GOVERNMENT / THE ELITE - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
Bush PR costs taxpayers $1.6 billion |
|
by Jennifer A. Dlouhy SFGate.com Entered into the database on Tuesday, February 14th, 2006 @ 14:44:01 MST |
|
The Bush administration spent at least $1.6 billion on public relations
and advertising campaigns over 30 months, according to a report released Monday
by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.
The report, requested by congressional Democrats, shows that government agencies
are relying on outside consultants to help pitch their messages to the public,
whether it's to bolster public support for the war in Iraq, deter buying prescription
drugs from Canada or recruit for the armed forces. "To communicate these messages to the general public or particular target
audiences, departments contract with media-related vendors ... for a wide range
of services, including communication plans, marketing design strategies, public
relations campaigns, public service announcements and educational materials,"
according to the report. Democrats complained that the White House was using propaganda to spin the
public its way on the war on terror and other initiatives. "No amount of money will successfully sell the Bush administration's failed
policies, from the war in Iraq to its disastrous energy policy to its confusing
Medicare prescription drug benefits," said Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco,
leader of the House Democrats, who criticized what she called the White House
PR machine. The White House did not return calls for comment Monday, but the Education
Department in the past has defended its public relations spending as a legitimate
way to disseminate information to the public. The GAO report did not single out any project for special attention
but, in a separate study a year ago, the agency said the Bush administration
had illegally engaged in covert propaganda for paying conservative commentator
Armstrong Williams to praise the No Child Left Behind Act, the 2002 education
law, in newspaper columns and on television. The Bush administration also was rapped for issuing prepackaged "video
news releases" that touted administration initiatives to broadcast media
outlets, some of which aired the programs without disclosing their source. Government auditors studied the spending by seven different cabinet-level departments
for 30 months covering all of fiscal 2003 and 2004 and the first half of fiscal
2005. They focused on government contracts with public relations firms, advertising
agencies and media organizations -- anyone the GAO said would "create (or)
distribute content through various outlets, such as radio, television (and)
newspapers." Using federal procurement data, the government auditors found spending over
two and a half years on 343 media contracts. The vast majority of the contracts
were with advertising agencies. For instance: -- The Army paid $2.5 million to develop a plan to present its "strategic
perspective in the global war on terrorism." -- The Department of Health and Human Services paid $29,900 in 2004 and 2003
to an advertising agency to convince Americans that buying prescription drugs
from Canada and other countries is risky. -- The government spent $116,088 over two years for a "Be Whale Wise"
campaign -- complete with billboards and radio advertising -- to educate residents
of Seattle and Tacoma, Wash., about how recreational boating was dangerous
to marine mammals in Puget Sound. A private group that watches government spending said that while the report
covers plenty of legitimate public relations spending, some of the costs should
raise eyebrows. "People see (military) recruitment ads on TV all the time, and I don't
think anyone objects to that," said Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against
Government Waste, a not-for-profit watchdog group. But targeted, specific programs
deserve a closer look, Schatz said. The Interior Department complained that a host of legitimate contracts had
been swept into the report and inaccurately labeled as public relations spending.
For instance, department officials said the GAO should not have included spending
on brochures or exhibits at National Park Service visitor centers. No other government departments responded to the report. |