The Battle Between the White House and Fox News

xavierx · Joined: Nov 06, 2004 Posts: 5427

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/weekinreview/18davidcarr.html?_r=2

Quote:

The Obama administration, which would seem to have its hands full with a two-front war in Iraq and Afghanistan, opened up a third front last week, this time with Fox News.
...
It could all be written off as a sideshow, but it may present a genuine problem for Mr. Obama, who took great pains during the campaign to depict himself as being above the fray of over-heated partisan squabbling. In his victory speech he promised, “I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.”

Or not. Under the direction of Ms. Dunn, the administration has begun to punch back. On Sept. 20, the president visited all the Sunday talk shows save Fox News’, with Ms. Dunn explaining that Fox was not a legitimate news organization, but a “wing of the Republican Party.”

The one weapon all administrations can wield is access, and the White House, making it clear that it will use that leverage going forward, informed Fox News not to expect to bump knees with the president until 2010. But Fox News, as many have pointed out, is not in the access business. They are in the agitation business. And the administration, by deploying official resources against a troublesome media organization, seems to have brought a knife to a gunfight.
...
People who work in political communications have pointed out that it is a principle of power dynamics to “punch up “ — that is, to take on bigger foes, not smaller ones. A blog on the White House Web site that uses a “truth-o-meter” against a particular cable news network would not seem to qualify. As it is, Reality Check sounds a bit like the blog of some unemployed guy living in his parents’ basement, not an official communiqué from Pennsylvania Avenue.
...

Why, oh why, is Obama being so dumb? I thought he was supposed to be a great thinker. I thought he was supposed to be "post-partisan". I thought, as quoted above, he was going to keep open dialogs "especially when we disagree".

I have a theory. It all goes back to what many of us said years ago - Obama has no - zero - experience governing. Al he knows how to do is campaign. And in a campaign, you fight with people who disagree with you.

Presidents, however, aren't supposed to be bullies like Obama has become (or tried to become). Presidents aren't supposed to attack the opposition at ever possible opportunity, they're supposed to try to bring us together. Isn't that one of the things Obama and all the Democrats accused Bush of doing, being a "divider"? Well, we're even more divided than ever under Obama, and he's done everything he can to make it worse.

And he's still at it today!
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/18/rahm-emanuel-fox...nt-news

Quote:

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel Sunday made one of the most absurd comments to date about the Administration's fight with the Fox News Channel.

In his "State of the Union" interview with CNN's John King, Emanuel said, "It's not a news organization so much as it has a perspective."
...

So, commentators on Fox have an opinion, and that makes Fox "not news"? Is Rahm a complete idiot? Has he ever watched an news station, or read any newspaper? They all have opinions.

All in all, I think a commentator on CNN of all places said it best:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/18/cnn-panelist-oba...can-tal

Quote:

On Sunday, one of the best observations yet came from Marisa Guthrie of Broadcasting & Cable magazine: "[Obama] can talk to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but he can't talk to Chris Wallace."

Such was stated on CNN's "Reliable Sources" after host Howard Kurtz played a video of Rahm Emanuel saying just a few minutes earlier that Fox isn't a news organization because it has a perspective.

kenmabmcc · Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:29 pm Post subject:

He said he would listen...
.....he did not say he would talk....

who cares about Faux.... the sports channels are more important..

Wink

CowpokeBob · Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:42 pm Post subject:

I think Obama might have made a tactical error in deciding to attack FOX news. He is not the first one to sit in the Oval office that has had problems with the media and you'd think with all the advisers he has around him that someone would have mentioned that these kinds of attacks never go well for the administration that launches them.

Then again you could be right that Obama is simply stuck in campaign mode since that does seem to be all he knows how to do but I tend to attribute it to the same 'ole Chicago style hard ball politics that have worked for him so far. He's just trying to use the power of his office to intimidate into silence those few foes in the media he hasn't been able to persuade, bribe or intimidate already.

xavierx · Joined: Nov 06, 2004 Posts: 5427

You may be trying to be funny, Ken, but that is exactly the attitude Obama and the Democrats have had towards anyone who dares ask questions, or even worse, disagree with them (gasp!). This would be why his approval rating dropped 20-30 points in less than a year, and why the latest polls show that no majority approves of his handling of almost any issue.

kenmabmcc

kenmabmcc

Media Matters have a page that lists all this republican spin.

bern · Joined: Mar 12, 2007 Posts: 1432 Location: ann arbor

xavierx · Joined: Nov 06, 2004 Posts: 5427

kenmabmcc

Well there is a interesting court ruling

Fox News gets okay to misinform public

bern · Joined: Mar 12, 2007 Posts: 1432 Location: ann arbor

michael_e · Joined: Jan 24, 2003 Posts: 99

I think most or all of the cable "news" channels slant their reports to whatever their
corporate opinions dictate, and most seem more about opinions or half facts that
justify their opinions, rather than reporting straight, no-slant facts. Most of the
cable news channels seem to want ratings boosting sensationalism over balanced
reporting. But that's just my newsworthy opinion Wink

I prefer AP, Reuters and BBC. I haven't noticed any "agenda" favoring one
political spectrum over another. But I am always open to having
my eyes opened Laughing

if anyone can give me good evidence to the contrary
on those three news organizations. Very Happy

Mike, Independent in MD.

xavierx · Joined: Nov 06, 2004 Posts: 5427

Everyone has a bias. I can show you plenty of examples of the AP, Reuters, and BBC liberal bias, but that's really important (and would just end up in a useless argument with Ken about Fox's bias Wink

).

What's important is knowing what the bias is and taking that into account when you read/listen/watch.

However, none of that is relevant to this case. Obama has declared that Fox is "an arm of the Republican Party". He's decided to totally alienate all their viewers. Was this smart? Even Democrats in DC don't think so. And here's why:
Fox News Reaches Across Party Lines

bern · Joined: Mar 12, 2007 Posts: 1432 Location: ann arbor

Gezzer

bern · Joined: Mar 12, 2007 Posts: 1432 Location: ann arbor