|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Obama aide accuses Fox of operating as GOP arm
NEW YORK – One of President Barack Obama's top aides says Fox News Channel acts like a wing of the Republican Party.
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told CNN's "Reliable Sources" on Sunday that Fox News operates "almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party."
It's another sign of the White House's aggressively going after Fox.
Commentators Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity have been strong administration critics. The president avoided Fox when he visited five Sunday morning news shows last month, and a recent White House blog post accused Beck of lying.
Fox News executive Michael Clemente (cleh-MEN'-tay) says most viewers know the difference between news and opinion shows. He says attacking the messenger doesn't work. Okay, first I want to note that this is an Obama AIDE, not Obama himself, but in any case ....  Seriously? You are calling Fox the arm of the GOP? Are you just mad that they won't fall in line with ABC, NBC, CBC, MSNBC, CNN, and a few other news channels and act as the arm of the DNC? I mean, Fox hasn't even tried to forge documents about Obama's prior service yet!  Not saying Fox is all fair-and-balanced, but it's kind of funny that someone is crying foul, considering what Bush had to endure from pretty much every other network for several years ... and how they've treat Obama with kid gloves since he came onto the scene. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
They want to control the media....just like a Hugo Chavez. Control the media and you control the masses.
"My signature line goes here."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418 |
I am reminded of the axiom ......
It is better to stay silent and be thought an idiot than to speak and remove all doubt ......
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
There is a very good reason that we get conflicing realities from various networks... this is from Rush Limbaughs life story: Quote:
Limbaugh's biggest break came in 1987, when the Federal Communications Commission repealed its Fairness Doctrine, a rule that had required radio and television stations to provide equal time to both sides of political debates.
You can find this and the rest of Rush Limbaugh life story here:
http://www.nndb.com/people/428/000022362/
I don't know who's Idea it was to allow radio and TV stations to eliminate the requirement for reporting all angles of a story, but who ever it was has led us to where we are today... Division, hatred, anger and a true lack of accountability.. A radio or TV personality can say whatever they want without fear. they know that they can spin it if they need to.
Obamas aid was incorrect to point out thier problems with FOX.. at least without a fair and balanced attack on other networks.. But that's the way it works today. Tell your side of the story, talk louder and more often and sooner or later, someone will think it's true.. that's the danger...
By the way, that read on Limbaugh is pretty interesting.. I can only attest to his time in Pittsburgh and McKeesport PA...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
The real problem came with the popularization of the Internet. Instead of being the source of breaking news. TV stations and Radio started getting scouped by random internet sources. To try and stay relevant, most of them have turned into Op/Ed's or just into borderline tabloid-type reporting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
There is some documentary called the beast or somthing like that---and it is all about the arrival of the 24 hour news network.
It is pretty interesting.
I think its called feeding the beast.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
Quote:
To try and stay relevant, most of them have turned into Op/Ed's or just into borderline tabloid-type reporting.
No doubt that has something to do with it, but it's like anything else, if you deregulate it, leave it to those involved to self police it with no oversite with teeth, it will get corrupted, which it did.
When the 1987 amendment to the Fairness doctrine took effect, That opened the door to anyone to say anything and leave the door wide open to one sided points of view,, that's why I liked guys like Walter Cronkite.. that law changed, but Walter didn't, He still felt it was important to tell the WHOLE story..
can you imagine what would happen today if that fairness doctrine weren't modified. FOX and MSNBC couldn't exist..
I'd find that funny if it weren't so dangerous..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
They want to control the media....just like a Hugo Chavez. Control the media and you control the masses.
Our masses are armed to the teeth...just the way it should be! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
No doubt that has something to do with it, but it's like anything else, if you deregulate it, leave it to those involved to self police it with no oversite with teeth, it will get corrupted, which it did.
When the 1987 amendment to the Fairness doctrine took effect, That opened the door to anyone to say anything and leave the door wide open to one sided points of view,, that's why I liked guys like Walter Cronkite.. that law changed, but Walter didn't, He still felt it was important to tell the WHOLE story..
can you imagine what would happen today if that fairness doctrine weren't modified. FOX and MSNBC couldn't exist..
