Why no cameras for press briefings?

[blackhawk]

G

So what?

You have no problem with that kind of bullshit grandstanding? I guess you are the problem.

Explain yourself... What is your issue exactly?

The entire press briefing consists of an unending series of a few questions being reworded and reporters taking turns getting on camera.

It gets old!

Surely they have better things to do!

They are starting to remind me of the scene from Aliens where Sigourney Weaver asked how many different ways do you want me to tell the same story.

what story are you trying to tell? The MSM sucks so they should be shut down? Is that it?

The point is that these briefings are not all that you and the media are trying to make them out to be and that theydon't always need to televised. This is less about keeping the people informed and more about reporters egos being burised. Speaking for myself I haven't missed any major news without these televised briefings.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

My opinion is it's because of the reporters grandstanding now trying to get their viral moment.

You could be right. I'd rather see consequences for improper behavior, like suspending reporters that speak out of turn, interrupt or take an uncivil tone, rather than trying to restrict exposure.

It seems to me with the advances in technology and all the social media outlets an ever increasing number of reporters are looking less to report the news and more to create the news and be part of the story themselves. Having cameras in there is a double edged sword you can tell the story much better with them but as we have seen they can also bring out the worst in the people standing in front of them. As a previous poster stated we're getting more sideshow than news from these right now.

But again, wouldn't you rather see a "code of conduct" instituted to restore a more respectful discourse, rather than limiting exposure?

These are supposed to be grown men and women if at this point in their lives a code of conduct needs to be implemented to get them to act like grown ups we have bigger problems than limiting exposure.

I don't think we need a code of conduct, I think the press has every right to press the WH. If they can't take the scrutiny then grow some balls and deal with it. Do better answering questions or get somebody who can control the room better. Don't run and hide by turning of cameras and holding less briefings

I think some better conduct would go a long way in fixing things. What ever happened to treat others as you wish to be treated? Maybe better answers would come from better questions. As far as controlling the room right now it's like a preschool after a candy festival. Better can be done on both sides but both have to work at it.

 

[Slade3200]

G

You have no problem with that kind of bullshit grandstanding? I guess you are the problem.

Explain yourself... What is your issue exactly?

The entire press briefing consists of an unending series of a few questions being reworded and reporters taking turns getting on camera.

It gets old!

Surely they have better things to do!

They are starting to remind me of the scene from Aliens where Sigourney Weaver asked how many different ways do you want me to tell the same story.

what story are you trying to tell? The MSM sucks so they should be shut down? Is that it?

The point is that these briefings are not all that you and the media are trying to make them out to be and that theydon't always need to televised. This is less about keeping the people informed and more about reporters egos being burised. Speaking for myself I haven't missed any major news without these televised briefings.

You make fine points and I agree that this isn't ground shattering. I'm just saying it is a step in the wrong direction. Trumps team is struggling to deal properly with the scrutiny, instead of retreating and shutting down they should be doing better, up their game.

 

[Slade3200]

You could be right. I'd rather see consequences for improper behavior, like suspending reporters that speak out of turn, interrupt or take an uncivil tone, rather than trying to restrict exposure.

It seems to me with the advances in technology and all the social media outlets an ever increasing number of reporters are looking less to report the news and more to create the news and be part of the story themselves. Having cameras in there is a double edged sword you can tell the story much better with them but as we have seen they can also bring out the worst in the people standing in front of them. As a previous poster stated we're getting more sideshow than news from these right now.

But again, wouldn't you rather see a "code of conduct" instituted to restore a more respectful discourse, rather than limiting exposure?

These are supposed to be grown men and women if at this point in their lives a code of conduct needs to be implemented to get them to act like grown ups we have bigger problems than limiting exposure.

I don't think we need a code of conduct, I think the press has every right to press the WH. If they can't take the scrutiny then grow some balls and deal with it. Do better answering questions or get somebody who can control the room better. Don't run and hide by turning of cameras and holding less briefings

I think some better conduct would go a long way in fixing things. What ever happened to treat others as you wish to be treated? Maybe better answers would come from better questions. As far as controlling the room right now it's like a preschool after a candy festival. Better can be done on both sides but both have to work at it.

Ahh the golden rule, it's what I was raised on and hope can be an example to as many as possible. The rest of your statement I agree with as well

 

[OKTexas]

They do when malice is proven, I think that would be easy to prove.


.

If there is malice, let it be proven. The fact remains that Trump hurts his own agenda with his Tweets. It makes him look petty, spiteful and overly emotional. His base will continue to support him, but his favorability numbers speak for themselves. His fans can scream "fake news" all they like, but the November 2018 elections will come as big a shock to them as the November 2016 was to Hillary fans.

American voters are not as ******* stupid as the partisan assholes want us to believe.

Malice is easily proven. Look at all the doctors these networks have hired to break every medical ethic in the book to express opinions on a person they've never examined or even met. Not only is that medical malpractice, but it demonstrates clear malice on the part of the networks.


.

Where they giving opinion analysis or facts?

