Liberal media's affair with Obama: Too hot not to cool down

From Josh Gerstein and Patrick Gavin of Politico, we learn that the media covering the White House isn't really that into Obama, and it's mutual. Why? Because Obama is just as he appears:

Reporters say the White House is thin-skinned, controlling, eager to go over their heads and stingy with even basic information. All White Houses try to control the message. But this White House has pledged to be more open than its predecessors – and reporters feel it doesn’t live up to that pledge in several key areas:

— Day-to-day interaction with Obama is almost non-existent, and he talks to the press corps far less often than Bill Clinton or even George W. Bush did. Clinton took questions nearly every weekday, on average. Obama barely does it once a week.

— The ferocity of pushback is intense. A routine press query can draw a string of vitriolic emails. A negative story can draw a profane high-decibel phone call – or worse. Some reporters feel like they’ve been frozen out after crossing the White House.

And so on. The course of true love never did run smooth. But it didn't have to be this way; Obama was, and is, the liberal media's guy. They rolled over and played dead so beautifully for him during the campaign. If only they had been willing to see Obama for who he was before they helped elect him; they'd be more prepared for these unpleasant traits of his. They're nothing new. Politico:

Much of the criticism is off-the record, both out of fear of retaliation and from worry about appearing whiny. But those views were voiced by a cross-section of the television, newspaper and magazine journalists who cover the White House.

“These are people who came in with every reporter giving them the benefit of the doubt,” said another reporter who regularly covers the White House. “They’ve lost all that goodwill.”

The article is lengthy. A few highlights:

A few days later, Gibbs said at one of his briefings, “This is the most transparent administration in the history of our country.”

Peals of laughter broke out in the briefing room.

. . .

One current focus of press corps ire are gauzy video features the White House’s staff videographer cranks out, taking advantage of behind-the-scenes access to Obama and his aides, such as a recent piece offering “exclusive footage” of First Lady Michelle Obama and Jill Biden touring Haiti.

“I think someone out there might mistake them for news, as opposed to slick publicity handouts for the White House,” said [Ann] Compton. “To me, they’re mocking what we do.”

. . .

And just what happens when you upset the White House?. . .

“It’s not unusual to have shouting matches, or the email equivalent of that. It’s very, very aggressive behavior, taking issue with a thing you’ve written, an individual word, all sorts of things,” said one White House reporter.

Some of this may stem from that toxic Obama mix of arrogance and inexperience:

Compton said that if the Obama White House’s sense of being besieged by the press is authentic it bespeaks a kind of innocence born from a candidate and a president who have never confronted a full-on Washington feeding frenzy.

“They ain’t seen nothing yet,” the longtime ABC reporter said. “Wait ‘till they have to start really circling the wagons when someone in the administration under attack, wait ‘till there’s a scandal, wait ‘till someone screws up, then it’ll get hostile.”

Right. The press is overwhelmingly sympathetic to Obama's agenda. How will he hold up when a real crisis hits his administration?

But it's no wonder they feel betrayed. And it's always a little sad when the spark dies, isn't it? Take it away, Frank.

Thanks to MichelleMalkin.com for the link.

Most recent posts here.