This site has regularly noted the growing impact of the UK media on American politics. Millions of Americans read British news websites every month. Left-leaning Americans are particularly keen on the BBC and Guardian America - the two UK media outfits with the biggest levels of penetration into the US domestic market (and with ambitions for deeper penetration). Gateway sites like Drudge, The Huffington Post and RealClearPolitics also help to ensure that articles written for UK markets are read widely in the States. Why then does Hillary Clinton keep snubbing British reporters? Hillary Clinton barred foreign journalists from her Iowa campaign party and she won't even talk to The Telegraph now. The Telegraph's Toby Harnden writes:
"In the hubbub of the spin room after last night’s Democratic debate in Hollywood’s Kodak Theatre, I introduced myself to Mandy Grunwald, Hillary Clinton’s media strategist, and prepared to ask a question. “Hi – you’re going to violate my I-only-speak-to-American-journalists…”, she said as I shook her hand... Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy platform states that “cooperative relationships have to be deepened and strengthened” across the globe while our “increasingly interconnected world demands an interconnected strategy”. I guess that doesn’t include the media."
So Hillary gets written down and Obama gets articles from Toby Harnden like this: "I'll see the world through your eyes". BritainAndAmerica knows of one of the Guardian group's most senior commentators who cannot even get Team Clinton to return his phone calls. If the election gets very tight Mrs Clinton may regret putting the Smallville Gazette ahead of the BBC.
I suppose she is taking the attitude that she isn't running for office in the UK so she needs to focus on getting the message over to US reporters to reach her target audience.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | February 03, 2008 at 07:35 PM
You've missed the whole point of the post YNA!!
The point is that the UK media has a large readership amongst US voters and US opinion formers.
Posted by: Editor | February 03, 2008 at 07:42 PM
The point is that the UK media has a large readership amongst US voters and US opinion formers.
Not as big as the US media though, there will be a lot of reporters wanting to talk to Hillary Clinton and her team, especially during an election campaign and no doubt they will struggle to get through many of the American ones let alone ones across the world.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | February 03, 2008 at 07:58 PM
The point is that the UK media has a large readership amongst US voters and US opinion formers
While most of my ancestry traces back to the British Isles, and I am something of a Anglophile, my reaction to this rather provincial statement is as follows.
LOL, ROTFL
Posted by: UneJikaTiDMurkin | February 03, 2008 at 10:16 PM
No wonder she ignores the British press when bastions like William Rees Mogg don't even know the difference between Arkansas and Alabama:
"The Clintons themselves are street fighters, trained in the tough school of Alabama politics, but they do not fight dirty unless they have to. They were fighting dirty because they were fighting scared." (From last week's column)
The British coverage of the US race is partisan and ignorant and they don't deserve any access.
Posted by: HFP | February 04, 2008 at 12:08 AM
HFP: re Alabama vs. Arkansas.
Yorkshire,Cornwall, what's the difference?
London, Glasgow, what's the difference?
One point in favor of American presidential candidates giving access to the British press is that Britain is more allied to us than other Western European countries. Thus, giving the British press access helps maintain the alliance. In return, we would expect non-partisan coverage.
Posted by: UneJikaTiDMurkin | February 04, 2008 at 01:13 AM
No one's suggesting that the US media as a whole has a lesser influence than the UK media - but it would be silly to suggest that *every* US outlet that is credentialed by Clinton is larger than the BBC, or indeed the Guardian.
Posted by: Craig M | February 04, 2008 at 02:57 AM
I saw an account of what happened with Mr. Harnden, and he's overreacting. Mandy Grunwald at first refused to answer his question, but she did that because she has to first focus on American press. These operatives have a limited amount of time, and they have to make sure it is used as efficiently as possible. Note that she later talked to him.
Yes, the Telegraph is important; yes, Britain is an ally; and, yes, Americans do read it (I'm an American and I read it), but its readership is miniscule in any particular state and much less influential than just about any of the news outlets she spoke to.
I hate to say it, but this is typical presumptuousness of foreigners and esp. Brits. We don't butt into your elections (astonishing that some Cameroons are actually helping in election efforts; most astonishing that some are helping Clinton), so stay out of ours.
As if you folks should have a say. As if . . . .
Posted by: doug stone | February 04, 2008 at 03:25 AM
This is how American politics works. If she didn't snubbed the British press her political enemies will call her a lap dog. It happen to Kerry with the French. I don't think she wants to repeat other politicians mistakes.
Anyway no one will care about politics for the coming week. The NY Giants did the impossible and won the Super Blow.
Posted by: jdun | February 04, 2008 at 05:47 AM
Super Bowl. Stupid typo.
Posted by: jdun | February 04, 2008 at 06:14 AM
Thankyou for a very entertaining and enlightening piece. It definitly opened my eyes to allot of things I had not thought of before.
Posted by: Jordan True Flight | September 25, 2010 at 08:54 AM
Yes, the Telegraph is important; yes, Britain is an ally; and, yes, Americans do read it (I'm an American and I read it), but its readership is miniscule in any particular state and much less influential than just about any of the news outlets she spoke to.
Posted by: snore stop | January 05, 2011 at 08:47 AM