In July, we learned from the New York Times that campaign and government stenographers have accepted the practice of manipulating quotes on behalf of Important People. Specifically, an official gives an interview, the reporter emails the quotes they intend to use back to that official, who cleans up the quote. The Times tells us that reporters believe nothing of substance is lost in the process. We are also told that reporters complain about this practice, but it appears they are too obsessed with access to say No, and too lazy to write articles that offer legitimate analysis (instead of propagandistic quotes from 'insiders').
Today, thanks to Talking Points Memo, we get to see this practice in action.
Because the events in Libya are a hot, evolving topic, the New York Times seems to have felt it needed to run its story on Willard Mitt Romney's response before getting an OK on all the quotes it ran. Here is the key quote from his campaign, found in the original article:
“We’ve had this consistent critique and narrative on Obama’s foreign policy, and we felt this was a situation that met our critique, that Obama really has been pretty weak in a number of ways on foreign policy, especially if you look at his dealings with the Arab Spring and its aftermath,” one of Mr. Romney’s senior advisers said on Wednesday. “I think the reality is that while there may be a difference of opinion regarding issues of timing, I think everyone stands behind the critique of the administration, which we believe has conducted its foreign policy in a feckless manner.”
[emphasis mine]
Fits pretty perfectly into most criticisms of Mitt Romney's campaign, doesn't it?
Lacking any real solutions to the problems we face, the campaign constantly uses and abuses the same lines of attack, regardless the situation. Regardless the accuracy of the critique. Regardless of the ongoing nature of the crisis being critiqued ("issues of timing").
Realizing he had been a bit too honest in his original critique - and further realizing the trouble of walking back an already-published (online) quote - Lanhee Chen decided to offer The Times a cropped version of the same quote, on the record. The Times, excited to get to publish this insider's name, let him crop his own quote to meet the needs of his campaign.
Mr. Romney’s camp was surprised by the blowback. “While there may be differences of opinion regarding issues of timing,” Mr. Chen said, “I think everyone stands behind the critique of the administration, which we believe has conducted its foreign policy in a feckless manner.”
Did you catch that? No more reference to the campaign's inability to play Foreign Policy Mad Libs with any sense of the weight of the situation before them.
This happens every day behind the scenes. Campaign (or government) official says something that doesn't perfectly fit the message. Journalist verifies the quote before publishing. Campaign official edits their quote. The public doesn't just get useless propaganda, it gets a press release, edited for content by the campaign itself, then stamped with the byline of the stenographer.
Massive h/t to Talking Points Memo for not only catching this article switcheroo, but archiving the original copy for all to see, too.
7:09 PM PT: As Clem Yeobright points out in the comments, the Public Editor at The Times is covering the changing quotes. She points out that the articles and quotes were dramatically different and that the final article muddled its critique of Romney's response.