Obama freezes unfriendly coverage

[Father Time]

Fox is a rightwing hackery, not a legitimate news outlet. It is TV's version of national enquirer.

Yep that's the reason Fox news, absolutely clobbers all of the other "legitimate news outlets" viewerships....right?

Your best defence of Fox News is appeal to popularity fallacy?

 

[Coyote]

I always like reading your input Coyote, but, this time I have a problem with what you say. Basically, what you and they seem to be calling for is the government dictating what the press can tell us. Either Fox News buckles under to the President's whims or Fox will not be allowed access to the White House.

And if all the other "News" agencies have already capitulated then where do we stand?

Immie

I do see what you are saying and I understand the problem and agree in prinicple...but it seems that Fox has become much more along the lines of something like the National Enquirer than a legitimate news organization. The number of lies that go uncorrected, news being created rather than reported, facts that are unchecked and opinion disguised as news - is mind-boggling. That is what brought the likes of Dan Rather - rightfully - to his knees. And some of those unsubstantiated falsehoods are downright slanderous like what was reported about Jennings. It seems that right now Fox has dropped the ball badly on journalistic integrity and being relegated to tabloid status is the price for going down that road.

The administration isn't saying it won't have anything to do with Fox, it's just limiting it but that does not stop Fox from participating with the rest of the media in press reviews etc. I suspect that the previous administration's officials made many more appearances on Fox than on the likes of the far less friendly MSNBC so I'm not sure this is really the issue they make it out to be.

Just like your Van Jones example....

Oh? Care to elaborate?

 

[manifold]

It appears to me that both sides are missing and/or obfuscating the point here.

Clearly the White House cannot allow access to every single news outlet that requests it. So why should there be any special obligation to allow access to Fox?

 

[jreeves]

but it seems that Fox has become much more along the lines of something like the National Enquirer than a legitimate news organization.

Fox is, and has been, the mouth piece of the GOP. Even Murdock says so and he owns the darn station. So, if the owner says his station is the GOP mouthpiece, only an ID10T would argue with him.

Considering Murdock isn't the owner, it wouldn't surprise me, if you had this wrong.

Rupert Murdoch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Murdoch's publications have been said to have conservative leanings, in comparison with other national newspapers. During the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, all 175 Murdoch-owned newspapers worldwide editorialized in favor of the war.[18] Murdoch also served on the board of directors of the libertarian Cato Institute. News Corp.-owned Fox News is often criticized for its alleged Republican and/or conservative bias, though it denies these allegations.

 

[Coyote]

Legitimacy with who? The looney left? Last I checked Fox SMOKES ALL the other media in terms of viewership.

And how's the NYT doing these days?

But, then again they are no CNN. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I mistakenly assumed the "looney right" was interested in impartial and accurate reporting. Maybe it's just the "not-so-looney" right.

But, keep on deflecting by bringing up the NYT....do their lapses of journalistic integrity somehow rationalize Fox's? Are you saying you are willing to accept less than accurate reporting? Maybe that is why you are a member of the "looney right"

guess what? Fox News beats all other news on cable combined. has for years, and guess what? in avoiding Fox like the plague his highness avoids many of his would be supporters. and if you think people don't notice is bias sissyfied ways when it comes to softball press you are very much mistaken. but guess what? we don't care if you like kool aid more than you like truth. we accept that that's why we call you DUmmies.

On cable.....that's not saying much because cable overall lags behind other news sources for reliability, depth of coverage, etc.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This must be Obama's Audition piece for the lead in "The Vagina Monologues"

 

[Coyote]

It appears to me that both sides are missing and/or obfuscating the point here.

Clearly the White House cannot allow access to every single news outlet that requests it. So why should there be any special obligation to allow access to Fox?

Interesting point....

 

[beowolfe]

link to his direct quote and in context please?

Go find it yourself. Only a real ID10T defends things that he/she doesn't even know the truth about. And you even have the nerve to try and specify what form of proof............ ROFLMAO..... god, you people are not very bright.........

