Back to SoWal Lounge

Fox News isn't a news organization..

30ashopper avatar
SoWal Insider
4,275 views
On Monday, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow were among several people who attended an off-the-record briefing with Pres. Obama at the White House. Sources tell us other attendees at the two-and-a-half hour chat included Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, Maureen Dowd of the New York Times, Gwen Ifill of PBS and Gloria Borger of CNN. Perhaps not surprisingly, no one from Fox News was in the room.

This fact quickly turned into ammunition for the folks at FOX. Last night on "Special Report," Bret Baier revealed the information pointing out that opinion hosts from one channel were being invited to a briefing with the Commander-in-Chief, all the while Fox was declared not a news organization.

Maddow/Olbermann Invited to White House Chat with Obama, But Fox Isn't a News Organization? - mediabistro.com: TVNewser

While Maddow and Olberman get front row seats and face time in the White House.

When Obama's term started out, I was really hoping things would change, but really nothing has. In fact I'd argue it's become far worse - the divide continues to widen. What happened to all those promises of transparency? Now we have the White House selectively blacklisting one of the three major cable news networks. I'd be laughing if this wasn't so, incredibly, sad.

Edited

Replies

103
AlphaCrab avatar
Beach Fanatic
#52
its quit obvious that many on here are olby zombies judging by their comments ie "fixed news", "faux news" and "fox noise".

ailes is frankly a genius. he saw that the american people werent getting the news in a fair and balanced way and brought it to them and has been very successful in doing so.

quote]

A "genius" who also begat Karl Rove who then begat McCains campaign "advisor."
GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION!!! These are destructive, evil individuals.
Blair avatar
Beach Fanatic
#53
But only if the opinions expressed absolutely lines up with the current Republican talking points. It is like SOOOOOOOOOOO obvious. Yes, and I do watch FOX NEWS.

No....If you really watched, you'd know that hey have both been critical of the Republicans. Both are admitted conservatives but I don't think Glen Beck calls himself a Republican....I'll give you Hannity...You certainly can't say that about Olberman and Maddow....
30ashopper avatar
SoWal InsiderAuthor
#54
I agree, but even a simple, small town reporter knows that if you manufacture, or misquote a public official or private citizen, they will probably not agree to speak with you again and quite honestly, why would they? If I twisted or made up something in an article, they would have a right to be upset.
There is a code of ethics that used to be present in American journalism. The Fox model, which others soon followed, was based on Australian journalism, which in my research is anything but "Fair and Balanced," never-mind if you have to tell people that you are "Fair and Balanced" you are probably not.

And before anyone's heads explode and they attack me, I don't watch TV, I don't have cable, and I don't belong to either party, so bite me.:wave:

Isn't the "Fox model" the same as the "MSNBC model" or the "NYT Model" or the "Newsweek Model"? Where do you draw the line on what you should see / read and shouldn't. Obama seems to be drawing the line by asking the question "do they support me and my policies in their reporting?".
30ashopper avatar
SoWal InsiderAuthor
#55
So the media outlet that has been publicly chastised by the White House for their behavior, untruths and sensationalism WASN'T invited to a special briefing session w/ the President?

Gee, wonder why?

No, just the news organization who's untruths and sensationalism went against the grain of the president's policies. All the others got in.
mtlinscomb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#56
If the other networks were real "news" organizations my guess is Hillary would be President. The funny thing about Fox is they break a story and the other networks wait as long as they can before being forced to give that story some air time...and when they do, the angry and painful look in their eyes is priceless. Anyone with the load of baggage President Obama was carrying wouldn't have made it past first base without the help, or should I say, blind eye of the media. IMO this war on Fox is making Obama look like a wuss.
Alicia Leonard avatar
SoWal Insider
#57
Isn't the "Fox model" the same as the "MSNBC model" or the "NYT Model" or the "Newsweek Model"? Where do you draw the line on what you should see / read and shouldn't. Obama seems to be drawing the line by asking the question "do they support me and my policies in their reporting?".


