TV (and radio) have been lazy from the day they realized:

"Hey, we just have to read newspaper headlines!"

"...my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier." Agreed. My rule is to avoid conspiracy theories when incompetence, stupidity or laziness explain the situation.

What a shame that the "best and brightest" journalists spend their time on such trivialities.

The laziness of the national media this election cycle has been nothing short of astonishing. They decide on the Conventional Wisdom and then they all run with it.

The reporters' credo used to be, "If your mother says she loves you, check it out." Today it appears to be, "If the GOP issues a release, run with it."

but reporting is HARD. Don't make them actually work... its much easier to regurgitate.

"There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier."

come on, steve. you know better than that. it's because they're in the tank for mccain.

You're right -- but Obama has to suck it up and play this game, too, pretending that it makes sense. He should have rushed out an "ad" with Hillary's "I do not approve that message" line. He should have rushed out an ad with "No way, nohow, no McCain" and "Twin Cities" by 9 this morning. This is the new "have a beer with": the press wants to see cockiness and the press wants to be given stuff (in this case, easy stuff to write about rather than food or friendship).

"Falling for the trick" is a polite way to say "In the tank for".

Dumbass networks. Good thing nobody here ever gives these ads any ink.

Ditto Steve M. It's not like this is something new; Republican campaigns have been doing this for years. So why the hell aren't the Democrats similarly taking advantage of the free advertising the media is handing out?

Cable news networks don't even bother with news shows any more. It's become talk radio on television.

@Pat - So you think Benen should ignore this phenomenon? That tactic didnt work too well with the Swift Boaters in 2004.

That said, I dont blame the media too much for the "Hillary's Right" ad. Back when she said that stupid quote, we all knew it would be used in the general election to attack Obama. I think it's reasonably newsworthy this week, at least.

Steve Benen wrote: "... this is part of a well-executed scam that the news networks keep falling for ... But why would major news outlets repeatedly fall for the same trick, even when they realize the ads are created for the sole purpose of free media attention?"

The "news networks" are not "falling for" anything. They are knowing, active participants in the "scam". They are in fact an integral part of the McCain campaign.

As with the 2000 goring of Al Gore and the 2004 swiftboating of John McCain, the corporate-owned media is working in close collaboration with the Republican Party and the overtly partisan right-wing extremist media to character-assassinate the Democratic candidate and glorify the Republican candidate.

Steve Benen wrote: "There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier."

Here's a "hunch" for you: America's corporate-owned mass media is not performing some kind of altruistic public service of impartially informing the American people about what's going on in the campaign or the world in general. America's corporate-owned mass media is propagandizing the American people to advance the interests and agenda of its owners, America's Ultra-Rich Ruling Class, Inc., and their ruthless class war against everyone else.

"But why would major news outlets repeatedly fall for the same trick, even when they realize the ads are created for the sole purpose of free media attention? There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier."

Uh, because they're otherw3ise-unemployables who know which side of the corporate toast is buttered, and they don't want to be otherwise unemployed???

Basically, they're the ones who eat McCain's barbecued baloney.

Who says they're falling for it? They don't run Dem ads over and over for free. I think it's part of the deal.

There are other things more valuable than money you can lobby with. Air time is one of them.

I think the country died as a functioning democracy when the SCOTUS intervened in 2001. The mainstream media has just become a propaganda arm of the Republican Party.

"fall?"

I think it's clear: they're jumping.

But why would major news outlets repeatedly fall for the same trick, even when they realize the ads are created for the sole purpose of free media attention? There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier.

Considering all the other biased stuff that comes out of the mainstream media, it's well-passed the point of being certain by now that they're in cahoots.

This is a real problem, so we've got to think of a way to solve it.

All the times you see stuff from the mainstream media that looks liberal, it's just a red herring. The conservative reach is far in the mainstream media, and they can influence any story or headline in any mainstream media new report they want, even if they haven't actually bought off or intimidated every single mainstream media employee yet. The point of this is so the public won't realize they have a controlled mainstream media yet, since the public isn't so uniformly conservative to support that yet.

I doubt the public ever will be that conservative, but we still suffer from the results of having all these lies infiltrate our mainstream media news. So we've got to deal with the problem frankly and seriously.

