Fox News: In recent weeks, the White House has begun using its government blog to directly attack what it called "Fox lies." David Gergen, who has worked for President Bill Clinton and three Republican presidents, questioned the propriety of the White House declaring war on a news organization. "It's a very risky strategy. It's not one that I would advocate," Gergen said on CNN. "If you're going to get very personal against the media, you're going to find that the animosities are just going to deepen. And you're going to find that you sort of almost draw viewers and readers to the people you're attacking. You build them up in some ways, you give them stature."
I have to agree that if the White House is fighting Fox News, which it seems pretty reasonable by the video on the website that they are at least "not friendly", it is not a smart thing to do. I too believe it can cause more people to watch Fox News and see what is happening.
I agree. Every time President Obama singles out Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News, he elevates them to his level. He lends them Presidential credibility, because the underlying message is - 'these people are to be taken seriously'. He drives more listeners to Rush and more viewers to Fox News each time he brings him up. Can you imagine the Bush White House bringing up Keith Olbermann or MSNBC up repeatedly in this fashion? Not even the 'dumb' Bush made this error. I think the President needs to take a good look at some of his political advisers. And who ever is responsible for advocating this strategy should be shown the door. My bet is it's Gibbs, though I have nothing to verify that. Just a gut feeling.
Funny - the guy wins the Nobel Peace Prize but can't get along with a tv station.
How can he mend riffs between nations if he himself cannot handle something is minimal
as this?
__________________
we only part to meet again vt BRIAN BLUHM vt
The White House vs. Fox: Fox wins
October 12th, 2009
Bob Franken
Bob Franken
Is it me or does anyone else have an impression that White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has a second job…that she is a public relations spokesperson for Fox News? What else would possess her to declare that FNC is not a news organization at all but “…often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party”.
What else could she possibly utter that would cause the right wing nuts and any others not enamored of the Obama Administration to lock their TV remotes on the network’s channel wherever they live? It’s hard to imagine a siren song more seductive to them. Rupert Murdoch and/or Roger Ailes surely sent her flowers after she said that.
The only other possibility is that the Obama group is so bent out of shape when someone doesn’t follow the message of the day that its members don’t realize they are downright petulant.
It doesn’t matter that Fox is generally slanted toward the right…shamelessly so. Even though there are many fine journalists who work there, the story selection and tone during straight news reporting is almost always conservative, to say nothing of the bulk of its “personalities”, guests, and most blatantly, its strategy of becoming a megaphone for the partisans who organize contrivances like the so-called “Tea Parties”.
That’s what happens when news business becomes show business. That’s what happens when the corporate decisions have nothing whatsoever to do with a responsibility to adequately inform those who vote and everything to do with currying favor with one mass of true believers or another. Those of the conservative persuasion are just as convinced that other media, particularly MSNBC, are nothing but shills for the Democrats, and they too can make a persuasive case.
Here’s the problem: A White House of either party can seriously inhibit a news organization by freezing it out. The way the Washington reporting game is played requires access to the newsmakers. Obviously, the bulk of those come from the people in power. When one network or another, or one paper or another is frozen out or ostracized it can seriously inhibit its ability to play the game. And when the motivation is that it isn’t part of the administration’s team we have a situation comparable to the Nixon “Enemies List”, where the power of government was turned on those who didn’t follow orders.
That’s one reason why Anita Dunn should abandon the campaign against Fox News. But it’s not the best reason. The best reason is that it’s a dumb strategy, it’s counter-productive, it plays right into the hands of Fox News, which thrives on victimhood. Don’t we all.
The only thing that might work is some sort of popular movement that holds news organizations accountable for the reporting they do. Before that can happen, we’ll need to decide if we’re even interested in getting substantive information about our government and society or if we prefer the fluffy entertainment and simple-mindedness we’re fed today.
As for the politicians, they need to acknowledge that their public opinion manipulations take full advantage of the triviality which news organizations dole out instead of news these days. On both sides they should stop whining about them. They only encourage them.