I'd find that funny if it weren't so dangerous..
I'm sorry but Fox and MSNBC are exempt from the Fairness Doctrine. It only pertains to Radio and not TV or Newspaper (Or internet for that matter).
The Fairness Doctrine is a joke and needed to be overturned. The only thing they want the fairness doctrine to do is silent the only media source the GOP dominate.
I may give it a second look if it did include all media outlets.
I don't see anyone getting thier arms up agianst anyone being able to make a website and talk about what every they want. No one regulates the NY Times and makes sure they offer the GOP view.
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
Quote:
I'm sorry but Fox and MSNBC are exempt from the Fairness Doctrine. It only pertains to Radio and not TV or Newspaper (Or internet for that matter).
No so.. Read on
This is what the bio on Limbaugh said...
Quote:
Limbaugh's biggest break came in 1987, when the Federal Communications Commission repealed its Fairness Doctrine, a rule that had required radio and television stations to provide equal time to both sides of political debates.
This is from Wiki, see link below.
Quote:
The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced.
Broadcast licenses.. Both TV and Radio need Broadcast licenses.. so yes, it does indeed mean TV as well as Radio. I see no mention of Newspapers in the Wiki and I certainly wasn't talking at all about newspapers.. Also, when the fairness doctrine was first born, there wasn't an Internet.. In fact, in 1987, when it was amended, the internet wasn't a big factor in everyday life..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133 |
Damn, this is an act of desperation. First Beck, now the network? I guess it's not good enough to have just about every other major media outlet kissing your arse.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
As far as radio - or tv for that matter: what people are missing is these are shows that either make money by having listeners/viewers, or they don't. Pretty simple, really.
Why is Rush so big? Cause he has listeners.
Why is Fox making it? Because they have viewers.
While some may think the fairness doctrine should be re-enacted, they miss the boat by a mile.
Liberals, dems, heck ANYONE can have a radio show, or a tv show. Guarantee you, or anyone, that ANYBODY can do a show. The problem comes with "who will listen to it" or "who will watch it".
Libs have tried radio - what was it called? Air America? Something like that........it failed. Why? No one listened to it.
The 'fairness doctrine" doesn't give a crap about anything other than either attempting to shut one side up, OR attempting to give a different side equal time. I guarantee if the lib. side would be able to make money doing a radio show or a tv show, stations would pay for it. Problem? It doesn't sell.
The fairness doctrine is a joke, and anyone that thinks otherwise is probably foolish.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
You should at least read the fairness doctrine before condeming it...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I'm sorry but Fox and MSNBC are exempt from the Fairness Doctrine. It only pertains to Radio and not TV or Newspaper (Or internet for that matter).
No, it most certainly included television...
It was a pain in a sense...it was often applied to even non-political programming (even though it was intended not to). like, today, how Obama goes on Letterman or whatever? Back then Letterman would've have to book a counterpoint guest, because someone could claim that a few words represented a controversial opinion.
It was a mixed bag. It had it's problems, it had it's positive outcomes...I can't say I'm upset or glad that it's gone
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,253
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,253 |
Exactly, If anybody wanted to listen to that Liberal garbage they would be all over the airways. They tried with Al Franken and Garafalo woman( is that broad a little ball of hate ,or what?) Obama is a spoild brat for not going on FNN. He just cut out over half of America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
the good is pretty simple.. you know when you hear a commentator like Beck on Fox or Oberman on MSNBC say something is fact.. well, they can say that all they want, but under the Fairness Doctrine pre 1987, they have to offer up the counterpoint..
But like anything else, human nature would take over and you would get a weak counterpoint argument.. Guaranteed.
End result, without folks with strong ethics running the networks, the result would pretty much be what we have today.. ethics are the problem.....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,235
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,235 |
You know I have come to the conclusion that anyone who actually watches the news (any station) in this day and age is a fool. Rarely do any news stations report on any ACTUAL news anymore.
