this garbage.