Funny - the guy wins the Nobel Peace Prize but can't get along with a tv station.
How can he mend riffs between nations if he himself cannot handle something is minimal
as this?
How well do you think Bush got along with Al Jazeera? I know, I know, you didn't mean what you said ...
How well do you think Bush got along with Al Jazeera? I know, I know, you didn't mean what you said ...
HAHA. You crack me up. Yeah, not fair that Bush didn't give his first interview after inauguration to Al Jareeza, huh? He also didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize as far as I can remember.
If you're honestly trying to compare the two you need to lay off the scotch for breakfast.
I agree. Every time President Obama singles out Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News, he elevates them to his level.
That's exactly what they want. They want Limbaugh and Fox News to be seen as the voice of the Republican party because the majority of people don't like Rush Limbaugh and don't like Fox News. By labeling Fox as the mouthpiece of Republicans, they attempt to marginalize it like the Republicans attempt to marginalize the New York Times.
By elevating Limbaugh to the level of spokesman for the Republicans, they tarnish the party with the stench of racism and extremism that accompanies Limbaugh wherever he goes.
I'm all for keeping Limbaugh in the news. Glenn Beck too. They make Obama look awesome every time they open their mouths.
__________________
Berlin Wall: What they told us about communism was a lie, sadly, what they told us about capitalism was true.
That was candidate Obama. President Obama treats FOX NEWS quite differently. To my knowledge, President Obama has not appeared for an interview on Fox News. (I'm not counting news briefings or news conferences which all networks get - before you start splitting hairs )
More Americans should watch Al Jazeera (or at least be able to watch it), it would give them a different perspective (not better, not worse, just different) on the world. Not as pro-American or American issue centric as our news.
__________________
Berlin Wall: What they told us about communism was a lie, sadly, what they told us about capitalism was true.
Only to the Obama choir. The last thing you want to do is push undecideds towards the message of your political enemy.
I was unaware that a majority of people don't like Fox News.
The majority of undecideds aren't going to be influenced by Limbaugh. Also, the majority of hispanics are offended by him and he's seen as a racist. Tarring the Republican party with that helped lose them the last election.
If people were predisposed to liking Limbaugh or being responsive to his message, they wouldn't be voting for Obama anyway. "Undecideds" will be turned off by the hate. Or, more of them will be turned off than turned on.
As for Fox News, like I said, I think it's akin to what the Republicans have tried to do to the major newspapers in the country - the NYT, etc - for the last 30 years: discredit them and devalue their opinions by stating that they're the mouthpiece for one political party (or philosophy). A double whammy for the Dems, as it were, tarnish Fox's credibility by saying they're in bed with the Republicans and tarnish the Republican's credibility by saying they're in bed with the network of Glenn Beck and the angry white southern male contingent.
__________________
Berlin Wall: What they told us about communism was a lie, sadly, what they told us about capitalism was true.
More Americans should watch Al Jazeera (or at least be able to watch it), it would give them a different perspective (not better, not worse, just different) on the world. Not as pro-American or American issue centric as our news.
Al Jazeera's online media actually is fairly neutral most of the time. I usually review it about once a week. Al Jazeera English - AJE
__________________ What I received has no receipt or price tag. I can't take it back and I can't give it away. It's mine and always will be.
I think it's scary when any government goes on the attack against a private news network. He is the freaking president. If he is worried about what Fox News is saying, it seems like he's truly got something to hide.
The majority of undecideds aren't going to be influenced by Limbaugh. Also, the majority of hispanics are offended by him and he's seen as a racist. Tarring the Republican party with that helped lose them the last election.
If people were predisposed to liking Limbaugh or being responsive to his message, they wouldn't be voting for Obama anyway. "Undecideds" will be turned off by the hate. Or, more of them will be turned off than turned on.
