Dawkins writes:

I don't understand what the problem is here. The government has merely created and disseminated these "video news releases" to educate members of the public about all the fantabulous benefits they'll receive from President Bush's Medicare reforms!

What's so wrong with the government wanting to do its own "journalism"? Why are journalists so snotty all the time about insisting that they're the only ones who can do real journalism?

From the New York Times today:

Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines.

The videos are intended for use in local television news programs. Several include pictures of President Bush receiving a standing ovation from a crowd cheering as he signed the Medicare law on Dec. 8.

The materials were produced by the Department of Health and Human Services, which called them video news releases, but the source is not identified. Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting."

But the production company, Home Front Communications, said it had hired her to read a script prepared by the government.

Another video, intended for Hispanic audiences, shows a Bush administration official being interviewed in Spanish by a man who identifies himself as a reporter named Alberto Garcia.

Another segment shows a pharmacist talking to an elderly customer. The pharmacist says the new law "helps you better afford your medications," and the customer says, "It sounds like a good idea." Indeed, the pharmacist says, "A very good idea."
…

In the videos and advertisements, the government urges beneficiaries to call a toll-free telephone number, 1-800-MEDICARE. People who call that number can obtain recorded information about prescription drug benefits if they recite the words "Medicare improvement."

At least the publicity campaign won't be costing taxpayers anything. It's a "win-win" for seniors and consumers of prescription drugs:

Other documents suggest the scope of the publicity campaign: $12.6 million for advertising this winter, $18.5 million to publicize drug discount cards this spring, about $18.5 million this summer, $30 million for a year of beneficiary education starting this fall and $44 million starting in the fall of 2005.
…

Federal law prohibits the use of federal money for "publicity or propaganda purposes" not authorized by Congress.

"Federal law"? That sounds to me a little like liberal political hate speech…

In a related story, it has been determined that George W. Bush is himself a journalist, analyzing and critiquing his own policy proposals in a rigorously objective and dispassionate fashion for the benefit of an informed and educated journalism-consuming public:

"In Washington, I'm a corrupt fraud lying to you. "


Giuseppe Abote adds:

Another ridiculous but true news item.

It is almost as though, borrowing from George Saunders, the administration made a list of wrongs that it had not yet committed but which were theoretically possible -- and then did them.

Put this one alongside formerly-plausible-only-in-theory shennagins such as:

1. Stocking the seemingly enthusiastic audience at a Bush campaign speech entirely with non-English speakers;

2. Classifying fast-food burger assembly as a "manufacturing" job;

3. Accusing John Kerry of being a spy for North Korea;

4. Demanding that entire concrete roadways be erected between the helipad and the groundbreaking site of that Long Island 9/11 memorial because (real quote) "the president's feet are not to touch the dirt."

And this is merely from the past two weeks or so.

Blicero adds: Do you think Bush is some kind of 'male witch' who if his shoes touch the dirt he'll melt? Is there some implicit allusion to Mary Magdalene wiping the dirt from Jesus' feet with her hair?