Team Obama: "We Control the Media"

[Si modo]

 

[del]

The posted the link to the study earlier in the thread.

pssst. it's not 2005 any more.

keep it under your hat.

Have you seen in major shifts in media coverage over the past four years? I surely haven't. George Will still has his seat every Sunday on This Week.

no, surely nothing has changed in four years.



dope

 

[uptownlivin90]

6. FOX News has been consistantly in the same place when it comes to Obama coverage since he got into office, negative.

Now that's what I call CONSISTENCY!!

Quite truthfully I was suprise by exactly HOW consistant. I don't watch FOX or mainstream all-day news stations... the only time I'll watch the news is on local stations at 5 or 11 at night... and if I see an interesting looking article on yahoo when I get online... I might click on it... but usually only 'bout foreign issues. Not watching mainstream news... keeps you from going crazy. Anyway... I really did sit there and ask do they really get the guy that badly? LOL

Regardless the report shows a downward trend in the MSM. Any "Maoist control" over the MSM Obama had, he's loosing it. But then again like I said I don't believe that MSM actually has biases towards individuals or ideologies (well some of them do ie FOX and MSNBC), but they have public relations managers just like the white house and other corporations that test and see what "issues" Americans "care about the most" and spend their time trying to get ratings by talking about whatever their polls tell them is important alot. Which is why I don't watch MSM because half of the sh** that's "important to Americans" really isn't important at all... and I'd far rather go outside and play basketball or make money on the job then listen to what's "important to Americans".

 

[Polk]

pssst. it's not 2005 any more.

keep it under your hat.

Have you seen in major shifts in media coverage over the past four years? I surely haven't. George Will still has his seat every Sunday on This Week.

no, surely nothing has changed in five years.



dope

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

 

[Si modo]

Have you seen in major shifts in media coverage over the past four years? I surely haven't. George Will still has his seat every Sunday on This Week.

no, surely nothing has changed in five years.



dope

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

Source?

 

[del]

Have you seen in major shifts in media coverage over the past four years? I surely haven't. George Will still has his seat every Sunday on This Week.

no, surely nothing has changed in five years.



dope

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

maybe it'll help if you stomp your feet AND cover your ears.

 

[Polk]

no, surely nothing has changed in five years.



dope

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

Source?

What's yours?

 

[del]

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

Source?

What's yours?

you'd be surprised the things you can see when your head isn't jammed up inside your duodenum.

you should try it; the air's better, too.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Well...I would say there has been a significant shift in the media environment. All one has to do is look at the various news channels out there.

I leave my television on the AFN Television news channel 24/7 and they have quite a variety of news programs. The news coverage as far as I can tell has taken a significantly liberal slant. There is nothing wrong with this insofar as looking at which party is in power. It's expected.

 

[Polk]

no, surely nothing has changed in five years.



dope

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

maybe it'll help if you stomp your feet AND cover your ears.

So have Democrats started getting significantly more press time? Last I checked, ABC hasn't hired a liberal to be a permanent fixture of their Sunday table the way Will is.

Let's take a look at the MTP lineups for two recent months, June and July:
June 14, 2009: Vice President Joe Biden, Mike Murphy, Joe Scarborough
June 21, 2009: Benjamin Netanyahu, Sam Nunn, Fred Thompson, Nina Easton, Chuck Todd
June 28, 2009: David Axelrod, Mitt Romney, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), David Brooks, E.J. Dionne, Dee Dee Myers, Mike Murphy
July 12, 2009: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Karen Hughes, Andrea Mitchell, Bob Shrum, Roger Simon
July 19, 2009: Kathleen Sebelius, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Paul Gigot, John Harwood, Michele Norris, Richard Wolffe
July 26, 2009: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

That looks like a lineup with a slight, but notable, bias toward the right.
Biden is on, but he's balanced by not one but two conservatives.
Axelrod is on, but again he's balanced by two conservatives.
The only airing where liberals have a big voice in that time span is the week Hillary was on for the whole hour.

 

[Polk]

Well...I would say there has been a significant shift in the media environment. All one has to do is look at the various news channels out there.

