Dogfight over videos of White House pup

As the holiday season looms, Web publishers led by the Washington Post are battling the White House over, of all things, a video of a dog.

This is no laughing matter. At stake are Webcasting rights to video clips of Barney, the first pooch, and his antics around 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. The White House has so far denied requests from online publishers seeking copies of the third annual Barney holiday video, insisting on hosting the video exclusively on its own Web site while at the same time freely granting broadcast rights to TV networks.

That's got some online publishers, including the Post, up in arms over a legally dubious double-standard and potential lost advertising revenue. Last year's Barney video drew 24 million viewers to the White House Web site, a White House spokesman said--about the same number of people who visited political sites in the final month of the presidential race. Now plans for a new video promise to renew the tug-of-war over the taxpayer-funded project.

News.context

What's new:
Web publishers led by the Washington Post are battling the White House over video clips of the first pooch.

Bottom line:
Online publishers are up in arms over a legally dubious double-standard and potential lost advertising revenue.

More stories on this topic

"We haven't discussed the plot of the next Barney Cam, and we haven't discussed distribution," White House spokesman Jimmy Orr told CNET News.com this week. Online distribution will be "addressed" in the planning meetings, he added, but he refused to commit to a truce in the Free Barney wars.

The growling match began last year when the White House's communications office offered TV stations the right to broadcast a pair of videos showing Barney, a playful Scottish terrier, cavorting with President Bush, First Lady Laura Bush and top presidential aides.

But officialdom's Christmas spirit ended there. News organizations were prohibited from hosting last year's popular "Barney Reloaded" flick on their Web sites and instead must link to the files on WhiteHouse.gov, the White House insisted.

That drew a bark from Doug Feaver, executive editor of WashingtonPost.com and outgoing president of the Online News Association, who wrote a letter to White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett.

"The justifications we have been given are that (1) the White House wants to drive 'eyeballs' to the White House site and (2) the White House is concerned that the video might appear 'all over' if it gave it to WashingtonPost.com and other online news sites," Feaver wrote last December. "I think you will agree that neither of these attempted justifications is substantial and neither justifies the White House's discrimination against online news sites."

Feaver never received a response, he said in a telephone interview this week. But because the White House is planning a Barney III sequel

[herkamur]

American tax dollars at work

The US government is spending scads of money fighting in Iraq and battling over broadcasting the family dog is where American tax dollars are going??? Man, I'm not even American and I find that repugnant. Now if the dog-cam were generating money for education or something, that would be another story... or is that too sensible?

[herkamur]

American tax dollars at work

The US government is spending scads of money fighting in Iraq and battling over broadcasting the family dog is where American tax dollars are going??? Man, I'm not even American and I find that repugnant. Now if the dog-cam were generating money for education or something, that would be another story... or is that too sensible?

[patrickr]

Are you really suprised?

That the American media is not covering the real news? I'm not.

[herkamur]

Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes.

No, not really. It would certainly seem to be a great tactic to divert attention from the more sensitive news items.

"Hey, is that a rabbit!?!?!?!?"

[patrickr]

Are you really suprised?

That the American media is not covering the real news? I'm not.

[herkamur]

Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes.

No, not really. It would certainly seem to be a great tactic to divert attention from the more sensitive news items.

"Hey, is that a rabbit!?!?!?!?"

[vinayd]

what a story!

just techy enough I guess

[Ubber geek]

techy enough

http://www.analogstereo.com/infiniti_q45_owners_manual.htm

[vinayd]

what a story!

just techy enough I guess

[Ubber geek]

techy enough

http://www.analogstereo.com/infiniti_q45_owners_manual.htm

[mortis9]

madness!

this has to be one of the most rediculous issues i've ever heard of. what do you tell to some 18 year old that dies in a humvee without enough armor? "we could have had that truck upgraded, but instead we hired ridley scott to film the george bushes dog. sorry!" what a bunch of bull!!!!

[mortis9]

madness!

this has to be one of the most rediculous issues i've ever heard of. what do you tell to some 18 year old that dies in a humvee without enough armor? "we could have had that truck upgraded, but instead we hired ridley scott to film the george bushes dog. sorry!" what a bunch of bull!!!!

[Earl Benser]

How dumb can you get????

Doug Feaver is trying to become the Compleat Media Ass. HE
has absolutely no rights to the Barnet video but he thinks that he
and the Washington Post should not be denied a greedy power
play.

Stuff it, Doug, and go try to find some real news to report.

Now that would be novel......

[Earl Benser]

How dumb can you get????

Doug Feaver is trying to become the Compleat Media Ass. HE
has absolutely no rights to the Barnet video but he thinks that he
and the Washington Post should not be denied a greedy power
play.

Stuff it, Doug, and go try to find some real news to report.

Now that would be novel......

[Fray9]

How?

How can you possibly trust a man who names his dog after a 7 foot purple dinosaur that rots the minds of children?

Seriously though.. if the President of the United States doesnt have anything better to do with his time and the taxpayers money during a WAR then to film his dog and argue over where the tape will be displayed, then we have some serious problems.

Lately Ive found myself often questioning his sanity in general.

Thats not a good sign.

[Fray9]

How?

How can you possibly trust a man who names his dog after a 7 foot purple dinosaur that rots the minds of children?

Seriously though.. if the President of the United States doesnt have anything better to do with his time and the taxpayers money during a WAR then to film his dog and argue over where the tape will be displayed, then we have some serious problems.

Lately Ive found myself often questioning his sanity in general.

Thats not a good sign.