Seeking Sunshine As Press Secretary Jay Carney Takes The Stage

Press briefings are bad theater, and the White House is as close as Washington, D.C. gets to Broadway. So on Wednesday, when Jay Carney took the stage as the new White House press secretary, every seat was taken and the aisles were packed. People had not so much gathered to hear what he would say—the press secretary rarely says anything newsworthy in briefings these days. They wanted to see how he would perform. As one reporter asked Carney, “Do you have a preference on which member of the cast of ‘Saturday Night Live’ plays you this weekend?”

This makes me the theater critic, and this a theater review. Which is a bit awkward, since there are some disclosures to make: Before Carney’s current stint in government service, he was one of the people who hired me at TIME magazine. He was my direct supervisor for more than a year, giving me my performance review and signing my expense reports. After John McCain won the nomination, we both reported on McCain’s 2008 campaign together. Carney set up the lease for my Connecticut Avenue office. I think he picked out the carpet where my feet now rest.

And I am not the only White House reporter who knew Carney in a former incarnation. Many in the press corps worked with him when he was the White House reporter for TIME. Folks travelled with him on Air Force One, griped with him in filing centers, and drank with him after work. More still know him from reporting on the 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns. He was, for about 20 years, a journalist through and through, a validated member of a squalid tribe. Then he crossed the line.

When it began to dribble out that Carney was likely to replace Robert Gibbs there was lots of airy speculation from pundits who rarely visit the White House about what it might all mean. Gibbs, predictably, had gained the ire of many in the press. He tended to filibuster, and dodge. He didn’t always return emails, and when he did, his answers didn’t always mean so much. He came from the world of cutthroat campaigns, where manipulation of information was often both the method and the goal. He had little experience with the tedious minutia of being a reporter.

In recent weeks, this contrast led the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank to erect a straw man argument—that Carney’s arrival would usher in a new era of press room harmony. Milbank wrote a column about a nasty email Carney had once sent as the press secretary for Joe Biden. Milbank claimed that he wanted to “discredit the notion that Carney will, by virtue of being a longtime journalist, automatically bring a new era of sunshine into the White House briefing room.” Um, duh. The Milbank column read like payback, and it painted with such a broad brush that it missed a central point.

The basic physics between reporter and source at the White House have been, and will always be, transactional. Presidents and their staffs try to manage their press. Reporters try to find out what is happening. These are often conflicting interests. Complicating things further, press secretaries play the dual role of chief information manipulator, and front line information providers. They are supposed to follow certain rules: Don’t lie, stay accessible and appear interested in helping reporters. But their overriding mission is to protect and promote the president, not to provide sunshine. Press secretaries prefer sunshine when it furthers their narrow goals. No more, no less.

Carney, who won awards working with press secretaries on the White House beat, knows this well, and this knowledge is among the assets he brings to his new job. When he left TIME he made a decision to cross a line completely. I dealt with him regularly when he worked in the Vice President’s office. There was never a moment when he gave a wink to his old hire that said, “Yeah, I know this is all a load of bullpucky, but I am just doing my job.” He had stopped being a journalist. He protected and promoted Biden. And like my colleagues, I used our interactions to try to figure out what was happening. He helped to the degree that it promoted and protected his employer.

Which returns us to Wednesday’s curtain raiser in the briefing room. The first question Carney got was about how he would straddle the line between his old calling and his new employer. The answer was rather direct, if milquetoast: “I work to promote the president and the messages he’s trying to convey to the American people,” Carney said. “But I also work with the press to try to help you do your jobs, to help you cover the White House, cover the administration and report on what we’re doing here.”

In other words, he would provide sunshine to the extent it helps Obama, which is pretty much the definition of a press secretary. But even here, there is room for Carney to make an improvement over Gibbs, who had never known the joys and agonies of working as a reporter. A case in point happened on Monday: After a marine helicopter ride from Washington D.C. to a middle school outside Baltimore, the travelling press pool was ushered, as is the habit, past the secret service from position to position so that we could watch President Obama do things: Shake hands in an 8th grade science class, give an address about the budget and entertain a lunch room full of screeching students.

As we were leaving the cafeteria, Carney approached us with his notebook in hand. He had taken down some quotes from a conversation that President Obama and a school teacher had in the hallway, when the press was not around. It was nothing spectacular. (“I love your enthusiasm,” Obama said. “I just love what I do,” the teacher replied.) It was sunshine in a way, the sort of sunshine that promoted the president. But more important than the quotes themselves was the fact that Carney was trying to pass them on. These sort of behind the scenes details, especially ones so mundane, were rarely, if ever, relayed by Gibbs. But the new guy, as a former journalist, seemed to be trying to share our pain.