It's all about ratings, ratings and ratings.
Cleveland Browns, Space Browns ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/iVP5Po2.png)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
You should at least read the fairness doctrine before condeming it...
Have you read it? I've read articles on it - I cannot say I have read the act that was repealed in.......I think you said 1987 - not sure.
But, have you read up on it? What it does is use federal power to mandate what stations can do.
You support that? You support even MORE gov't. control? The fairness doctrince is already there - those that get listened to get air time, those that don't, don't. It's a fairly simple and reasonable approach in my opinion.
People like what you say? They listen. People don't like what you say? They don't. Why does the gov't. feel the need to step in and say "if you air this point of view, you have to air the other point of view"? We need gov't. telling us?
I think the whole recent fairness crap is just that. Crap.
Stretch it out a bit daman........say there's a show like, oh, The Cosby Show - and it's a hit. It shows a happily married upper class family. When taken at its root, the fairness doctrine would demand that there be another popular show that involves the opposite. Would you support that? I would hope you wouldn't.
Now, if that "other" show were to garner ratings based only on its content, that's fair. But to shove something down someones throat in the attempt to be "fair" is ludicrous.
Why is it that fox news, limbaugh, beck, etc enjoy such high ratings? Is it because the silent majority is letting them speak for them? I think yes. My opinion.
My opinion also includes: I think the libs are getting nervous and seeing that the country is NOT behind them.
And please note I said "libs" , not democrats. I didn't say republicans.......for me, this isn't a party thing. But I honestly think there is a majority of people that are starting to say "wait a minute. This country has been going the wrong way for years and we're getting tired of it".. You probably don't see it that way.
What I do know is if someone promises something for free, a bunch of people show up thinking they deserve it. Like it's a right or something.
Political correctness is not something I'm big on. Stupid is as stupid does, and stupid never helped any one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
Yes, I was a program director at a radio station.. you damn skippy I read it.. but it was years ago. Before it was amended in 87.
Have you?
No, I don't support more control.. But you damn well better believe, I don't support the misuse of the power of the Boob tube and radio waves.
I'm all for free speech,, I'm NOT for free lies...
The rest of your post,, I frankly don't even want to read..,.
Last edited by Damanshot; 10/12/09 07:07 PM.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
You know I have come to the conclusion that anyone who actually watches the news (any station) in this day and age is a fool. Rarely do any news stations report on any ACTUAL news anymore.
It's all about ratings, ratings and ratings.
My wife doesn't allow it in our house,...call me whipped, but she is right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Why is it that fox news, limbaugh, beck, etc enjoy such high ratings? Is it because the silent majority is letting them speak for them?
Well, they have their listeners who believe in them, which is a big number...they're not very intellectual, and they keep it geared towards the lowest common denominator...that's how folks like Rush, Beck, Olbermann, Maddow, et. al. keep numbers big -- keep it dumb, paint with a broad brush. It's almost a requirement to be a political pundit with any success.
Then there's what I call 'The Howard Stern Effect'. People who hate them find themselves compelled to tun in and see what they say. Heck, I check in on Hannity or Beck every now and again for a laugh, but some people are really ridiculous...have you ever seen mediamatters.org? It's crazy. They have daily reports on what Limbaugh says every hour...it's almost like they're stalking them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Yes, I was a program director at a radio station.. you damn skippy I read it.. but it was years ago. Before it was amended in 87.
Have you?
Apparently reading posts before you respond is something you don't do?
Quote:
No, I don't support more control.. But you damn well better believe, I don't support the misuse of the power of the Boob tube and radio waves.
So, misuse is not giving equal time to a side that can't get listeners or viewers? Misuse is giving everybody a chance, but those that can't don't? And that's wrong? Not following there.
If fox was so terrible, if limbaugh was so terrible, the ratings would show it and they'd be done. If........well, I can't think of any liberal person that has a radio show or tv show.........but IF they were so good, don't you think the networks would jump on it and broadcast it?