A Obama-Clinton divide in the party is good for ratings.

What SecularAnimist said. Why is it so hard to figure out? If reporters are that dumb and lazy, why do they get paid mega bucks?

At some point, laziness morphs into complicity. I think the traditional media morphed a while ago.

Nice discussion going on about this over at TPM, too. http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/new_mccain_ad_badly_distorts_o.php

A couple of commenters noted that McCain has to spend a whole lot of his primary campaign money in the next week.

I think this is what McCain called his "free media strategy". And it should be a serious discussion at the FEC and the FCC.

Uhh, Steve, you forgot the final graf from Rutkoff's blog post:

(T)he Obama campaign has also embraced the TV ad as press release tactic. Those recent commercials raking McCain over the coals for his troubles enumerating the houses he owns? They’ve received abundant attention on the news channels, but there’s no sign yet that they are on the air otherwise.

This cuts both ways.

As I pointed out at Mother Jones, this tactic predates cable news. The "Daisy" ad aired once in 1964, but was seen so much in news reporting that it became an icon of 20th century television. If there's any difference these days, it's that ads are crafted solely for news consumption with no intent to go public.

See also Huckabee's "let me show you the ad I'm too classy to air."

Not a new opinion apparently, but the last thing I'd assume is that the media is "falling for" anything the GOP supposedly tells them. They're complicit. Maybe not all media outlets, or rather, not all employees in all media outlets. But enough people in enough outlets to get whatever the story the GOP wants out there, out there.

Let's face it, if they weren't complicit, if they were geuinely concerned about their image, they'd apologize to their audience for being duped so often, and promise to not let it happen again.

Seems silly, but if they were concerned about their reputation, they'd have to acknowledge that there's reason for them to be concerned. They're not admitting anything, because they're not concerned. They're big media, pulling for the GOP and preparing for what'll happen when/if their efforts fail. You can be sure rule of law will suddenly matter a whole lot more come January 2009, if not a few months earlier.

Not a new opinion apparently, but the last thing I'd assume is that the media is "falling for" anything the GOP supposedly tells them. They're complicit. Maybe not all media outlets, or rather, not all employees in all media outlets. But enough people in enough outlets to get whatever the story the GOP wants out there, out there.

Let's face it, if they weren't complicit, if they were geuinely concerned about their image, they'd apologize to their audience for being duped so often, and promise to not let it happen again.

Seems silly, but if they were concerned about their reputation, they'd have to acknowledge that there's reason for them to be concerned. They're not admitting anything, because they're not concerned. They're big media, pulling for the GOP and preparing for what'll happen when/if their efforts fail. You can be sure rule of law will suddenly matter a whole lot more come January 2009, if not a few months earlier.

The Corporate Media is just that: The CORPORATE MEDIA. And, as Scott McClellan said .. 'active complicity' ... and that is exactly what they do: active complicity is manipulating public perception in order to advance the agendas of the Corporations which boils down to maximum profits for the Corporations themselves. Thus, they hire 'journalists' and 'reporters' that are nothing more than little monkeys with their little bell hop hats on, attached to hand cranked organ machine by a tether, and dancing to the tune .. meaning the corporate narratives that have nothing to do with actual reality .. of the Corporations themselves. Thus, they pay these 'reporters' their million dollar paydays to act out the Corporate Script/ narratives. So we end up with nothing more than Corporate pimps, sluts, pigs all dressed up in their million dollars suites and or dresses consciously lying to the American people thru their TV sets, issuing Corporate generated propaganda in order to advance their own self interest .. keeping their 'jobs'... they 'tax breaks for the rich now that they are millionairs..and of course the Corporate agenda itself. The Corporate Media in nothing more than a Repiglican Mafia who should be charged, tried, and convicted for purposeful , criminal, fraud committed against our once great nation. They should be frog marched out of the protection of their Corporate studios and right into prison and turned into 'bitches' for the enjoyment of the inmates.

Well, shouldn't the laziness v in-the-tank question be answered when the Obama campaign sends out similar ads during the Republican convention?

Fearless prediction: the media big boys will suddenly claim that they've "caught on" to this tactic and tell viewers they're not providing free air time for the Obama campaign during the Republican Convention. Even if Obama actually airs his ads.