At the Wednesday briefing, the Carney sunshine was less evident. Behind the podium, Carney stands lower than Gibbs, and though older, appears younger. He answered questions more briskly, with less adventurous attempts at humor, but he showed no less enthusiasm for evading direct responses. Eight times he referred reporters to the other agencies to get their questions answered. Three times he said he was not an economist, quoting one of Gibbs’ favorite dodges. Seven times he said what he was not going to do—speculate, negotiate, etc.—from the podium.

Most of what he did say had the look, feel and taste of a recycled talking point. Three times he used the phrase “win the future.” Twice he used the phrase “big things.” When he said, “We cannot support arbitrary or irresponsible or deep cuts that undermine our ability to grow the economy or create jobs or win the future or harm our national security or — or other essential functions of government,” he appeared to be reading from a script on his desk.

The most telling moment came when he got a question from NBC’s Chuck Todd, asking if President Obama’s decision to do local television interviews in the home districts of several prominent Republicans amounted to sending a message to those Republicans. 

Todd’s question all but answered itself, but Carney dodged, choosing recycled message pablum. “I think those are important states, important parts of the country,” he said, “And he’s very eager to talk to and reach out to Americans in all parts of the country, to explain what he’s doing on the budget, explain his vision for the future, the need to reduce spending reasonably, promote economic growth and invest in the areas that will help us compete in a very competitive environment in the 21st century.” Not exactly sunshine.

In the end, Carney’s biggest success was to avoid any big flubs, or provide any obvious ways for Saturday Night Live to lampoon his performance. (He did seem to swish his drink around in his mouth every time he took a sip.) The last question of the day came from Mark Knoller, the long time White House correspondent from CBS radio. “Which side do you prefer to be on?” he asked.

“I like it up here,” the press secretary answered. With that, the Carney era officially began. It is difficult to doubt his allegiances. Whether he will better serve the press remains an open question.

Related Topics: jay carney, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, White House
  • Latest on Swampland

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know, until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, were the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, whom Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • Paul-no not that one

    Let me see if I can summarize those 15 paragraphs-
    .
    “Circle jerk”

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    “There was never a moment when he gave a wink to his old hire that said, “Yeah, I know this is all a load of bullpucky, but I am just doing my job.” He had stopped being a journalist. He protected and promoted Biden.”

    That is not a good thing, Michael. Neither is the specter of a former journalist trying to pass off anodyne quotes between the President and some teachers that have no news value.

    Obviously the President has the right to an advocate and gatekeeper and such functions have always existed for the powerful and always will but… sheesh, if a former journalist can be so corrupted then maybe the President needs an Ombudsman too.

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    I think that’s funny, but unfair. There’s something more complicated going on here. The President is always going to have a PR guy. But why this one? And what about his former commitment to transparency? And how does Michael deal with a former colleague, boss and friend in this context?

    I think Michael’s done more than describe a circle jerk here, but he hasn’t yet written frankly about the real issue, which is whether or not Carney sold out and why.

  • chupkar

    So, here is my question….was there ever a Press Sec that well….didn’t act like a press secretary? I always hear complaining as though there was another time when press secretaries divulged all manner of info and candid moments and speculated for the press ( I have to tell you, I always wonder about some of those questions from all the press. They often *do* require speculation. Why should a press sec do that?) Anywho, just wondering, have previous pressers been really forthcoming? Everyone always seems disappointed with each one.

  • chupkar

    One other question…why is it that Mr. Carney is considered some kind of turncoat? (Or “corrupted” as another poster says). Are journalists not entitled to change careers if they want? (I am no particular fan of Mr. Carney either. I just am wondering about these things.) I could see the rancor if someone was a *practicing* journalist who was pitching this kind of stuff as “news”, but as far as I can tell, Mr. Carney stopped being a journalist and became a press secretary. I don’t understand the ire over that.

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks Michael, though it might be worse: Ron Ziegler could come back, except he’s still dead. Thanks for pointing out contrast between press sec’s’ and journalists’ conflicting motives, though the last sentence is an open invitation to demand how the press can better serve their audiences. I’d imagine it’d be worse to be a corporate mouthpiece (aka selling out) than a public one. Alas, I’m not a first generation replier here so can’t add Carney memories.
    .
    But in a rare open criticism (from me), speaking of how the press can better serve their audiences, one is to directly engage them …such as here perhaps? Replies back to us – esp. answering legit questions – have been rare lately, though you’ve lead sort of lead the most, then Jay, then the list drops off (Pickert?) though Joe got one in at Babylon. Even semi-official swamper Steinmetz has been quiet. Being busy is NOT an excuse; KT found time to engage while here; so can you. At least Carney has to answer q’s. though whether that’s his real job is in doubt as pointed out. So there’s some irony in reporters here complaining about Gibbs et al dodging and not answering back …when same behavior happens here, even with the trolls in full blast and trying to ignore them.

