It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White House Loses Bid to Exclude Fox News From Pay Czar Interview

page: 7
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by reasonable
 


Here's a discussion of IQ and frequency distribution of IQ levels. You might be surprised that about 98.5% of the population has an IQ over 50, although scores vary by mean and standard deviation.

Glenn Beck had an opponent of net neutrality on his show yesterday. Net neutrality was linked to a left-wing agenda and video of Van Jones supporting the cause was presented.

Would Rupert Murdoch support net neutrality? Probably not from what I've read.

However, is this proof that Fox News is pushing McCain's opposiiton?

I gave it some serious thought, but I've not seen enough evidence to come to that conclusion.

Do you have evidence?




posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


On that same note considering Fox has more viewers than any other news outlet and more of a combination of democrats, independents and Republicans than the others that could mean people that watch MSNBC are within that 1.5% of people with an IQ under 50.


[edit on 23-10-2009 by Sheeper]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oldnslo

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by WarIsASport
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I'll ask again... was there a law or something which was broken by excluding Fox News?

[edit on 23-10-2009 by HunkaHunka]


Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

And oh yea, its freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.



Ok, and how does the President stating that Fox news is not welcome at a press conference have anything to do with the legislative branch making a law abrdiging the freedom of the press?

You do know there are three branches right?

[edit on 23-10-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


Has Team Obama just been handed their first defeat?
What's the next defeat going to be?

Cap & Trade?

I think their first defeat was when the olympic comittee handed them their ass on a platter and told them to pound sand.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Fox? Fair and Balanced? That's a laugh.

I have come to the conclusion that the majority of news reporting in this country is second hand information that gets thrown through the spin cycle.

If you want news without spin, I suggest going straight to the source instead of relying on news organizations to punish your brain with drivel.

Cause in the end, it doesn't matter what news you get your news from, they all are just screwing with the reporting.

This administration compared to the last has been quite open and transparent. Just because you haven't bothered to look it up yourselves doesn't mean that they haven't put it out there for you to see.

Fox isn't going to report on things that make this administration look good. On the other side of the coin, MSNBC isn't going to report on anything that makes this administration look bad.

Sad truth is, most reports you see on the news come either from the Associated Press or Reuters.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Um, what source would you recommend? Should we run around the country looking for news on our own or do you have some unknown, hidden source that's all about news with no bias at all?

I_R



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by candide
 


Point blank here. Is it right for a President to attempt to control media content; yes or no? There is no third side here.

I'm an Independent by the way. I dislike both Parties equally. My viewpoint is based solely on Obama's actions.


I have a more libertarian take. The administration is within their rights to give their message to whatever journalists they choose, those that get excluded are within their rights to whine about lack of access.

If the prez somehow prevented Fox from being able to express their journalistic opinion or removed their ability to publish via their chosen medium then it would be worthy of serious outrage. That is not the case.

What we are seeing here is just lack of access to ask questions at high level press conferences. I have never been able to figure out what the value of those BS press release parties were anyways, but im sure they are life and death to the DC cocktail party set.

Its an acknowledged fact that Bush shut out NBC towards the end of his administration and the world didn't end.

This whole thing is just the death rattle of a former giant realizing it no longer pulls the strings of power.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by liveandletlive

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
As far as I know, this assault against Fox News by the administration is unprecedented and it flies into the face of the much touted transparency that candidate Obama promised as part of his "change" and "hope" platform.


I believe Nixon did the same thing. That was a great administration! .......of course there was that whole Watergate thing...... oh and he abolished the gold standard.....and there was that impeachment thing because of the little federal crimes he was involved with.....but other than that........


Don't forget India and Pakistan. Wasn't that all in the first year? What an embarrassment



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka


Ok, and how does the President stating that Fox news is not welcome at a press conference have anything to do with the legislative branch making a law abrdiging the freedom of the press?




You're missing the whole point.

There are five news agencies in the White House pool. Fox has been in this pool for years. The news agencies cover the White House at their own expense, so it's really kind of win-win situation. The White House gets a lot of news coverage and the news agencies get some juicy news.

Now, the White House has decided that Fox does not follow the party line and so they are being treated by the White House as though they are "second-class citizens," to coin a phrase.

They're not stopping there. They are engaging in a systematic character assassination and ostracism campaign. You know just like the left does to people.

