In October 2021, President Joe Biden found himself at the center of a controversy over his use of the South Court Auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB), a facility within the White House complex. The auditorium, equipped with a backdrop featuring digital windows of the Rose Garden, served as the venue for several events, including Biden’s public COVID-19 booster shot. This setup prompted critics to dub it a “fake White House set,” igniting a wave of criticism across social media platforms. Prominent conservative voices, such as Jack Posobiec and Charlie Kirk, ridiculed the arrangement, while conspiracy theorists, including some QAnon adherents, escalated the narrative, suggesting it was evidence that Biden’s presidency lacked legitimacy.
This issue resurfaced in a recent X post by journalist Lara Logan on March 12, 2025, where she expressed curiosity about the “fake Oval Office set,” quoting an earlier post by Alina Habba showing the same setup (Lara Logan). Logan’s query reflects ongoing public interest, though it echoes the 2021 controversy without introducing new evidence. Her post garnered responses questioning the set’s purpose and authenticity, with some users reinforcing claims of deception, while others speculated on its logistics.
Despite the fervor, fact-checking organizations like Reuters and PolitiFact swiftly clarified the situation in 2021. The South Court Auditorium, they noted, is a well-established venue within the White House complex, with a history of use by prior administrations for similar purposes. For instance, the same backdrop appeared just days earlier during a global coronavirus summit, underscoring its role in routine presidential communications. The EEOB itself, constructed in 1871, has long been a hub for significant events, including televised news conferences under President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1955. These details effectively countered claims of deception or irregularity.
The backlash peaked in late 2021 but faded quickly, with no notable resurgence in subsequent years. By March 2025, the episode remains a minor, albeit intriguing, chapter in Biden’s tenure. It serves as a reminder of how swiftly misinformation can spread in the digital age, fueled by political polarization and amplified by social media. At the same time, the incident highlights the importance of historical context and factual verification in addressing such claims. While the “fake set” narrative briefly captured attention, its lack of staying power suggests that public focus shifted to more pressing concerns. Ultimately, this moment reflects the ongoing challenge of navigating optics and truth in a highly scrutinized presidency.
