http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/200...hite-house-pool

I find this incredibly odd, given that the various news organizations are more or less in competition with each other. One would think they'd be glad to have an edge over Fox.

It could be out of friendship of one another amongst these journalists, and or the others are afraid if they do not stand their ground now, they all may eventually find themselves on Obama's hit list.

You mean like MSNBC did with GWB? Where was FoxNews then?

Glad to see the white house stenographers finally wiping the pixie dust off their shoulders. At least now SOMEONE understands the difference between a 24-hrs/day news network and three, one-hour pundit programs.

On that note, Keith Olbermann wouldn't make a pimple on Brit Hume's arse.

Here's a good reason why Fox and News shouldn't be two words uttered together.

...or find themseleves suffering reprisals under a RW President. Of course, Fox never opposed the shabby manner in which President George W Bush treated Helen Thomas, either. The door swings both ways, you know. if the Fox supporters are going to defend their beoloved netowrk, they might want to at least be consistent in defending any reporter who asks hard questions.


I find this whole thread ironic, considering that the White House is not allowing Ed Schultz to interview Obama.

When I hear it from the real news sources, I might believe that the rest of the press is upset about Faux News being relegated to their proper place at the far end of the line. The White House and the President must occassionally cut conferrences short and do not always have time for all questions. Why shove people out of the way for Rupert's rats?

Whining Whining.
The right can do nothing but whine.

Fox sez: "I hate everybody, why does no one love me?"

today's friend is tomorrow's foe.

The press is belated seeing this WH does not have an American view of a free press, rather they found the WH practices the Chavez/Soviet/dictatorial model.

You can't allow that to exist, it's totally un-American and symptomatic of an admin with something to hide AND gives the impression that the other news orgs are complicit and/or subject to being intimidated.

A free press is essential to ensure the govern have at minimum an opportunity to keep tabs on the government.

good point.
how quickly it forgets how much attenshun b666h WH paid to...fauxsleaze to push war agenda.
how many blacklists they had, how many names they kept.
oh but that was fine...

btw....lawrence Odonnell shows the clip tonight of precisely where....fauxsleaze began this.
...while they attempt to blame this admin.

do you have a link when Bush WH labeled MSNBC as not a news org and that they would be restricted to access.

Remember NBC is the news parent of MSNBC and they are the main news org of the pair.

Bush's Press Sec Dana Perino

Fox is primarily a spin organization, not a news organization.

Fox has, on numerous occasions, mislabelled a Republican embarrassment as a Democrat (Mark Sanford, for instance). If this had happened once or twice, I could imagine it was not deliberate, but they've done it five or six times. The point: at Fox "News," they lie.

Fox spent hours and hours covering the DC "Tea party," exaggerating the attendance, and conveniently faling to mention on air that the whole affair had been orchestrated by themselves. Then when a gay rights rally was held in DC with roughly the same official estimated attendence, Fox doesn't even mention it. The points here: they orchestrate stories and they pick and choose which parts of the news to report (they call this "filtering").

Fox, like every other 24 hour "news" channel, intersperces their daily "reporting" with commentary and evaluations from "experts." These are not pundits, but they do tend to reflect right-wing values in their commentaries. The point: even when it isn't time for the Obama-bashing and calumny they call commentary, Fox spins.

Fox is offering entertainment disguised as news. They have no scruples. The closest they ever come to objectivity is being objectionable. Their news coverage reflects an ultra-conservative bias, and if they claim otherwise, they lie. Again.

A free press IS essential, and we don't have one. No one can be free without being independent, and there are only about a half-dozen providers of electronic media covering 90% of the nation. Thus, the decisions made by a half-dozen men determine what a formerly free people will be allowed to know. Do not make me laugh; the last thing Fox resembles is a member of a free press. They're a political tool masquerading as a news channel, a propaganda machine such as the world has not yet seen.

And the bolded part of the quoted post, I call this a damned lie. Back this up or withdraw it, sir; sometimes your rhetoric reeks of such stupidity that I can smell it out the computer screen. Calling Fox out, finally, as a bogus news organization echoes Chavez and the Soviets HOW, exactly?

You boldface someone's opinion and then call it a lie? How liberal of you. You and others ought to google who covers the costs of the WH Press "pool" and then it might enlighten you as to why the other members did what they did, which was the CORRECT decision.

As for Bob's observation, shared by thousands if not millions (including this former journalist), who in hell made you the opinion sheriff?

The source of this thread is NewsBusters. 'Nuff said. Fox News can legally lie.



Fox News and all their pundits claim their ratings are going through the roof because of Obama's attacks. Another lie.

It was not stated as an opinion. It was stated as a fact. Deny that, if you like. If it had been expressed as an opinion, I would not have made a comment.

Oh my god almighty!!! Now you're a former journalist?! Is there anything you haven't done, Maxx?

A free press doesn't take their own reporters to court to prevent them from telling the truth. A free press doesn't get daily marching orders from their boss telling them what and how to report the news. A free press doesn't spy on it's own employees. That is the Chavez/Soviet/dictatorial model.