...this is part of a well-executed scam that the news networks keep falling for.

This is not a scam and the networks are not falling for it. This is a methodology and a plan which the networks are a part of.

Call it as it is.

I thought Obama wasn't doing this for some reason, but SocraticGadfly cites one counterexample. Are there others? I guess if the Republicans are doing it, I don't see why Obama doesn't, and am curious to know whether he is.

"But why would major news outlets repeatedly fall for the same trick, even when they realize the ads are created for the sole purpose of free media attention? There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier."

No ... NO.

It's not some trick the corporate media is falling for, it's part of a Republican Party-strategy. The corporate media in this country is slanted against Obama and the Democratic Party. They know the majority of the voters will likely vote for Obama and Democratic Party this fall. So the media will do what they think is necessary to prevent that from happening. Of course, in order to 'appear objective', they cannot admit their obvious bias to their viewers, so these things are couched as 'news'.

Steve, you really need to frame along these lines. As long as you treat the media outlets as 'pawns', rather than more substantial chess pieces, you let the real story that needs to be told to people die - that the media in this country cannot be trusted to deliver accurate information to their viewers.

Don't the news outlets rely on revenue from commercials?

So when these networks show these ads for free, instead of charging for the airtime, aren't they pretty much throwing money out the window?

I’d call it a wise use of resources. The videos are short, light, and catch people’s attention. Airing them probably boosts ratings. Obama should do the same thing.

I don't watch cable news any more, but would love to see a month of play, discussing questions about McCain that everyone knows is complete BS, for the entire month of August. I'd like to see them give the kind of attention to a bestselling Bush-hating book they give to Corsi because they've gamed the system. I'd like to see the Most Trusted Name in News spend days playing an Obama ad (I haven't seen them do much with the houses ad), and then ask if McCain is the anti-Christ.

There are competing explanations, but my hunch is a lot of outlets are just lazy, and video press releases make their jobs easier.

It's also a lot cheaper than producing their own content. The cable news networks in particular have a lot of time to fill each day.

Yesterday Zeitgeist complained that Democrats have been unable to adapt to the media environment, come up with effective ways to deal with it and that it speaks poorly of the party leadership in this regard. I second that.

Why are "sensible liberal" pundits so adamantly unwilling to acknowledge that the corporate media is not some neutral, disinterested entity, imperfectly performing some kind of public service by dispassionately providing impartial information to the American people?

The so-called "mainstream media" consists of a handful of giant, for-profit corporations whose owners have their own interests and their own agenda. There is no reason in the world to expect that they would be neutral in a presidential campaign, and there is every reason in the world to expect that they would propagandize on behalf of the candidate and the party that they believe will best serve their interests.

"Sensible liberal" pundits need to stop scratching their heads in puzzlement at the blatant propagandizing of the corporate-owned mass media on behalf of McCain and the Republicans and recognize it for what it is: powerful corporations using the most advanced brainwashing techniques ever developed by Madison Avenue to persuade the American people to vote for candidates who serve the interests of those powerful corporations, and not the interests of the overwhelming majority of Americans.

The mass media's propaganda is effective because, unlike Fox News, they hide their partisanship behind a pretense of impartiality. "Sensible liberal" pundits would be performing a public service by stripping away that pretense, rather than reinforcing it.

I agree completely with those who say the media is complicit as opposed to just being suckers. It also seems to me that they must be violating some sort of campaign finance rule by showing something for free that has a quantifiable market value. It might be legitimate to discuss the ads, but actually airing them seems like an in-kind donation or something like that.

2Manchu wrote: "Don't the news outlets rely on revenue from commercials? So when these networks show these ads for free, instead of charging for the airtime, aren't they pretty much throwing money out the window?"

The corporate-owned media isn't sacrificing lucrative commercial-break time to run these ads as commercials. They are running them on their "news" programs as "news". So in addition to accomplishing their primary mission of supporting the Republicans' propaganda efforts, they also get free "content" to fill up their "news" programs, which saves them the cost of producing their own content.

I'll just add my voice to the "If you can't beat 'em join 'em" crowd. I'm sure the Obama campaign can afford to pump out at least as many "video press releases" as the McCain campaign, and if that's the way the game is played now, why the hell not?