Apparently people that care in the u.s. and about the u.s. prefer to listen to fox, limbaugh, beck, etc........you don't need to like it. But you should face up to it.
Quote:
I'm all for free speech,, I'm NOT for free lies...
Free lies. Thats interesting. I guess thats what people say when they can't say anything else? The anti fox, anti limbaugh, anti beck people are free as hell to broadcast their own shows. There is no law against it. Interestingly, they have failed every time. But you're in favor of the gov't. mandating that the no listeners get equal time? Crazy. You must also then favor mandating that people listen to the anti rush's and anti beck's, right?
Face it dude - if there were a market for it, someone would fill it. It just isn't happening. That's been proven over the years. The people the libs want to help don't even care enough to help themselves.......they want handouts, free, clear, and easy. You don't need to like it, but it would behoove you to know it.Quote:
The rest of your post,, I frankly don't even want to read..,.
Wow, that's saying something. You're a big man. You don't care to read the rest of my post? Good. I have $100 that says you did.
The liberals think they are a majority. They aren't. Just watch the next few years.
Sorry bud, when you bleed a turnip dry, it's done. And when the people doing the bleeding are too ignorant to see what they are doing, they are done.
My only hope is idiots don't bleed this country dry. They are well on their way, but thanks to REAL news - fox - the bleeders are finding out the majority of the u.s. says "screw you" to them. "not anymore".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,550
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,550 |
Quote:
They want to control the media....just like a Hugo Chavez. Control the media and you control the masses.
I agree.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
If fox was so terrible, if limbaugh was so terrible, the ratings would show it and they'd be done.
I don't think I follow the logic there.
Plenty of terrible things are popular. Go to the movies, turn on the TV, turn on the radio...a good deal of it is untalented, unimaginative, and just plain stupid.
Look at our current president. At the current rate, despite his atrocious job performance, he's likely to get re-elected.
Quote:
Apparently people that care in the u.s. and about the u.s. prefer to listen to fox, limbaugh, beck, etc........you don't need to like it. But you should face up to it.
Wow. That sounds like a Bush administration press conference.
Quote:
but thanks to REAL news - fox -
You can't be serious...do you actually believe that or are you trying to get a rise?
Quote:
The liberals think they are a majority.
As do the conservatives...
It's hard to gauge in our political climate, as the Democrats aren't liberal and the GOP isn't conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Either you missed my point, or I didn't make it clear enough. I'll try again.
Why is limbaugh's ratings rising, and have been for years?
Why is Beck getting the ratings he does?
I myself happen to believe it is because there are millions upon millions of people that agree with THEIR OVERALL take on things. Not every specific detail, but the OVERALL. (is that clear enough - I'm not saying everything they say is representative of the majority, but the "take" if you will, the underlying point)
Funny, so many get up in arms about some "idiots" and a lone ranger tv station............if they are idiots and nothing but an anti lib tv station......why do so many people listen/watch?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
E
Why is limbaugh's ratings rising, and have been for years?
Why is Beck getting the ratings he does?
As I said in an earlier post...it's a combination of their fans and their detractors. I tune into to them for laughs every now and again, but there are legions of folks who hate these guys yet for some reason are pathetically obsessed with them. I don't really get it to be honest...
Quote:
if they are idiots and nothing but an anti lib tv station......why do so many people listen/watch?
Most Americans are idiots?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced.
How could you be equitable and balanced over some of the stupid stuff that happens in Washington and still be honest? Seems to paint all broadcasters into a corner... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790 |
All that reinstating the fairness doctrine would do is put 3 hours of zero ratings on any station that carries Rush.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
Quote:
They want to control the media....just like a Hugo Chavez. Control the media and you control the masses.
I suppose you prefer the style that used lies about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman to assert media control?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,120
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,120 |
Quote:
Obamas aid was incorrect to point out thier problems with FOX.. at least without a fair and balanced attack on other networks.. But that's the way it works today. Tell your side of the story, talk louder and more often and sooner or later, someone will think it's true.. that's the danger...