Ok..I agree to a point and as I said, which TFT pointed out first, the others have followed this model, after FOX started, but if someone spun the interview you gave them against you, how long would you allow them to interview you? :wave:

I have seen people upset, and turn down interviews over editing and not the reporters work. I don't think it's uncommon, from a small town perspective and all the way up to the networks:idontno:


edit:When I speak about a model, I am referring to the 24 hour news cycle that came with cable new shows. Newspapers have always had a history on leaning left or right and their readers were well aware of it, they just didn't claim to be without a side.

Edited

scooterbug44 avatar
SoWal Expert
#58
All the others? ALL the reporters and news media in the entire world who were there EXCEPT for Fox? :roll:

I certainly don't blame the White House - this whole thing very effectively demonstrates WHY they weren't invited. Fox et al are so focused on whining and ratings they can't have time left to effectively report on anything.

P.S. Guess who else wasn't invited and isn't throwing a hissy fit about it: BBC, ABC, NBC, Wall Street Journal, anyone from the AP.................
LuciferSam avatar
Banned
#59
Isn't the "Fox model" the same as the "MSNBC model" or the "NYT Model" or the "Newsweek Model"? Where do you draw the line on what you should see / read and shouldn't. Obama seems to be drawing the line by asking the question "do they support me and my policies in their reporting?".

Post #43 http://www.sowal.com/bb/politics-cu...x-news-isnt-news-organization.html#post620714 clearly shows that the "fox model" is a different animal (more like "model fox" grrrr!). It's quite clear where she draws the line and what she wants you to see. As for me, I don't drink the Koolaid but I'm more than happy to sample the candy.
Yzarctoo avatar
Beach Fanatic
#60
FOX not balanced?

FOX news is a joke. Very little news. not fair and balanced, more like "fear and imbalance" A person could watch that network all day and learn absolutely nothing worth knowing.


May I suggest a good eye exam and a up to date hearing exam...might make your TV experience better. FOX has news, and also commentary shows, I am able to tell the difference...with new glasses and a modern hearing aid...it might help you out with seeing this for yourself.
scooterbug44 avatar
SoWal Expert
#61
Fox may differentiate between "news" and "commentary" but both categories are so rude, incendiary, and lacking in truth that I can't watch or read them.

I get information from a wide variety of sources (only way to be well informed and cancel out biases), but after many attempts I have had to reject Fox as a credible source because of how deliberately misleading and sensational they are.

If they start reporting w/ a factual base instead of "info-taining" and trying to fearmonger and push an agenda with every story, maybe they'll get invited to the same events as real reporters.
30ashopper avatar
SoWal InsiderAuthor
#62
All the others? ALL the reporters and news media in the entire world who were there EXCEPT for Fox? :roll:

I certainly don't blame the White House - this whole thing very effectively demonstrates WHY they weren't invited. Fox et al are so focused on whining and ratings they can't have time left to effectively report on anything.

P.S. Guess who else wasn't invited and isn't throwing a hissy fit about it: BBC, ABC, NBC, Wall Street Journal, anyone from the AP.................

Which begs the question, why would Obama hand pick a set of journalists like that and sit down with them for three hours discussing - nobody knows for sure. Just seems a little "off" to me. (But like Fox news, I don't trust the guy, so, ..;-) others might have a different take.)
Yzarctoo avatar
Beach Fanatic
#63
[quote=scooterbug44;620749]
Fox et al are so focused on whining and ratings they can't have time left to effectively report on anything.

Scooterbug, Fox is the only news station that reminds us and Obama of what he said while campaigning for election and what he is NOT doing as President. All those promises of how he was going to run the office of President...all those broken promises, all those failures to launch transparency government, those promises of ruling together,...no more old boy way of doing things in Washington....Fox helps to remind us of his promises and how they haven't been kept. I really don't blame Obama, I would rather answer the easy questions than the hard questions...I don't blame him for hiding from FOX ....why have to explain to Americans why you aren't keeping your word...why you are letting your czars and your cabinet run the country...why it is so difficult for you to make a decision...why you are selling out Americans and America itself. No one wants to be called on the carpet and have to face the music, they would rather blame it on someone else...like his pat answer for everyting... "Bush did it."
scooterbug44 avatar
SoWal Expert
#64
Wow! Actually they aren't....................