As for Fox News, like I said, I think it's akin to what the Republicans have tried to do to the major newspapers in the country - the NYT, etc - for the last 30 years: discredit them and devalue their opinions by stating that they're the mouthpiece for one political party (or philosophy). A double whammy for the Dems, as it were, tarnish Fox's credibility by saying they're in bed with the Republicans and tarnish the Republican's credibility by saying they're in bed with the network of Glenn Beck and the angry white southern male contingent.
I don't disagree with your analysis of Limbaugh. But this kind of political wrangling versus the media doesn't need to be coming from the White House. Let the freakin' DNC be the mouthpiece for this kind of garbage. It bothers me that Obama, who wants to be the leader of ALL the people, wants to specifically marginalize Fox News, and by association, all their viewers. I can see sending Tim Kaine, the DNC Chair out there. But the White House needs to stay above this kind of fray - IMO.
HAHA. You crack me up. Yeah, not fair that Bush didn't give his first interview after inauguration to Al Jareeza, huh? He also didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize as far as I can remember.
If you're honestly trying to compare the two you need to lay off the scotch for breakfast.
oops, mixed Al Jazeera up with Al Arabiya.
Take it easy Francis! I'm not the one who made the statement "the guy wins the Nobel Peace Prize but can't get along with a tv station. How can he mend riffs between nations if he himself cannot handle something is minimal as this?"
That eminently mockable position was taken by Billee. So tell me - are they both not TV stations? Are both guys not presidents? Wasn't it part of Bush's job to "mend riffs" - a nice mixed metaphor coming from a musician I might add - ? Don't they both fit billee's statement? The answer to all of those questions surely is yes.
That was candidate Obama. President Obama treats FOX NEWS quite differently. To my knowledge, President Obama has not appeared for an interview on Fox News. (I'm not counting news briefings or news conferences which all networks get - before you start splitting hairs )
Now you see john, this is why we haven't been fighting.
You said Obama hadn't been on Fox. Thats not true. I showed its not true. You came back with some a story about how you didn't mean candidate obama but president obama. Which is really lame.
But we won't fight because at this point I'll ignore you.
And everybody ends up happier. Or at least not less happy.
Only to the Obama choir. The last thing you want to do is push undecideds towards the message of your political enemy.
I was unaware that a majority of people don't like Fox News.
I'm with Buddha on this - the Dems - at least the smart ones and they seem to be getting smarter - have no problem promoting Rush and Fox et al as the GOP mouth piece. Thats a winning strategy.
I think it's scary when any government goes on the attack against a private news network. He is the freaking president. If he is worried about what Fox News is saying, it seems like he's truly got something to hide.
Their thesis - which is right - is that it isn't a private news network but part of the GOP power system. And they are 'going after them' by pointing out the real behavior of Fox and to some extent shunning them. Now *thats* unfair, I worry that Rupert will have his feelings hurt.
Now you see john, this is why we haven't been fighting.
You said Obama hadn't been on Fox. Thats not true. I showed its not true. You came back with some a story about how you didn't mean candidate obama but president obama. Which is really lame.
But we won't fight because at this point I'll ignore you.
And everybody ends up happier. Or at least not less happy.
We don't have to fight. I simply clarified my post because I wasn't specific enough. No need to start labeling things as lame bill. It's that kind of antagonistic attitude which leads to a majority of our fights. I'll stipulate that Senator Obama went on Fox when it served his purpose during the election.
I'd like to see you agree with these factual statements.
Facts:
President Bush, while President, went on Al Jazeera.
President Obama, while President, has not gone on Fox News.
President Obama, chose Al-Arabiya (a rival of Al Jazeera) for his first formal televised interview as President, but won't go on Fox News.
How well do you think Bush got along with Al Jazeera?
As good or better than President Obama gets along with Fox.
Facts:
President Bush, while President, went on Al Jazeera.
President Obama, while President, has not gone on Fox News.
President Obama, chose Al-Arabiya (a rival of Al Jazeera) for his first formal televised interview as President, but won't go on Fox News.
John - I don't find the subject dull at all. I'm just not interested in having the kind of debate/argument that we've had in the past. You want to do that - go find another partner.
