Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I understand they don't find Fox News favorable since it provides a conservative angle to news however I fail to see the strategy in trying to limit Fox access and openly criticize them. It seems that action would boost Fox's ratings and reflect poorly on the White House as being petty and not honoring the concept of a free press. Those who have read my posts and know my reputation understand that I'm fairly centrist who has criticized Fox News and Glenn Beck in the past so I'm not being biased. I just don't understand what the White House seems to gain by doing this?
It boils down to the fact that Fox is extremely Bias.
In a sign of discomfort with the White House stance, Fox’s television news competitors refused to go along with a Treasury Department effort on Tuesday to exclude Fox from a round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth Feinberg that was to be conducted with a “pool” camera crew shared by all the networks. That followed a pointed question at a White House briefing this week by Jake Tapper, an ABC News correspondent, about the administration’s treatment of “one of our sister organizations.”
Later that week, White House officials said, they noticed a column by Clark Hoyt, the public editor of The New York Times, in which one of the paper’s managing editors, Jill Abramson, described her newsroom’s “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.” The Washington Post’s executive editor, Marcus Brauchli, had already expressed similar concerns about his newsroom.
Whoever in the WH advocated this strategy, should be fired.
They are losing...big time.
So really....they seem to be upset that Fox pounded the Van Jones story and the ACORN story, real stories, btw, while the other outfits ignored them.
So this is what they are after......the other "news" outfits to not pay attention to radicals, corruption, lies and scandals surrounding obama.
I suppose Obama and I are the only two people not losing sleep over this issue. Obama doesn't care what I watch and I don't care what he watches. He would do better to watch his polls and I would do better to spend less time on C-D.
I found this..Helen Thomas, from what I read, is about as liberal as you can get and she even has harsh words for the Obama administration "trying to lead them around by the nose".
She said this back in July and even spoke out against the staged Town Halls held by Obama.
So while it's becoming obvious now with the "war on Fox", this has been brewing among journalists for some time.
snippet:
"At yesterday’s White House briefing, CBS’s Chip Reid and Hearst Newspapers columnist Helen Thomas confronted Press Secretary Robert Gibbs over how "very tightly controlled" the media are by the Obama Administration. After the briefing, CNSNews.com reports that many members of the press corps went out of their way to thank Thomas for making her stand."
It doesn't matter if they are NOT LEGALLY NEWS. You can try to ignore that all you want. They have voluntarily given up their seat at the table
You have a link for that ? They are not part of the Press Corps anymore ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
