The White House is increasingly acting as editor and gatekeeper of press-pool reports, which are supposed to be an independent report of the president's day-to-day activities written by reporters for other reporters who then weave that information into daily news articles about the president.
But according to the Washington Post, Obama's press aides sometimes demand that details be changed prior to releasing the reports to other journalists, using "its unusual role as the distributor of the reports as leverage to steer coverage in a more favorable direction."
While the details the White House wants changed are usually minor and seemingly non-controversial in nature, actively requiring certain facts to be censored, regardless of significance, is quite controversial in itself. The fact that these reports must go through a White House intermediary in the first place seems to contradict the very job of journalists: to candidly report facts free from coercion from the party they report on.
"The decades-old White House press pool was created as a practical compromise between the news media and the nation's chief executive: Instead of having a mob of journalists jostling to cover the president at every semi-public function, a handful of reporters are designated to act as proxies, or 'poolers,' for the entire press corps," said the Washington Post. "Poolers are chosen on a rotating basis from among regular White House correspondents, and they typically get more favorable access to presidential events to provide coverage that is shared with other reporters."
After a pooler writes a report, it has to first be sent to the White House press office, which is supposed to simply forward them along to an e-mail database of journalists, federal agencies and congressional offices.
The Washington Post notes that while the "overwhelming majority" of reports are forwarded by the White House press office without delay or objection, "some have been flagged by the administration's press staff, which has demanded changes as a condition of distributing them."
The idea that a pool report is being reviewed and approved prior to being forwarded to other journalists is unsettling in itself, said to Anita Kumar of McClatchy newspapers.
"The worry is tat when you send in a pool report, the White House is readint it and approving it," she said.
After Kumar wrote a detailed account of Obama's appearance on "The Tonight Show" last year, the White House said it was too long and needed to be trimmed down prior to sending it out, to which Kumar reluctantly complied.
Other bits that prompted White House editing requests include an account of Obama making a lighthearted comment referring to electoral college data, a mention of an unnamed White House intern fainting after a press briefing and even a report that spoke of Michele Obama's workout at a hotel gym in Asia.
Several reporters told the Washington Post that their reports have all been approved without incident, and veteran White House reporter Tom DeFrank said he's only been asked to change a report once - during the Ford administration - but he refused.
"My view is the White House has no right to touch a pool report," DeFrank told the Washington Post. "It's none of their business. If they want to challenge something by putting out a statement of their own, that's their right. It's also their prerogative to jawbone a reporter, which often happens. But they have no right to alter a pool report unilaterally."