If facts can you provide a few examples?

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

 

[Slade3200]

If there is malice, let it be proven. The fact remains that Trump hurts his own agenda with his Tweets. It makes him look petty, spiteful and overly emotional. His base will continue to support him, but his favorability numbers speak for themselves. His fans can scream "fake news" all they like, but the November 2018 elections will come as big a shock to them as the November 2016 was to Hillary fans.

American voters are not as ******* stupid as the partisan assholes want us to believe.

Malice is easily proven. Look at all the doctors these networks have hired to break every medical ethic in the book to express opinions on a person they've never examined or even met. Not only is that medical malpractice, but it demonstrates clear malice on the part of the networks.


.

Where they giving opinion analysis or facts?

If facts can you provide a few examples?

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

Kudos for providing examples and doing some work to back up your claims... puts you above most in this board. The problem I'm having is it only took 10 seconds in both videos... the first dr says very clearly that she doesn't know Trump and she can't diagnose him, then she went on to talk shit. She basically discredited herself... that ain't news. The second one stated that they were OpEds, opinion editorials, quite different than reporting the news.... I have an issue with the overuse of opinion attacks in our media. It's happening on both sides, look at Hannity or Levin or Rush on the right. It's food for the fishies but not news. It's also protected by free speech, not illegal.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

So you think the broadcast networks interrupt their programming for a WH press briefing?

LOL!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

 

[Slade3200]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

So you think the broadcast networks interrupt their programming for a WH press briefing?

LOL!

Think? No... I know, I've seen it with my own eyes

 

[Slade3200]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

Yes, FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. The 3 largest cable news networks in America. I'm talking about those

 

[Missouri_Mike]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

So you think the broadcast networks interrupt their programming for a WH press briefing?

LOL!

Breaking news! Everything is breaking news to these people. Not a single show on any channel doesn't open with "Breaking News!"

What is the news?

Trump had ice cream, two scoops!

Trumps tax returns! Page six showing he paid a lot of taxes.

It's ******* ridiculous.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

What's the point of having cameras if the mainstream media is just going to doctor the footage to fabricate the news?

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

Yes, FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. The 3 largest cable news networks in America. I'm talking about those

And every one of them may as well be the Jersey Shore.

 

[Slade3200]

When has that happened? Please show examples. The major networks have been airing the pressers in their entirety from what I've seen

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

Yes, FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. The 3 largest cable news networks in America. I'm talking about those

And every one of them may as well be the Jersey Shore.

They are trending that way... I've been calling them Kardashians but I think we are on the same page.

All the BS aside though, there are elements of truth to be found if you're looking at the right things

 

[OKTexas]

Malice is easily proven. Look at all the doctors these networks have hired to break every medical ethic in the book to express opinions on a person they've never examined or even met. Not only is that medical malpractice, but it demonstrates clear malice on the part of the networks.


.

Where they giving opinion analysis or facts?

If facts can you provide a few examples?

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

Kudos for providing examples and doing some work to back up your claims... puts you above most in this board. The problem I'm having is it only took 10 seconds in both videos... the first dr says very clearly that she doesn't know Trump and she can't diagnose him, then she went on to talk shit. She basically discredited herself... that ain't news. The second one stated that they were OpEds, opinion editorials, quite different than reporting the news.... I have an issue with the overuse of opinion attacks in our media. It's happening on both sides, look at Hannity or Levin or Rush on the right. It's food for the fishies but not news. It's also protected by free speech, not illegal.

You should watch all of them.

The three you mentioned don't claim to be news people, unlike many in the MSM. And you're right the first doctor discredited herself, but that didn't stop her from proceeding to make a diagnosis. How many average CNN viewers would even remember her disclaimer?

BTW, the doctor who wrote the diagnosis book says the terms used about Trump don't apply to him. He said he may behave badly but the the clinical terms used by the other doctors are wrong.


.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Uh, no. I don't know what you have been watching, CSPAN maybe?

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

Yes, FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. The 3 largest cable news networks in America. I'm talking about those

And every one of them may as well be the Jersey Shore.

They are trending that way... I've been calling them Kardashians but I think we are on the same page.

All the BS aside though, there are elements of truth to be found if you're looking at the right things

We shouldn't have to search for elements. That's why nobody trusts them. How about they just provide the elements?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Where they giving opinion analysis or facts?

If facts can you provide a few examples?

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

Kudos for providing examples and doing some work to back up your claims... puts you above most in this board. The problem I'm having is it only took 10 seconds in both videos... the first dr says very clearly that she doesn't know Trump and she can't diagnose him, then she went on to talk shit. She basically discredited herself... that ain't news. The second one stated that they were OpEds, opinion editorials, quite different than reporting the news.... I have an issue with the overuse of opinion attacks in our media. It's happening on both sides, look at Hannity or Levin or Rush on the right. It's food for the fishies but not news. It's also protected by free speech, not illegal.

You should watch all of them.

The three you mentioned don't claim to be news people, unlike many in the MSM. And you're right the first doctor discredited herself, but that didn't stop her from proceeding to make a diagnosis. How many average CNN viewers would even remember her disclaimer?

