White House boasts: We 'control' news media

www.wnd.com...

and the video of the conference...

YouTube Link

This should be evidence to anyone that there is, in fact, a "liberal media" in place to put spin on events and news in favor of the current administration.

This should be a red flag to everyone out there that what you're hearing about Health Care reform, illegal immigration, global warming, hell, ANYTHING, is what they want you to hear!

Still in denial? You need to pull your head out.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by sos37]

I can't watch the damn thing.

Is anyone else getting extremely irritated with YouTube today?

3 seconds ..... buffer buffer buffer ..... 3 seconds ..... buffer buffer buffer ...... 3 sec ...

[edit on 10/19/2009 by Misfit]

This should be no surprise to the people on ATS. The whitehouse controls everything that is reported in the news media these days. There is one rogue media outlet that they are trying to get under control. Fox News.

Fox News will not play their game and the Obama administration is on the offensive to try to bring them down.

www.foxnews.com...

Never before in my life have I ever heard of the federal government trying to silence a news station that is critical of them. It really says alot about how much they are worried about the real truth getting out instead of the controlled spin on the issues coming out of the Whitehouse.

Unbelievable times we live in.

Notice, people, the word "CONTROL" is the only word in quotes in the headline. This is a CLEAR sign that a quote is being taken out of context and being used to make news where there is none.

Yes, Anita Dunn DID use the words "control" and "making" but you'll need to listen to the video or find the complete quotes in context to see what she actually said.

If you want the truth, you'll do the work. If you want to simply bash the administration, you'll take the OP at face value without looking further. Your choice.

Every presidential candidate, president elect and president has done this, it is nothing new.

"while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled,"

Pre-interviews, "approved questions", staged events, generated exclusives etc.

All top political figures (regardless of party) do this.

Of course they will control, as much as they can, everything they feed to the media.

It would be politically reckless to do it any other way.

They may wish to entirely control the media, but that is virtually impossible, especially in these times and with the vast technologies and ways in which the public can access news and information.

1) wnd = autofail in the same way huffington post = autofail

2) absolutely right, and I have no doubt what she is talking about is true...however, you might want to listen again not for keywords but to the subject.

Discussion of the campaign trail, everyone controls the media and what their message is. you wanted a candidate for presidency to discuss all their strategys beforehand with the media so that the other side knows what they will be bringing up? What world do you live on?

when you play cards, do you make sure everyone around the table knows what your hand is and what your going to do? its a bloody contest and yes, using the media to make you shine and not see your warts during such a time is what they do...and its up to the other side and their control of their media wing to try to show the competitors warts while not showing your own.

welcome to earth politics.

but whatever...they got juicy keywords in there

can a mod shove this tripe into the political madness section next to "Obama shaves every morning....with chinese razors!" or is breaking political news dedicated to learning how campaigning works during election years?

seriously...whats wrong with some of you..are you just now waking up to how elections work? Where were you in 04, 00, etc...you should have seen the nonsense that went on in those years.

Wow, and the Obama administration apologists never cease to amaze me...

She clearly said that They, the government, controlled the interviews instead of the media controlling it. Here is part of what she said....

"to get the message out without actually having to talk to reporters. We just put that out there and MAKE THEM WRITE what Pluffet said (sp?) as oposed to Pluff doing.....aaah...... an interview with the reporter. So it was very much, we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it, and it didn't always make us popular with the press...."

No kidding it didn't make them popular with the press?....

But obviously, the Obama administration apologizers will claim there is nothing unusual about this, just like they do with every fact, and evidence they don't want to deal with and just ignore....

Please do not speak about truth when you obviously have no idea what it means.


[edit on 19-10-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

I made not one apology, nor did I defend the administration in any way. In fact, I did not address the implications made in the OP at all. I simply suggested that people look beyond the headline to find the truth.



Indeed.

reply to post by Erasurehead

---

Fox News a "rogue media outlet"?

Please for your own sake and that of your country, go and Google "Rupert Murdoch" or for that matter just try and remember more than a year and a half back.

Fox News are NOT rogue and they are certainly NOT on the side of the people, although they are very good at being populist and making it seem like they are in there with the "grass roots" (Astroturf)

If people continue believing that it's "the liberal media" versus "the conservative media" or whatever you want to call it, then America is truly screwed...

No, you just claimed, obviously without even watching the video, that they just put in quotes the word control and that was "a CLEAR sign that a quote is being taken out of context and being used to make news where there is none."