 

[WillowTree]

It appears to me that both sides are missing and/or obfuscating the point here.

Clearly the White House cannot allow access to every single news outlet that requests it. So why should there be any special obligation to allow access to Fox?

NO. they would be DUmmies to allow access to Fox News Network. DUmmies I tell you. They are doing exactly the right thing here. I commend them for their actions. Now.

 

[manifold]

To protest Obama's obvious wussitis, I think that all loyal viewers of Fox News should vote against him in the next election. That'll teach him!

 

[California Girl]

Jennings covered up/failed to report the statuatory rape of a 15 yr old boy, and that he (guilty by implication) supports NAMBLA.

Van Jones is a communist, that he was jailed for participation in the Rodney King riots.

Fox News claims that White House official worked for ACORN

Obama is a Muslim yada yada yada...

Death panels anyone?

Chris Thomas - Politics on the Rocks – Lies, Liars, and Accountability: Fox News is Having A Bad Week - True/Slant

...and so on.

Yet Van Jones resigned...hmm....is Fox lying or asking questions that the other networks won't ask

Resignation doesn't equal truth. He resigned for a good reason - he didn't want to be a source of distraction for the administration's initiatives.

Aside from that, it isn't even remotely a question of "is" - it's a fact, supported by evidence that they lied. All your implications can't change that.

Jones is a communist. He resigned because he had to. End of.

 

[Coyote]

Yet Van Jones resigned...hmm....is Fox lying or asking questions that the other networks won't ask

Resignation doesn't equal truth. He resigned for a good reason - he didn't want to be a source of distraction for the administration's initiatives.

Aside from that, it isn't even remotely a question of "is" - it's a fact, supported by evidence that they lied. All your implications can't change that.

Jones is a communist. He resigned because he had to. End of.

Oh brilliant. Well that ends the debate of course.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No proof at all, CG, about that.

Hey, have you met divecon, elvis, or crusaderfrank? You may find true love!

 

[California Girl]

Sorry, I must agree with Obama on this one. Fox "news" isn't a valid news organization anymore. It's more like Rush Limbaugh TV.

Sucks really bad. So bad in fact I went back to network news.

That clears up a lot. I now understand you much better.

 

[beowolfe]

To protest Obama's obvious wussitis, I think that all loyal viewers of Fox News should vote against him in the next election. That'll teach him!

Cool.......... that will just be a repeat of 2008....

 

[California Girl]

No proof at all, CG, about that.

Hey, have you met divecon, elvis, or crusaderfrank? You may find true love!

I have read the quotes from Van Jones about his being 'a radical communist'. I have seen no quote from him disavowing those beliefs. And I have read chapter and verse about and from Jones. A quick google search will give you, in his own words, his communist beliefs. You find me any quote from him that disavows that and I'll be happy to read it.

I make it my business to know who these people are.

 

[Sarah G]

Sorry, I must agree with Obama on this one. Fox "news" isn't a valid news organization anymore. It's more like Rush Limbaugh TV.

Sucks really bad. So bad in fact I went back to network news.

That clears up a lot. I now understand you much better.

Doubtful. Unless of course what you understand is that I like hearing the opposing pov. Fox isn't that anymore. Closest thing to it is network news.

 

[jreeves]

Resignation doesn't equal truth. He resigned for a good reason - he didn't want to be a source of distraction for the administration's initiatives.

Aside from that, it isn't even remotely a question of "is" - it's a fact, supported by evidence that they lied. All your implications can't change that.

