Rebounding From Iran-Contra Scandal : Reagan Giving More Interviews to Press

In the gulag of the White House press room, they call it “American glasnost. “

As in the Soviet Union, where it refers to Mikhail S. Gorbachev’s new internal policies, it means “openness.”

At the White House, however, glasnost is a key element in Chief of Staff Howard H. Baker Jr.’s effort to portray President Reagan as a man recovering from the damage of the Iran- contra scandal.

Under Baker’s direction the White House is granting the media more access to the President and his men, and generally pursuing warmer relations with the press corps.

Officials called it “significant,” for instance, that on Thursday night the White House allowed a press pool to go to Reagan’s mountaintop ranch, where its members took pictures and heard comments from the President after he met with Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who had just returned from meetings in the Soviet Union.

Impromptu Conferences

After months in which the President ignored the questions reporters shouted to him as he boarded Air Force One, Reagan is not only answering questions again but also holding impromptu press conferences with the journalists cordoned off under the plane’s wing. After a speech at Purdue University last week, the President used such an encounter to attack the congressional Democrats’ approach to the budget. Reagan had prepared notes, and though none of the reporters had asked about the budget, his remarks received wide coverage.

When the Moscow embassy scandal broke, the President dropped by the White House press room to deliver his statement in person and even take some questions.

‘Months in a Bunker’

“In the aftermath of three or four months in a bunker followed by the criticisms of the Tower Commission report, Reagan was in danger of being written off as an almost irrelevant figure, disengaged to the point of negligence,” said NBC chief White House correspondent Chris Wallace. “From their point of view it was very important to show he was in charge.”

The policy sharply contrasts with the atmosphere under former Chief of Staff Donald T. Regan and the then-White House spokesman, Larry Speakes. By the time they left the White House, members of the press corps say, the President was personally isolated and the media antagonistic.

“We found a President who was more than ready, he was anxious to get out, get engaged,” said one new high-ranking White House official privately, adding that part of the President’s isolation this winter was due to his recovery from prostrate surgery in January. “And when he’s out, he’s better. It sharpens his instincts.”

Calculated Openness

“Glasnost is not for the press,” said Knight-Ridder White House correspondent David Hess. “It is a coolly calculated strategy by Baker to reinstate Ronald Reagan as President, as The Boss.”

A second element in the White House strategy of calculated openness involves making former Sen. Baker and his staff more accessible than their predecessors.

During the President’s Easter vacation here this week, Baker conducted two briefings and two off-the-record breakfasts with reporters. Most members of the press corps said that was more formal contact with the chief of staff than they had during Regan’s entire service in the job.

Deprived of regular access to White House officials during the Regan-Speakes era, reporters formed themselves into groups they called “tongs” after the often warring gangs active among Chinese immigrants around the turn of the century. Pooling their efforts, they felt, gave them a better chance of reaching the sources they needed.

Setting Up Dinners

This week in Santa Barbara, the White House in effect took control of the tongs by setting up dinners for the groups with key White House officials. The move also answered criticism that, under Regan and Speakes, only reporters from the biggest media organizations received access.

Many on Baker’s staff feel that background meetings with reporters not only help shape a story’s content, but also provide an opportunity to see how the press and public may react once the story appears.

Under Regan, in contrast, reporters complained that Regan’s top aides, who were derisively called “the mice” in the press room, said little that journalists found useful, apparently because their authority and freedom were so limited.

“You had to go on ‘deep background’ (which entails a promise of special anonymity to the source) to say, ‘Didn’t we have a great day today?’ ” said one high-ranking White House official.

Concealed Contempt

As a result, most substantive official contact with the Administration was through Speakes, whose relations with many members of the press corps had seriously deteriorated.

“By the end Speakes could barely conceal his contempt (for us),” said Hess of Knight-Ridder.

“When you asked a question Speakes didn’t like, he would become this Mafia don, saying things like ‘You’re out of business,’ or ‘I’m going to lop you off at the knees,’ ” said USA Today White House correspondent Johanna Neuman.

“Virtually everyone in this room had been put out of business (at one point or another),” said Washington Times reporter Jeremiah O’Leary.

Privately, some in the White House now also express deeply negative feelings about Speakes’ approach. “I probably shouldn’t say anything,” said one high ranking official. “I have very strong feelings about that. I think Speakes was not a good press secretary.”

Care and Feeding

Thus the other element to Baker’s glasnost policy involves a warmer and more open approach to the daily care and feeding of the press corps by new presidential spokesman Marlin Fitzwater.

While Speakes required reporters to make appointments, Fitzwater’s door is generally open.

“Fitzwater has yet to make his first enemy,” said CBS White House correspondent Bill Plante.

A government press spokesman for more than two-decades, Fitzwater also is adept at using a droll, often self-effacing sense of humor to deflect tough questions.

When pressed repeatedly about apparent differences in tone between Baker and Shultz over Soviet arms proposals on Wednesday, Fitzwater deftly made fun of the secretary of state’s monotonic speaking style to dismiss the subject: “Secretary Shultz’s tone is always a little difficult to analyze.”

A friendly press corps broke into laughter.

Massaging the Message

Although Fitzwater describes his approach as a function more of personality than calculation, he concedes matters such as more personal warmth in the daily press briefings can help it do a better job of what some reporters have called “spin control,” the art of massaging the message that reaches the public through the press.

“If there is a climate of trust and credibility it is easier for me to give guidance and background,” Fitzwater said. “If there is hostility it is more difficult to do that and for the press to accept it.”

Not all reporters agree that more positive treatment from the White House translates into more positive coverage. Some contend, on the contrary, that allowing such personal matters to influence them is unprofessional. But others concede it is inevitable.

“It does help the President,” said David Beckwith of Time magazine. “We are human beings. We pride ourselves on being as objective as we can but you are a captive of your environment.”

Better Public Relations

But reporters concede that making the President more accessible has helped the Administration in public relations terms.

“Ronald Reagan did himself a grave disservice by remaining silent for four months,” said CBS correspondent Plante.

Baker realized, said NBC’s Wallace, that “the best way to get us to stop talking about Iran was to give us something else to talk about.”

Fitzwater agrees that Baker “set out from the beginning to make the President accessible, and the thing is, all we’ve had to do is provide the opportunity. The President is more than eager to take them.”