White House vs. Fox News - Page 9

Bobl · #**321** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shabba4detroit

You're an odd duck, Bob.

agreed

Bobl · #**322** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha

A couple of points:

1) Who cares if Obama wants to talk to Fox News or not? I've seen him on other news shows get legitimately critical questions on a number of issues. He's not being allowed to skate freely by any serious news organization. I don't watch MSNBC or CNN so I don't know if they lob softballs at him, but in a lot of his appearances, he gets grilled and rightly so. Why does he have to kow tow to Fox News, which is an organization that is openly hostile to him?

2) We have a recent tradition in this country of news organizations having to be non-partisan, and that's fine, that's how we do things here. However, there is nothing in the rules that states they have to be. I think Fox should be able to be openly conservative and hostile to Obama if it wants to be. It brings a different side to the debate. So be it.

3) For all the talk about how MSNBC and CNN are liberal (and I assume they are), it was Fox that changed the game and pushed them there in search of an audience. Fox is the one that has rewritten the rules of television journalism. If you don't like the way things are going, blame Fox.

4) I think this is brilliant political strategy from Obama. Do everything you can to link the Republicans to Fox News and Limbaugh and Beck. It reinforces people's opinions that the Republican Party is nothing more than the party of angry white southern men. Have fun in the next election and keep driving those latino votes into the waiting arms of the Democratic party.

i really don't care if the news organizations are non-partisan as long as they each get a fair shake. i'd like to watch all the news outlets and the decide for myself. blackballing a certain news source because they don't walk your line is a way for the government to control the media which i feel is unacceptable. i'm sure fox actually likes this though as it just creates publicity for them and probably will increase their ratings.

billms · #**323** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

off topic but.... Perino is hot.

Bush had a lot of that going on. The man had good taste.

billms · #**324** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobl

i really don't care if the news organizations are non-partisan as long as they each get a fair shake. i'd like to watch all the news outlets and the decide for myself. blackballing a certain news source because they don't walk your line is a way for the government to control the media which i feel is unacceptable. i'm sure fox actually likes this though as it just creates publicity for them and probably will increase their ratings.

Why do they deserve a fair shake? And why should the cable news outlets get more of a fair shake over some big name bloggers (for example). Why are the latino new channels not always part of the pool? Or BlackTV or whatever it is.

This isn't bingo, not all organizations are equal, and I can't imagine how you could treat them that way.

Bobl · #**325** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

Why do they deserve a fair shake? And why should the cable news outlets get more of a fair shake over some big name bloggers (for example). Why are the latino new channels not always part of the pool? Or BlackTV or whatever it is.

This isn't bingo, not all organizations are equal, and I can't imagine how you could treat them that way.

you know what **** it. let's just start a government news agency and let them report the news. it would be easier that way. nobody else deserves a fair shake so **** em.

billms · #**326** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 11:45 AM

The press is suppose to behave in a somewhat adversarial role to the government. This is a natural outgrowth of that. Things have always behaved this way. Your reaction is a bit extreme and irrational given our national - let alone global - history with the press.

TheCouga · #**327** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

The press is suppose to behave in a somewhat adversarial role to the government. This is a natural outgrowth of that. Things have always behaved this way. Your reaction is a bit extreme and irrational given our national - let alone global - history with the press.

Right. But certain people are confusing "adversarial" with "completely manufacturing smear tactics." Fox is an ideological smear factory, a conspiracy theory propagator, and a tabloid all rolled into one. They have no clue as to what adversarial journalism actually is.

Oblong · #**328** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 12:25 PM

Do you just copy and paste the WH talking points or do you actually read them and put them in your own words? I've always been curious how they handle that part of their information campaign.

baseballbruce30 · #**329** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

Do you just copy and paste the WH talking points or do you actually read them and put them in your own words? I've always been curious how they handle that part of their information campaign.

Just an opinion of one & consensus of few.

TheCouga · #**330** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

Do you just copy and paste the WH talking points or do you actually read them and put them in your own words? I've always been curious how they handle that part of their information campaign.