John - I don't find the subject dull at all. I'm just not interested in having the kind of debate/argument that we've had in the past. You want to do that - go find another partner.
Oh, you mean where you refer to things as "lame" and post pictures insinuating other posts are dull, and then try to claim the high ground? Like that eh? You crack me up.
Here ya go bill, cheer up 0- I'll repost this. Something from the approved Obama network :
John, facts are boring. Making stuff up is interesting. Get with the program.
Well, from my recollection, a lot of people on the right and the WH generally acted like Al Jazeera was part of 'the enemy'.
Rumsfeld said that AJ was encouraging islamist violence.
"Al Jazeera has a pattern of playing propaganda over and over and over again. What they do when there's a bomb goes down they grab some children and some women and pretend the bomb hit the women and children. And it seems to me that it's up to all of us to try to tell the truth, to say what we know, to say what we don't know, and recognize that we're dealing with people that are perfectly willing to, to lie to the world to attempt to further their case. And to the extent people lie, ultimately they are caught lying and they lose their credibility. And one would think it wouldn't take very long for that to happen, dealing with people like this." - Donald Rumsfeld
from wikipedia
Quote:
On November 13 2001, during the US invasion of Afghanistan, 2001, a U.S. missile strike destroyed Al Jazeera's office in Kabul. There were no casualties.[33]
In the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the U.S. Pentagon hired the Rendon Group to target and possibly punish Al Jazeera reporters who did not stay on message.[34] When Al Jazeera went on to do reporting featuring very graphic footage from inside Iraq, US officials decried Al Jazeera as anti-American and as inciting violence.[35] This sentiment was widely echoed throughout the US media and population.
On Monday, 24 March 2003, shortly after the start of the invasion, two Al Jazeera reporters covering the New York Stock Exchange had their credentials revoked. The New York Stock Exchange banned Al Jazeera (as well as several other news organizations whose identities were not revealed) from its trading floor indefinitely. NYSE spokesman Ray Pellechia claimed "security reasons" and that the exchange had decided to give access only to networks that focus "on responsible business coverage". He denied the revocation has anything to do with the network's Iraq war coverage.[36] The move was quickly mirrored by Nasdaq stock market officials.[37]
On 8 April 2003 Al Jazeera's office in Baghdad was hit by a U.S. missile, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub and wounding another.[38] Al Jazeera claims that it had mailed coordinates for their office to the U.S. State Department six weeks earlier and that these should have clearly identified their location.[citation needed] Dima Tareq Tahboub, the widow of Tareq Ayyoub, continues as of 2003[update] to denounce her husband's death and has among other things written for the Guardian and participated in a documentary broadcast on Al Jazeera English.[39]
...
On 30 January 2005 the New York Times reported that the Qatari government, under pressure from the Bush administration, was speeding up plans to sell the station.[40] However, as of 2008, the station/network has not been sold and it is unclear whether there are still any plans to do so.
...
On 22 November 2005, the UK tabloid The Daily Mirror published a story claiming that it had obtained a leaked memo from 10 Downing Street saying that former U.S. President George W. Bush had considered bombing Al Jazeera's Doha headquarters in April 2004, when U.S. Marines were conducting a contentious assault on Fallujah.[41]
In light of this allegation, Al Jazeera has questioned whether it has been targeted deliberately in the past–Al Jazeera's Kabul office was bombed in 2001 and another missile hit its office in Baghdad during the invasion of Iraq, killing correspondent Tareq Ayyoub. Both of these attacks occurred subsequent to Al Jazeera's disclosure of the locations of their offices to the United States.[42]
Yes - how could I ever forget what a tight relationship the american people, the wh, and gwb in particular had with Al Jazeera.
Now contrast that with the time Obama and one of his girls shot Rupert's nephew and danced with the intestines. *thats* a bad relationship!
Oh, you mean where you refer to things as "lame" and post pictures insinuating other posts are dull, and then try to claim the high ground?
I can't make you go away john - but if you don't want to have an honest discussion I don't really have to continue to follow up with your lame arguments. Try pfife - you've had some success trolling him recently.