  • deconstructiva

    It’d be interesting to compare bloggers / journalists dealing with public spokespeople (Carney) vs. corporate ones. Certainly Enron shareholders would’ve benefited from more disclosure …which is precisely what ENE could NOT reveal lest their schemes (and stock prices) collapse …which happened anyway but with worse damage to everyone involved.

  • Cliff

    Please stay on top of this very important story, Michael.

  • swissArmyBrainBETA

    oh, thanks paul. i was about to actually read it.
    .
    my thoughts?: WORST. JOB. EVER.
    .
    oh, and there’s a huffpo thing at the bottom here which reminds me of that time i went there for the first time. like yesterday. WORST. WEBSITE. EVER. they’ll get along great w/ aol.

  • apr2563

    Michael, has there ever been anything of real importance that came out of the daily press conferences? I remember a few slip ups that were noted for a few days but nothing significant.
    It is theater and reporters are both players and audience. Most times I think the reporters just want to be considered part of the Village insiders. Reporters all seemed to love Mike McCurry because he made them feel part of that group. His informatiion wasn’t any better, he was just better at selling it.
    .
    I would rather see that man and woman power out gathering real stories than transmitting the usual spin.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I know it was Michael.
    .
    I was just trying to be pithy enough to knock grape off of the TIME’s political page quote of the day.
    .
    I just checked…nope.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Michael is the only Swamper who puts this much introspective effort into defining his role as a journalist. But at the end of the day he still writes down what people say.

  • newfreedomblog

    I’ll take “Nothing” for 1000 Alex.
    .
    What is the difference between the White House Press Secretary and the Lame Stream Media today?
    .
    Correct!!

  • nflfoghorn

    Or roughly the same as your vapid, incessant posts–
    .
    DANG! It’s Thursday! Erase from the record!

  • newfreedomblog

    foggy:
    .
    Go jump back into the rat-hole you came out of, take a rest.

  • newfreedomblog

    Test test test

  • afguy

    What is the sound of “one finger twirling”?

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    MS
    .
    I guess the real question is why do people attend? There’s a transcript. The briefings are broadcast live. There are seldom shoes thrown. But there are more shoes thrown than news made.
    .
    Why does the press corps validate these spin sessions?

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    LOLZ, Cliff.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    I was just talking to a blogger yesterday who was on the WH conference call on the budget. The blogger said it was a total waste of time.

  • http://twitter.com/michaelscherer Michael Scherer

    Two big drivers are the fact that it’s important to get even no answers on the record sometimes, and that television networks need tape every day for their evening newscast. Also, briefings are helpful is telling you what the White House message is on the topic of the day, which is often distinct from what White House officials really think, and are really doing, about the issues of the day.

  • http://twitter.com/michaelscherer Michael Scherer

    Alas, yes. Occupational hazard.

  • afguy

    Reding those “tea leaves” must really stain the fingers.
    .
    But, I guess, holding those same fingers up in the “political winds” to dry (or divine) may help some.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    I can see that you have to have SOMEONE there. But it seems more like something you could pool. And that by treating it as an all hand on deck event, the effect is to validate the exercise as newsworthy and important, rather than an attempt at media management.
    .
    I think Olivier’s take on the job is instructive,or, at least funny:
    .
    http://www.mediaite.com/online/5qq-olivier-knox/
    .
    Although he is on the Hill now.
    ,
    OKnox on twitter. Very funny stream. I’ll poke around and see if I can find him describing being in Baghdad for the shoe throwing.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Touché!

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    I think Michael’s done more than describe a circle jerk here, but he hasn’t yet written frankly about the real issue, which is whether or not Carney sold out and why.
    .
    The real issue is richer than that. It struck me as I got off a bus Tuesday, to find George Stephanopoulos’ mug in my face, advertising GMA.
    .
    Or when we heard about how Gibbs really is worth 2 million dollars a year, rather than the paltry 177K he earned before he resigned.
    .
    I am not sure what “sold out” means in the context of people who are reporting and commenting on the news from Washington during the time they are not in power. The idea of an independent press is pretty much lost if being part of the government is a key entry on the resume–and vice versa. The staff/media revolving door just feeds this sense of Versailles on the Potomac–where property values continue to grow at double digit rates, and the occupants are untouched by a devastating recession.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Jay Carney VERY LOUDLY getting the US Attorneys scandal wrong was probably the highlight of his time here.
    .
    To his credit, he acknowledged his mistake quite gracefully.
    .
    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2007/03/13/where_credit_is_due/
    ,
    TIME had a pretty significant presence at YearlyKos in Chicago, even sponsoring a party. (This was the convention that featured a Dem Presidential candidate debate.) Jay had at least one stage appearance in the main hall. MS was there too, working for Salon at the time.
    .

    .

blog comments powered by Disqus