White House botched communications on the OBL killing

[Bragi]

Aside from getting/killing OBL, it seems logical that the biggest priority of the Obama White House in this operation would surely have to be making sure that the story comes out accurately and fully, so that everyone knows exactly what happened, without any contradictions or gaps in the official story.

This the Obama White House has failed to do. Yes, they got the media pop they obviously hoped for when the announced the killing of OBL late Sunday, but then almost immediately found themselves to be changing the official story as more information came to public attention.

The story has now had OBL armed, then not armed; they had him using a woman as a human shield, then changed the story on this.

This kind of confusion on facts is exactly what they needed to avoid to make sure that, 10 years from now, there won't still be people, especially people in the Muslim world, plausibly claiming OBL never was killed; or that he was killed illegally and unjustly; that he wasn't killed because he was already dead; that there was or was not a firefight; etc. etc.

This opportunity to reject the official story was totally avoidable, but it appears to me the WH was so anxious to make sure they got "credit" for this that they issued details about the event Sunday night long before they really knew the facts.

Saying the President was viewing the event through helmet-cams made the changing storyline even more problematic. Was the President not then in position to make sure no-one sent out misinformation about the event?

I therefore blame the White House for monumental and egregious incompetence in dealing with communications around this event.

Domestically, the result of this incompetence may be that the repugs will have little difficulty eventually arguing, with some plausibility, that Obama somehow botched this job, and is now changing the story to cover up his failure.

[jillan]

1. Did you watch Rachel last nite? If not, you should. She does a whole segment on

reporting a story while it's developing. It'll make you feel better...it did for me.

[RegieRocker]

4. This is the fault of the media period.

[EFerrari]

128. No, not really. Brennan gave out information that was wrong.

And there will probably be more corrections.

On the other hand, even if 15 or so people in the White House watched in real time, we don't know what they could see. Wasn't it the middle of the night in Pakistan? If the family was in bed, a lot of that video could have been dark.

The real problem, imo, is delivering this story to the public was one of the last tasks in a really long working week end. Everybody was probably beat by the time they got to that one.

[Ohio Joe]

6. That was an excellent job by her (as usual)

With 24/7 news reporting the way we have now, I do not understand why anyone expects first reports to be completely accurate.

[KurtNYC]

36. Nothing new -- Churchill said 'A lie can get halfway around the world before

the truth get its pants on.'

[iwishiwas]

91. yes, i recall that quote or something along those lines.

[blondeatlast]

7. Won't happen. Can't challenge the narrative. even if it was a good piece. nt

[seabeyond]

24. it wont make him feel better. we should be clever enough, experienced enough to already "get it"

gotta work hard to find something to create obama as evil. bad. a liar.....

[Bragi]

69. Where did I say Obama is "evil" or "a liar"?

I think you should either demonstrate where I said that, or retract.

I feel safe predicting, of course, that you won't do either.

[Bragi]

54. This isn't about "reporting"

This is about the White House announcing late Sunday night the killing of OBL, when they clearly did not have all the facts they needed.

Nor was there any evident compelling reason to be announcing this story on a hyped late Sunday night newser.

On whatever R. had to say (I missed it) I don't think the story "evolved" such that new information was added to earlier information, which is common.

What happened is that the story "changed" in several key respects, with the WH having to admit that information they put out earlier was simply wrong.

I call this poor communications, and think they should be called on it. I don't think anyone is doing anyone any favors by refusing out of misplaced loyalty to acknowledge poor communications when we see it.

[seabeyond]

85. WHO is the source sunday night. a name. who is it.

oh wait... there is not a name. it is someone anonymous that was not in the know that you depend on without any part on you to ensure the info is valid. just like media is not responsible to ensure what they provide their audience is valid.

instead, blame obama who really ahs NOTHING to do with it. yet, he was immediately (within 24 hours) correcting the incorrect info press put out adn fools bought into because they were to lazy or incapable of recognizing an evolving story with info from an anonymous source not in the know

who is the sucker

[WinkyDink]

135. It didn't need to be reported "while it's developing." They delayed the reporting for a significant

amount of time. Enough to get people on the same page.