Which you would know if you were watching a wide variety of coverage. :roll:

Obviously there is a wide range of news sources and some report on certain political parties more favorably, but if you think noone but Fox is criticizing Obama, you REALLY need to get out more.
futurebeachbum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#65
FOX news is a joke. Very little news. not fair and balanced, more like "fear and imbalance" A person could watch that network all day and learn absolutely nothing worth knowing.

Sadly, that's pretty much true of all of the major news sources, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, PBS, ABC, WSJ, NYT etc.. all work from the political agenda of their management.

Your only real hope of discerning the real facts of any news story is get from several sources with divergent agendas and then attempt to extract the truth from among the slanted versions presented. Knowing where each network stands helps in the actual filtering process.

If I were looking for credible, unbiased, fact-checked, straight-up news reporting, I would never visit any organization I've mentioned above.
mtlinscomb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#66
"very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control." Anita Zedong-Dunn
Mango avatar
SoWal Insider
#67
Not a smart move to demonize a media outlet with the viewership that Fox has. It would be interesting to know what took 3 hours to discuss or does it take that long to feed the dogs the biscuits? I'm not a big fan of FOX, but occasionally watch it along with the other networks, then put on BBC news for a reality check. It seems foolish to alienate their loyal viewership, especially after winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Not very partisanlike.
Beach Comber
#68
The only thing I am seeing out of all of this is everyone has a different opinion, which is very American. What scares me is our current administration does not seem to acknowledge the American way. Freedom of press.
mtlinscomb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#69
The only thing I am seeing out of all of this is everyone has a different opinion, which is very American. What scares me is our current administration does not seem to acknowledge the American way. Freedom of press.

lol...that's part of the change.
LuciferSam avatar
Banned
#70
The only thing I am seeing out of all of this is everyone has a different opinion, which is very American. What scares me is our current administration does not seem to acknowledge the American way. Freedom of press.

I don't see how this is contrary to freedom of the press unless you define it as the right of the press to force unwilling subjects speak with them. This is an example of the administration exercising its freedom of choice and right to privacy. The press has the freedom to put negative spin on this from now until the end of time. I think the administration is focusing on the people who put Obama in office (recall he stomped his opponent) and I praise them for that.
Winnie avatar
Beach Fanatic
#71
I don't see how this is contrary to freedom of the press unless you define it as the right of the press to force unwilling subjects speak with them. This is an example of the administration exercising its freedom of choice and right to privacy. The press has the freedom to put negative spin on this from now until the end of time. I think the administration is focusing on the people who put Obama in office (recall he stomped his opponent) and I praise them for that.

53% to 46%

The cost was over twice as much to win as to lose. Well, that is campaign spending. In real dollar terms, it is unknown. ;-)

The administration has belittled itself with this public stance on FOX News.

Many liberals are not as good at spotting bias when they agree with it as they are when they disagree with it. Some conservatives also. Here on SoWal, there appears to be a large majority who see FOX News as more biased than other outlets. Some think FOX is not only biased but also reports falsely and the other cable outlets report from the center and accurately. Just last week CNN and MSNBC were falsely quoting Rush Limbaugh. I think they begrudgingly admitted their errors eventually.

Would Van Jones or ACORN been reported on at all if FOX News hadn't reported? I hope that these incidents have shamed the other news sources into doing their jobs better. At least when President Bush was in office, there were reporters challenging every move the administration made. We need that. No public servant should be given free reign. If we really could have transparency in government, maybe we wouldn't need the press so much. Since so much is done out of the public eye, we need a cynical press. I see it more now than earlier this year - thank goodness.

