Posted on 02/17/2005 6:29:03 AM PST by Pikamax
c
By Joe Strupp
Published: February 15, 2005 5:25 PM ET
NEW YORK Don't expect major changes to the White House press-credentialing process any time soon.
Following a meeting today between the leadership of the White House Correspondents' Association and President Bush's press secretary, Scott McClellan, neither side seemed to be in a hurry to alter the current system, which has drawn criticism amid the recent "Jeff Gannon" scandal.
After a 30-minute sit-down with McClellan, WHCA President Ron Hutcheson said he believed the current system was fine and hesitated to have the correspondents' association play a bigger role in distributing press passes. "I'm not sure we need to do anything," Hutcheson told E&P. "I'm not comfortable in passing judgment on who is a journalist and who isn't. My overriding view is that if I am going to make a mistake, it is going to be on letting people in rather than keeping people out."
But Hutcheson said the full nine-person WHCA board will consider the matter on Feb. 28, and, if the board members want to seek changes to the process or vote to play a greater role in it, he will not stop them. "The board may feel differently than me," he added. "We will go back and tell them what are the criteria."
In addition to McClellan and Hutcheson, the meeting included WHCA vice president Mark Smith of AP Radio and Steve Scully of C-SPAN. Smith said the meeting was aimed at clarifying the current system, not discussing potential changes. "We have not taken any position on it, and [McClellan] did not ask us to do anything," Smith said. "We asked about what if any guidance we could provide in the future and he offered to listen to our ideas."
McClellan did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
The meeting followed the recent uproar over James Guckert, a former White House reporter for Talon News, who had used the name Jeff Gannon and drawn criticism for asking partisan questions. He resigned from his job last week after questions arose about why he had gained press access with a fake name and while representing a news agency with ties to the Republican Party.
Although no changes to the system were discussed at the meeting, some WHCA members had said prior to the meeting that a number of potential changes were being considered. Those included tighter restrictions on who can receive daily press passes, such as those Guckert had obtained, and a more active role by the WHCA in approving requests for credentials, which are now solely handed out by the White House Press Office.
Currently, two types of press passes are issued. The "hard pass," which allows reporters regular ongoing access to the White House, and "day passes," which must be issued each morning and are good only for one day. Hard passes are more difficult to obtain, requiring the reporter to first obtain a Capitol Hill credential, issued by a committee of congressional reporters known as the Standing Committee of Correspondents.
Day passes appear to be available to any reporter who provides his or her name, address, and social security number and the name of his or her news organization, and can pass a basic security check.
Guckert had been denied a congressional press pass last year after the Standing Committee determined that Talon News was not a legitimate news organization. But he was still able to obtain daily White House press passes by applying each day.
Smith requested the meeting with McClellan after the press secretary mentioned last week during a briefing that he would be open to discussing the process with White House reporters after the recent concerns surrounding Guckert.
"I think it is part of their role to address the matter," McClellan told E&P Monday, referring to the WHCA. "There are a lot of issues that are good to talk about with the correspondents."
But Hutcheson said the meeting ended up being mostly informational. "The idea was to find out the criteria for day passes and hard passes," he said. "We didn't ask about what is considered a legitimate news organization. We didn't press him on that because we just wanted to find out how they do it now."
Hutcheson said the group did not want to discuss changes until the entire WHCA board takes up the matter. He had said that perhaps the White House should require that anyone seeking a day pass first obtain a Capitol Hill press pass, which would allow the Standing Committee to pass judgment on a reporter's legitimacy.
apply for day passes people and tick off the elitists.
Seems to me something more than a credentials check is needed.
This guy was hounded out because he was conservative and asked conservative questions. The press ought to be asking for an investigation and better protection of reporters covering the White House.
And what would those ties be? I'm betting it's nothing more significant than the news agency donating money to the RNC. Otherwise, the news media would be trumpeting it loudly. All I'm seeing is vague references to "ties". It's funny how I never read about the alphabet networks' "ties" to the DNC. They have the same friends, go to the same cocktail parties, and donate money to the DNC.
It's because liberals run the process. Rush Limbaugh was denied because he's not a "legitimate media source", but Helen Thomas has the run of the place.
bookmark and ping
Just as we commonsense types stated from the start. They did not want to start playing that game.
The meeting followed the recent uproar over James Guckert, a former White House reporter for Talon News, who had used the name Jeff Gannon and drawn criticism for asking partisan questions. He resigned from his job last week after questions arose about why he had gained press access with a fake name and while representing a news agency with ties to the Republican Party.
If E&P has evidence that Talon News has ties to the "Republcian Party", they ought to present it.
Thanks for the ping Alia!!
I notice that many articles critical of Gannon are coming from E&P.
Wonder how much attention they have given the charges Jordan made about the miitary?/s
very little.
How about the fact that he was a gay prostitute?
miitary = military...
Apparently only 9 fingers showed up for work today.
Gonna be one of those days...
Has someone proven that fact, or are just repeating the rumor till it becomes one?
You're not supposed to "ask" partisan questions within the confines of the White House Press Room, which Liberals consider their personal domain.
What you do is "spin" questions already asked to fit partisan Liberal ideology.
GREAT NEWS!!!
SCREW THE MSM
BRING BACK GANNON (so what if he is GAY- how many people at the Times are gay again? 85% wasn't it?)
or SOMEone conservative...
I have seen no such "fact" stated anywhere, and I have followed this story. However, having never been charged or convicted of doing any such thing, this again has nothing to do with what happened at the press corps. He quit after being harrassed because he asked a conservative question. All you have to do is read these stories to see there is no substance to any "scandal" or else it would be in the story. The liberal press is more than willing to run around repeating the word "scandal" re a conservative, with no substantive backup.
| How about the fact that he was a gay prostitute?
Hopefully, you are not suggesting that the government should keep lists of who is gay, and who isn't. How would you get on that list? How would you find out you were on it? How would you get off it if you were on it? Would you be happier if he had been providing "escort services" to rich old ladies? Would it make a difference? Too many people talk about this as though the government ought to know all and see all. I don't think we want that. |
I don't know that he was, and I haven't heard him asked that or the specific charge made before. Regardless, is anyone seriously suggesting that is the basis of the "scandal?" If so, do you really think the rest of the press corps would agree to be excluded based on morality checks or even investigations into whether they might have done something illegal sometime in their lives? The MSM will NEVER criticize gannon as gay or as a gay prostitute because those are behaviors they religiously protect.
Let's look at the reality of what happened here. Because this guy asked conservative styled questions (in a room full of totally liberal questions),left wingers began following him around, calling and threatening his family, and he was threatened with some kind of outing regarding some gay connection in his life. That's what should be investigated. The MSM will keep reporting this story in vague terms because they will never get on the side of harrassment of gays.
Years ago he developed a web hosting or domain name registration business and a few names were registered for customers interested in setting up gay sites.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Hindsight is wonderful stuff. He had managed to keep that secret for 2-1/2 years. He'd never been arrested for it, so how was anybody supposed to know?