PDA

View Full Version : Kudos to... the media?



sack316
10-23-2009, 09:34 PM
The White House made available Ken Feinberg for a round robin interview, only excluding Fox News.

The other media outlets chose to not do the interview unless Fox was included.

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 10:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The White House made available Ken Feinberg for a round robin interview, only excluding Fox News.

The other media outlets chose to not do the interview unless Fox was included.

Sack </div></div>

That's too bad. Fox is a Republican Attack organization, which spreads around so many lies, Americans who watch them, have been proven to be among the most misinformed people in the country.

While they may have a few on board, Shepard Smith, for one, and maybe Greta, who mostly report the news, and give their opinions, without a predetermined right wing twist, they surely cannot be compared to journalists who, investigate, report, and give their opinions, in the form of additional commentary, presented as commentary, and without spreading intentionsl lies, and slander, for political purposes.

Fox, is not a source of news, but a source of propaganda, IMO. there is nothing "Fair and Balanced" about them, anymore than there is anything fair or balanced about Limpballs, Coulter or any other right wing nut.

G.

sack316
10-23-2009, 11:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=sack316]The White House made available Ken Feinberg for a round robin interview, only excluding Fox News.

The other media outlets chose to not do the interview unless Fox was included.

Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's too bad. Fox is a Republican Attack organization, which spreads around so many lies, Americans who watch them, have been proven to be among the most misinformed people in the country.</div></div>

How is media outlets sticking up for another media outlet too bad? And where is it "proven" that their viewers are among the most misinformed?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While they may have a few on board, Shepard Smith, for one, and maybe Greta,</div></div>

I agree those two keep it all pretty straight without any slant.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">who mostly report the news, and give their <u>opinions</u>, without a predetermined right wing twist, they surely cannot be compared to journalists who, investigate, report, and give their <u>opinions</u>, in the form of additional commentary, presented as commentary, and without spreading intentionsl lies, and slander, for political purposes. </div></div>

And there's the key term in bold and underlined. When there is opinion involved, it is not journalism in the sense we are speaking of here. Bill O, Rush, Beck, Olbermann, Maddow, etc. are not "journalists" IMO.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fox, is not a source of news, but a source of propaganda, IMO. there is nothing "Fair and Balanced" about them, anymore than there is anything fair or balanced about Limpballs, Coulter or any other right wing nut.

G. </div></div>

It goes both ways. If the claim is to be made for Fox not being a news channel because of the likes of Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity, then the same applies to MSNBC for Ed, Olbermann, and Maddow.

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 11:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=sack316]The White House made available Ken Feinberg for a round robin interview, only excluding Fox News.

The other media outlets chose to not do the interview unless Fox was included.

Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's too bad. Fox is a Republican Attack organization, which spreads around so many lies, Americans who watch them, have been proven to be among the most misinformed people in the country.</div></div>

How is media outlets sticking up for another media outlet too bad? And where is it "proven" that their viewers are among the most misinformed?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While they may have a few on board, Shepard Smith, for one, and maybe Greta,</div></div>

I agree those two keep it all pretty straight without any slant.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">who mostly report the news, and give their <u>opinions</u>, without a predetermined right wing twist, they surely cannot be compared to journalists who, investigate, report, and give their <u>opinions</u>, in the form of additional commentary, presented as commentary, and without spreading intentionsl lies, and slander, for political purposes. </div></div>

And there's the key term in bold and underlined. When there is opinion involved, it is not journalism in the sense we are speaking of here. Bill O, Rush, Beck, Olbermann, Maddow, etc. are not "journalists" IMO.

<span style="color: #000066">Don't be silly, Sack. Walter Chronkite gave his opinion about the lies and waste of the Vietnam War, and he was one of the most honorable newsmen in our history.

Bob Scheiffer, also gives a commentary at the end of his program, "Face The Nation" every sunday, and again, a very respected news reporter.

I surely do not put either of them in the same league with ANYONE on Fox, which reports lies, intentionally, aka propaganda, and calls it news.

If you are going to argue with me that any other so called "news Organization" is as slanted and opinion driven as Fox, then we may as well just drop the subject right now, because that would be such a totally ridiculous statement, I would not endeavor to reason any further with you, on the subject.

Oh, and there were polls done which proved that those who watched Fox were the most misinformed. I'll try to look them up for you.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fox, is not a source of news, but a source of propaganda, IMO. there is nothing "Fair and Balanced" about them, anymore than there is anything fair or balanced about Limpballs, Coulter or any other right wing nut.

G. </div></div>

It goes both ways. If the claim is to be made for Fox not being a news channel because of the likes of Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity, then the same applies to MSNBC for Ed, Olbermann, and Maddow.

Sack </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ed, Olbermann, and Maddow, all three, show proof for everything they expose, without the editing to skew the information which it has been proven, Fox does on a regular basis.

