Partisan media

Yglesias, 29 September:

I wonder how an Obama White House will deal with MSNBC’s flirtations with establishing itself as the progressive-friendly cable network. An incumbent administration has a lot of ability to reward particular reporters, hosts, and networks with access, scoops, and choice interviews. In principles, a White House inclined to think and act strategically about the media could do a lot to push MSNBC to transform in that direction while simultaneously bolstering the news credibility of Maddow and Keith Olbermann.

Yglesias, 11 October:

One issue I’m interested in that I think hasn’t been aired yet is whether or not a new Obama administration will try to use the considerable leverage at its disposal to enhance the credibility and standing of some of the new more progressive media — with Maddow’s show certainly being a big part of that. People forget, but Fox News had quasi-pariah status at the beginning, but conservative politicians really insisted on getting it taken seriously and the Bush administration, when it came into office, did a lot to further entrench that.

Ezra Klein recently:

... the important thing Obama could do for the "liberal" media is not have dinner with them. That's good for egos but meaningless for influence. It is, however, well within Obama's power to increase the influence of progressive outlets. Covering the presidency is the central concern of political reportage. And an outlet's ability to cover the presidency can be affected by the favor of the President. If The American Prospectand TPM Cafe and Huffington Post and others of our ilk were given the occasional interview with Obama, and fed useful scoops, that would rapidly increase our readership, our importance in the broader media ecosystem, and the likelihood that members of our outlets would go on to hold key positions in more mainstream institutions. To give just one example, if was understood that Mark Schmitt had more contacts with the Obama crew than Howard Fineman, the Sunday shows would be more likely to turn to Schmitt for analysis. In the long-run, that would be good for both Obama and for progressivism. And he wouldn't even have to waste time watching me chew my dinner.

Ross Douthat today:

Now obviously if I worked for The American Prospect or HuffPo I'd be thinking exactly along these lines: It would be absurd for a ideologically-motivated publication to turn down a shot at political influence to preserve its sense of purity. (And I'm all for Mark Schmitt on Meet the Press - or better, as a permanent replacement for David Gergen.) But it's still worth noting that this is roughly how the Bush Administration treated the conservative media - rolling out scoops to partisan outlets, wooing right-wing media types with Presidential face-time, bypassing mainstream outlets in favor of talk radio and Fox News, and so forth. And in the long run, it was good for neither the Bushies nor for conservatism.

Gah. He's damn right it would be counterproductive, for both the left and the earnestness of our politics. Eight years of FOX exclusives was enough. No thanks.

And I doubt it would jive with Obama's pledge to be "the President of all Americans".