The White House has been bragging that they got elected by controlling the media. Now they are deciding that Fox, despite having some of the most respected journalists in the business on their staff, is not worthy to interview the president when he makes a tour of the networks to push his agenda and they have cut Fox, a White House pool member, out of an important interview with a czar.

Clearly, the White House is trying to control Fox. They want to hurt Fox by cutting them out of the loop, hoping that they will fall into line.

This might not be illegal, but it certainly violates the spirit of the Constitution and it clearly violates the protocol of the White House pool.

It is blatantly unfair and it is blatantly un-American.

Get it?

This is what the discussion is about.

It's not about the law.

It's about decency and integrity and fairness.

If White House's use of intimidation to control the media is cool with you, fine. You're entitled to your opinion.


[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 



decency and integrity and fairness.


All attributes that cannot be attributed to Fox news.

But, I believe that they should be allowed in as well as the other sham news agencies.

Might as well have the other side of spin.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by joey_hv
 


I'll buy that.
This is defeat #2.
Throw in an embarrassing Nobel Prize that nobody thinks
Obama deserved .
What's going to be defeat #3?
Cap & Trade?



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno

All attributes that cannot be attributed to Fox news.


I'm glad you think that Fox should be included, but it would be nice if you would support your thesis.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
I watch CNN personally (if I watch at all, which usually I don't)...

1. I find the Presidents actions to be childish, to say the least. Its pathetic by all accounts and a huge slap in the face to Fox viewers and anyone who holds sacred the Constitution.

2. I find, even more so than the presidents's actions, more concerning that people are supporting Obama on this?!?!...

I get it, Liberals hate Fox.. but this transcends the "what and how" they produce their news..

Its hypocritical, unbecoming, childish, pathetic and above all else, asinine.

Deny ignorance people...

(Ps I'm a Libertarian, not a rep or a dem I hate everyone equally)



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:02 AM
link   
I love it when people say that Fox News is not fair or balanced, or truthful. Its a highlighter on their ignorance. If these people knew what the truth of any news story was, to call it true or untrue, they wouldnt need to watch the news in the first place since they already knew!

The fact is, you cant call a news station unworthy of reporting from the White House based upon your ideology. Just because you may not agree with Glen Beck or the way they report the news, doesnt make them any less credible than any other news station. It makes them the other side of your coin.

Just because they are mostly unwilling to be a WH propaganda hand puppet, doesnt mean they should be shut out. In fact they, more so than any other stations, should be first in line because of that! Balance means hearing opposing opinions, and finding the truth somewhere in the middle usually.

Its amazing to me how many people posted here that they didnt find any fault with the Obama Admins attempt to shut Fox out. Apparently they desire to be treated like a mushroom. Fed s**t and kept in the dark.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I just caught wind of this article stating that Fox news may have fabricated the story about being denied access. Who knows, there may be more to this than what everyone is buying.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
What are they going to do next, start screaming "I can't hear you" when Fox asks a question at a press briefing.........


Or they could just cut to Nancy Pelosi asking "Are you serious?"





(I know she wasn't saying that about this particular story, but I just had to post it)



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoffinman
yeah as far as i can tell this is first too... obama is a dictator...


King Obama I like to call him.

All hail the king!



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Well honestly... where is the law about this?

It's one thing to say "Oh another thing about Obama we don't like"

It's an entirely different thing to paint it as some sort of illegal or unconstitutional act!


Humm...wow, so Hunka doesn't know that the Constitution specifies freedom of Speech, and freedom of the PRESS as a right, and is unconstitutional for the President, and his administration to try to shut down a news network because it is a conservative news source...and the Obama administration has been woring very hard to shut down any conservative news source, including talk hosts.

But of course Hunka would agree with this...

But what else is new about Hunka....



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tartarspoon
I just caught wind of this article stating that Fox news may have fabricated the story about being denied access. Who knows, there may be more to this than what everyone is buying.


bingo



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by reasonable
 


That is such a crock. There are tons of video of Rahm Emanuel and David Axlerod saying Fox is not a legitimate news agency, so it is obvious they were trying to cut them out of the loop.

That is not a newsource that they guy links to in his post its a freaking blog.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by StupidMonkeyMan]




top topics



 
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join