berni_mccoy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:35 AM
Original message |
When Obama is President, should he deny access to Faux, Mooney Press and other RW rags? |
|
I'm sick and tired of the crap these guys spew. They should be banished to the likes of the National Enquirer as sensationalistic rags. It would be a bold move to deny them any sort of access to the White House Press Room and to deny them ANY press credentials in Congress. They don't report facts anyway, they just make shit up, so they should be relegated to doing that and stay out of the way of important business.
They will still have freedom of the press to report whatever they want and to protect their sources, but they should be given the proper respect they deserve.
|
VeraAgnes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:37 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I see no problem with them sitting in |
|
the last row, way behind the independents and skinhead news reporters.
|
demokatgurrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:37 AM
Response to Original message |
2. No, I think he should try to educate them |
|
Surely (hopefully?) other sources will print and broadcast the truth, and I don't think Obama will hesitate to call Faux and others out on a lie.
|
Uben
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:39 AM
Response to Original message |
|
They should make it a pre-requisite for news agencies to report the truth in order to have access to the president. They should have to vow to tell the truth or lose their priviledges!
|
ITsec
(477 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:41 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Only because I believe Obama fully supports the First Amendment, and would not create that kind of volatile environment.
However, there's nothing that goes against that by just putting them in the last row in the back, and then never calling on them when they start asking questions.
|
elocs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:50 AM
Response to Original message |
5. I would answer this questions with a question: what would President Obama do? |
|
My guess is that our new president will disappoint and piss off many here by not being vengeful and vindictive, as deserving as it may be.
|
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. You've got it exactly right |
|
Obama will be the new Pelosi
|
leftofcool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
18. No he won't. Pelosi has done nothing. Obama will do many things |
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
19. He won't be left enough for many on this board... |
|
...if he talks to a Republican without spitting on his shoes he'll be accused by many here of selling out.
|
polichick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:52 AM
Response to Original message |
6. I'd shut them out - but don't think Barack will. |
WallStreetNobody
(389 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:52 AM
Response to Original message |
7. He should give them a taste of what Bush has done for 8 years |
|
He shouldn't give anything exclusive or grant any interviews to any of their people who he doesn't think are fair - which is everyone at Fox.
|
genna
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message |
9. He can control how many seats each group gets in the WH Briefing room |
|
I think he should broaden the number of seats to smaller papers and some bloggers.
There is no written in stone, rhyme or reason as to why some media gets better seats than others.
I'd choose to make that appeal broader.
|
gravity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:02 AM
Response to Original message |
10. It would look worst if Obama did deny Fox News |
|
Instead, whenever Fox blatantly lies, the Obama team should say that Fox News is a RW rag and can't be taken seriously.
|
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:04 AM
Response to Original message |
11. Yes, why not - relegate them to the status of the National Enquirer |
|
Which they deserve. Heck, since they make all their shit up, why do they even need to be present to hear anything? they can read about it in the serious media and then make up their shit.
|
Maven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message |
12. No, I think he should keep handling them the way he does now. |
|
Edited on Thu Oct-30-08 09:05 AM by Harvey Korman
Grant them minimal access while still calling them on their bias.
Put them on the defensive, the way the right has done for years with their "liberal media" bullshit.
|
kwolf68
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:06 AM
Response to Original message |
13. He should marginalize them |
|
But he won't. Obama will give these right wing huckers respect as 'journalistic' institutions. He will wipe the slate clean. Obama is trying to build a coalition that will change the world and setting up battle lines before he even takes office isn't the way to do that.
That being said, you bet your ass he'll call them out on their bullshit when appropriate (which will probably be often).
|
nc4bo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:08 AM
Response to Original message |
14. Nope, as much as I'd wish it were so. I do believe we MUST have a countermedia |
|
that encourages diversity and a return to real journalism instead of relying on sensationalism and opinions to contaminate the truth and facts.