BTW, the doctor who wrote the diagnosis book says the terms used about Trump don't apply to him. He said he may behave badly but the the clinical terms used by the other doctors are wrong.


.

They don't care if she discredited herself. They just want the headline and whatever watchers they can round up in the net.

 

[IsaacNewton]

The only reason I can think of is they are trying to limit the amount of people who are tuning in by only allowing the press to play the audio recordings. Does anybody know the White Houses rationale for this or have any other theories?

"The most successful criminals come out at night, when no one can see." - J R Lippay -

 

[Slade3200]

Where they giving opinion analysis or facts?

If facts can you provide a few examples?

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

Kudos for providing examples and doing some work to back up your claims... puts you above most in this board. The problem I'm having is it only took 10 seconds in both videos... the first dr says very clearly that she doesn't know Trump and she can't diagnose him, then she went on to talk shit. She basically discredited herself... that ain't news. The second one stated that they were OpEds, opinion editorials, quite different than reporting the news.... I have an issue with the overuse of opinion attacks in our media. It's happening on both sides, look at Hannity or Levin or Rush on the right. It's food for the fishies but not news. It's also protected by free speech, not illegal.

You should watch all of them.

The three you mentioned don't claim to be news people, unlike many in the MSM. And you're right the first doctor discredited herself, but that didn't stop her from proceeding to make a diagnosis. How many average CNN viewers would even remember her disclaimer?

BTW, the doctor who wrote the diagnosis book says the terms used about Trump don't apply to him. He said he may behave badly but the the clinical terms used by the other doctors are wrong.


.

Yeah man these cable "news" shows are getting filled with people from all sides who are trying to sell books and make a name... capitalism at its finest. It frustrates me, I try and stick to the more objective programs or at least ones that have good balance and debate. It's mostly crap TV though geared to drive ratings. We need to pick and choose carefully to find the real news that's floating behind all the hype.

It's the unfortunate trend that has become cable news. It's not illegal, it's not even "fake news" it's just a lot of bias and a lot of opinion/speculation.

All the more reason for the WH to take command of that briefing room and do better at controlling the narrative in a honest and transparent way

 

[Slade3200]

I watch CNN and Fox and both would air all of the Spicey show whenever he was in camera

That's not "major networks". Those are cable news.

Yes, FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. The 3 largest cable news networks in America. I'm talking about those

And every one of them may as well be the Jersey Shore.

They are trending that way... I've been calling them Kardashians but I think we are on the same page.

All the BS aside though, there are elements of truth to be found if you're looking at the right things

We shouldn't have to search for elements. That's why nobody trusts them. How about they just provide the elements?

I agree, need to demand better and hope the market meets that demand. BBC has a good program called HardTalk. They really get down to the nitty gritty none of this 5 minute debate then cut BS. I'd like to see more programs like that for those who like details and then straight up news alerts for world events. I think Bloomberg is supposed to be pretty good at that, but I haven't watched it much

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You tell me. What would you call a medical doctor pontificating on the mental health of a person they've never met or examined, using medical terminology. For me the word "quack" comes to mind.


.

GIve me an example and I'll tell you what I think

That's because people LOVE to watch Spicer put the fucktards in their place.

haha, they like watching the bully fumble over his own words and dig Trump deeper into his hole

Kudos for providing examples and doing some work to back up your claims... puts you above most in this board. The problem I'm having is it only took 10 seconds in both videos... the first dr says very clearly that she doesn't know Trump and she can't diagnose him, then she went on to talk shit. She basically discredited herself... that ain't news. The second one stated that they were OpEds, opinion editorials, quite different than reporting the news.... I have an issue with the overuse of opinion attacks in our media. It's happening on both sides, look at Hannity or Levin or Rush on the right. It's food for the fishies but not news. It's also protected by free speech, not illegal.

You should watch all of them.

The three you mentioned don't claim to be news people, unlike many in the MSM. And you're right the first doctor discredited herself, but that didn't stop her from proceeding to make a diagnosis. How many average CNN viewers would even remember her disclaimer?

BTW, the doctor who wrote the diagnosis book says the terms used about Trump don't apply to him. He said he may behave badly but the the clinical terms used by the other doctors are wrong.


.

Yeah man these cable "news" shows are getting filled with people from all sides who are trying to sell books and make a name... capitalism at its finest. It frustrates me, I try and stick to the more objective programs or at least ones that have good balance and debate. It's mostly crap TV though geared to drive ratings. We need to pick and choose carefully to find the real news that's floating behind all the hype.

It's the unfortunate trend that has become cable news. It's not illegal, it's not even "fake news" it's just a lot of bias and a lot of opinion/speculation.

All the more reason for the WH to take command of that briefing room and do better at controlling the narrative in a honest and transparent way

I would start with taking away the child's toys. Video for them is World of Warcraft for the preteen virgin. Without it they shriek and throw fits. But sometimes it's what is best. I think Trump did that.