CONFESSIONS OF A WRITER FOR HIRE GOVERNMENT PAYOFFS CAN GROW ON YOU.

Byline: STEVE YOUNG

LAST week it was revealed that conservative commentator Armstrong Williams was paid $240,000 by the Bush administration to promote the White House's No Child Left Behind law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.

Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the deal with Williams required him to regularly comment about NCLB during the course of his broadcasts, and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004.

Williams said that he understands that critics could find the arrangement unethical, but ``I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in.''

The only ``something'' that I'm sure that Williams believes in was the $240,000 he received for his work. And I can say that with some personal familiarity on government payoffs. I was on the receiving end of a government payoff - at least I received a rather handsome paycheck because the government laid some green on the bosses I worked for.

Here's the whole dirty story:

Back in 1997, I had pitched a story idea to the executive producer at ``The Smart Guy,'' a WB family sitcom that you can still catch on The Disney Channel. It was based on something I believed in, that parents need to be better educated on the drinking problem their kids face, and I could make it funny.

The producers passed, because they felt that the network and the Disney company would not want the 12-year-old character played by Tahj Mowry to appear drunk. And so my dreams of another sold script (and years of free medical) went down the drain until months later, when I received a call from the producer telling me that the network had a change of heart.

The heart transplant came by way of a gentle nudge from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy in the form of $75,000. All the show had to do was adhere to a few dictates. No mention of beer brand names. The kid had to be clearly inebriated and the negative consequences of drinking had to be emphasized, including his breach of trust with his father. And father and son had to (eventually) have a heart-to-heart talk.

It was pretty much already part of my story.

I was truly proud of my work. I even received the Prism Award and a Humanitas nomination (good-guy writing honors) for the episode.

You can see how I might be a bit ambivalent about the Williams incident. Like Armstrong, what I wrote was something I believed in, and I would have written it whether the government bribed the network or not. Then again, the WB probably wouldn't have made the show if it weren't bribed - I mean, encouraged. And then I wouldn't be paid. So then the Writers Guild wouldn't have let me write it. Whew.

At the time, there was a bit of a brouhaha concerning the government's input into entertainment. I must admit that while all the input into the script was important to get the correct message to the kids and parents as I wanted to do, there was certainly the possibility of dominoes falling and leading to more nefarious government intervention. Why, one day they might end up paying a so-called news information forum to spread propaganda as if it were real news. Of course, I think that's highly unlikely, and just the type of black-helicopter conspiratorial fear-mongering that terrific programs like No Child Left Behind, employed in our schools, will teach our kids is wrong (please send check care of the Daily News).

As I attempt to rationalize my own participation in government kickbacks, there were some very distinct differences between what Williams and I did. The result of my effort was a made-up story that was perpetrated on the public. Williams effort was a made-up story that was ... all right, not the best example.

Let's try this: I was a supposed comedy writer who was anything but trustworthy. Williams was a supposed trustworthy pundit who was anything but trustworthy. I was paid to pitch humor. Williams was a paid pitchman. My credibility came from writing jokes. Williams credibility is a joke.

As much as some people believe that infotainers like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and rest of the plethora of right-wing Lords of Loud are just propagandists for President George W. Bush, none of them reap cash rewards from spewing pro-administrative talking points. At least not from the White House. Dinner invitations, interviews with the cabinet during the campaign. But not cash. 'Course I wouldn't expect any of the conservative broadcasters to be calling Williams or the White House on the carpet. Not unless the carpet is spread on top of Dan Rather, whom, I might remind you, didn't take a dime to work for the Democratic Party.

But no matter the differences between my payoff and Williams', we participated in a continuing clandestine attempt by the government and the broadcast outlets to obscure the line between news, entertainment and government infomercials. The FCC hates flashes of breasts, f-word slips and lesbian-dating games, but gives a blind pass to the media when it comes to assaulting the airwaves with partisan deception and misinformation.

So, as I stand sanctimoniously on the holy ground of the fourth estate, I cannot even afford my first estate. Let any government agency that needs to get out its message know: I believe strongly your initiative, whatever it is, and am available to believe in it even $tronger.