Reporters told no filming interviews in US Capitol Halls without Permission

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I don't disagree with that, at all. Not a big fan of the overt media bias, but that in no way excuses this. If anything, it ramps up the bias, doesn't it?

a reply to: Kali74

Reporters don't generally show themselves running across the Capitol subway platform to catch up to somebody.

That doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Hippie

a reply to: seagull

The bias is already there, I think it may be one more thing they latch on to .. but if not this it would be something else. They don't even need anything, they can invent things such as Trump gets 2 scoops so write a negative story about him over it.

If we had an actual free press instead of propaganda machines this would piss the hell out of me. Instead I can't help but be very meh about it because the press has done this to themselves with their partisan 'reporting'.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: schuyler

You can still say what you want to say.

This is about "freedom of the press" to access the halls of Congress, where the laws are being hammered out and voted on, so they can report back to the people, as the 4th Estate and the people's watch dog.

Just because you have freedom of speech does not mean you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Just because you have a "free press" does not mean you get to endanger thousands of people in a crowded Capitol building. The press is still free and there are many ways any reporter can have access to legislators without laying traps in the pubic hallways that endanger the rest of us. I challenge you to actually visit the place and see what I'm talking about. It's a mad house and reporters are contributing vastly to the situation by insisting on creating roadblocks and restricting the public's right to travel freely by invoking the "Fourth estate."

a reply to: schuyler


I'm sure the halls are especially crowded today, because Sessions is testifying. But, this seems to be a drastic way of dealing with traffic and supremely bad timing.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: seagull

It would be more disturbing if we had an actual free and unbiased press. Propaganda outlets don't count as press to me.

The actual press is held to a standard, they have rules they have to follow. Bloggers etc... can be propaganda but it shouldn't be banned because then all you need to do to shut someone up is label them propaganda. As much as I loathe Alex Jones, I fear living in a nation where he is silenced.

a reply to: Shamrock6

They could start a new trend... Congressperson tipping.

a reply to: Kali74

I am not for silencing them, I just do not consider them actual press.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Fair enough.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Shamrock6

They could start a new trend... Congressperson tipping.

Totally. You should go first. right behind you, promise.

a reply to: Kali74

The press held to a standard??? Are you just joking? I find the press the last on the trust list. They licked a non accomplished junior senator's boots for 2 terms, told you what supported their agenda only and have not let up on THEIR narrative. I find modern MSM completely irrelevant. There is not a particle of any accountability...

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yes, they make a mountain out of a molehill--the ice cream story, as an example. This, however, is a story, and a bad one, that could be used by the biased media as an example of an attempt at hiding stuff.

I realize that access hasn't been totally cut off. I do, however, see this as possibly a disturbing harbinger of future attempts at cutting off of access. Maybe it isn't, but again, maybe it is. Time will certainly tell.

a reply to: Kali74

And to be fair I would be just as upset with a press that I considered a rightwing propaganda tool. I am sure many people on ATS consider me Republican/Conservative, but I am definitely not. I just think the Dem platform is far more dangerous to this country long term than the Repub one. I dislike both parties. I am a huge proponent of single payer healthcare. although my version would upset both D and R equally I think.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: schuyler


I'm sure the halls are especially crowded today, because Sessions is testifying. But, this seems to be a drastic way of dealing with traffic and supremely bad timing.

That, and that it seems some details were available about the healthcare bill that it seems some might not have wanted to have been questioned about or recorded answering (or refusing).

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Flip side of the coin is apparently the Sergeant At Arms of the Senate had already sent a note out, a month ago, to the media about overcrowding when attempting to get to legislators.

While on it's face it certainly appears geared to inhibit access, if there's been overcrowding to the point of causing safety concerns or impacting "business" (such as Congress actually conducts any actual work), then this would be a fairly logical step.

I think times have changed the press used to show respect for elected officials. But as we can see journalists now just attacks there victim I mean source.

a reply to: Kali74

What standards are we talking about here? Proper punctuation? Spelling?

Other than that, I'm not seeing a whole lot of standards being enforced in the media of late. Perhaps I've missed some?

a reply to: seagull

This definitely is not good. But it's hard for me to get worked up because I really see the press being a huge part of why this happened. They need to take this opportunity to think about the mistakes they are making, dial it down a bit, and hopefully get this removed.

a reply to: seagull

The only standards I see is pushing Democrat agendas and creating news rather than reporting news in order to make money.

a reply to: dragonridr

I think times have changed the press used to show respect for elected officials. But as we can see journalists now just attacks there victim I mean source.

I have yet to see or hear about a politician being manhandled, shoved or punched by a reporter.

a reply to: seagull

For all the allegations of fake news and media lies... you would think there'd be some libel suits. Yet there's not. The anonymous sources keep turning out to be factual.