Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6887|132 and Bush

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch … 02009.html
Jake Tapper (ABC News Senior White House Correspondent) used his time in the Briefing Room to challenge Robert Gibbs on the Obama administration’s attempts to brand Fox News as something other than a news organization.  Gibbs sputters but never answers Tapper’s essential question.
From this morning’s gaggle in White House press secretary Robert Gibbs’ office:

Tapper: It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one –

(Crosstalk)

Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.

Tapper: But that’s a pretty sweeping declaration that they are “not a news organization.” How are they any different from, say –

Gibbs: ABC -

Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?

Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon.

Tapper: I’m not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I’m talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a “news organization” -- why is that appropriate for the White House to say?

Gibbs: That’s our opinion.

-jpt
Click over to Tapper’s blog to hear the answer.  Ultimately, though, Gibbs thoroughly misses Tapper’s point.  The White House is not just some political 501(c)3 issuing opinion statements on policy.  They’re the executive branch of government, who exist to enforce laws and are accountable to the people, at least in part (one hopes) through the media.  It’s entirely inappropriate to make pronouncements on the credibility of those organizations holding them accountable, especially when they try to wheedle other news organizations into ignoring them.

What do they have to fear from Fox News, after all?  It makes them look petty and craven, instead of simply responding on each story and letting other news organizations tell their side of the story.  After all, they have no lack of volunteers for that task.

It’s the difference between campaigning and governing.  Gibbs et al still haven’t learned it, and they look like Amateur Hour as a result, or worse, Nixonian.  At the moment, no video of the exchange is available, but I’ll update this post with it as soon as its available.
The Whitehouse is going out of it's way to to reclassify what is news. This move is total crap, and certainly not the role of the executive branch. I'd feel the same way no matter who was in office. It's no surprise to me that other outlets (ABC) are questioning the way the WH is treating Fox news. If it can happen to them it can happen to anyone.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6829|Texas - Bigger than France
I think you just revoke creditials.

The White House is acting like this is The View, and Fox is Rosie O'Donnell.

Way to rise above the chattel Gibbs.
mcgid1
Meh...
+129|7003|Austin, TX/San Antonio, TX
This seems to be the current hallmark of the Obama administration.  He/they stick their noses into issues and stories where, as president and a branch of the government, they have no need or right to go, give an opinion, and expect everyone to go along with it.  When it backfires, they sputter and squabble but can never give a justifiable reason for their actions.  Sooner or later, they need to realize that the campaign ended last year and that they are in office now and need to focus on national issues.  They also need to realize that this makes the administration look petty at best, and at worst a group that does not really know what it is actually supposed to be doing.

Last edited by mcgid1 (2009-10-21 13:04:41)

Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7003
This has only backfired for the administration...  more viewers for FOX now to see what all the fuss is about...
The other media outlets realize that they could be targeted next for any opposing views to Obama... and they are standing up
for FOX which is good... I hate Keith Olbermann but i defend his right to have a show...
Love is the answer
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6816|Global Command
America always goes big.

Our version of communism shall make all previous attempts look like fapping.
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7055
Why not call a "spade a spade"?

Fox isn't news, its entertainment and opinion and advertising and fearmongering.

Maybe fox will lift their standards but I doubt it.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6908|London, England
It's hardly passing a law through your congress banning them now is it. They're just flinging shit towards Fox and acting all hissy. Doesn't change anything in the real world, just words. If they start going down an actual legal route is when you should start worrying.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6698|'Murka

Mekstizzle wrote:

It's hardly passing a law through your congress banning them now is it. They're just flinging shit towards Fox and acting all hissy. Doesn't change anything in the real world, just words. If they start going down an actual legal route is when you should start worrying.
It's a slippery slope that nobody--not even the left-leaning media--want our government to start going down.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Hurricane2k9
Pendulous Sweaty Balls
+1,538|5988|College Park, MD

BN wrote:

Why not call a "spade a spade"?

Fox isn't news, its entertainment and opinion and advertising and fearmongering.

Maybe fox will lift their standards but I doubt it.
And MSNBC and CNN aren't?

MSNBC: Major left-wing slant
Fox: Major right-wing slant
CNN: Stories about Anna Nicole Smith and other stupid shit
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6887|132 and Bush

BN wrote:

Why not call a "spade a spade"?

Fox isn't news, its entertainment and opinion and advertising and fearmongering.

Maybe fox will lift their standards but I doubt it.
Fox reports on news outside of their opinion pieces. But yea, the same could be said of MSNBC. The larger point is that it is not up to the administration to label what is news. There is an obvious conflict of interest there. Cutting out an entire network because they are critical of you? .. c'mon.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Diesel_dyk
Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears
+178|6281|Truthistan
Fox news is infotainment.

The question is if Fox is being hypercritical without having anything positive to say, why should the whitehouse indulge them. Sounds like mud slinging going back and forth and IMO Fox has more to lose.