[MineralMan]

2. You "therefore blame the White House?"

Really?

That's just peachy.

UNREC.

[dennis4868]

5. remember....

this is DU....Obama and the WH get blamed for everything....EVERYTHING.....

[MineralMan]

12. Only by some.

Most DUers understand the problems of instant reporting of things like this, and are waiting for accurate information. That usually takes a few days, at least. I think it's wrong to say that DU (as a whole) blames Obama for everything. Only a tiny minority of DUers do that.

[dennis4868]

3. Okay.....

I know this is DU so we have always blame Obama....but it seems to me that the WH was only repeating info they were getting from the CIA and Pentagon....I don't think Obama was there when Bin Laden was killed, right? There was a rush to get info out to the public and when you do that sometimes you get things wrong. The WH could not say to the world, "come back in a week and we will let you know what happened." When things are moving fast, like the bin Laden killing, the info will be blury for awhile......

[Armstead]

15. For once I'll agree with you

It would have been impossible to keep it a secret until all of the facts were in. There would have been an escalating tsnuami of rumors, speculations, etc.

Letting it leak out slowly would have led to even more confusion and fabrications.

So the WH did the right thing by laying it out quickly. The confused response is more a problem in the way the public handles information than the way it was handled by the WH.

[Bragi]

72. I don't see how facts bear you out

Why would it have been so big a problem to keep a top secret operation that had been planned for a long time secret at least overnight so details could be confirmed?

And lets say somehow the story did get out overnight, what major harm would have been done to US interests if the WH had waited until Monday morning to make the announcement?

I think that any adverse consequence of waiting would have been much less than the loss of credibility that would occur by having the official story unravel in important details in the hours following the President's unnecessary, late Sunday night newser.

[Armstead]

111. It's not what would come up overnightv

11 pm Sunday Vs 7 am sunday not making any difference

The info holes, contradictory accounts, etc have been coming more the longer it has been public....there's never the ideal time to release it to avoid such things

Now for example there's this clamor of whether to release photos....after that it'll be something else

The basic factbis there is no way to prevent the speculative sideshows.

EEG handled it as well as anyone could in our current media environment

[leveymg]

8. Very well argued. Recced.

[Buzz Clik]

9. "monumental and egregious incompetence". That's a whole lot of incompetence.

And why do you need the very finest of details on this incident? Are you filming a docu-drama and want it "just so"?

[ProSense]

10. "White House botched communications on the OBL killing

...Domestically, the result of this incompetence may be that the repugs will have little difficulty eventually arguing, with some plausibility, that Obama somehow botched this job, and is now changing the story to cover up his failure."

Send this to John Boehner. No doubt he's searching for a angle to spin this. Obama's Katrina?

When has there ever been seemless, accurate and definitive reporting after any major event, especially a huge clandestine operation?

"I therefore blame the White House for monumental and egregious incompetence in dealing with communications around this event. "


What nonsense.

[Solomon]

64. As I said, the bigger the achievement, the more the griping.

I didn't hear Obama say any of the things in his inital address that people are now saying the White House purposely lied about. Not one of them.

Yet, some yokel claiming anonymity makes stupid conjectures, and all of a sudden, Obama was trying to lie for propaganda purposes.

Standard fare these days.

[JTFrog]

11. What a fucking joke.

Obama bad...Obama admin bad... And the fabulous competent GOP is gonna upstage him on this?

How's that been working out for them so far?

:rofl:
:rofl:

But don't fret, I'm sure they appreciate you trying to help!

[woo me with science]

13. Oh for pete's sake. nt

[KittyWampus]

14. Confess- You were looking for anything to blame on the Obama White House. ANYTHING.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. DU is running out of sharks to jump.

Therefore I can offer only a humble facepalm.

[Richardo]

17. Breaking news is NEVER accurate.

I learned this in 1986 when first breathless reports out of Chernobyl indicated 20,000 people had instantly been killed. Since then, I rarely even read the accounts in depth until a week has gone by. And I NEVER watch television 'analysis' until they make a Frontline episode about it.