Unless the White House likes to criticize itself for catering too much to industry lobbyists, than the answer is no.

I simply call out BS when I see it. And anyone who is seriously trying to cast Fox as a news organization is full of it. They never were. They have a long history of smearing people, including Republicans, who speak out against their narrow agenda. This is precisely why the Obama Administration wants to elevate their status in the Republican party. The more power Fox News has to make their movement "ideologically pure," the more marginalized from mainstram moderates they become.

Oblong · #**331** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCouga

They have a long history of smearing people, including Republicans, who speak out against their narrow agenda. This is precisely why the Obama Administration wants to elevate their status in the Republican party. The more power Fox News has to make their movement "ideologically pure," the more marginalized from mainstram moderates they become.

If you think they are any different from CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. then you are truly delusional. The fact is people like you are so insulated in their bubble that their perception of normal is warped. It's only when Fox comes along and operates from the other side of the coin does it looked funny. But what you describe about Fox is what half the country has been saying about everybody else for half a century.

Welcome to the party.

billms · #**332** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 01:29 PM

They are completely different and that is obvious to anyone looking at it objectively.

The other networks are run by news people. Fox is run by a GOP operative. It all starts from the top.

Mark The Shark · #**333** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

They are completely different and that is obvious to anyone looking at it objectively.

Fortunately, we can be pretty sure you aren't looking at it objectively.

Which is fine as far as it goes -- I don't make any claims to be objective either.

sinister porpoise · #**334** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:10 PM

This is one of my favorite FNC propaganda bits ever:

Fox passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all | Media Matters for America
Replete with screenshots, video and a link to the RNC website with the original document.

But somehow this never happened, I'm sure..

billms · #**335** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:18 PM

Lies, lies, all lies. Those screen shots and videos are forged. George Soros is behind it all. He killed Paul.

Bobl · #**336** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

They are completely different and that is obvious to anyone looking at it objectively.

The other networks are run by news people. Fox is run by a GOP operative. It all starts from the top.

that would explain the conservative nature of the other programing on fox.

TheCouga · #**337** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

If you think they are any different from CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. then you are truly delusional. The fact is people like you are so insulated in their bubble that their perception of normal is warped. It's only when Fox comes along and operates from the other side of the coin does it looked funny. But what you describe about Fox is what half the country has been saying about everybody else for half a century.

Welcome to the party.

LOL @ other networks being similar. The only comparison is MSNBC, and that was hatched as a reaction to Fox. Other networks never had hour-long shows with pundits that made zero attempt to be fair and balanced. Other networks were never turned into ideological mud-slinging factories that smeared and villified their opponents. They all made an attempt to be unbiased and balanced, even if some of that bias occasionally seeped through.

Fox makes it no secret that they are a partisan organization. All but a few pundits and anchors are admitted fringe conservatives. They revel in the fact that their coverage is ideologically slanted, even though they call themselves "fair and balanced." Fox is one of a kind in mudslinging, partisanship, character assasination and slanted coverage. It takes someone living in a bubble to deny this.

Buddha · #**338** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

If you think they are any different from CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. then you are truly delusional. The fact is people like you are so insulated in their bubble that their perception of normal is warped. It's only when Fox comes along and operates from the other side of the coin does it looked funny. But what you describe about Fox is what half the country has been saying about everybody else for half a century.

Welcome to the party.

Fox was the network that changed the ehtos from one of perceived unbiased reporting to taking a particular side and trumpeting it. You might perceive a bias in reporting, but it wasn't network policy like it is at Fox.

Chevycola · #**339** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

But there is nothing wrong with me pointing out that this is not very polite behavior.

You pointing out not very polite behavior is like Pig Pen being on the cover of Good Housekeeping.

Oblong · #**340** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 02:50 PM

ah so "Fox made us do it" is the mantra now?

Couga, you are arguing against a point I haven't made. I'm not sticking up for Fox's objectivity because I don't watch it enough to really care.

That's right, I remember NBC blowing up trucks right after Fox came along and ruined it for everybody.