I leave my television on the AFN Television news channel 24/7 and they have quite a variety of news programs. The news coverage as far as I can tell has taken a significantly liberal slant. There is nothing wrong with this insofar as looking at which party is in power. It's expected.

The news hasn't taken a significant liberal slant. MSNBC has doubled down on liberal opinion programming, but that's one network out of many. Fox has taken a similar move in increasing it's already strong conservative bias (booting Alan Colmes to give Hannity the show all to himself, not that Colmes was ever there to provide more than token opposition anyway and replacing one of the hours previously used for "news" programming instead of opinion programming with Glenn Beck).

 

[Si modo]

I didn't say nothing hasn't changed in the past five years. I stated the media environment hasn't changed. And guess what? It hasn't.

Source?

What's yours?

YOU made the claim and it logically stands as bullshit until YOU provide support for it.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Well...I would say there has been a significant shift in the media environment. All one has to do is look at the various news channels out there.

I leave my television on the AFN Television news channel 24/7 and they have quite a variety of news programs. The news coverage as far as I can tell has taken a significantly liberal slant. There is nothing wrong with this insofar as looking at which party is in power. It's expected.

The news hasn't taken a significant liberal slant. MSNBC has doubled down on liberal opinion programming, but that's one network out of many. Fox has taken a similar move in increasing it's already strong conservative bias (booting Alan Colmes to give Hannity the show all to himself, not that Colmes was ever there to provide more than token opposition anyway and replacing one of the hours previously used for "news" programming instead of opinion programming with Glenn Beck).

Do you only have a 2 channel cable package?

Check some of the other news sources before making blanket statements using 4 year old data.

 

[California Girl]

Well...I would say there has been a significant shift in the media environment. All one has to do is look at the various news channels out there.

I leave my television on the AFN Television news channel 24/7 and they have quite a variety of news programs. The news coverage as far as I can tell has taken a significantly liberal slant. There is nothing wrong with this insofar as looking at which party is in power. It's expected.

The news hasn't taken a significant liberal slant. MSNBC has doubled down on liberal opinion programming, but that's one network out of many. Fox has taken a similar move in increasing it's already strong conservative bias (booting Alan Colmes to give Hannity the show all to himself, not that Colmes was ever there to provide more than token opposition anyway and replacing one of the hours previously used for "news" programming instead of opinion programming with Glenn Beck).

MSNBC, owned by GE, who took bail out money from the Government. Bail out money came with strings attached..... as you will see if you read Dr Ezekiel Emanuels blog. String - support the Obama agenda. That's using taxpayers money inappropriately, at least it is to some of us.

And Fox has a perfectly fine balance of 'opinion'. It's not their fault that the liberals there find it hard to defend their position. I would too if I supported the Obama Administration - because they behave like spoiled children.

 

[Fatality]

Anita Dumb finally admits what even Helen Thomas finds painfully obvious: the American media is run out of the White House

White House boasts: We 'control' news media
Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government
Posted: October 18, 2009
7:11 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

TEL AVIV – President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference."

White House boasts: We 'control' news media

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. What the hell do they think we are, puppets? They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.” -- Helen Thomas

Better Late Than Never

yes helen they think you are their puppet, and so far the press has only proven that to be the case. the press is a willing accomplice, they do not need to be duped, they like their strings. that is except fox who doesnt get on its knees in front of barry no matter how much he crys about it.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

as you will see if you read Dr Ezekiel Emanuels blog

This is one whacked guy!!!!! He thinks kibbutzism is the way to go...a socialist-zionist regime seems to be his goal for America.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Well...I would say there has been a significant shift in the media environment. All one has to do is look at the various news channels out there.

I leave my television on the AFN Television news channel 24/7 and they have quite a variety of news programs. The news coverage as far as I can tell has taken a significantly liberal slant. There is nothing wrong with this insofar as looking at which party is in power. It's expected.