It's impossible to know exactly what happened in that compound - I'll bet even the SEALs involved each have a different version. And why wouldn't they? Watching through a helmet-cam is probably more confusing than listening to audio. I can't even follow what's happening in the fight scenes in 'Batman Begins'.

[Ganja Ninja]

18. Getting the story out to the press was not "monumental".

Why are you trying to build a mountain out of an imaginary molehill? Shouldn't you be posting this crap over at Fear-republic?

[Bragi]

30. yes, it was monumentally botched

Instead of creating certainty and allowing everyone to reflect and move on, the White House went too early with the story, created uncertainty and played into the hands of their enemies.

Other than that, it did a great job communicating.

[Ganja Ninja]

33. Go sell crazy some place else. n/t

[Bragi]

42. Why have you no argument to make?

I see you are angry that someone accused the White House of poor communications.

Beyond venom, do you have any actual counter-arguments you'd like to make to any of the points I raised in support of my criticism?

I suspect not, but feel free to surprise me.

[Ganja Ninja]

113. I have no argument because you have no valid charges.

If there was any hyperbole put out on this story it came from the media trying to one up each other.

[Bragi]

118. You wrote:

Okay, you're getting a bit closer to a real argument, so we're making progress.

You wrote: If there was any hyperbole put out on this story it came from the media trying to one up each other.

Okay, so that does constitute asserted evidence, which can be part of an argument. The problem here is that I believe the asserted evidence is untrue. The misinformation that has resulted in the continuous unraveling of the official storyline since Sunday was provided to media by administration spokespeople.

See http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/04/osama-bin-laden-killing-us-story-change

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/white-house-osama-bin-laden-wife-died-as-human-shield-13511717

etc.

[SidDithers]

19. Piffle...nt

Sid

[seabeyond]

20. the misinformation started with "an official FAMILIAR with the situation wanting anonymity"

and media ran with it.

a huge story, media rushing it and this is where you chose to criticize

obama did a huge thing, accomplished something big, and this pithily shit is what you focused on.

bully for you, you can criticize

[Pirate Smile]

21. Oh, Bullshit. The tendency of Democrats/left-leaning folks to so quickly turn on their own and be

proud of it is a big part of Democrats frequent message problem.

Republicans don't need to attack a Democratic Administration. Plenty of Dems will do it for them.

Brennan gave his first read out of what happened to the press around 12 hours after the raid happened. It is no surprise that as the Seals get debriefed that more info comes out. First reports were based on the chaos of a nighttime raid.

Arm-chair keyword know-it-alls have the luxury of no responsibility & all the time in the world to just bitch.

Edit to add - The WHITE HOUSE is clearing up the story, NOT the media or anyone else.

Also - SCREW YOU.

[Bragi]

22. Gosh, you're all correct and I'm wrong

Great points being made (above) that I missed the point: this is the Obama White House, which never does anything wrong.

This being the case, on reflection, it turns out this was actually a triumph in effective communications, and I was just too dumb to catch it.

So to recap:

Obama is still perfect, and so was communications around this event. The constant changing of the official narrative was actually a brilliant strategy to, ah, sustain media interest in the story?

Way to go White House!

[seabeyond]

25. ya... pretty damn clear we are right and you are wrong, but you will continue with your trashing

and nto learn a damn thing. it really is pathetic

[Bragi]

31. It was a triumph I tell ya!

Sure, the way the White House put out the information may have caused confusion and loss of credibility about their version of what happened.

But it was done brilliantly, for sure.

I see that now because of your thoughtful counter arguments.

Oh wait, you didn't make any thoughtful counter-arguments.

Nevermind.

[seabeyond]

34. you read the article i gave you and you say.... what is the relevance. official familiar with

situation wanting anonymity.

this is where you put all your conspiracy.... in a person that was "familiar" not necessarily in the know giving info to media that they ran with

then you call wh liars.

[Bragi]

38. I didn't call them liars

I called them incompetent communicators in this instance.

I get a feeling I'm debating several hard-core know-nothings here who can't even read.

[seabeyond]

40. the know nothing is your incredible lack of ability to get evolving story and how all stories

evolve as they are rushed by media to get info out there by incompetent anonymous sources

[Bragi]

46. The WH was too eager to announce immediately

The WH did not need to call a late Sunday night newser to get this story out. The event had been in the workls for some time and they could have waited until they knew all the facts and could get the story out properly.