Mark The Shark · #**341** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinister porpoise

This is one of my favorite FNC propaganda bits ever:

Fox passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all | Media Matters for America
Replete with screenshots, video and a link to the RNC website with the original document.

But somehow this never happened, I'm sure..

So the press reported what was in a press release. Like every other news organization?

Oh, the scandal!!!!!!!!

DrWho17 · #**342** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

They are completely different and that is obvious to anyone looking at it objectively.

The other networks are run by news people. Fox is run by a GOP operative. It all starts from the top.

Fox is the only organization that is run by a news man, odd that you would state something so obviously false, did you forget the smiley face?

Edman85 · #**343** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billms

They are completely different and that is obvious to anyone looking at it objectively.

The other networks are run by news people. Fox is run by a GOP operative. It all starts from the top.

Quick glances at their bios show all three cable networks are run by people with news production backgrounds. Fox's in the only one with past political involvement, but he's still a news person.

TheCouga · #**344** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong

ah so "Fox made us do it" is the mantra now?

Couga, you are arguing against a point I haven't made. I'm not sticking up for Fox's objectivity because I don't watch it enough to really care.

That's right, I remember NBC blowing up trucks right after Fox came along and ruined it for everybody.

But you, unless I read you wrong, advanced the notion that Fox was just like everyone else. There's nothing out there to suggest that the standard slew of networks that you normally demonize as being biased even come close to approaching that of Fox.

Fox did start it. It was unique at the time of its inception, as it was basically an extreme partisan opinion page masquerading as a news channel. And not only was it an opinion page, but they viciously went after people who criticized or disagreed with their own ideological movement -- even those who were generally on their side. This ideological rigidity was only reinforced by the way the Bush Administration handled dissenters. Thus, the purge of moderates from the conservative movement began. The AM Radio/Fox News/Drudge triumvirate pretty much sets the tone as far as what ideas are going to be accepted in the conservative movement, and which ones are going to be rejected. Republican politicians were taught early and often to obey or risk being smeared. Over the last decade or so, they have set some pretty narrow standards, and moderates have left the party because of it. This cleansing the movement and making it ideologically pure gave it some initial momentum and organization, but it has long since became counter-productive. As long as these people set the tone in Republican circles, the party will continue to be more and more marginalized, especially considering their base is becoming older and older. Obama and the Democrats are more than happy to raise the stature of Limbaugh and Fox within the movement if it ends up costing the Republican Party moderates.

pfife · #**345** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrWho17

Fox is the only organization that is run by a news man, odd that you would state something so obviously false, did you forget the smiley face?

Quote:

[Roger Ailes] was a media consultant for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush, as well as Rudy Giuliani’s first mayoral campaign in 1989.

[snip]

Political consulting

Ailes served as a political consultant for many Republican candidates during the 1960s, 70s and 80s. His first such job was as media advisor for the Nixon campaign in 1968. He returned to presidential campaigning as a consultant to Ronald Reagan in 1984. He is widely credited with having coached Reagan to victory in the second presidential debate with Walter Mondale.

In 1988 Ailes was credited (along with Lee Atwater) with guiding George H. W. Bush to a come-from-behind [11] victory over Michael Dukakis. Ailes and Lee Atwater scripted and produced the "Revolving Door" ad. He did not produce the Willie Horton ad, which was directed and produced by the National Security Political Action Committee (NSPAC), but Democrats later charged the Bush campaign with illegally coordinating the ads with the NSPAC. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) investigated the charge and deadlocked on a 3-3 vote, clearing Ailes and the campaign of legal problems.[12] Ailes also came up with the "orchestra pit theory" regarding sensationalist political coverage in the news media, with the question:

If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, 'I have a solution to the Middle East problem,' and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?[13]

Ailes did not work on the 1992 Bush campaign against Bill Clinton. His TV ads for the 1988 Bush campaign were extensively examined in the award-winning documentary film Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story.

