The Patsy propagandist
“ Dear readers:
Full Article
In 2003, I agreed to run a paid ad on my syndicated television show, promoting the Department of Education’s No Child Left Behind Act. I subsequently used my column space to support that legislation. This represents an obvious conflict of interests. People have used this conflict of interests to portray my column as being paid for by the Bush Administration. Nothing could be further from the truth. ”
Armstrong Williams is out of the closet as a bought and paid for shill for the Bush administration's propaganda arm. Don't let his "apology" fool you -- this was by no means an innocent mistake. And we shouldn't let this patsy distract from the shameless and ongoing acts of the government.
Read On! |
 |
|---|---|
|
Williams supported "No Child Left Behind" anyway, so there was no harm done by taking a kickback. (Lucky guy -- paid for nothing!) "I have long felt that school vouchers hold the greatest promise of ending the racial education gap in this country….That is why I have vigorously supported school vouchers for the past decade—in print, on TV, during media appearances and in lectures." "Please know that I supported school vouchers long before the Department of Education ran a single ad on my TV Show. I did not change my views just because my PR firm was receiving paid advertising promoting the No Child Left Behind Act." |
While Armstrong did offer general support for vouchers, it wasn't nearly as enthusiastic -- a LexisNexis search found one article from 1993 to 2003 (and 29 from 2003 to 2005, after he says he was paid). And despite his general support for vouchers, he criticized the "No Child Left Behind" act before being paid off. In a May, 2001 article ("Bush education bill gets watered down") he wrote "By letting vouchers fall by the wayside and by throwing more money at public schools than any president had previously imagined, Bush scooped out the soul of his own education proposal." He seemed proud of his criticism in an appearance on FOX News in June, 2001: "On the issue like where he [Bush] just totally capitulated to Senator Ted Kennedy on his education plan, on vouchers, which he's trying to revive today, we [right-wing radio commentators] certainly criticized him on that because the plan eventually became the Kennedy plan." |
|
The payment was for a "paid ad," rather than promotion disguised as independent commentary. "In 2003, I agreed to run a paid ad on my syndicated television show, promoting the Department of Education’s No Child Left Behind Act. I subsequently used my column space to support that legislation. This represents an obvious conflict of interests. People have used this conflict of interests to portray my column as being paid for by the Bush Administration. Nothing could be further from the truth." |
The payola was for Williams' commentary, as well as for special interviews with Ed. Secretary Rod Paige and for using his contacts to get others to write about it. USA Today reported that the contract required Williams "'to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts,' and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004... [It] also shows that the Education Department ... arranged with Williams to use contacts with America's Black Forum, a group of black broadcast journalists, 'to encourage the producers to periodically address' NCLB. He persuaded radio and TV personality Steve Harvey to invite Paige onto his show twice." |
|
Justice has been served by Williams losing his syndication representative, so he can keep on writing commentary. "I accept full responsibility for my lack of good judgment. I am paying the price. Tribune Media has cancelled my column. And I have learned a valuable lesson. I just want to assure you that this will never happen again, and to ask for your forgiveness." |
Williams still promotes himself under "self-syndication," and he apparently plans on keeping his TV and radio shows. When Williams decided to enter the PR business, shilling for industry and government clients, he ought to have made a choice between his career as a quasi-journalist commentator and his career as a PR flack. Now that dilemma has been decided for him. He is a paid shill. Anybody who runs his columns or shows needs to either fire him or make sure their audience knows they are running an infomercial. |
Armstrong Williams deception is much deeper than he admits. He did not merely "run ads" for the Department of Education -- he shamelessly used his TV, radio and print media operations to plug the administration line on a program even he didn't like, and passed it off his as own "commentary." His bogus "commentator" career -- running a PR firm all the while -- is now over. The question for him is whether his employers are willing to continue the make-believe.
But the far bigger question is for the Bush administration. We already know that the same firm hired by the Education Department for Williams' payola was also paid to rank newspaper coverage of "No Child Left Behind" and produce fake news spots ("video news releases") promoting the Bush program, in which PR professionals pretended to be news reporters. We know the administration also used "video news releases" to promote Bush's Medicare law before the election -- ads which the Government Accounting Office judged to be illegal "covert propaganda."
We're also learning about a "tactical plan" at the Social Security Administration, where the agency itself is being made to promote Bush's privatization scheme.
And Armstrong Williams let slip to David Corn that he wasn't the only one on the take from the government:
"This happens all the time," he told me. "There are others." Really? I said. Other conservative commentators accept money from the Bush administration? I asked Williams for names. "I'm not going to defend myself that way," he said. The issue right now, he explained, was his own mistake. Well, I said, what if I call you up in a few weeks, after this blows over, and then ask you? No, he said.
The question is: what else is the new propaganda arm of the Bush administration doing with our tax dollars?
Bush would like Armstrong Williams to take the fall for this. Responding to USA Today last week, the president said:
I do think that your story brought up serious concerns. And I think there needs to be a clear distinction between journalism and advocacy. And I appreciate the way Armstrong Williams has handled this, because he has made it very clear that he made a mistake. And I think all of us — the Cabinet needs to take a good look and make sure this kind of thing doesn't happen again.
No, Mr. President, Williams the PR flack didn't make a mistake -- he did exactly what he was paid by you to do. We made a mistake in believing he was a "journalist" or "commentator." You made a mistake in letting a crack of light shine on your propaganda operation, and we want to know what else you've got hidden in there.
comments@polianna.com