That's the thing. With this administration, it's now about being honest, it's about silencing those with opposing views. CNN, MSNBC, etc all have positive views of Obama, so why would the aid attack them? The comments have nothing to do with the fairness doctrine and everything to do with silencing opposition.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I believe that the Obama administration is just genuinely naive enough to actually be surprised that this nation isn't all on-board with his initiatives. I'm serious, I think they are shocked that people are as strongly opposed to his nationalized healthcare and his other initiatives as they are... Which is further proof that he was never prepared for the job.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
I definitely agree with you that he was quite naive in underestimating his opposition.
His plan is not nationalized health care. It is a three-card monte game where he placates the insurance and pharm industry (who rank higher than him), and lawyers.
All he needs to do is make it look or sound like he's done something. I don't think he realized that at first, either...but he does now.
The again...dude is a slick liar. He may have been keen all along.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 11
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 11 |
I can only answer for myself....I will watch fox occassionaly just to see which way they are spinning things. Fox loves to crow about it's ratings,about being fair and balanced,about being the place for conservatives and family values.
What I find odd about their claims are some programing they show on the FX channel..a Fox subsidiary, watch Sons of Anarchy sometime and tell me how that program jibes with a "family values" tag that they have annoited themselves with.Fox is about money,nothing more,nothing less. If they could make more money by adopting a liberal view they would.
Fox appeals to the Baby Boomer generation, my generation,who remember a time in this country when life seemed a bit less hectic.In 30 years when most of the Boomers are dead,or close to it,Fox's numbers will decline.Sooner if they don't get a clue,and stop trying to scare the crap outta all the whites. That sort of rhetoric from some of their "personalities" behooves no one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,405 |
Here's a great read...and there is a little tidbit you may not have heard about (bolded) http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/10/23/fox_wars WASHINGTON -- Rahm Emanuel once sent a dead fish to a live pollster. Now he's put a horse's head in Roger Ailes' bed. Not very subtle. And not very smart. Ailes doesn't scare easily. The White House has declared war on Fox News. White House communications director Anita Dunn said that Fox is "opinion journalism masquerading as news." Patting rival networks on the head for their authenticity (read: docility), senior adviser David Axelrod declared Fox "not really a news station." And Chief of Staff Emanuel told (warned?) the other networks not to "be led (by) and following Fox." Meaning? If Fox runs a story critical of the administration -- from exposing White House czar Van Jones as a loony 9/11 "truther" to exhaustively examining the mathematical chicanery and hidden loopholes in proposed health care legislation -- the other news organizations should think twice before following the lead. The signal to corporations is equally clear: You might have dealings with a federal behemoth that not only disburses more than $3 trillion every year but is extending its reach ever deeper into private industry -- finance, autos, soon health care and energy. Think twice before you run an ad on Fox. At first, there was little reaction from other media. Then on Thursday, the administration tried to make them complicit in an actual boycott of Fox. The Treasury Department made available Ken Feinberg, the executive pay czar, for interviews with the White House "pool" news organizations -- except Fox. The other networks admirably refused, saying they would not interview Feinberg unless Fox was permitted to as well. The administration backed down.