However, they didn't do this properly, they rushed to the microphones, and that's why the official story has unraveled in several key details, enough to put a cloud of suspicion over the whole thing.

Given the importance of getting this story out cleanly and effectively, I see this as being monumentally poor communications.

[seabeyond]

53. some anonymous official in the unknown is the whitehouse? nt

[seabeyond]

55. where is YOUR responsibility at looking at sources. where is MEDIA responsiblity

in confirming info before giving to the masses.

you want story fast... as all are bitching not getting it fat enough.
brennen misspoke midmorning. obama correct at night

the OUTRAGE. how dare he take too long to correct. give it more, faster, inaccurate is fine, then bitch

[KurtNYC]

44. sarcasm is the least efficient form of communication and it requires

very little effort on the part of the writer.

Sarcasm is hardly a 'thoughtful counter argument.'

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. Straw man.

Nobody is saying Obama is perfect. What everybody is saying that the first information that comes out about a complex event is often inaccurate. So if an administration official reported facts as they had been conveyed to him by the Pentagon, and later, after the SEAL team had been thoroughly debriefed some of that information turns out to have been incorrect, that is not evidence of gross incompetence.

[Bragi]

32. I respecfully disagree

This operation was in the works for a long time. The White House had the option to simply wait until all the facts were in and solid before making its announcement. There was nothing requiring that they make a late Sunday night announcement. They chose to do this. They are now paying the price as the official story unravels on key details.

That's my point. Whether one agrees or not with my point, the idea that this kind of critique is unfair is simply ridiculous.

[uponit7771]

49. Then it's obvious you haven't dealt with communicating through too many complex situations

...it's common places for the overall facts to be right and the details to be either skewed or wrong all together.

Regards

[Bragi]

57. That's not actually so

I have a whole lot of experience in exactly this area.

That's why I am critical of the performance of the Obama White House on this.

They did Obama no favors by going out prematurely to announce this event.

[Javaman]

39. responding to your own post is very unattractive.

only highlights your fail.

[dionysus]

62. "Gosh, you're all correct and I'm wrong" correct. "Obama is still perfect" no one said that.

strawman fail.

[phleshdef]

73. Geez, cut the whining. Its unbecoming.

[treestar]

82. A bit martyrish

BTW Osama didn't get to be a martyr. Obama zapped him.

[SidDithers]

100. Awwww. Did the mean people disagreeing with you hurt your feelings?...nt

Sid

[Teaser]

101. get used to it

.

[WilliamPitt]

102. Another rhetorical triumph for DU

Or something.

[DCKit]

23. I read an awful lot of outlandishly fantastic CT crap right here yesterday.

There's just no stopping it with a story this big.

[lonestarnot]

26. The only thing botched is Al. So now put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[KurtNYC]

29. "when you trust you television, what get is what you got

'cause when they own the information
they can bend it all they want"

OBL is dead. A week from now this MSM tempest will be forgotten and OBL will still be dead. In fact tomorrow after the WTC visit, none if this will be discussed.

TV is dying bc of the kind of stuff you are repeating in your OP; it's BS.

[spanone]

35. botched? bwahahahahahaaa

[Javaman]

37. fail. peddle this someplace else. nt

[MatthewStLouis]

41. The fact remains: We got him! Obama put his arse on the line and he now deserves credit for it..

Can you imagine if the thing had really been botched?! Lawrence O'Donnell mentioned Jimmy Carter's experience last night; the failed op into Iran to rescue American hostages. People died, and Carter got roasted, whether he deserved it or not. Obama would be totally done if both those chopper's had crashed and men had been killed. Unlike other presidents who chose to launch missiles from afar, or perhaps would rather just bomb the hell out of someplace, Obama took the greater risk. People might say, "well, he didn't risk his own skin". Well, hell! What do you expect a President or any real leader to do?!! They make the tough choices and they reap the consequences.

[Bragi]

65. I never said otherwise

I said communications about the operation were botched, not the operation itself.

