( CNN ) -- When I saw the story , my jaw dropped . Has journalism deteriorated so badly that Barack Obama 's campaign aides are allowed to send quotes to reporters that `` come back redacted , stripped of colorful metaphors , colloquial language and anything even mildly provocative , '' as The New York Times reported . It 's called `` quote approval , '' and it 's quite a problem . It 's also , as the Times noted , not a practice limited to Team Obama . `` Quote approval is standard practice for the Obama campaign , used by many top strategists and almost all midlevel aides in Chicago and at the White House , '' the story reported . `` It is also commonplace throughout Washington and on the campaign trail . '' Some Mitt Romney staffers are afforded the same privilege , the Times said . Dan Rather : Quote approval a media sellout . Ten years ago when I was White House press secretary , before Twitter and Facebook , in an era when reporters used to pick up their phones to conduct interviews as opposed to e-mailing , I would have been laughed out of the briefing room if I tried to get quote approval for something I said . Occasionally , I talked on background as a senior administration official , but no reporter would ever let me pick and choose which on-the-record quotes they could use nor would anyone let me edit or clean up a quote . My how things have changed -- and the change began , it 's important to note -- toward the end of the second term of George W. Bush . Peter Baker , another reporter at The New York Times who has covered the last three White Houses , told me in an ( on-the-record ) interview that quote approval evolved from something beneficial to a `` pernicious practice to be avoided . '' Like Prohibition , it began with good intent . Reporters covering Bush 's second term , under pressure from editors not to use unnamed sources in their stories , started asking their sources if a background quote , attributed to a senior aide , could instead be turned into an on-the-record quote , with the aide 's name in print . I e-mailed last week with several former Bush staffers and many confirmed they engaged in that practice . For a very limited number of the most senior aides , that made sense . Let 's say a reporter is talking to a knowledgeable aide at the National Security Council who wo n't speak for attribution , because their job is not to talk to the press . Their boss wo n't like it if they do , or their phone will ring off the hook with 20 other reporters who want to turn the aide into a press secretary . But the aide will talk to an occasional reporter because their conversation , often about complicated policy matters , may inform the reporter and lead to a more accurate , more nuanced story . But since the reporter ca n't quote the official by name , and editors do n't want to use unnamed sources , what 's a reporter to do ? So reporters began pushing back , persuading staffers to let one sentence be quoted by name . The sentence was e-mailed to the aide , and when permission was granted to use it , quote approval among the most senior aides got started . Sunday 's Media monitor . But pushback has now turned into quote approval for almost everyone , even when the story is n't nuanced or complicated , and that 's where the problem begins . Reporters are easily acquiescing today to midlevel aides who seek quote approval . These aides are n't talking to make certain a story is more nuanced or better informed . They 're doing it because they want more control of the story or to clean up a sloppy quote -- and because reporters let them . Baker called it an `` effort to get more transparency but it 's backfired . The town has found a convenient way to control the press , '' he said , referring to people throughout Washington and on the campaign trail . As a former press secretary , I 'm all for trying to control the press , but quote approval goes too far . Ron Fournier , the editor-in-chief of the National Journal group , reportedly sent an e-mail to reporters who work for him declaring quote approval off limits . `` Our policy and common sense dictate that we do n't allow public officials to edit NJ coverage , '' he wrote . The problem with quote approval is it 's too easy . It turns the relationship between a source and a reporter entirely over to the source . And the practice has spread too far and wide . Too many staffers will speak only if their quotes are approved and too many reporters are happy to oblige . The relationship between a source and the press will always resemble a tug-of-war . Since the early days of our republic , government officials and the media have clashed . It 's part of the ongoing , generally healthy dynamic in our noisy democracy . Over time , the ground shifts and one party gains the upper hand , only to lose it back . Of course , the media 's focus on the trivial -- see coverage of Romney 's trip to England -- makes sources fight even more for control , lest a sentence be misconstrued , exaggerated and hyperfocused . But so long as reporters allow their sources quote approval , this round has been won by the sources . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ari Fleischer .
Former White House press secretary says balance of power dominated by officials . He says making reporters submit quotes in advance for approval goes too far . Ari Fleischer says practice emerged out of ongoing tug-of-war inside the Beltway .