Need a link to an encyclopedia? I can show you lots of such links, unless of course you want to claim that all encyclopedias are part of a conspiracy, and they are taking words out of context.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

I can't get over the OUTRAGE!
I mean, the Bush administration never manipulated the media, right?

WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD,WMD.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news to y'all, but media manipulation is nothing new to this country.

It's only the outrage from the right that's new.

One thing I'll say about Bush and Obama, they have opened the eyes of the American public, whether it be intentional or accidental I don't know.

I often said that one great thing that George W did was open the eyes of the people and let them know how cruddy our government realy is. Obama seems to be following the same trek.

Of course, anyone that knows anything about the media know that it's regulated by the FCC, which is a government ran commission.


[edit on 19-10-2009 by SpeakerofTruth]

reply to post by Rhetoric

---

errr...at least journalists were able to question president Bush, but now they can't question president Obama.

Not to mention that the media was on a daily Bush bash, complaining from his accent, he is not the only Texan that says the word "nuclear" like he does, to making pauses when he was asked questions as a sign that he wasn't smart...

Then we had President Obama make claims, on more than one occasion when asked how many states in the Republic he had visited he responded that he visited 57 states, that there was one he still needed to visit, and two more he could not visit, or wasn't allowed, among some other clear signs that this man has no idea even on what country he is living, yet he is president of such country and the media for the most part idolize him to no end...

Oh and BTW, EVERY country was at first claiming Saddam had WMD, even Clinton was saying the same thing even after our forces had invaded Iraq...

But of course, it was only Bush who claimed Saddam had wmd...

Anyway...let's not derail the thread....

Oh and btw, before people start claiming that i am a Bush fan, I disagreed with him not controlling our borders better, not to mention that at the end he claimed there were no wmd when there were clear signs that there were and they were moved. The government even fired a U.S. official for telling the public that the Russian government was the one that helped Saddam move it's wmd, and this man had proof of it, as it was his job in the government to check what Saddam's regime was doing, and the reason he was given of why he was demanded to resign was that he had given information to the public which he shouldn't have given, or something like that. There were other things which I disagreed with of what president Bush did. But again I don't want to derail this thread.



[edit on 19-10-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

isnt it funny how people can watch the same thing and get completely different things out of it.

See, to me...when she was talking about how they controlled their media wing on their campaign trail, what that meant to me was they controlled their media wing on their campaign trail..whereas you somehow heard "we currently tell the media what to report now that we are in the white house.

amazing...its like seeing a glass of water, and someone seeing a hubcap...I mean, you can touch it, its wet, you can pick it up and drink it, you can spit the water on the other person's face and the other person will continue to see it as simply a hubcap.

there is either denial going on here, or some serious mind control...

simply amazing. Done with this nonsense also.

NO DUH.

Seriously I am sick of these retarded threads.

And there are two of this one saying the same thing.

What do you expect? That press releases would be top secret white house memos of the day stuck into a blender and then poured onto a page?

Grow up.

I'm know this might shock you, but I think I actually agree with you on this one. Read this article on the video and then watch the video.

I can't say that I disagree with the President's policy of circumventing the media. The President could lie or make things up in a press briefing and control the media that way just as easily. No, he's just skipping the traditional media filter. Can't say that I disapprove of this at all. The media's coverage usually stinks anyway.


EDIT: My favorite conservative talk show host, Michael Medved, refers to WND as "World Nut Daily". I agree. They're so extreme that it embarrassing to conservatism. Please don't believe that this is how the right thinks.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by dbates]

reply to post by wanderingwaldo

---

So why would you:
a) spend time reading the thread
b) responding?

wouldnt someone who is sick of these threads not comment on them, but im glad ive got the opinion of some random guy. That really makes a difference, thanks for adding absolutly nothing!!

Well it is a thread on nothing so I think I made a valid contribution to the mental void.

My dearly departed maternal grandmother had a favorite saying “The whole world is queer but me and thee and sometimes I wonder about thee”.

One indeed might be inclined to wonder when people defend the inexcusable and abusive as being tolerable because of the long standing pervasive nature of the abuse.

It is almost as if people really are saying, “Well we have been lied to and abused before, why change it now”.

Hope and change it would appear are the most meaningless of words for people who seem to not want hope or change.

It seems to me that people want bad government and will defend government’s ability to be dishonest and disingenuous, manipulative and abusive at all costs.

Perhaps grandmother should have said “The whole world are masochists but me and thee and sometimes I wonder about thee”?