[LiberalFighter]

43. It wasn't that the White House botched the news

It was the person who reported the information not knowing the facts and filling in the gaps without confirming.

IMO a good press person would get all the W's & H before reporting.

And if I recall this has happened many times in previous administrations with events that are ongoing.

[uponit7771]

52. Nah, it's Obama's fault.....he let Bambi get killed so to some folk he aint ish

[SoCalDem]

45. The official story should have been this:

Osama is dead.. We are debriefing the team members, and when all the debriefing is done and the tapes analyzed, we will release the details..

and then say no more..

[Bragi]

58. Agreed.

The only proviso is that I don't think they actually had to say anything until they had their story straight sometime the next day.

My rationale is that this operation had been planned for a long time, and there was no way anyone could "beat" them to the story.

And say AQ had (inexplicably) prematurely announced OBL's killing before the WH, so what?

Obama was still able to take full credit for doing this, and he wouldn't now be facing doubt about whether the WH is actually telling the true story on this.

[ProSense]

77. Yup,

that would have prevented all conspiracy theories, handwringing and speculation.

Can you imagine: What are they hiding? Why did it take so long to release the information? Get out the shredders! Talking points being issued!

The OP would have been about the botched attempt at a coverup.

The WH displayed complete incompetence in not getting the information ready and out in an appropriate time frame...minutes!!!!!

[CrossChris]

47. All the OP is saying is that the WH looks bad for having to change such a major facet of the story

Why is that not a valid topic for discussion?

[uponit7771]

51. Who said that facet was major, also...people on DU nick pick the WH all the time about stupid shit.

[CrossChris]

56. Whether OBL was armed or not is a major facet to the story & the mission.

Did we aim to take him alive at all? That's an important facet to the mission. Were we there to kill OBL, or get information from him that could prevent future attacks? Those aren't minor details.

[Bragi]

59. Good question

Some time we should in fact discuss the broader question: "Why does the Obama White House suck so bad at communications."

Because, in my view, it does generally suck at communications, and this serves the President and the people poorly.

[seabeyond]

88. because people are looking for ways for wh to look bad. unreasonably refusing

to allow an evolving story EVOLVES and media and audience has a responsibility to recognize that fact and question ANONYMOUS official not in the know.

[CrossChris]

90. But the official wasn't anonymous. It was WH Counterterrorism Advisor John Brennan.

He first said that OBL fired back, then the White House corrected him the next day.

[seabeyond]

93. that was monday morning. i am talking about the initial person who first gave info

to media.

after brennen obama came out that night and corrected him. so we had his speaker say soemthing wrong and obama immediately corrected. why are we not applauding obama for correcting the info so quickly?

[CrossChris]

95. No, Brennan gave the incorrect info.

I will double check.

eta: 'Intelligence officials and Obama “extensively” discussed the prospect of capturing bin Laden alive during the U.S. military raid on his compound Sunday, Brennan said, but were “certainly were planning for the possibility … that he would likely resist arrest.” In the end, the al Qaeda leader fought back and was “therefore killed in a firefight,” Brennan said.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/02/brennan-we-would-have-taken-bin-laden-alive_n_856541.html

[seabeyond]

103. yes. and monday night, that same day... obama corrected him.

that is a good thing.

[seabeyond]

106. here is what i am talking about. someone familiar (not in the know). sunday night

http://www.krem.com/home/Navy-Seals-kill-Osama-Bin-Laden-in-Pakistan-compound-121069234.html

An official familiar with the operation said bin Laden fired on U.S. forces and was hit by a barrage of carefully aimed return fire.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because aspects of the operation remain classified.

The official says two dozen SEALs in night-vision goggles dropped into the high-walled compound in Pakistan by sliding down ropes from Chinook helicopters in the overnight raid.

______________________

so brennen picked up on this. could not say (did not know) if fire was returned.

obama clarified that night

EVOLVING story. this is what happens when people rush adn OUR job to recognize

[Robb]

48. No.

DU analysis notwithstanding, this is the most media-savvy White House in a generation. They are fully aware, I'm certain, that the first story is the only one that gets ink. Corrections and second-day stories will go where they always go -- to paraphrase Berke Breathed, on page 99Z under the tide tables. :)

This one was crafted, IMO, to deflate bin Laden's image worldwide. And it was all, you'll notice, quite carefully couched -- there's nothing for the GOP to play with here. The B-list Republicans who try will get spanked.