I don't watch FOX News but I would if I received it on my antenna.
Alicia Leonard avatar
SoWal Insider
#72
Maybe this will shed some light on this discussion:

As Crooks and Liars’ Susie Madrak notes, the complainers at Fox appear to be “suffering from memory loss” about President Bush’s many off-the-record chats with conservative columnists and radio hosts, including Fox News personalities Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Glenn Beck. Additionally, they seem to forget that Obama shared an off-the-record dinner with conservative columnists, including Fox contributors Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol and Paul Gigot, before his Inauguration. Malkin should note that the dinner lasted two-and-half hours.
Blair avatar
Beach Fanatic
#73
Maybe this will shed some light on this discussion:

As Crooks and Liars? Susie Madrak notes, the complainers at Fox appear to be ?suffering from memory loss? about President Bush?s many off-the-record chats with conservative columnists and radio hosts, including Fox News personalities Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Glenn Beck. Additionally, they seem to forget that Obama shared an off-the-record dinner with conservative columnists, including Fox contributors Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol and Paul Gigot, before his Inauguration. Malkin should note that the dinner lasted two-and-half hours.



And Katie Coouric, And Tim Russert, And Bob Schieffer....And numerous appeareaces on 60 minutes....During Obama's health care TV tour, he wouldn't even talk to Chris Wallace....Chris Wallace??? Everywhere but Fox News....In my opinion,that's where all of this crud started.
LuciferSam avatar
Banned
#74
53% to 46%

The cost was over twice as much to win as to lose. Well, that is campaign spending. In real dollar terms, it is unknown. ;-)

The administration has belittled itself with this public stance on FOX News.

Many liberals are not as good at spotting bias when they agree with it as they are when they disagree with it. Some conservatives also. Here on SoWal, there appears to be a large majority who see FOX News as more biased than other outlets. Some think FOX is not only biased but also reports falsely and the other cable outlets report from the center and accurately. Just last week CNN and MSNBC were falsely quoting Rush Limbaugh. I think they begrudgingly admitted their errors eventually.

Would Van Jones or ACORN been reported on at all if FOX News hadn't reported? I hope that these incidents have shamed the other news sources into doing their jobs better. At least when President Bush was in office, there were reporters challenging every move the administration made. We need that. No public servant should be given free reign. If we really could have transparency in government, maybe we wouldn't need the press so much. Since so much is done out of the public eye, we need a cynical press. I see it more now than earlier this year - thank goodness.

I don't watch FOX News but I would if I received it on my antenna.

I'm fairly certain that's a popular vote romp, and I'll spare you the pain of reliving the electoral count and the fact that the big O poached states like Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Ohio etc.. Change I can sink my teeth into. I got what I want, you didn't. So sorry. And yes, bias that works in my favor is my kind of bias, so what else is new?
Alicia Leonard avatar
SoWal Insider
#75
And Katie Coouric, And Tim Russert, And Bob Schieffer....And numerous appeareaces on 60 minutes....During Obama's health care TV tour, he wouldn't even talk to Chris Wallace....Chris Wallace??? Everywhere but Fox News....In my opinion,that's where all of this crud started.


and point being, this is nothing new under the sun for either administration. I just think many had hoped it would have stopped with the last, but it is not unheard of, was my only point.

Edited

Winnie avatar
Beach Fanatic
#76
I'm fairly certain that's a popular vote romp, and I'll spare you the pain of reliving the electoral count and the fact that the big O poached states like Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Ohio etc.. Change I can sink my teeth into. I got what I want, you didn't. So sorry. And yes, bias that works in my favor is my kind of bias, so what else is new?

I am pointing out that 46% of us did not vote for President Obama. Your candidate won and is OUR President. We didn't resign our citizenships. We still deserve consideration and representation from the administration.

Since you recognize the overwhelming media bias in favor of candidate Obama, I wasn't referring to you as one of the liberals on SoWal who don't recognize it. :wave:

Checking your forum account

Please wait while we verify your forum account.

New posts