Research often?
Van Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1992, while still a law student at Yale, Jones participated as a volunteer legal monitor for a protest of the Rodney King verdict in San Francisco. He and many other participants in the protest were arrested. The district attorney later dropped the charges against Jones. The arrested protesters, including Jones, won a small legal settlement. Jones later said that "the incident deepened my disaffection with the system and accelerated my political radicalization."[18] In October 2005 Jones said he was "a rowdy nationalist"[15] before the King verdict was announced, but that by August of that year (1992) he was a communist. [15]

Check your reading skills:

Glenn Beck, among others, said that Van Jones went to prison for taking part in the Rodney King riots. The riots were not in San Francisco but Los Angeles. Van Jones was, as you noted "participated as a volunteer legal monitor for a protest of the Rodney King verdict in San Francisco" - a protest that according to witness' and court findings, was peaceful. That is a huge difference from "taking part in the Rodney King riots".

Secondly, the communist comments. Key word, present tense: is.

Fox News reported - in many different ways, all present tense - that he is a communist (usually textured with "rabid", "radical", "unabashed" or some such terms.)

As your own source says: he was a communist. Everything in his records and writings however indicates he has long since taken up capitalism as the means for social change.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgkWG4VnOIg]YouTube - Glenn Beck - Van Jones: SHOCKING WORDS! 9/01/09 Part 1/5[/ame]

Tell me what is wrong with the Glen Beck report?

 

[Coyote]

No proof at all, CG, about that.

Hey, have you met divecon, elvis, or crusaderfrank? You may find true love!

I have read the quotes from Van Jones about his being 'a radical communist'. I have seen no quote from him disavowing those beliefs. And I have read chapter and verse about and from Jones. A quick google search will give you, in his own words, his communist beliefs. You find me any quote from him that disavows that and I'll be happy to read it.

I make it my business to know who these people are.

You don't have to "dissavow" a belief in order to change it. That's a fallacy. Political ideology is not like religious dogma. Do you dissavow the GoP to become a Democrat or do you find, after a while, that your beliefs have changed and are no longer in line with your party and...change it?

Look at what he's written and done since 2002 and it is clear he that he believes capitalism is the vehicle to social change.

You may make it your business to "know who these people are" but that doesn't affect your accuracy, only your bias.

 

[Immanuel]

She's right.

Maybe if they'd concentrate on news instead of reporting opinion as fact in their eagerness to cut down Obama...and perhaps doing a bit more fact checking on their stories they might gain some legitimacy back. Instead, they've hit the bottom where Dan Rather slid after his ignominious exit.

I always like reading your input Coyote, but, this time I have a problem with what you say. Basically, what you and they seem to be calling for is the government dictating what the press can tell us. Either Fox News buckles under to the President's whims or Fox will not be allowed access to the White House.

And if all the other "News" agencies have already capitulated then where do we stand?

Immie

I do see what you are saying and I understand the problem and agree in prinicple...but it seems that Fox has become much more along the lines of something like the National Enquirer than a legitimate news organization. The number of lies that go uncorrected, news being created rather than reported, facts that are unchecked and opinion disguised as news - is mind-boggling. That is what brought the likes of Dan Rather - rightfully - to his knees. And some of those unsubstantiated falsehoods are downright slanderous like what was reported about Jennings. It seems that right now Fox has dropped the ball badly on journalistic integrity and being relegated to tabloid status is the price for going down that road.

The administration isn't saying it won't have anything to do with Fox, it's just limiting it but that does not stop Fox from participating with the rest of the media in press reviews etc. I suspect that the previous administration's officials made many more appearances on Fox than on the likes of the far less friendly MSNBC so I'm not sure this is really the issue they make it out to be.

Like Allie said, when I want to see what is going on in the world, I typically go to CNN since CNN seems to be more "news" oriented and better yet CNN's Headline News. Fox "News" (the Fox Network channel here) has an okay news network, but unfortunately if you watch that you pretty much only get the "local news" unless there is something major going on like a hurricane or the President receiving an award he did not earn. But when you start heading into the Fox Cable Network (that being the O'Rielly's, Hannities and the likes), you can pretty much assume that you are dealing with MSNBC-like garbage.

However, I still do not like the idea of the White House even insinuating that if Fox doesn't come over to his side of the fence they will not get any "face time". I just don't like that. It is not so much that he will not grant them interviews, but rather the hint of governmental control of the press.

Immie