Maddow has the actual people who are being discussed in the news on her program every night, both from the right, and the left, as Does Chris Matthews.

The biggest difference between Fox, and those you mention above, is that the others do not claim to be other than they are, they are liberals, as they admit, unlike Fox, which claims to be fair and balanced.

There is a huge idfference.

G. </div></div>

sack316
10-23-2009, 11:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ed, Olbermann, and Maddow, all three, show proof for everything they expose, without the editing to skew the information which it has been proven, Fox does on a regular basis.</div></div>

I watch each fairly regularly, with the exception of Ed whom I may catch once a week or so... overall I see no discernible difference between any of the programming. Any of them could slap a different logo in the corner and switch sides without missing a beat. I base my opinion on watching each program in its entirety on a regular basis, not on clips or editorials from third party sources.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">maddow has the actual people who are being discussed i the news on her program every night, both from the right, and the left, as Does Chris mathews.</div></div>

Must be nice, to have the people actually agree to your invitation and come on to discuss rather than ignoring and attempting to blackball and discredit from afar.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the biggest difference between Fox, and those you mention above, is that they do no claim to be other than they are, they are liberals, as they admit, unlike Fox, which claims to be fair and balanced.

There is a huge idfference.</div></div>

I have not seen those on MSNBC admit to being liberal. How I would have missed that I do not know... but if that is indeed true then you are correct and that is a huge difference.

Sack

Qtec
10-24-2009, 12:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The White House made available Ken Feinberg for a round robin interview, only excluding Fox News.

The other media outlets chose to not do the interview unless Fox was included.

Sack </div></div>

link (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/wh-were-happy-to-exclude-fox-but-didnt-yesterday-with-feinberg-interview.php?ref=fpblg)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Adding to the Fox News v. White House feud today is a dust-up over an interview with pay czar Ken Feinberg. Turns out, it was a sort of miscommunication, but the White House adds that if they had left Fox out it would be a case of "Not that there's anything wrong with that!"

The version Fox has pushed all day is that the network was excluded from an interview roundtable with Feinberg yesterday, and that bureau chiefs from ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN came to Fox's defense.

TPMDC dug into it, and here's what happened.

Feinberg did a pen and pad with reporters to brief them on cutting executive compensation. TV correspondents, as they do with everything, asked to get the comments on camera. Treasury officials agreed and made a list of the networks who asked (Fox was not among them).

But logistically, all of the cameras could not get set up in time or with ease for the Feinberg interview, so they opted for a round robin where the networks use one pool camera. Treasury called the White House pool crew and gave them the list of the networks who'd asked for the interview.

The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn't on the list, was told that they hadn't asked and the crew said they needed to be included. Treasury called the White House and asked top Obama adviser Anita Dunn. Dunn said yes and Fox's Major Garrett was among the correspondents to interview Feinberg last night.

Simple as that, we're told, and the networks don't want to be seen as heroes for Fox.

TPMDC spoke with a network bureau chief this afternoon familiar with the situation who was surprised that Fox was portraying the news as networks coming to its rescue.

"If any member had been excluded it would have been same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues," the bureau chief said. "It's all for one and one for all."</div></div>

Q

Gayle in MD
10-24-2009, 12:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ed, Olbermann, and Maddow, all three, show proof for everything they expose, without the editing to skew the information which it has been proven, Fox does on a regular basis.</div></div>

I watch each fairly regularly, with the exception of Ed whom I may catch once a week or so... overall I see no discernible difference between any of the programming. Any of them could slap a different logo in the corner and switch sides without missing a beat. I base my opinion on watching each program in its entirety on a regular basis, not on clips or editorials from third party sources.

<span style="color: #000066">So, you're telling me that you watch the liberal news shows on MSNBC, everynight, in full?

Well then, why are you so misinformed? LOL, JC. I never watch Fox. I watched them for a time, but once I realized their game, I never turned them back on again. I also don't watch Lou Dobbs, anymore. I do see Keith blow away their lies, left and right, and I see Maddow, expose lots of their lies, and the lies from the right.

I have to tell you, since I watch C-Span, I think I'd know it if either of them was skewing things, and they don't.

Fox, is a totally different story. So is Scarborough, on MSNBC, in the mornings. I catch him in lies all the time, particularly about Reagan, Iraq, and Bush.

</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">maddow has the actual people who are being discussed i the news on her program every night, both from the right, and the left, as Does Chris mathews.</div></div>

Must be nice, to have the people actually agree to your invitation and come on to discuss rather than ignoring and attempting to blackball and discredit from afar.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the biggest difference between Fox, and those you mention above, is that they do no claim to be other than they are, they are liberals, as they admit, unlike Fox, which claims to be fair and balanced.

