"You know, this was the first front row assigned seat issue, as I understand it, started in the Obama administration. In the Bush administration, you just took a seat, and I guess there were a couple of people that have had reserved spots," Priebus said. "But for the most part, the more formalized reserved seating piece came in over the last eight years."
Assigned seating actually started with Reagan. Now, as you know, Priebus will be Trump's Chief of Staff, and one would think that as RNC chairman he'd be pretty familiar with history of the press interactions with the administration. He's probably watched press conference raw footage, I assume.
A strange thing happened as I researched this for more sources and reactions. I found few news organizations with this quote or the wider story. BBC has nothing, and they are usually my goto. CNN was the major carrier of the above quote. Townhall blog has the quote, but only remarks on how it is going to freak out the media. Huffington post quotes it, amusingly with the observation: "There are only 49 seats, and digital outlets such as The Huffington Post and Breitbart News, which is sure to be influential during the Trump years, don’t have their own."
Now the quote came from a radio show with Hugh Hewitt. Transcript follows:
HH: And that brings me, Glenn Thrush on Wednesday said there is worry in the White House Press Corps that they’re going to do away with the traditional bullpen, the upstairs, the downstairs. Now I do want the front row given over to Salem Media, but what do you, what are the plans for the press corps and that traditional approach?
RP: We’re, and I hate blowing things off, because I’m not doing it on purpose, it just so happens that we’re actually talking about those things right now. And what the new tradition, I guess you could say, should be in the Trump White House. You know, this was the first front row assigned seat issue, as I understand it, started in the Obama administration. In the Bush administration, you just took a seat, and I guess there were a couple of people that have had reserved spots. But for the most part, the more formalized reserved seating piece came in over the last eight years. That issue is being talked about. The point of all of this conversation is that the traditions, while some of them are great, I think it’s time to revisit a lot of these things that have been done in the White House, and I can assure you that change is going to happen, even on things that might seem boring like this topic, but also change as far as how we’re going to approach tax reform, the American worker, how we protect them and business all at the same time why skyrocketing our economy.
http://www.hughhewitt.com/reince-priebus-incoming-white-house-chief-staff/Now, why make that statement? He clearly wasn't misunderstood, since he continues on with a statement of what happened in the Bush administration. Is he trying to appeal to anti-Obamists by making it seem like Trump is undoing something Obama did? This might be conscious on his part, or unconscious. But I don't buy for an instant that he was just ignorant of the history, and even if he was, I would say you don't take a guess at something you don't know in such vivid detail.
Twitchy has a bunch of twitter reactions captured. Interesting how everyone quickly took sides, but also how the story changed immediately on Twitter to somebody retweeting the story and saying "Priebus suggests they could do away with WH daily press briefing", which is a wildly inaccurate characterization of a discussion on seating tradition. If that had been a regular person, so be it, but Rosie Gray's profile says "reporter. soon joining @TheAtlantic. formerly @BuzzFeedNews." Now, BuzzFeed and TheAtlantic aren't exactly the Economist, but at least some measure of professionalism should be expected, no?
http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2016/12/14/how-the-fakenews-is-made-reince-priebus-wh-press-briefing-edition/Now, I don't know quite how there can be this much inaccuracy and by everyone involved in a very minor story. Twitter notably has a weaker mechanism to add feedback to refute a claim, on Facebook one would get a notification when someone responded that is much more visible.
I'm not sure any of the people involved would even feel embarassed. I
imagine Priebus deflecting and reiterating his wider point that traditions may be changed. I
imagine the radio host blame the lack of followup on time or other considerations. I
imagine Rosie Gray deflecting and talking more about how Trump interacts with the press in general. Obviously, I can't know if these imaginations are really how they would react, but that's what I'm left with because for sure no one will have the inclination to follow up with any of them.