Joined the Navy in 1979 and quickly headed off to serve on the 6th Fleet flagship in Gaeta, Italy. I waited two years to attend Defense Information School in Indianapolis, Indiana (1981-82) and was a senior JO2 (Journalist Second Class) when I decided to reenlist for big bucks and grab a significant bonus to switch to the intelligence community where the Navy was experiencing significant shortages during the late 80's. To be honest, after two shore duties writing for REAL editors, I simply did not want to return to sea as a journalist and return to those earlier battles as a JO3 where I would constantly fight battles with skippers who refused to acknowledge the existence of the AP Stylebook. I lost count of how many captains and executive officers felt their four-year degree at the Academy qualified them as journalists. Anyways...

Ended my career in the intelligence community however, during my tenure as a military journalist, I was sent to about 60 countries covering stories and was awarded two CHINFO Merit awards in feature writing right around the time I was a founding member of the West Florida Press Association. CHINFO, for lack of any better explaination, is the Navy's version of the Pulitzer. Never got a Thomas Jefferson though...that would have been the ulitimate.
A few careers in 30-odd years? Not anything terribly unusual but I'm mystified as to why so many in here think someone who has lived nearly five decades has done more than one or two things in that time. Some of you people must lead, or have led, terribly boring lives.

Of course I'm going to defend it. Deny it? Why would I deny your opinion? Bob's words were clearly his own and you are in disagreement with them...fine...but your disgreement manifested into a call to demand another member remove their opinion because.....you think it's not factual?

I agree with Bob. The administration's vendetta to Fox HAS taken on all the thuggery of Chavez and the Soviet Union, who attempt to denounce and silence their critics as well. Are you going to tell me my opinion is not factual as well? You might want to remind yourself of the details which led to the creation of this thread in the first place.

The White House has every right to strike back at Fox. If you defend free speech for Fox you must also do it for the White House, there isn't a double standard. Now, should the WH be trying to shut out Fox... not so much. But they are hardly the first administration to attempt it towards a media outlet, nor the last.

Folks, the reason why the media went to bat for Fox is because Fox also pays for the expenses of the WH Pool. It would have been fairly stupid for the WH Pool to accept interviews granted by the White House while another paying member of the pool was denied same access.

As I wrote earlier, Fox News leans right, MSNBC leans left. What on earth is the difference between Fox and MSNBC starting at 5 pm each night? It's five hours of political pundits on both sides. Whomever is steering this ship's strategy really doesn't have a clue. It's NOT working. Fox's ratings are skyrocketing and the administration is shining a very bright light on Glenn Beck...which explains why his ratings now exceed 2 million for...get this....a freakin' 5 pm time slot? That's unheard of.

The WH ought to get back to doing the people's work and stop whining about Fox News. It was stupid when Bush's team did it with NBC and it's stupid now.

He stated it as fact. When I give my opinion, there are clue words like "I believe" or "I think." Instead Bob, and now yourself, have made unsupported accusations against the President of the United States. You offer no evidence and no argument; you believe it and therefore treat it as fact.

Forget it. It's obvious you have no objectivity and care nothing for logic or truth.

If you can't tell the difference between opinion and a fact, let me help:



An opinion doesn't require facts. Let me repeat AN OPINION DOESN'T REQUIRE FACTS. If I state "I believe there is life in outer space" is that an incorrect fact as well? Using your logic?

An opinion, according to the number one answer at dictionary.com, is "a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty."


and FWIW, I'm cracking up at your "unsupported accusations" reply. That was hysterical. Wasn't it Axelrod who said about Fox "It's really not news -- it's pushing a point of view. And the bigger thing is that other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way, and we're not going to treat them that way." Unsupported?

Dont you find it comforting that the administration is sitting around a table daily and actually spending hour apon hour worrying about what FOX news is going to say when we just lost another half million jobs and their own people are sayinf the stimulas effect is over. Like I said in the beginning the bill should have had 500 billion in labor entesive projects not40 billion which not one person can see its effect. We should have thousands of people in ever state working on building repair new construction and road improvement. Where is it? Have you seen it? I have not.

No. Pay close attention, now. If you had written, "There is life in outer space," you would have written your opinion as a fact. The fact that you included the words, "I believe," made it clear it was an opinion.

I well know that for conservatives, there is nothing wrong with forming opinions completely independent of the facts. No facts are necessary for your opinion; you may relax on that score. It's something we all understand.


This again misses my point, which was that opinions are generally indicated by code words that clearly identify it as opinion.


Axelrod told the truth. Fox is a spin network, a political apparatus to brainwash the public to support the GOP and conservative "values". It's not a news network simply because it claims to be. Fox long ago abandoned any pretense of objectivity; it is an electronic right-wing rag.

Unsupported. Further, assuming Axelrod merely exaggerated the truth, how does this echo Chavez and the Soviets? This was blather, pure and simple, of no redeeming value whatsoever as a post; I just want the poster to admit it.

I cant see how anyone in their right mind could defend faux news..
Everyday they are one sided!! They have one anchor that is a bit fair and balanced and that is Shep Smith and he will most likely be fired very soon due to some "reason"..Anyone that can argue that Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, Bill O'Rielly and everyone one else that spews anti Obama hate is fair and balanced is beyond me..Also look back and see what george bush did about NBC..He tried to shut them down..Its called Politics get used to it

last week just my local cable provider .my local cable company ..just began ... Filed FOX news .. under: Entertainment comady ..