The news hasn't taken a significant liberal slant. MSNBC has doubled down on liberal opinion programming, but that's one network out of many. Fox has taken a similar move in increasing it's already strong conservative bias (booting Alan Colmes to give Hannity the show all to himself, not that Colmes was ever there to provide more than token opposition anyway and replacing one of the hours previously used for "news" programming instead of opinion programming with Glenn Beck).

MSNBC, owned by GE, who took bail out money from the Government. Bail out money came with strings attached..... as you will see if you read Dr Ezekiel Emanuels blog. String - support the Obama agenda. That's using taxpayers money inappropriately, at least it is to some of us.

And Fox has a perfectly fine balance of 'opinion'. It's not their fault that the liberals there find it hard to defend their position. I would too if I supported the Obama Administration - because they behave like spoiled children.

Are you serious? Bailout money? The bailout money from Bush? The Republican guy who gave out the bailout money?

How a Loophole Benefits GE in Bank Rescue
Industrial Giant Becomes Top Recipient in Debt-Guarantee Program
Loophole Helps GE Benefit From Bank Rescue Program - washingtonpost.com

General Electric, the world's largest industrial company, has quietly become the biggest beneficiary of one of the government's key rescue programs for banks.

At the same time, GE has avoided many of the restrictions facing other financial giants getting help from the government.

The company did not initially qualify for the program, under which the government sought to unfreeze credit markets by guaranteeing debt sold by banking firms. But regulators soon loosened the eligibility requirements, in part because of behind-the-scenes appeals from GE.

As a result, GE has joined major banks collectively saving billions of dollars by raising money for their operations at lower interest rates. Public records show that GE Capital, the company's massive financing arm, has issued nearly a quarter of the $340 billion in debt backed by the program, which is known as the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP. The government's actions have been "powerful and helpful" to the company, GE chief executive Jeffrey Immelt acknowledged in December.



Edited for copy right laws. Please do not post full articles. Thanks.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Obama didn't give anyone bank bailout money he wasn't President when the bailout money was given to GE

Tell us when GE received the bailout money...with links provided......please.

Now.... be careful.....

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Still waiting.............

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The news hasn't taken a significant liberal slant. MSNBC has doubled down on liberal opinion programming, but that's one network out of many. Fox has taken a similar move in increasing it's already strong conservative bias (booting Alan Colmes to give Hannity the show all to himself, not that Colmes was ever there to provide more than token opposition anyway and replacing one of the hours previously used for "news" programming instead of opinion programming with Glenn Beck).

MSNBC, owned by GE, who took bail out money from the Government. Bail out money came with strings attached..... as you will see if you read Dr Ezekiel Emanuels blog. String - support the Obama agenda. That's using taxpayers money inappropriately, at least it is to some of us.

And Fox has a perfectly fine balance of 'opinion'. It's not their fault that the liberals there find it hard to defend their position. I would too if I supported the Obama Administration - because they behave like spoiled children.

Are you serious? Bailout money? The bailout money from Bush? The Republican guy who gave out the bailout money?


Seriously your last post was a SERIOUS distortion of facts. Obama didn't give anyone bank bailout money he wasn't President when the bailout money was given to GE, and yes I think that little "loophole" and the bailout itself was bullshit. It's insanity to say that Obama somehow manuevered into the FDIC and convinced them to support GE with bailout money... in return for them helping out his campaign. What proof do you have of this claim? Where is it? Where's the quotes, the meetings Obama shoing up at somebody's office lobbying somebody a phone call, witness statement something! We know how GA got bailout funds happened they invoked a bullshit loophole, something that the Bush admin liked alot, loopholes, and took advantage of a broken system that was broken YEARS before Obama was even a Senator.


Obama is on the record saying he and his administration OPPOSES what happened with
this group... now I don't think it's EVER going to go as far as action, and I don't think it did, that's actually the last I've heard of it. The guy IS full of good nice sounding rhetoric and little action... but you can't pin EVERY DAMN THING on the man.

It's absolutely amazing how far you people will go to criminalize this man. GE was corrupt long before even the Bush regime. So was Citigroup, these folks don't give a damn about Obama or anybody else.

Do you need help retracting any statements you made in this post?