Should the President be able to limit the media?
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Should the President be able to limit the media?

  1. #1
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,515

    Default Should the President be able to limit the media?

    Conservative media watchdogs push back on Obama's Fox News attack | Fox News

    Should the President or the government be able to limit the media?

    ~Bonita~

  2. #2
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,591

    Default

    President Obama's definition of bipartisanship is for the Republicans to give in to his demands to spend massive amounts of money. MSM is already overwhelmingly liberal and that just isn't good enough for him because he wants all media to be in the tank for him. It is starting to get hard for him to blame everything on Bush, so he needs a new scapegoat. He is just playing games he knows he will never be able to limit the media.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  3. #3
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    'Limit the media'? No. Speak out against Fox News' reprehensible and definitely NON bipartisan reporting? Yes. The media has a responsibility to report, not opine.

  4. #4
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ClairesMommy View Post
    'Limit the media'? No. Speak out against Fox News' reprehensible and definitely NON bipartisan reporting? Yes. The media has a responsibility to report, not opine.
    Ha. Tell that to MSNBC
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  5. #5
    Super Poster
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jeddah
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    Conservative media watchdogs push back on Obama's Fox News attack | Fox News

    Should the President or the government be able to limit the media?

    This is an interesting question. I think censored is another word for limit. I don't think constitutionally the media can be censored.

    I think there are potstirrers, people and groups of people of the media with their own agendas who aim to push them, twisting words and offering half baked interpretations. I think all media is somewhat guilty of that. I don't think we should depend on new reports to make our decisions about issues. We can go to the original speech and listen for ourselves then decide. I get frustrated with the slant of media so I limit it. I don't think anyone needs to censor us from the media for most reasons. I think the only thing I can really think of where it might be beneficial is in cases of national crisis. I don't think censoring is right, but more like asking the media to exert the best judgment in what they report and to sit down with media boards and explain some sensitivities. I think that is reasonable. Then they WH should be extra conservative and strict about what leaks.
    wlillie likes this.
    Aisha

  6. #6
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    Ha. Tell that to MSNBC
    Okay, MSNBC too. Whatever the outlet, they should report the news with no slant. Let people formulate their own opinions.

  7. #7
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,591

    Default

    Exactly. And the President shouldn't be targeting Fox just because they don't tow the line and worship him like the other media.

    This latest volley from the president is just one in a long line of comments from his White House as part of their campaign to silence any dissent they detect in the press corps.

    Recently, the White House has kept Fox News off of conference calls dealing with the Benghazi attack, despite Fox News being the only outlet that was regularly reporting on it and despite Fox having top notch foreign policy reporters.

    They have left Chris Wallace’s "Fox News Sunday" out of a round of interviews that included CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS for not being part of a “legitimate” news network. In October 2009, as part of an Obama administration onslaught against Fox News,White House senior adviser David Axelrod said on ABC’s “This Week” that the Fox News Channel is "not really a news station" and that much of the programming is "not really news."

    Whether you are liberal or conservative, libertarian, moderate or politically agnostic, everyone should be concerned when leaders of our government believe they can intentionally try to delegitimize a news organization they don’t like.

    In fact, if you are a liberal – as I am – you should be the most offended, as liberalism is founded on the idea of cherishing dissent and an inviolable right to freedom of expression.

    That more liberals aren't calling out the White House for this outrageous behavior tells you something about the state of liberalism in America today.

    Sure, everyone understands how some of Fox's opinion programming would get under President Obama's skin, the same way MSNBC from 4pm until closing time is not the favorite stop for Republicans. But it's not okay -- or presidential -- to continue smearing an entire network of hard working journalists because you are mad at Sean Hannity.

    During the initial launch of the war on Fox News in October 2009, then-White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told the New York Times of Fox News, “[W]e don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.” On CNN, she declared that Fox was a “wing of the Republican Party.” Then: “let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."

    Gosh, this sounds so familiar. In fact, it’s exactly the line that Media Matters used in a 2010 memo to donors: “Fox News is not a news organization. It is the de facto leader of the GOP, and it is long past time that it is treated as such by the media, elected officials and the public.”

    In fact, this is the signature line of Media Matters in discussing Fox News, which they say they exist to destroy. Their CEO, David Brock told Politico in 2011 that their strategy was a “war on Fox” that is executed by 90 staff members and a $10 million yearly budget, gratis liberal donors.

    Can someone explain to me how it’s “liberal” to try and shut down a media organization? What the Obama administration is doing, and what liberals are funding at MMFA is beyond chilling – it’s a deep freeze.

    On the heels of Dunn’s attack on Fox, Brock wrote a letter to progressive organizations bragging about the U.S. government trashing a news organization: “In recent days, a new level of scrutiny has been directed toward Fox News, in no small part due to statements from the White House, and from Media Matters, challenging its standing as a news organization.”Point of order: who put Media Matters in charge of determining what is and isn't a news operation?

    A Media Matters memo found its way into the public domain and if you care at all about decency and freedom of the press, it will make you throw up. If you like McCarthyism, it’s right up your alley. It details to liberal donors how they have plans to assemble opposition research on Fox News employees.