I think Fox's problem is that their News, looks like their opinion peices and it looks like their morning show, it all blends together. I watch sometimes and it looks like news but all I hear to BS and crap spewing and other times there are some actual news stories. There isn't much differentiation image wise and so they come across as one long smear campaign with little bouts of weather reports.

So when the ABC guy says "I'm not talking about the opinion pieces" I'd say that's the point, you can't seperate them if you can't tell the difference.



What's funny is that any person with an ounce of credibilty can look at Fox and tell its crap.... but some people think its gospel.
Besides doesn't Murdoch own them.... that's all you need to know about bias.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6887|132 and Bush

All the big cable networks are infotainment. Anyone who thinks otherwise just hasn't figured out why their koolaid taste so good.

Why? .. dunno free press.

As far as opinion. You've got another network openly saying that they will do everything they can to make sure Obama succeeds. Which, btw is their prerogative. However, how in the hell can even consider them as objective after hearing that? The presidency is an elected public office. They should treat all networks the same. The networks that happen to have dissenters on their staff included.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6784

imma venture in, and ask a question - what role do blogs play in today's news' industry?
Hurricane2k9
Pendulous Sweaty Balls
+1,538|5988|College Park, MD

burnzz wrote:

imma venture in, and ask a question - what role do blogs play in today's news' industry?
As long as they're presenting factual stories, I tend to trust their take a lot more than CNN or MSNBC's or Fox's.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6784

it seems quite a few are cited by the "regular" news any more.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6698|'Murka

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Fox news is infotainment.

The question is if Fox is being hypercritical without having anything positive to say, why should the whitehouse indulge them. Sounds like mud slinging going back and forth and IMO Fox has more to lose.

I think Fox's problem is that their News, looks like their opinion peices and it looks like their morning show, it all blends together. I watch sometimes and it looks like news but all I hear to BS and crap spewing and other times there are some actual news stories. There isn't much differentiation image wise and so they come across as one long smear campaign with little bouts of weather reports.

So when the ABC guy says "I'm not talking about the opinion pieces" I'd say that's the point, you can't seperate them if you can't tell the difference.



What's funny is that any person with an ounce of credibilty can look at Fox and tell its crap.... but some people think its gospel.
Besides doesn't Murdoch own them.... that's all you need to know about bias.
Like MSNBC with Bush.

Strange that his administration didn't feel the need to whine about them and say they weren't a news outlet...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Diesel_dyk
Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears
+178|6281|Truthistan

FEOS wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Fox news is infotainment.

The question is if Fox is being hypercritical without having anything positive to say, why should the whitehouse indulge them. Sounds like mud slinging going back and forth and IMO Fox has more to lose.

I think Fox's problem is that their News, looks like their opinion peices and it looks like their morning show, it all blends together. I watch sometimes and it looks like news but all I hear to BS and crap spewing and other times there are some actual news stories. There isn't much differentiation image wise and so they come across as one long smear campaign with little bouts of weather reports.

So when the ABC guy says "I'm not talking about the opinion pieces" I'd say that's the point, you can't seperate them if you can't tell the difference.



What's funny is that any person with an ounce of credibilty can look at Fox and tell its crap.... but some people think its gospel.
Besides doesn't Murdoch own them.... that's all you need to know about bias.
Like MSNBC with Bush.

Strange that his administration didn't feel the need to whine about them and say they weren't a news outlet...
TBH I don't think the Bush administration, especially Cheney, didn't give a rats ass about most things, let alone what people said about them. They had their agenda and that was all that mattered.

Its true that there were a lot of anti-Bush stuff, but then again he made it easy, AND Bush was given a lot of room after 9/11. There wasn't to many critical pieces digging into the information he was putting out there to support the war.

It could be taking on Fox plays to the democratic base. But I would rather see PBO take a bull dog stance and run his agenda through. It would be kind of refreshing to see a democrat do that for a change, but to me they are always looking for the angle.

Anyway, are trying to say that Fox on the whole, opinion pieces and news, is not overly critical of PBO? Have they ever done a "wow" what a good job the president is doing piece? even one?

That leaves the question why should the Whitehouse play ball with a group like that? I wouldn't and you probably wouldn't either if you were in their shoes.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6698|'Murka

Diesel_dyk wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Fox news is infotainment.

The question is if Fox is being hypercritical without having anything positive to say, why should the whitehouse indulge them. Sounds like mud slinging going back and forth and IMO Fox has more to lose.

I think Fox's problem is that their News, looks like their opinion peices and it looks like their morning show, it all blends together. I watch sometimes and it looks like news but all I hear to BS and crap spewing and other times there are some actual news stories. There isn't much differentiation image wise and so they come across as one long smear campaign with little bouts of weather reports.

So when the ABC guy says "I'm not talking about the opinion pieces" I'd say that's the point, you can't seperate them if you can't tell the difference.



What's funny is that any person with an ounce of credibilty can look at Fox and tell its crap.... but some people think its gospel.
Besides doesn't Murdoch own them.... that's all you need to know about bias.
Like MSNBC with Bush.

