Joshua Spivak

[Commentary] Every new administration complains that the daily briefing is a charade that allows the media to batter the White House’s policy. Yet no matter how badly the press secretary is doing, no president has gone so far as to cancel it. The reason is that the briefing is a powerful weapon against the opposition and Congress.

Since President Donald Trump is willing to serve as his own unfiltered spokesman, giving interviews and pecking out late-night tweets, he doesn’t need the briefing to inform the world about the ever-changing presidential agenda. But the briefing still offers the White House a chance to control the political conversation and play out its chosen narrative: that unfair reporters are trying to bully an administration they don’t like. What’s in it for the press? Under President Trump the briefings have become ratings dynamite, as journalists try to one-up each other and catch the White House in any contradiction. Still, there’s no reason the media should make them such major events.

The big stories aren’t going to be broken in the briefing room, through an official statement or at a scheduled time. Instead of being stuck for an hour trying to ask a single pointed question to a harried and seemingly ill-informed spokesman, the White House press corps would be better off going out and looking for stories. For the country as a whole, ending the briefing would be a positive step. It would help break the public’s presidential obsession and free the press corps to pursue other stories. Without the distraction of a daily performance by the press secretary, Americans might learn more about what’s happening in Washington beyond the briefing room.

[Spivak is a public relations executive and a senior fellow at Wagner College’s Hugh L. Carey Institute for Government Reform]