There is a huge idfference.</div></div>

I have not seen those on MSNBC admit to being liberal. How I would have missed that I do not know... but if that is indeed true then you are correct and that is a huge difference.

Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Must be nice, to have the people actually agree to your invitation and come on to discuss rather than ignoring and attempting to blackball and discredit from afar.
</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">I just posted a link in another thread, where Perino Admitted that Bush's W.H. Blocked out MSNBC....</span>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y05lVO_izCY

<span style="color: #000066">And we all know, Bush refused to take questions from Helen Thomas for years! And actually planted a phoney reporter in the press room, to ask administration friendly qestions. Now THAT is what I call Marxist, Communist, Fascist, propaganda....That and their lies to scare the public, so they could send their no bidder cronies to Iraq, in their blood for oil campaign.</span>
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

LWW
10-24-2009, 12:48 AM
Did you even view the link Gayle?

Of course not.

If you had, you would know that it strictly disproves the claim made by you and whoever posted it on YOUTUBE.

Proof, again, that you get all of your "BELIEFS" delivered on a spoon.

LWW

Sev
10-24-2009, 06:54 AM
Its nice to see who actually believes in first amendment rights.
It is not only individuals that have protections under the constitution.
The Obama got caught crossing a constitutional line and had to retreat.

pooltchr
10-24-2009, 08:04 AM
Sack,
Obama has declaired war on Fox. (kinda odd, while his zars are meeting and working deals with the Taliban, but that's a different story.)

As I mentioned in another thread, there are plans underway in this administration to change the way we get our news. The government wants to control what we see and hear. I guess freedom of the press doesn't apply if the press is critical of Obama. What the heck did he expect? The office of POTUS is ALWAYS subject to criticism by the press. A free press is the greatest protection we have against government tyrany.

The other news organizations understand that if the White House can marginalize one news organization, they can marginalize any of them.

While the whacky libs may think this is ok, they would be singing a different song if the other party was in power and trying to do this.

In a way, Obama has provided the "transparent" government he spoke of. Anyone with half a brain can see right through them!

Cheers to the media for taking a stand!

Steve

Qtec
10-24-2009, 08:27 AM
link (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=288348#Post288348)

Q

sack316
10-24-2009, 09:40 AM
from your link:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This White House has demonstrated our willingness to exclude Fox News from newsmaking interviews, but yesterday we did not," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. </div></div>

So the White House admits to committing the action in question here, just not in this particular instance. And you find this a logical defense?

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-24-2009, 10:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">from your link:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This White House has demonstrated our willingness to exclude Fox News from newsmaking interviews, but yesterday we did not," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. </div></div>

So the White House admits to committing the action in question here, just not in this particular instance. And you find this a logical defense?

Sack </div></div>

Rather than nit pick, the point is that Fixed News, is nothing but an arm of a very dangerous, radical right wing fringe, of the Republican party, and of the blood for oil, multitrillion dollar organization which lied us into the Iraq War. From the American Enterprise Institute, a Foreign Policy Institution, interestingly named, to the Project For The New AMerican Century, straight down to Liz cheney's ridiculously named new organization for "Security" aka, secure the Bush/Cheney/Rice/Feith/Wolfowitz/Baker/REagan multi fortunes....where you will see every oil connection, and Iraq invasion proponent, and lying SOB from both Bush Administrations, FULL of OIL money, and Saudi/Iran/bin Laden connections, all of them, many going all the way back to Nixon.

Fixed News, should be eliminated from the White House Press Corps, because the fact is, they lie, spread false rumors, attack with lies, and spread Political propaganda, and they are not a news organization, at all.

If you righties want to find the communists fascist Maoists, etc., they are right under your noses, and you're all too blind, to allow yourselves to see it.

Same ol' same ol' /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Sev
10-24-2009, 10:15 AM
You do realize that doing such creates a kind of constitutional crisis??

Obama retreated as they know they would loose in court.

pooltchr
10-24-2009, 11:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
If you righties want to find the communists fascist Maoists, etc., they are right under your noses, and you're all too blind, to allow yourselves to see it.

</div></div>

Yes they are! You elected them!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve

LWW
10-24-2009, 05:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">from your link:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This White House has demonstrated our willingness to exclude Fox News from newsmaking interviews, but yesterday we did not," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. </div></div>

So the White House admits to committing the action in question here, just not in this particular instance. And you find this a logical defense?

Sack </div></div>

He finds a logical defense is whatever Obama tells him a logical defense is.

LWW

LWW
10-24-2009, 05:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rather than nit pick, the point is that Fixed News, is nothing but an arm of a very dangerous, radical right wing fringe, of the Republican party, and of the blood for oil, multitrillion dollar organization which lied us into the Iraq War.</div></div>
http://pinkadelic.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/sunflowerseeds5.jpg

Verrrrrrrrrry good.

Sunflower seed?

LWW