This was an important defeat because there's a principle at stake here. While government can and should debate and criticize opposition voices, the current White House goes beyond that. It wants to delegitimize any significant dissent. The objective is no secret. White House aides openly told Politico that they're engaged in a deliberate campaign to marginalize and ostracize recalcitrants, from Fox to health insurers to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. There's nothing illegal about such search-and-destroy tactics. Nor unconstitutional. But our politics are defined not just by limits of legality or constitutionality. We have norms, Madisonian norms. Madison argued that the safety of a great republic, its defense against tyranny, requires the contest between factions or interests. His insight was to understand "the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties." They would help guarantee liberty by checking and balancing and restraining each other -- and an otherwise imperious government. Factions should compete, but also recognize the legitimacy of other factions and, indeed, their necessity for a vigorous self-regulating democracy. Seeking to deliberately undermine, delegitimize and destroy is not Madisonian. It is Nixonian. But didn't Teddy Roosevelt try to destroy the trusts? Of course, but what he took down was monopoly power that was extinguishing smaller independent competing interests. Fox News is no monopoly. It is a singular minority in a sea of liberal media. ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC vs. Fox. The lineup is so unbalanced as to be comical -- and that doesn't even include the other commanding heights of the culture that are firmly, flagrantly liberal: Hollywood, the foundations, the universities, the elite newspapers. Fox and its viewers (numbering more than CNN's and MSNBC's combined) need no defense. Defend Fox compared to whom? To CNN -- which recently unleashed its fact-checkers on a "Saturday Night Live" skit mildly critical of President Obama, but did no checking of a grotesquely racist remark CNN falsely attributed to Rush Limbaugh? Defend Fox from whom? Fox's flagship 6 o'clock evening news out of Washington (hosted by Bret Baier, formerly by Brit Hume) is, to my mind, the best hour of news on television. (Definitive evidence: My mother watches it even on the odd night when I'm not on.) Defend Fox from the likes of Anita Dunn? She's been attacked for extolling Mao's political philosophy in a speech at a high school graduation. But the critics miss the surpassing stupidity of her larger point: She was invoking Mao as support and authority for her impassioned plea for individuality and trusting one's own choices. Mao as champion of individuality? Mao, the greatest imposer of mass uniformity in modern history, creator of a slave society of a near-billion worker bees wearing Mao suits and waving the Little Red Book? The White House communications director cannot be trusted to address high schoolers without uttering inanities. She and her cohorts are now to instruct the country on truth and objectivity?
Last edited by I_Rogue; 10/27/09 12:27 PM.
"My signature line goes here."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831 |
Good move by the other news organizations. While I may not like Fox, they are members of the press. I wish the administration would interview for Fox and get it out of the way. They're so worried about their public image that it's beyond ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177 |
Freedom of speech anyone? Does the white house not understand that in America you can say what you please, just as the left killed Bush everyday. That was their right as an American....just as its Fox's, or Becks right to say what they want.
If they are blabbering fools...then why not ignore it? Its hitting to close to home for the white house, now that several bills and plans have been foiled by "alternate veiws" on TV and Radio...Obama is ticked.
He doesn't want people to have rights, or freedom, its all about control, control, control. Who knows what rights he'll have wiped out by the time hes out office.
Its scary too see our country just being taken apart, even our most sacred freedoms being challenged by this communist...thats what he is...he's a marxist to the core...and hes following it to a T...control the money, split up big banks, socialize the country, next step is to go after all who oppose and shut them up, then he can work on stripping remaining freedoms, and then pass whatever bills or laws he wants.
Fox and all the other conservative outlets are severely slowing his progress and pointing out who really is...that what this all about...and Obama cares nothing for whos freedoms or rights he takes away, just along as it benefits his plan.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133 |
Quote:
The Treasury Department made available Ken Feinberg, the executive pay czar, for interviews with the White House "pool" news organizations -- except Fox.
This is mind numbing, if not scary. Any of you Obamanites going to chime in and say this is no big deal?
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133 |
I guess not. 
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
They're so worried about their public image that it's beyond ridiculous.
That's because that's all they've got. They ran on image, raised money on image, and are governing on image.... if they lose the image, there is no substance behind it.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
Quote:
That's the thing. With this administration, it's now about being honest, it's about silencing those with opposing views.
it's not JUST this adminstration,, As far back as I can remember, every adminstration has had it's issues with honesty.. Depending on your overall views, there is always one admin that was worse then another, but they all had the same honesty issues..
Until we hold them accountable (and I'll be damned if I know how) they will continue to have those problems....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Obama aide accuses Fox of
operating as GOP arm
|
|
![[Linked Image from i190.photobucket.com]](http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z33/booger52/phpGGRdhwAM.jpg)