I am really glad to see this. Plus I think it gives the other 4 agencies some much needed credibility.
They realized they where going down if they continued to go the path they where going. Don’t be too surprised if you see a 180 from the networks when it comes to Obama.[/quote]
It’s in the other network’s best interests to do so. Allowing otherwise sets a dangerous precedent. Who knows when this administration will move too far left for CNN’s comfort levels. I honestly feel that, while CNN has some wingnut leftists on their team, the majority of their audience are just blue pill moderates like our own Pitbulll.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
It’s in the other network’s best interests to do so. Allowing otherwise sets a dangerous precedent. Who knows when this administration will move too far left for CNN’s comfort levels. I honestly feel that, while CNN has some wingnut leftists on their team, the majority of their audience are just blue pill moderates like our own Pitbulll.
[/quote]
Yes, I did just make a Matrix reference there. Suck it.
â??My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.â?? – Barak Obama
that statement has become such joke, yet I run across people daily who absolutely believe he is completely open and honest and that is the only reason we know all that we do. idiots . . .
[quote]koffea wrote:
̢??My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.̢?? РBarak Obama
that statement has become such joke, yet I run across people daily who absolutely believe he is completely open and honest and that is the only reason we know all that we do. idiots . . . [/quote]
More proof he is a liar and a deceitful som-bitch. He tell you he yours friend while he stabs you in the back.
Naturally, Fox News is dedicating a section to this battle. It’s seems obama is treading on thin constitutional water as freedom of the press is a guaranteed constitutional right. Fox lawyers are primed and ready for a court battle which the obama administration will lose. I hope he takes it their…I would actually watch TV news just to watch this battle unfold. Even the other networks are rallying around Fox, if you can believe that…I guess like cops, they protect their own…
Here is the latest about the war:
“The Obama administration on Thursday tried to make “pay czar” Kenneth Feinberg available for interviews to every member of the White House pool except Fox News. But the Washington bureau chiefs of the five TV networks decided that none of their reporters would interview Feinberg unless Fox News was included.”
As Thomas Jefferson often said, a free and hostile press is essential to liberty…Not having it is tantamount to losing liberty. Really, if the obama administration wins this fight, we are in deep trouble. I think they better back off before they get embarrassed. This goes to the USSC, he’ll lose. If he wants to amend the constitution, he just won’t have the votes. Honeymoon is over.
[quote]pat wrote:
Even the other networks are rallying around Fox, if you can believe that…I guess like cops, they protect their own…
[/quote]
Sure is. Other news agencies recognize that FOX is a peer, and an important one. FOX reporters and journalists are unionized just like the rest of them. The little detail that is never discussed is that FOX journalists (the real ones, not the personalities) are likely to have a liberal point of view as any other organization. I mean, they’re journalists coming out of the same schools as the rest of them. The good ones can keep their ideologies at bay and report FACTS fairly.
Just because they work for a network that has a ‘conservative reputation’ doesn’t make it so. Like the highschool tease who has a rep for sleeping around but has never gotten laid.
The other networks are seeing this for what it is-- a wake up call. Obama’s focus could very well be on them next. News is news. Even the left-bias media went on a feeding frenzy with Clinton (lewinsky). The networks may not appear to get along, but they’re all cut from the same cloth and are protecting their own.
An important factor also is that the reporters, editors, etc of the other networks are not so stupid as the sheep who have seen a few minutes (or more) of O’Reilly or Beck – who have opinion shows, not newscasts – and decided the nonsense about Fox that they have.
They are well aware that the news reporting is legit, and Obama is really engaging in trying to shut down legitimate news.
And as you say, they have to be wondering when a factual story that they have might incur Obama’s wrath.
I think it’s just foward thinking on the other networks part. If they attend and go along with it, they’ve helped legitimize the practice. I mean, if the right does win the next election it could be FOX in, some of them out. And having gone along with it when the left was in power, their protestations wouldn’t have any bite.
NRO is following this closely. For all you FOX dismissers, here is an implication that nullifies all your parroting about FOX’s legitimacy:
The White House’s Real Problem with Fox
This New York Times account today confirms that what most bothered the White House about Fox is that it caused inconvenient reporting by other news organizations. Can’t have that! It picks up the story after a meeting between Roger Ailes and David Axelrod:
By the following weekend, officials at the White House had decided that if anything, it was time to take the relationship to an even more confrontational level. The spur: Executives at other news organizations, including The New York Times, had publicly said that their newsrooms had not been fast enough in following stories that Fox News, to the administrationâ??s chagrin, had been heavily covering through the summer and early fall â?? namely, past statements and affiliations of the White House adviser Van Jones that ultimately led to his resignation and questions surrounding the community activist group Acornâ?¦
If it were only for CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, and CNN, as well as papers like the New York Times and Washington Post, as of Election Day and probably still to the present, the average person would be saying “Jeremiah who? ACORN what?”
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
An important factor also is that the reporters, editors, etc of the other networks are not so stupid as the sheep who have seen a few minutes (or more) of O’Reilly or Beck – who have opinion shows, not newscasts – and decided the nonsense about Fox that they have.
They are well aware that the news reporting is legit, and Obama is really engaging in trying to shut down legitimate news.
And as you say, they have to be wondering when a factual story that they have might incur Obama’s wrath.[/quote]
This is exactly right on all counts.
Also,there’s something very abrasive and disconcerting about an administration that overtly warns some news outlets about how to treat the copy from one of the others. It’s one thing when they push Obama’s marxist dream because they share it. It’s quite another to be told to do it. They have to be having meetings wherein it’s being said, “jist a nanny state minute here. Nobody’s tellin us what we can cover and what we can’t”.
Ironically, to them what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander.