Jan. 23rd, 2009
Day 4 of the failed Obama administration
Jan. 23rd, 2009 10:21 amThe press corps is frustrated with the lack of transparency so far:
A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.
Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.
Not saying the Obama administration's feet shouldn't be held to the fire. But the WH press corps spent eight years transcribing whatever Ari, Scott, and Dana fed them. Now they're chafing. I don't know what to say. All the actions I want to take involve bitch-slapping.
A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.
Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.
Not saying the Obama administration's feet shouldn't be held to the fire. But the WH press corps spent eight years transcribing whatever Ari, Scott, and Dana fed them. Now they're chafing. I don't know what to say. All the actions I want to take involve bitch-slapping.
Day 4 of the failed Obama administration
Jan. 23rd, 2009 10:21 amThe press corps is frustrated with the lack of transparency so far:
A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.
Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.
Not saying the Obama administration's feet shouldn't be held to the fire. But the WH press corps spent eight years transcribing whatever Ari, Scott, and Dana fed them. Now they're chafing. I don't know what to say. All the actions I want to take involve bitch-slapping.
A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.
Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.
Not saying the Obama administration's feet shouldn't be held to the fire. But the WH press corps spent eight years transcribing whatever Ari, Scott, and Dana fed them. Now they're chafing. I don't know what to say. All the actions I want to take involve bitch-slapping.
The thing is
Jan. 23rd, 2009 06:49 pm...even though I knew the wip needed work, and in many of the places that Editor pointed out--this is a 5-page letter, single-spaced--I still need to adjust to the facts that the letter is indeed here and the wip is not perfect. I knew it wasn't perfect, but I was, of course, willing to be proved wrong. No such luck for five previous books. No such luck now. Time to dig the tool box out from under the bed.
They say that it takes ten good reviews to counteract one bad one. Well, a revision letter, no matter how encouraging it is in places, is a bad review. Granted, it is a bad review of the constructive sort, a bad review that no one else need ever read. The issues it points out should be repaired, never to see the light of day. For the most part. There may be some room for discussion here or there...
Not asking for sympathy or pats on the back. It's just something I need to work through before I settle down to work. The realization that I still have miles to go before this book sleeps.
They say that it takes ten good reviews to counteract one bad one. Well, a revision letter, no matter how encouraging it is in places, is a bad review. Granted, it is a bad review of the constructive sort, a bad review that no one else need ever read. The issues it points out should be repaired, never to see the light of day. For the most part. There may be some room for discussion here or there...
Not asking for sympathy or pats on the back. It's just something I need to work through before I settle down to work. The realization that I still have miles to go before this book sleeps.
The thing is
Jan. 23rd, 2009 06:49 pm...even though I knew the wip needed work, and in many of the places that Editor pointed out--this is a 5-page letter, single-spaced--I still need to adjust to the facts that the letter is indeed here and the wip is not perfect. I knew it wasn't perfect, but I was, of course, willing to be proved wrong. No such luck for five previous books. No such luck now. Time to dig the tool box out from under the bed.
They say that it takes ten good reviews to counteract one bad one. Well, a revision letter, no matter how encouraging it is in places, is a bad review. Granted, it is a bad review of the constructive sort, a bad review that no one else need ever read. The issues it points out should be repaired, never to see the light of day. For the most part. There may be some room for discussion here or there...
Not asking for sympathy or pats on the back. It's just something I need to work through before I settle down to work. The realization that I still have miles to go before this book sleeps.
They say that it takes ten good reviews to counteract one bad one. Well, a revision letter, no matter how encouraging it is in places, is a bad review. Granted, it is a bad review of the constructive sort, a bad review that no one else need ever read. The issues it points out should be repaired, never to see the light of day. For the most part. There may be some room for discussion here or there...
Not asking for sympathy or pats on the back. It's just something I need to work through before I settle down to work. The realization that I still have miles to go before this book sleeps.