Bookmarked. :)

[Bragi]

61. I very much disagree

I think this White House sucks at communications, which serves the President and the people very poorly. The botching of comms around the OBL killing is but one example.

[Robb]

122. "Botching" would imply something bad happened as a result of the communication.

It didn't; you're presuming some future where the GOP seizes upon these inconsistencies to the detriment of Democrats.

I'm telling you I doubt very much there is a Republican who has been in politics more than 20 minutes who will come anywhere near criticizing the administration on OBL.

[CrossChris]

126. Something bad did happen. Not only Arab, but Euro news outlets are doubting our story.

I don't think it's a HUGE deal, especially if we can clarify the narrative. If not, then we will always have problems convincing a percentage of the population---and not just the conspiracy theorists, but people who are troubled by the WH's backtracking on key details in the story.

[Historic NY]

50. Its call Monday morning quarterbacking & unnamed sources....

all adding there own special touches. The computer generate graphics were even wrong. There is lots of crap coming out and spinning from the media. Every major news story has this crap who can sensationalize the story even more.

[dionysus]

60. what a steaming pile of garbage.

:rofl:

[Bragi]

63. Excellent argument

Oh wait, there was no argument, just vitriole.

But thanks for that. Your call is important to us.

:hi:

[dionysus]

66. steaming garbage is a correct description of your OP.

:hi:

[CrossChris]

70. Now why not put forth an argument of your own that shows how the WH DIDN'T botch communications

I think the name calling in this case is unwarranted & an attempt to bully. Why not attempt to contradict him with reason and facts?

[Bragi]

74. Very impressive indeed!

[Bragi]

94. I feared I might have to do this

Apparently, the idea of what constitutes an "argument" eludes you.

Okay, maybe I can help.

Calling a statement "steaming garbage",a s you did, is just an exclamation.

To make an "argument" you need to cite some evidence, or some logic or rationale, to justify your exclamatory statement.

Got it?

If so, would you like to take a shot at making an argument in support of your statement?

[dionysus]

110. you're not making an argument, you're grasping at straws to continue your campaign against the

administration. it's all you do, but you don't do it very well.

[Bragi]

117. My campaign against the administration?

Pointing out poor communications by the WH constitutes "a campaign against the administration"?

That's just weird.

So how invested are you in promoting criticism-free discussion of the Obama administration?

How's that working out for you?

[Lisa D]

67. You should write for Fox News

You've got their style of spin down pat.

[Bragi]

75. Right, because any criticism of the WH is unfair, if not treasonous

I get it.

[JVS]

68. They had to rush the story because the East Coast was starting to go to bed.

As a result they fucked up on the details.

[CrossChris]

71. Why would you rush such an important story when you know details will be scrutinized?

To say the WH failed at this aspect of communications--I don't see why that's controversial at all.

It seems like this OP is getting ganged up on, just for saying ANYTHING negative about the way this all has been handled.

Like it or not, the WH having to change its story on whether OBL was armed and used his wife as a human shield vastly hurts our credibility around the world with this story. Personally, I can buy that it was hastily reported and delivered, but I think you have to take care with a story like this so that there's NO room for denial from the Arab world.

[phleshdef]

76. Because thats the way it pretty much goes down with all big events like this.

I give any administration a good deal of leeway on something like that, at least a week, before I start taking accounts as serious and official. Its not a problem with the WH. Its a problem with people looking for things to gripe over without giving a reasonable chance for the whole story to be put together. No one should have expected full and honest details to come to fruition that quickly. In either event, its not important. We will all soon know the full account, in its entirety.

[CrossChris]

87. What big events have been comparable to this? Seems getting details right would have top priority

at least priority over getting the story out before the east coast went to bed.

I'd rather the admin were thinking globally on that count.

[phleshdef]

97. I've yet to experience one major news event where conflicting stories were not present.

Name any major shooting, any major military operation, any major terrorist attack, etc.