Here's a suggestion - tell him that obama has universally never been on fox and then after he wipes the floor with you get upset because you didn't mean universal, obama, or fox. You meant something different. Which you didn't say - but he should have known. Lame john. As in pathetic.
I agree. Every time President Obama singles out Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News, he elevates them to his level. He lends them Presidential credibility, because the underlying message is - 'these people are to be taken seriously'.
I thought the underlying message of (paraphrasing) "Fox News is a propaganda outlet and a joke" would be exactly the paraphrase I just put, not the opposite..
I thought the underlying message of (paraphrasing) "Fox News is a propaganda outlet and a joke" would be exactly the paraphrase I just put, not the opposite..
You haven't been paying attention. When a person says something they never mean what they say. They usually mean something similar but different in some important way - like obama means president obama not obama. And universal health care means health care. See its tricky that way - sometimes you add a word that isn't there and sometimes you take away a word that is there. But sometimes they mean the opposite like "Fox News is a propaganda outlet and a joke" obviously means 'these people are to be taken seriously'.
Now if you mean "Fox News is a propaganda outlet and a joke" you should say something like "I watch Fox News every day".
Did that help? By which I meant go get me a beer, mkay?
That eminently mockable position was taken by Billee. So tell me - are they both not TV stations? Are both guys not presidents? Wasn't it part of Bush's job to "mend riffs" - a nice mixed metaphor coming from a musician I might add - ? Don't they both fit billee's statement? The answer to all of those questions surely is yes.
Fox News is a TV Station based out of the United States which primarily talks about American news and politics much like CNN and MSNBC. Al Jazeera is a TV station based out of the Middle East that talks primarily about Arab current affairs and news.
Why does Barack Obama get along better with these Arab stations rather than an American station? I would think that the "Uniter" would be just as friendly, if not more so with an American news station. Oh wait.... they don't always blindly agree with Obama. Damn that first amendment. Let's get rid of it.
Someone that attacks and badmouths an American TV station while praising and being friendly with an Arab TV station has their priorities mixed up.
He thinks expressing differences of opinion is dangerous. I think silencing them is dangerous. I guess I'm weird.
I can't make you go away john - but if you don't want to have an honest discussion I don't really have to continue to follow up with your lame arguments. Try pfife - you've had some success trolling him recently.
Here's a suggestion - tell him that obama has universally never been on fox and then after he wipes the floor with you get upset because you didn't mean universal, obama, or fox. You meant something different. Which you didn't say - but he should have known. Lame john. As in pathetic.
Bill - why do you feel the need to act like this? The honest discussion deteriorated, as usual, when you start up with you "lame" talk. Now we've moved on to pathetic and regarding another persons post - mockable. I would suggest to you that if you can't make your points without having to use negative labels that are specifically meant to be completely negative, maybe you need to take a break. I'm trying out here to avoid this going forward. You sure do make it challenging.
I apologize to you for not being clear in my original post. If I had known it was going to result in causing you to use such negative name-calling behavior and that you would be unable to continue having a civilized conversation, I would have been more careful. I'll try to be more careful in the future, because it's obviously my fault that you can't control yourself and behave properly out here.
Bill - why do you feel the need to act like this? The honest discussion deteriorated, as usual, when you start up with you "lame" talk. Now we've moved on to pathetic and regarding another persons post - mockable. I would suggest to you that if you can't make your points without having to use negative labels that are specifically meant to be completely negative, maybe you need to take a break. I'm trying out here to avoid this going forward. You sure do make it challenging.
I apologize to you for not being clear in my original post. If I had known it was going to result in causing you to use such negative name-calling behavior and that you would be unable to continue having a civilized conversation, I would have been more careful. I'll try to be more careful in the future, because it's obviously my fault that you can't control yourself and behave properly out here.
I do appreciate your apology - but I expect you will tell me tomorrow that the word means something else.
Just to away troll. No fish here.
White House vs. Fox News
)
Linear Mode
