Transcript
BROOKE GLADSTONE: From WNYC in New York, this is NPR's On the Media. I'm Brooke Gladstone.
BOB GARFIELD: And I'm Bob Garfield. The Bush administration is on the record with doubts about the media-filtered news, but - no problem - if you don't like somebody else's news, make your own. [GROUP OF MEN SHOUTING, VERY HAPPY]
MAN: The televised images from Baghdad prompted celebrations from Iraqi-Americans all across the United States. They seemed to revel in the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime as much as they did in Baghdad. [GROUP OF MEN SHOUTING: USA! USA!]
BOB GARFIELD: That's a report produced after the fall of Saddam Hussein and made available to any TV station that wanted to run it. But, it wasn't produced by journalists; it was produced by public relations professionals working for the State Department.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: It looks like journalism, and it sounds like journalism, but it's actually a video news release - a gussied-up commercial, used for years by pharmaceutical companies and other corporate entities, to slip product ads, or spin, into TV newscasts. And in recent times, governments have gotten in on the act - state and federal - Democrat and Republican. We've reported on the technique before, but last Sunday, the New York Times ran a frontpage bombshell that made us gasp. The article revealed that not two, not five, but at least 20 federal agencies have produced VNRs over the past four years as part of a quarter billion dollar public relations effort by the Bush administration. The spots ranged from nakedly political, like the one we just heard, to innocuous, like this one from the Census Bureau.
WOMAN: Safety experts say all that traffic congestions can be dangerous, especially during holidays like Independence Day.
MAN: July 4th, particularly when it comes on a weekend, which it does this year, has the highest number of deaths, typically, of any day of the year.
WOMAN: Experts offer a simple message: Wear seat belts. Cut down on distractions like cell phones, and of course don't drink and drive. In Washington, I'm Jane Wattrell reporting.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Jane Wattrell, not a reporter. She just plays one on TV, as did Karen Ryan, whose fake news packages on the Bush administration's controversial changes in Medicare reached millions of TV viewers last year.
BOB GARFIELD: But is the practice kosher? The Bush administration said yes; the Congressional Government Accountability Office reviewed the Medicare VNR and said no. Susan Poling is associate general counsel for the GAO. Propaganda may be older than the printing press, but she says the VNR posed some brand new questions.
SUSAN POLING: It was a novelty to us. We had never seen one before, and when we looked at it, we had some concerns.
BOB GARFIELD: Were any laws broken in its preparation and distribution?
SUSAN POLING: Well, there's an Appropriations Act that prohibits the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes, and over many years, the GAO has interpreted this to prohibit materials that are self-aggrandizing, purely partisan in nature or covert as to source. And, after looking at this particular video news release, which is a complete story - it looks exactly like the local TV station produced it - we found that it was covert as to the source.
BOB GARFIELD: And, specifically, what did your office do?
SUSAN POLING: We explained the reasons why we found this to violate the publicity or propaganda prohibition. Later, we received another request having to do with the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and after we made the same finding with regard to that particular pre-packaged news story, the comptroller general thought that it might be a good idea to let other agencies know that they may also be having problems in this area. And so, in February of this year, he sent out a circular letter to the heads of departments, which indicated that the way to avoid this is to disclose to the target audience, which was the television viewing audience, that this was made or produced with taxpayer dollars.
BOB GARFIELD: Lo and behold, however, the Justice Department looked at your decision and took a strikingly different view and said, hold on, we actually disagree with the GAO. Tell me about the Justice Department's ruling.
SUSAN POLING: Well, the Justice Department decided that a pre-packaged news story also needed to be an advocacy piece before it would violate the publicity or propaganda prohibition, and they took as a given, without looking at the HHS pre-packaged news story, they took as a given that this was, in fact, purely informational. Those are their words.
BOB GARFIELD: Just the facts, ma'am.
SUSAN POLING: Just the facts, yes.
BOB GARFIELD: So, what do you make of the distinction that they are drawing between propaganda and information?
SUSAN POLING: We didn't choose to go by defining propaganda. Propaganda is a little bit in the eyes of the beholder. One person's information or facts is another person's propaganda. In a pre-packaged news story, an agency is emphasizing some facts and leaving others out. It's just by the nature of anyone who sits down and writes something - they tell you some things; they don't tell you other things. When you can evaluate what the source is, then you can help decide for yourself what information you are getting. So, we believe that it's truly the covert nature of this that pushes it over into propaganda, because if the material were properly identified, we would say it is informational.
BOB GARFIELD: The administration, this week, continued to defend its use of VNRs, saying that the agencies that distribute them are clearly labeling them as coming from the government. The labels, of course, are outside the package - you know, stamped on the box. Is that a persuasive argument for you? That, well, sure - they're labeled - there's the label right there.
SUSAN POLING: Well, our opinion states that the target audience must receive the notification, and the target audience of a pre-packaged news story is not the television studio itself. It's the television viewer, and unless it's there for the television viewer to see, then they are not properly labeled.
BOB GARFIELD: When there is a disagreement between the GAO and the executive branch, who becomes the arbiter? Does this head for the courts?
SUSAN POLING: In all likelihood, this is not something that would end up in the courts. This is a difference of view between the executive branch and the legislative branch. While we have the statutory authority to address the federal agencies' use of appropriated funds, GAO does not have enforcement authority. But we do expect agencies to act in accordance with our appropriations law decisions, and we hope that the executive branch will do what is reasonable, responsible and right.
BOB GARFIELD: [LAUGHS] Don't wish your life away. Susan Poling, thank you very much.
SUSAN POLING: Glad to be here.
BOB GARFIELD: Susan Poling is managing associate general counsel at the Government Accountability Office.
copyright 2005 WNYC Radio