Roger Ailes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DrWho17 · #**346** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfife

Roger Ailes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rupert Murdoch runs Fox, a newsman, he is the man at the top as the poster I responded to referred to. I'm quite aware of Roger Ailes role as news director, but I wasn't referring to the day to day guys, just the men at the top. Murdoch/Immelt/Iger/Dauman, sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I can see why you implied the news chief, but that wasn't what I was referring to.

JohnJMS · #**347** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfife

Roger Ailes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You forgot the part where Roger Ailes worked for that bastion of conservatism, NBC. In 1993, Ailes became President of the cable channel CNBC and began planning another NBC cable channel, America's Talking, which morphed into MSNBC. 89 additional employees of the NBC networks left with Ailes to help with the creation of FOX NEWS CHANNEL.

So I guess FOX is actually just the son of NBC. Kinda like the Cylons were actually created by man in Battlestar Galactica. Does that mean Ailes is kinda like Baltar?

pfife · #**348** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnJMS

You forgot the part where Roger Ailes worked for that bastion of conservatism, NBC. In 1993, Ailes became President of the cable channel CNBC and began planning another NBC cable channel, America's Talking, which morphed into MSNBC. 89 additional employees of the NBC networks left with Ailes to help with the creation of FOX NEWS CHANNEL.

So I guess FOX is actually just the son of NBC. Kinda like the Cylons were actually created by man in Battlestar Galactica. Does that mean Ailes is kinda like Baltar?

I was addressing his status as a GOP operative, per Bill's message.

pfife · #**349** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrWho17

Rupert Murdoch runs Fox, a newsman, he is the man at the top as the poster I responded to referred to. I'm quite aware of Roger Ailes role as news director, but I wasn't referring to the day to day guys, just the men at the top. Murdoch/Immelt/Iger/Dauman, sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I can see why you implied the news chief, but that wasn't what I was referring to.

I *think* Bill was referring to Ailes, but I'll defer to him about who he was referring to.

MrDeeds · #**350** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:17 PM

So there was no media bias in the mainstream press before evil Fox News came along? Now that's rich.

sinister porpoise · #**351** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:23 PM

What does it say about the "liberal media" that they are all defending Fox News?

JohnJMS · #**352** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinister porpoise

What does it say about the "liberal media" that they are all defending Fox News?

It says what I said much earlier - they realize that if/when they do stories that are critical of the President, they don't want to be next in line to be cut out. The signal from the White House here is, if you present an overly negative perspective of us, you'll be cut out. It also says they don't want to report on a White House that has shot down one News Org, and is pointing a loaded pistol at the rest of them. So them joining with FOX isn't shocking at all. And I believe you will see more of this.

TheCouga · #**353** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrDeeds

So there was no media bias in the mainstream press before evil Fox News came along? Now that's rich.

no one is saying that

Edman85 · #**354** (**permalink**) 10-23-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCouga

no one is saying that

But didn't you just...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCouga

But you, unless I read you wrong, advanced the notion that Fox was just like everyone else. There's nothing out there to suggest that the standard slew of networks that you normally demonize as being biased even come close to approaching that of Fox.

Fox did start it. It was unique at the time of its inception, as it was basically an extreme partisan opinion page masquerading as a news channel. And not only was it an opinion page, but they viciously went after people who criticized or disagreed with their own ideological movement -- even those who were generally on their side. This ideological rigidity was only reinforced by the way the Bush Administration handled dissenters. Thus, the purge of moderates from the conservative movement began. The AM Radio/Fox News/Drudge triumvirate pretty much sets the tone as far as what ideas are going to be accepted in the conservative movement, and which ones are going to be rejected. Republican politicians were taught early and often to obey or risk being smeared. Over the last decade or so, they have set some pretty narrow standards, and moderates have left the party because of it. This cleansing the movement and making it ideologically pure gave it some initial momentum and organization, but it has long since became counter-productive. As long as these people set the tone in Republican circles, the party will continue to be more and more marginalized, especially considering their base is becoming older and older. Obama and the Democrats are more than happy to raise the stature of Limbaugh and Fox within the movement if it ends up costing the Republican Party moderates.