Regardless, the presence of conflicting stories within the first 48 hours of the event means nothing to me. Its not a problem. Its not a big deal. Its not a "failure of communication". Its just something that happens. And, as expected, the conflicts are being corrected and we are finding out what really happened. Maybe I just have a more seasoned attention span and a bit more patience than some people.

[JVS]

79. I agree with you. And the talk of the developing story doesn't quite wash.

A developing story is when there are still things happening. Fukushima's reactors are a developing story right now. With the OBL story, the action was over and the process of debriefing and making sure they got the correct details to the public were rushed. There was pressure to get the story out before the country went to bed (as was already happening in the Eastern and Central timezones) as well as getting the story out before some other source broke the story (I'm looking toward Al Jazeera here. It's hard to keep a lid on a story for 8 hours), but ultimately the responsibility for having accurate details falls on the administration. My guess is that they were willing to risk being first and having to make corrections rather than having other sources break the story.

[Bragi]

89. I think that "risk" was unnecessary

You write: My guess is that they were willing to risk being first and having to make corrections rather than having other sources break the story.

That's a good point, but if their risk calculation was as you describe, then I think their assessment was wrong, because:

a) who could have stolen the story from them, since it was about as top secret a mission as one can imagine? and

b) even if someone (say AQ) announced OBL's death early, then the WH was still in a command of the information and details only it had, and only it could put out.

I think bad judgment was shown by the WH comms people. This isn't the first time I've reached this conclusion. I think Obama deserves better strategic comms support than he's getting.

[Bragi]

80. Quite so!

I find it amazing how criticism of a poorly thought out White House communications strategy around a major event is taken by many here to be a grave assault on the President himself.

I think I'll do this more often. In my view, Obama is generally poorly served by ineffective communications from the WH, and his supporters ought to spend more time critiquing this weakness in his administration.

[treestar]

78. So what? Obama got Osama.

Osama's gone!

[Bragi]

83. How do we know that with the story changing all the time?

I ask that question rhetorically because the point of my critique is that many people won't believe what happened actually happened because the official story keeps changing.

[iwishiwas]

81. And unfortuately, the Repugs are always good at messenging.

[Bragi]

84. But our side could get better

We won't get better at communicating unless we are prepared to examine openly instances like this one when we communicate poorly.

[cliffordu]

86. YAWN.....ho hum ho hum.....

[ieoeja]

92. Do you believe the Republicans would have kept this secret overnight?

If you don't, then do you believe that Republicans and the media would not be screaming bloody murder at Obama for refusing to talk immediately?

[Bragi]

98. How would anyone beat the WH to the story?

This was about as top secret an operation as one can imagine.

This being so, how would anyone other than the WH beat them to the media with this story?

And if they did, so what? Only the WH had the actual info and the details.

[ieoeja]

112. You believe keeping it secret from Congress would have been better?!?

There were calls for his impeachment over Libya for not informing the FULL congress, and you want him to launch the bin Laden raid without even informing the congressional leaders.

[Bragi]

115. I don't think Congerssional leaders were informed

Could be wrong, but I don't think they were.

But whatever be the case, this has nothing to do with why the initial official storyline is unraveling.

[ieoeja]

129. Congressional leaders were informed.

And what has unraveled in the "official" initial storyline? Here is the entire initial official storyline:


"Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

"Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body."


That is the beginning and ending of what Obama said Sunday night about the raid. Please provide quotes from the above paragraphs that have "unraveled".

[Bragi]

134. Please note the subject line of the OP

And do provide quotes from my posting where I have spoken specifically about Obama's statement.

I though I was pretty clear in distinguishing between the President and the White House comms operation.

[cherokeeprogressive]

125. Is it possible that Al-Jazeera could have pre-empted the WH with a totally fabricated story

that puts the US in the worst possible light and Osama Bin Hidin' in the best possible one? This did happen in Pakistan after all. It did happen in the middle of a populated area after all. It did happen in the middle of an area not known for its pro-America sentiment, after all. And, I'll add that it did happen in the middle of a place where people are known to take huge liberties with truth.

