The debate about the ethics of the White House paying Armstrong Williams $240,000 to plug the No Child Left Behind Act seems to circling, understandably, around the ethics of Williams's actions. That's fine enough.
But why don't I see anyone questioning the White House's judgment in picking Armstrong Williams as their highly-paid mouthpiece? I mean, if you're going to blow money on a paid-for pundit, shouldn't you get someone with a little higher stature? Who's the genius who said, Wait a minute, forget Bill Bennet--let's get Armstrong!
Nick Naylor would never make that sort of bush-league call.
D.C. Bonus Points: Williams says, "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in." Ummm, if you believe in it, why didn't you do it for free?
8 hours ago
4 comments:
Is the Dept. of Education now headquartered in the WH?
I understood it was the department that hired an ad agency, and the agency hired Williams. Not clear to me that the WH was involved, although that's what the Dems would like you to think.
Don't government agencies often hire PR firms to put a happy face on projects, especially when the media is busy attacking those projects.
This post brings to mind the old English saying about journalists:
You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
thank God! The British journalist.
But, seeing what the man will do
unbribed, there’s no occasion to!
I think he was doing it for free and then the Ed Dept. came along and paid him to do more. (Might have to take that back if it turns out someone from his office was doing cold calls.)
As I understand the situation, Williams has a PR firm, and that is who the Ed Dept. hired. Not a good idea for journalists to own PR firms as that just guarantees problems, no matter where the clients come from. I am surprised it hadn't been an issue on other subjects.
How about we first stop calling Armstong Williams a "journalist" and start calling him what he is, a "commentator."If an auto company came to me and offered a quarter of a million dollars for me to promote driving cars, so what? The question of ethics only arises if I don't like driving cars but I'm still willing to promote the act simply for the money.
BTW01: I didn't realize that President Bush and Secretary Paige looked so much alike that it was so easy for the media to confuse the two. Or does anyone really believe that the president (of any denomination) has either the time or inclination to micromanage the government on a day to day basis?
BTW02: Bill Bennett? I think he lacks a certain, um, er, eh, blackness to be a cedible front man to minorities. You know, those folk who typically find their children in failling schools and those who should be most outraged at attempts to block school vouchers?
Post a Comment