Since the corporate media loves controversy, you could maybe even use this tactic to get our some harder-hitting ads than you would otherwise. "Exclusive: CNN has managed to obtain a campaign ad that the Obama campaign has decided not to run because of its harsh treatment of John McCain. Here it is."

Steve M posted earlier

"You're right -- but Obama has to suck it up and play this game, too, pretending that it makes sense. He should have rushed out an "ad" with Hillary's "I do not approve that message" line. He should have rushed out an ad with "No way, nohow, no McCain" and "Twin Cities" by 9 this morning. This is the new "have a beer with": the press wants to see cockiness and the press wants to be given stuff (in this case, easy stuff to write about rather than food or friendship)."

The lack of ANY nimble response to McCain and the corporate owned media, by the Obama campaign, just reinforces my view that the Obama campaign is on the precipice of a major flameout.

Perhaps, the Obama campaign should be immediately firing these overpaid, overeducated, and so called experts consultants and advisors and begin listening to a lot of posters on various websites who are giving damn far better advice/strategies on how to win this election.

It appears that yet again another Democratic Presidential nominee, is on the road to defeat because of it's campaign being in snooze mode during August while the Republicans with their media enablers paint a picture and tell the story that proves to ultimately fatal for the Democrat.

Sigh..............................

>But why would major news outlets repeatedly fall for the same trick, even when they realize the ads are created for the sole purpose of free media attention?

If, I may, let me borrow a tech support response:
"That's not a bug, that's a feature!"

Yes, broadcast media are sucky and lazy. And???

We need to find ways to succeed in this environment, like it or not. This strategy of the McCain campaign is transparenta and cynical, but it's also ethically neutral and entirely copyable.

It's a classic can't-beat'em-so-joint-em scenario.
So, are we just going to complain, then?

I mean, who cares about a flyer produced in small quantities and handed out only to the media? But if it's video, it's news!

More accurately, if it's a video, it can be cut-and-pasted into a broadcast, just as text press releases can be copied verbating into a newspaper story, thus saving the so-called "journalist" the effort of actually creating any content.

It isn't a difficult content -- the McCain campaign is playing to the media's laziness.

up wrote: "So, are we just going to complain, then?"

Pointing out that the corporate-owned mass media is not a neutral party, but is promoting the financial and political interests of its ultra-rich owners by working hand-in-hand with the Republican Party and the overtly partisan right-wing extremist media to propagandize on behalf of the McCain campaign, is not "complaining". It is recognizing reality.

Whining about the "journalistic" failings of the corporate media, as though its blatant, deliberate, scripted, focus-group tested shilling for McCain were the result of "laziness" or ineptitude, is stupid and pointless.

The Obama campaign and the Democratic Party need to recognize that the corporate-owned mass media is its adversary, and is no more likely to respond to appeals for "fairness", "objectivity" or "impartiality" than the RNC.

Nice to read comments from people who get it. Seriously.

If you wanted to establish an authoritarian state, what steps would you take? You'd co-opt the press, develop your own propaganda machine, stack the courts, castrate the legislative branch, destroy any checks or balances on the executive, replace sunshine with secrecy, control the elections, restrict individual rights, spy on your citizens, demand strict party loyalty, denounce any difference of opinion... all the while, maintaining the impression of a representative democracy.

Any of this sound familiar?

It's what the phrase "permanent Republican majority" was all about, and we're a lot closer to that end than most people want to admit -- or are even aware of.

God forbid the Obama campaign tries this themselves. Better to whine about the unfairness of McCain's successful tactic than to adopt it and coop it...

Hopefully the Obama campaign is relying on the convention for exposure this week and will do the same as the Republicans during their convention. I do wish he would hit back harder though. Let's see what Biden does tonight.

get the slobbering media trolls to do it for you...priceless!

Wouldn't it be fun to see the Obama campaign pull the same tactic next week?

I can tell you the reason the ads get so much press. They are funny!

Price per minute to produce real news footage: High.

Price per minute re-use stock footage: some bucks + editing personnel.

Price per minute to run a video press release: Priceless. [and your talking heads can blather about it for a few minutes with zero marginal cost]

Yeah, this is just another "I'm Karen Ryan reporting."

They should be embarrassed.