I think a good start would be to pick up the crumbled pieces of the Fairness Doctrine, modernize it and incorporate all cable and satellite services under it's control.
|
L0oniX
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
16. Countermedia is one thing but what faux does is no better than the Star, Globe and Enquirer. |
|
When we need to know about aliens, infotainment and other bull shit stories we can go watch faux.
|
gravity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
21. But what if Bush banned the NY Times |
|
I know it isn't comparable to Fox, but you don't want to start the precedent of only allowing media who agrees with you.
|
TragedyandHope
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:08 AM
Response to Original message |
15. No, but he should work to stimulate smaller, diverse, regional media ownership |
|
Edited on Thu Oct-30-08 09:13 AM by TragedyandHope
Media consolidation has been a disaster for news and journalism. A "free press" shouldn't be limited to only two corporate viewpoints.
|
onenote
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:21 AM
Response to Original message |
17. list of WH Correspondents as of 7.30.08 |
|
Correspondents
ABC Ann Compton: Martha Raddatz:
Agence France Presse Olivier Knox Laurent Lozano
American Urban Radio Networks April Ryan
Associated Press Ben Feller: Jennifer Loven: Deb Riechmann: Mark Smith
Bloomberg Edwin Chen: Roger Runningen:
CBS Mark Knoller (Radio): Peter Maer (Radio): Bill Plante: Jim Axelrod:
Chicago Tribune Mark Silva:
Christian Broadcasting Network Melissa Charbonneau:
Christian Science Monitor Linda Feldmann:
Copley News Service George E. Condon Jr.: Finlay Lewis
Cox News Service Bob Deans: Ken Herman:
CNN Ed Henry: Elaine Quijano Suzanne Malveaux
Dallas Morning News Todd J. Gillman:
Dow Jones Newswires Henry J. Pulizzi:
Financial Times Edward Luce: Andrew Ward:
Fox News Bret Baier: Wendell Goler:
Hearst Helen Thomas:
Houston Chronicle Julie Mason:
Human Events John Gizzi:
Los Angeles Times James Gerstenzang: Johanna Neuman:
McClatchy William Douglas:
David Lightman:
National Journal Carl M. Cannon: Alexis Simendinger:
National Public Radio Don Gonyea: David Greene:
National Review Byron York:
NBC News David Gregory: John Yang: Kevin Corke:
Newsweek Holly Bailey: Richard Wolffe:
New York Daily News Kenneth R. Bazinet:
New York Times: Steven Lee Myers: Sheryl Gay Stolberg:
Reuters Tabassum Zakaria:
Salem Radio Network Greg Clugston
Scripps Howard Ann McFeatters:
Slate John F. Dickerson:
Talk Radio News Service Ellen Ratner:
Time Massimo Calabresi:
USA Today David Jackson:
U.S. News Kenneth T. Walsh:
Voice of America Scott Stearns: Paula Wolfson:
Wall Street Journal John D. McKinnon:
Washington Examiner Bill Sammon:
The Washington Post Michael Abramowitz: Dan Eggen:
Washington Times Joseph Curl Jon Ward:
|
DangerDave921
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:28 AM
Response to Original message |
20. how much Fox do you watch? |
|
When you say "they just make shit up" what is that based on?
I watch a lot of politcal TV at night, including Fox. And Fox always has plenty of liberal talking heads on there for debate. And I sometimes cathc their straight news too (as opposed to their commentary). The news seems pretty even to me in terms of reporting the day's events.
I know I'm in the minority, but I just don't get the obsessive Fox hatred.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-30-08 09:30 AM
Response to Original message |
22. If Bush banned MSNBC would you object? |
|
Of course you would. Are they equivalent? I would argue that in the eyes of the respctive fans O'Reilly/Hannity = Olbermann We view each other's with equal disdain and think our folks walk on water.
It would be damning and divisive however good it might feel,
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:27 AM
Response to Original message |