It looks to TCG as if the White House has simply thrown in the towel in its fight with Fox.
Which is to say, my earlier post, guided by a report from TVNewser, that the White House and Fox had reached some sort of "truce," now looks like it was way wide of the mark. Instead it now looks much more like the White House simply decided to stop fighting. That is, if Robert Gibbs of the White House reached out to Michael Clemente of Fox, well, what does that tell you? It tells me that the White House is raising the white flag, and crying "uncle." I mean, if the likes of Rahm Emanuel thought that they were winning, they'd keep fighting. You never want to stop when you're winning, until you've won decisively.
Mediaite's Steve Krakauer asks some good questions about this latest "truce":
So now what? Will Glenn Beck stop saying Van Jones? Will Sean Hannity stop talking about Kevin Jennings? We’ll see.
And Inside Cable News has an even better take, calling the whole idea of a "truce" overhyped:
Ok, there’s been some talk today about a meeting between White House Press SecretaryRobert Gibbs and FNC’s Michael Clemente about a “truce” between the White House and FNC.
I think the term “truce” is vastly over-hyping things. The attacks have been pretty one sided as far as “the war” goes. It’s been all White House practically. It’s the White House that got itself in this mess. It’s the White House that backed itself into a corner. FNC, on the other hand, doesn’t have anything to really back down from. So now we’re hearing the word “truce”. A truce implies that both sides knock it off (see: Olbermann/O’Reilly). What does FNC have to knock off? Glenn Beck’s rhetoric? Not going to happen. FNC doesn’t have anything to gain by throttling Beck. The whole reason Beck was hired by Ailes in the first place, as Beck tells it, is that Ailes wanted the equivalent of the “last defender at the gate” fighting off the hordes. Or something to that effect. Which, whether you like his tactics or not or agree with him or not, is exactly what Beck has been doing. Neutering or restraining Beck does not get you there. A “truce” from FNC’s side makes no sense.
But from the White House’s side, the term “truce” is a must. It needs something to cover its ass as it retreats from a bone headed, ill-thought out line of attack which has backfired more spectacularly than O’Reilly’s Phil Donahue petition all because there are some thin skinned types who think they can play hardball with a news network and win. So maybe FNC will throw the White House a bone, something superficially significant but ultimately tangential or unsubstantial, just to get the whole thing over with because in the very long term this conflict really is bad for both sides. But let’s not misunderstand what’s going on here. This is a truce to save face for the White House, not to make life easier for FNC.
That last line of ICN's--this is a face-saver for the WH--seems right to me. After all, the White House started this, now they seem interested in stopping it. That tells you plenty.
So once again, the test is what changes in the future. If Fox doesn't change its coverage, or its opinion analysis, then it will look like the WH has simply had enough of the fight. And it will look like that because it will be true.
And I just saw this, published just minutes ago, from Mike Allen Politico. It's short, so I'll use it verbatim:
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and Michael Clemente, Fox News' senior vice president for news, met at the White House for about 20 minutes on Wednesday morning, sources said.
Gibbs reached out to Clemente on Monday, the sources said.
The contents of the meeting remain private. A Fox source said that the marching orders are to “continue doing what we’re doing – reporting the news, asking tough questions and providing analysis/opinion on shows like O’Reilly, Beck and Hannity.”
Once again, if the WH asked for the meeting, and if Fox has no intention of changing, that's the WH throwing in the towel.