Strange that his administration didn't feel the need to whine about them and say they weren't a news outlet...
TBH I don't think the Bush administration, especially Cheney, didn't give a rats ass about most things, let alone what people said about them. They had their agenda and that was all that mattered.

Its true that there were a lot of anti-Bush stuff, but then again he made it easy, AND Bush was given a lot of room after 9/11. There wasn't to many critical pieces digging into the information he was putting out there to support the war.

It could be taking on Fox plays to the democratic base. But I would rather see PBO take a bull dog stance and run his agenda through. It would be kind of refreshing to see a democrat do that for a change, but to me they are always looking for the angle.

Anyway, are trying to say that Fox on the whole, opinion pieces and news, is not overly critical of PBO? Have they ever done a "wow" what a good job the president is doing piece? even one?

That leaves the question why should the Whitehouse play ball with a group like that? I wouldn't and you probably wouldn't either if you were in their shoes.
We'll just use the argument the media used when they bashed Bush for 8 years: Isn't that the job of the press? To question the government's policies and keep them honest?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
13rin
Member
+977|6766

Diesel_dyk wrote:

TBH I don't think the Bush administration, especially Cheney, didn't give a rats ass about most things, let alone what people said about them. They had their agenda and that was all that mattered.

Its true that there were a lot of anti-Bush stuff, but then again he made it easy, AND Bush was given a lot of room after 9/11. There wasn't to many critical pieces digging into the information he was putting out there to support the war.

It could be taking on Fox plays to the democratic base. But I would rather see PBO take a bull dog stance and run his agenda through. It would be kind of refreshing to see a democrat do that for a change, but to me they are always looking for the angle.

Anyway, are trying to say that Fox on the whole, opinion pieces and news, is not overly critical of PBO? Have they ever done a "wow" what a good job the president is doing piece? even one?

That leaves the question why should the Whitehouse play ball with a group like that? I wouldn't and you probably wouldn't either if you were in their shoes.
They did care.  They just had the class not to sling the mud and play the press game.  Bush made it easy?   How so?  Did you know that a young child asked Bama during a meeting recently why everyone hated him?  If that had been a question posed to Bush it would have been front page -"Even kids hate Bush".  Granted the media did give Bush some room, but it wasn't just him.  There were just as many D's on board after 9-11 as there were R's.  Funny though how when the spot light of the media shone back upon them months later, the D's scattered like roaches leaving the administration on it's own.  Character or politics?  Perhaps a bit of both.

The Administration HAS taken a bulldog stance on his agenda.  He's got whatever he wants.  The FAILED stimlus bill... Seen the numbers?   Anyways, He's got the party super majority.  It is his people not the R's that are the hold up.  The D's simply aren't as radical as he is.  They too like their power and there is a referendum in 2010 that will not be kind to the D's, and they know it.  The supreme community organizer isn't acting like a President at all.  He has used his office in unprecedented attacks to individuals (Limbaugh).  FOX actually has opposing views and does present news that is often ignored by the left media.  If roughly a million people march on the Washington isn't it news?  Why was it widely ignored or ridiculed by all other media agencies (other then fox)?  I wonder what would have happened if the Million man march by the african american community was ignored... How about the ACORN?  The media slant is so biased its scary.

Why should the administration "play ball"?  Its their job.  They answer to the people.  Not some of the people, but all of them. 

The bottom line is that the White House doesn't like FOX because they don't roll over for the Supreme Community Organizer.  They won't ask predetermined soft ball questions.  They ask REAL questions and are actually holding the administration accountable.  If that doesn't make for good journalism then keep the rose colored glasses on and stay tuned to pmsnbc.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6908|London, England

DBBrinson1 wrote:

If roughly a million people march on the Washington isn't it news?
I believe because, that was false news.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6393|eXtreme to the maX
Someone needs to decide what is a news organisation and what isn't.

Fox is more a Rupert Murdoch propaganda organisation than a responsible part of the media much of the time.
Fuck Israel
13rin
Member
+977|6766

Dilbert_X wrote:

Someone needs to decide what is a news organisation and what isn't.

Fox is more a Rupert Murdoch propaganda organisation than a responsible part of the media much of the time.
Do you watch Fox news?
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Mekstizzle wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

If roughly a million people march on the Washington isn't it news?
I believe because, that was false news.
How in the world is it false news? Just because the lefties called them 'tea baggers' and 'astroturf' it makes it so? Come on man, use your brain.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6908|London, England
No I mean it was no way near a million from what I gathered, just an exaggeration
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Mekstizzle wrote:

No I mean it was no way near a million from what I gathered, just an exaggeration
It was a few hundred thousand people gathered together to protest our government spending money it doesn't have. That's newsworthy imo.

Frankly, I grew up believing it was the media's responsibility to be critical of whoever is in office, no matter what their party is. The cheerleading that they've done for the past year sickens me. Report the story, not your slant on it. Thanks.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard