Presidential press conferences, UK v. US

Maggie says:
Did anyone see "Nightline" last night? (By the way, let's have a moment of silence for the last stand of this great program, scheduled to give way to something mediocre and pop culture-driven next year.)

Ted Koppel compared two press conferences that took place yesterday, the one here that Bush gave and one in England featuring Tony Blair. The differences were amazing, and watching them I was left with such a visual example of why our mainstream media SUCKS. A typical question from the Bush press conference was a softball like "So Mr. President, what is your impression of how the economy is doing?" A typical question from the Blair press conference involved name-calling, uncomfortable pauses, tough questions, and a pretty awesome "We're not as dumb as you think and we're not taking any bullshit answers" attitude. And guess what? Blair was forced to answer some uncomfortable questions and people were given a much more real assessment of the state of things than we're spoonfed on this side of the Atlantic.

Seeing the British media doing their job and comparing their results with the questions asked and answers given to our reporters makes me so angry. There are lots of great books out there about the declining access and freedom of the American media (which goes hand in hand with increasing corporate ownership), and all of this escalates when we're engaged in conflicts around the world. But beyond the huge problems with the American media, here are the little things that could - should - be changed immediately:

- Reporters should not be afraid to ask tough questions during a press conference because of retaliation. Access is everything, and it's horribly unfair that reporters will basically never be called on again if they ask something that makes the president uncomfortable. The White House Press Corps status quo is an outrage.
- What is the point of even having a press conference when the president has been relentlessly coached on likely topics he'll be asked - and then what a surprise, those are exactly the questions that really are asked!
- Reporters should be allowed a follow-up question during these press conferences. Especially when in almost all cases it would be something like, "You didn't that answer my question at all. Why don't you try again?"
- Why can't reporters work together to actually try and get something real from him? Screw whoever gets the best quote, becuase in reality none of them are getting real quotes or anything real at all. So how about going back to some legendary journalism for inspiration and show up that day ready to actually do their job?

I could rant about this all day. But instead I'll close with a quote Eric Alterman includes in his great Nation cover story this week In Your Face: Bush's War on the Press. It's from an unnamed Bush advisor who was asked why the administration doesn't respect reporters: "Let me clue you in," the advisor answered. "We don't care. You see, you're outnumbered two to one by folks in the big, wide middle of America, busy working people who don't read the New York Times or Washington Post or the LA Times."

So given the blatant lack of respect that exists for these reporters and the so-called Fourth Estate in general, why don't mainstream reporters just say screw it and really do their jobs again?