    It complains of the “pervasive unwillingness among members of the media to officially kick Fox News to the curb of the press club” and outlines how they are going to change that through targeting elite media figures and turning them against Fox. They say they want to set up a legal fund to sue (harass) conservatives for any “slanderous” comments they make about progressives on air. They actually cite one of the best journalists around, Jake Tapper, as a problem because he questioned the White House about calling a news outlet “illegitimate.” Tapper can see the obvious: if the White House can call one news outlet illegitimate for asking tough questions, then guess who is next? Anyone.

    We defend freedom of the press because of the principle, not because we like everything the press does. For example, I defend MSNBC’s right to run liberal programming to their hearts content.

    Monitoring the media is actually a good thing; the media should be held accountable, including Fox News. When MMFA began I was supportive of their endeavor and even used some of their research. They seemed a counterbalance to conservative media monitoring organizations.

    But now the mask is off. They make no bones about their intentions, and it's not a fair media. It is clear now that the idea of freedom of the press actually offends Media Matters. In their memo, they complain about “an expansive view of legal precedent protecting the freedom of the press, and the progressive movement's own commitment to the First Amendment” as an impediment to be overcome or changed. They say they are “consider[ing] pushing prominent progressives to stop appearing on Fox News.” For those who defy the order, they threaten to start daily publishing the names of Democrats who appear in order to shame them. If that doesn’t work, presumably they will just shave our heads and march us down Constitution Avenue.

    When Anita Dunn was informing America – as a senior government official – which news organizations were “legitimate,” she conveniently deemed CNN, which rarely challenges the White House, as a “real” network. Presumably she believes MSNBC is “legitimate” also, despite their undisguised disgust of the GOP and hagiography of the president, not to mention more opinion programming than any cable outlet.

    I’m going to go out on a limb and assume she thinks CBS is “legitimate” after they just ran what amounted to a 2016 ad for Hillary Clinton on "60 Minutes." CBS is the same place that has a political director who also writes for one of the most liberal outlets in the country, Slate. Who also just wrote in that publication that the president should “pulverize” the GOP. Imagine a political director at CBS hired away from the Weekly Standard who then wrote an article about "pulverizing" Democrats. I know, I lost you at the part where CBS hired a political director from a conservative outlet.

    Last week Rolling Stone editor Michael Hastings – who is a liberal and said recently that “most journalists I know are liberal” – discussed his time covering Obama on the campaign trail. Among the things he witnessed was a reporter trying to interview Obama using a sock puppet.

    He told MSNBCs Martin Bashir, “That’s the presence of Obama, even on the press corps, even on the people who follow him every day. When they are near him, they lose their mind sometimes. They start behaving in ways, you know, that are juvenile and amateurish and they swoon.”

    Hastings admitted that the presence of Obama made him go gooey too. "Did I ask about drones, did I ask about civil liberties? No, I did not.”

    I guess this is what the White House and their friends at Media Matters call the “legitimate” media.
    Read more: Obama vs. Fox News -- behind the White House strategy to delegitimize a news organization | Fox News
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  8. #8
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,515

    Default

    I like a variety of opinions. Just like on this board I learn from people on both sides of the issues, I check several news websites for my news. I do read Fox News, but I also read ABC and CNN and others. I think limiting the media to only more liberal sites or only more conservative sites would be bad for everyone. Freedom of Press is very important and I am very surprised that the President would not feel that way.

    ETA - About Congress not moving across the line because they are afraid the conservative media will report on it, I think that is a good thing. Our representatives should represent the people that voted for them. If they were voted in on a conservative platform, that is how they should vote and not try to hide how they vote from the People.
    Last edited by AlyssaEimers; 01-29-2013 at 03:24 PM.

    ~Bonita~

  9. #9
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    Exactly. And the President shouldn't be targeting Fox just because they don't tow the line and worship him like the other media.



    Read more: Obama vs. Fox News -- behind the White House strategy to delegitimize a news organization | Fox News
    He is not calling for Fox to undergo some kind of censorship; he has only expressed his opinion, the way that Fox has expressed theirs. I find American reporting by some news sources to be extremely opinionated. I'm talking strictly about the big news sources, not the media solely interested in rumour, hype, speculation, etc like TMZ. Maybe it all comes down to what the shareholders and members of the board of these so-called national publications hold dear.

  10. #10
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,591

    Default

    I can totally see this. 60 minutes used to be the place where they asked the hard questions and tried to expose injustices. That is where 20/20 and 48 Hours all those other shows sprang from. Now it is just more propaganda for the liberal media. It's not even worth watching anymore.

    CBS News' Steve Kroft made a statement Monday that totally epitomizes liberal media bias in the modern era.

    Speaking to CNN's Piers Morgan about his interview with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the previous evening's "60 Minutes," Kroft said the president likes doing his show because "he knows that we're not going to play gotcha with him":
    Read more: The transformation of '60 Minutes' -- now the place for swooning, softball interviews | Fox News
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions