From WNYC in New York, this is NPR's On the Media.

I'm Brooke Gladstone.

And I'm Bob Garfield.

In some ways, this was the first real week of the Bush presidency,

the week when he stepped out from behind the curtain

and laid his policies before the Congress and the country.

New York Times White House reporter Frank Bruney wrote that he navigated that juncture with a steady voice that betrayed few, if any, traces of nervousness.

Reporters complained during the campaign that candidate Bush was too sheltered by his aides, too unavailable to the press.

The aforementioned Frank Bruney joins us now on the line.

Mr. Bruny, how about President Bush? Is he more accessible?

Since he's been in the White House access has been extraordinarily limited. His public appearances have been, you know, assiduously staged.

And, you know, it was a month before he held a news conference.

Let me ask you an odd question here. Is Access all it's cracked up to be?

I know it makes the job a lot easier for reporters, but does it make for better information to the news consumer?

I mean, if he's out there giving interviews, he can put his own spin on things, and quotes are good,

but the real information is in the analysis of the impact of his policies anyway. Yeah, well, I think access is, I think you touch upon something important.

Access is in a sense overrated because if we're doing our jobs well,

there should be a heavy dose of outside commentary, of perspective, of analysis

that has nothing to do with simply repeating

the words that come out of his mouth. On the other hand, to the extent that I understand George

W. Bush and have any sort of sense of what he's like, that comes from access. In hearing what

he chose to talk about, how he talked about it. I learned a whole lot about him

...