There is only one chance at a first impression, then everyone else is playing catch-up.

[AtomicKitten]

96. Pfft. Weaksauce.

[LanternWaste]

99. The social narratives of a thing sometimes get a higher priority than the thing itself.

The social and media narratives of a thing sometimes get a higher priority than the thing itself. More's the pity...

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

104. is this all you could find to bitch about?

[yurbud]

105. I don't think so. If communication was botched a bit, it is a sin on the order of using the wrong

fork at a fancy dinner. It will be forgotten in the long run

[Bragi]

108. That's exactly the point -- it won't be forgotten

The unraveling official story will fuel speculation and doubt about what happened, and about whether the White House is being honest about what happened.

This is unnecessary, and the result of poor communications by the WH.

[Bragi]

107. How the WH changed its story

Read it and tell me this isn't a botch job.

The killing of Osama bin Laden: how the White House changed its story

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/04/osama-bin-laden-killing-us-story-change

There was no need for these errors. They are a result of going public before you have all the facts.

Obama deserves better strategic communications advice.

[ProSense]

109. "How the story changed"

Bin Laden had been 'living high on the hog'
Defence officials briefed reporters on Monday that Bin Laden's compound was worth $1m and was in stark contrast to the "much more dire conditions" endured by his "terrorist colleagues" and speculated on what they might be thinking "when they see that their leader was living, relatively speaking, high on the hog".


How the story changed

Local estimates suggest the house is worth $250,000. Footage from inside the compound shows little sign of luxury. Cooking equipment was shown on the floor, the decor seemed shabby, medicines were left on a shelf with no cabinet and the pantry seemed rudimentary. The paint was peeling outside the building and there was no sign of airconditioning.


Bin Laden's son Khalid was killed in the raid
Brennan told reporters: "Bin Laden died, the two al-Qaida facilitators – the brothers, who were the courier and his brother in the compound; Bin Laden's son Khalid; and the woman, presumed to be his wife, who was shielding Bin Laden."


How the story changed

The name of the son was changed to Hamza in the transcript.

It wasn't initially reported as a cave?

Usually, getting someone's name wrong is a correction (see the NYT edits).

Seriously? Anal gone wild!

:rofl:

[JoePhilly]

114. Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad

"I therefore blame the White House for monumental and egregious incompetence in dealing with communications around this event."

Monumental and Egregious ....

fail

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Bragi]

116. Another fabulous argument!

Oh wait, there is no argument put forward! Just exclamatory drivel!

[JoePhilly]

119. I matched my argument to the level of the OP. Drivel gets drivel.

[Bragi]

121. You are indeed impressive!

Especially the smilies. They add enormous credibility to your non-argument.

[JoePhilly]

123. A picture speaks 1000 words, thus the smilies. You used many words to say nothing.

This is fun, and the conference call I am on is kind of dull.

btw ... my argument has been proven, by the latest polls. Obama for all his terrible communications on this has received a rather large bump.

Pundits from both sides will run in circles trying to explain how "Obama failed" here ... and your path, claiming he failed at the messaging after .... fails.

[seabeyond]

120. i mean fuck the misison that could have gone wrong in so very many many ways

obl dead, our seals alive, all worked out AMAZINGLY well, but

waaaaa

the story was not perfect immediately, in media rush

even though obama has maintained the integrity to correct the few MINOR misstatements immediately

[JoePhilly]

133. Exactly

[cherokeeprogressive]

124. This post makes me want to gouge my eyes out with a dirty spork. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

127. Rational people are concerned with the decision and results

People looking for something to complain about are worried about the representation.

Luckily, so few care about your concern that it has precisely no effect in the public sphere. For that reason, it's perfectly useful to simply let you and others focus on such nonsense.

[Raffi Ella]

130. lol.

Obama Got Osama.

NEXT!

[A-Schwarzenegger]

131. POST OF THE DAY!

if this were FreeRepublic.

[guruoo]

132. Yeah, whatever.

[TNLib]

136. Honestly who cares the guys as dead as Julius Cesar and that is all that matters in the end

In my view this mission was pretty flawless and if a few minor fact were incorrect, so what. His critics are going to complain no matter what.