Notes Think Progress: Petraeus Gives Exclusive One Hour Interview To Fox
Drudge reported the same thing (indeed, the Think Progress post has a video of a Fox News commercial, which touts the interview as “exclusive”). If this is truly an exclusive interview, then this is a problematic move on the part of the administration.
The best case scenario in explaining the decision to exclusively go on Fox News for this interview is utter political tone deafness to the fact that a large number of people view Fox as utterly partisan and pro-administration on the war. At worst this is a calculated political move to take the administration’s message to rally the morale and support of those who are still pro-administration on the war. The latter is almost certainly the correct answer.
It is almost a cliche at this point, but this is an utterly Rovian move: mobilize just enough support to be able to “win”, which in an election means vote-getting, but in this case means generating just enough public support to be able to continue doing what one wants to do. While such a strategy makes sense for elections, it is a very poor way to manage public policy and is especially problematic when we are talking about war/military policy. Bare support to maintain a military action is not leadership and it isn’t appropriate.
If Petraeus and Crocker have information that the public needs to know in order for the public to better understand the situation in Iraq, then there should be a media blitz to share and persuade. However, to target information flow in this manner smacks of trying to avoid a broader conversation. It certainly undercuts the notion that the purpose of the Petreaus report was to provide information so that decisions could be made based on that information. Of course, that has clearly been fiction for some time (for example).
Sphere: Related Content
If Bush were hoping to convince the smallest number of people necessary, he would have started with Congress. They are the only people he really has to answer to.
Or, another way, he would target his message to the most hawkish districts being represented by his opponents.
I think this is either (1) an attempt to start *somewhere* (his approval ratings are low enough that he ought to go after low hanging fruit) or (2) an attempt to be relevant in this election season. I don’t think it’s all that directed at Congress, per se.
Comment by Max Lybbert — Monday, September 10, 2024 @ 5:21 pm
What’s “Rovian” is that a small segment of rabble rousers in our society have succeeded in branding FOX News as highly partisan so much so that any appearance on the network is instantly discredited regardless of its content. Fox News is no more “right” than CNN or MSNBC are “left.” In fact, if anyone has watched the recent debates, it is clear that the Fox News debates have been the most professional of any of the networks.
Sure they have partisan commentators, which they don’t try to hide. But their “news”–if news actually still exists on cable (debatable)–is more sensationalistic than partisan.
Unfortunately the administration has the choice between a network that will give them the opportunity to make their case (and will be perceived as being partisan) and networks that will actively seek to undermine their message. Unfortunately in this day and age, there is no network where you can go and have an honest discussion about the issues. The public doesn’t have the attention span.
Comment by Steve — Tuesday, September 11, 2024 @ 12:06 pm
To be honest, while I understand where you are coming from, I don’t buy it.
Understand: I am a regular consumer of Fox News, yet it is glaringly clear that on their news programs (specially Hume’s daily show and Fox News Sunday) that they are editorially predisposed to support the administration’s line on these issue–Hume in particular.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Tuesday, September 11, 2024 @ 12:15 pm
And regardless of all of that, perception matters in politics. To go to Fox News only, Petraeus and Crocker send a message (intended or otherwise) that they are only seeking to speak to a specific subset of the population.
Indeed, Petraeus has been primarily speaking to administration-friendly sources most of the time (e.g., lots of right-leaning talk radio).
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Tuesday, September 11, 2024 @ 12:21 pm
Maybe, considering what all the Congressional Democrats and their outside groups have been saying about them, he just wanted to make sure that he wouldn’t meet any.
What better way than go to Fox, where no Democrat dares now go?
Comment by Steven L. — Wednesday, September 12, 2024 @ 12:49 am