W.H.: Media shouldn't follow Fox

[TheBigDave]

White House attempted to bar Fox News from interviewing the Pay Czar.



Kudos to the other networks for standing up to the White House.

[jfoobar]

Originally Posted by TheBigDave

Kudos to the other networks for standing up to the White House.

And this may prove to be the practical end of this petty anti-Fox revolution by the Obama White House. They really do need complicity from the other networks to make their crusade work and they don't appear to be getting it.

This should be a tremendous embarrassment for the Obama administration but it probably won't be.

[Ky-Fi]

Let me see, so far Obama has characterized me as a bitter person clinging to my guns and Bible, someone who listens to the wrong talk radio, someone who watches the wrong news, and now, in contrast to the free-thinking Democrats, I find out that I generally just do as I'm told

(I also love the way Obama has to bring on the southern drawl and "y'alls" when he's talking to the unwashed masses)

[TheBigDave]

The White House is just wagging the dog. Declare war on Fox to divert attention from ObamaCare.

Beck had a good segment on it yesterday:



This strategy is going come back and bite them in 2012. Obama's claims of "bringing people together" may have worked in 2008. But it's going to get laughed at in 2012.

[brayzie]

Originally Posted by JasonF

But remember what your original statement was:



That's what Milo Bloom is responding to. He's pointing out that you don't have to wonder: similar stories with Xe and Haliburton have been downplayed.

I said:

I have to wonder if a similar story that implicated an organization with conservative ties would be downplayed like that.

"Similar story," meaning an undercover story involving a large scale organization that has employees assisting in alleged child prostitution, but with conservative/Republican ties.

Can you imagine if the employee's of banks who received bailouts got caught in trying to assist in alleged child prostitution?

@bout Blackwater/Xe,

I've read up about Blackwater/Xe but I haven't heard any major news channel touch up on it because I don't have a TV.
Was Fox the only one downplaying the story? Who, in your opinion, did follow the story with the amount of coverage it warranted?

@bout the other news channels sticking up for Fox,
I'm also impressed. I really dislike Fox News as a news channel but the White House shouldn't be telling people what's approved news and what isn't.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by Ky-Fi

Let me see, so far Obama has characterized me as a bitter person clinging to my guns and Bible, someone who listens to the wrong talk radio, someone who watches the wrong news, and now, in contrast to the free-thinking Democrats, I find out that I generally just do as I'm told

You forgot to mention your antipathy toward people who are different from you.

[Ky-Fi]

Originally Posted by creekdipper

You forgot to mention your antipathy toward people who are different from you.

Oh, yes, and also Michelle told me that my soul was broken.

[TheBigDave]

CBS News covers the War On Fox:

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by TheBigDave

White House attempted to bar Fox News from interviewing the Pay Czar.



Kudos to the other networks for standing up to the White House.

Here's a perfect example of Fox lying. The reason Fox was originally excluded from the Feinberg interview is ... FOX DIDN'T ASK TO INTERVIEW FEINBERG!!!.

Adding to the Fox News v. White House feud today is a dust-up over an interview with pay czar Ken Feinberg. Turns out, it was a sort of miscommunication, but the White House adds that if they had left Fox out it would be a case of "Not that there's anything wrong with that!"

The version Fox has pushed all day is that the network was excluded from an interview roundtable with Feinberg yesterday, and that bureau chiefs from ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN came to Fox's defense.

TPMDC dug into it, and here's what happened.

Feinberg did a pen and pad with reporters to brief them on cutting executive compensation. TV correspondents, as they do with everything, asked to get the comments on camera. Treasury officials agreed and made a list of the networks who asked (Fox was not among them).

But logistically, all of the cameras could not get set up in time or with ease for the Feinberg interview, so they opted for a round robin where the networks use one pool camera. Treasury called the White House pool crew and gave them the list of the networks who'd asked for the interview.

The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn't on the list, was told that they hadn't asked and the crew said they needed to be included. Treasury called the White House and asked top Obama adviser Anita Dunn. Dunn said yes and Fox's Major Garrett was among the correspondents to interview Feinberg last night.

Simple as that, we're told, and the networks don't want to be seen as heroes for Fox.

TPMDC spoke with a network bureau chief this afternoon familiar with the situation who was surprised that Fox was portraying the news as networks coming to its rescue.

"If any member had been excluded it would have been the same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues," the bureau chief said. "It's all for one and one for all."

A Treasury spokesperson added: "There was no plot to exclude Fox News, and they had the same interview that their competitors did. Much ado about absolutely nothing."

But the White House isn't backing down from its feud with Fox.

"This White House has demonstrated our willingness to exclude Fox News from newsmaking interviews, but yesterday we did not," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest.

An administration source wondered if the networks were annoyed Fox disclosed logistical negotiations since they are treated as off the record, but the bureau chief did not view this in the same light as discussions about, for example, the president going to Iraq.

As for the ongoing battle, Earnest said: "The president and other high ranking officials and people like Ken Feinberg have done interviews with Fox in the past and will do them in the future."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...-interview.php

[Brack]

Originally Posted by jfoobar

Without even mentioning the obvious (Maddow), have you seen Ed Schultz's show? It is revoltingly partisan. No network that gives an hour of prime time to Schultz can claim any high ground over Fox News at all, sorry.

Ed's on at 6p. That's not prime time.

[Mad Dawg]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Here's a perfect example of Fox lying. The reason Fox was originally excluded from the Feinberg interview is ... FOX DIDN'T ASK TO INTERVIEW FEINBERG!!!.

Fox says they did request.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_332707.html

[crazyronin]

Originally Posted by Mad Dawg

Fox says they did request.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_332707.html

So, on other words...The White House (and Talking Points Memo) LIED!!!eleventy!one!!1!

[Nugent]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Here's a perfect example of Fox lying. The reason Fox was originally excluded from the Feinberg interview is ... FOX DIDN'T ASK TO INTERVIEW FEINBERG!!!.

It looks more like you just choosing to believe the "facts" of the organizations with which you agree.

If this is one of the examples of Fox lying, it's a rather poor one.
Chicken Little comes to mind.

[wmansir]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Here's a perfect example of Fox lying. The reason Fox was originally excluded from the Feinberg interview is ... FOX DIDN'T ASK TO INTERVIEW FEINBERG!!!.

Normally I wouldn't cite HuffPost as a news source, but according to this article a FN exec claims they did request an interview and that Gibbs acknowledged Treasury made the mistake of excluding Fox from the list. As you see in a prior post, CBS reported that the pool organizations did get together and, in his words, say to the WH "That's it, you crossed the line". Also in your video Garrett, a WH approved real journalist, avoids blaming the admin but says he's never seen this happen in his 9 years at the WH.

I don't think this was a WH approved snub based on the WH's reaction, but I doubt it was an innocent mistake either. With the WH PR department running a coordinated effort to brand FN "not a news organization", they can hardly fault other departments for following their lead.

[TheBigDave]

Update from Mediaite:

Fox News: White House Apologized For Pay Czar Interview Snub “Mistake”

Mediaite has learned more about what happened with the decision by the Treasury Department to exclude Fox News in a round-robin of pool interviews Thursday.

But more importantly – there are more details emerging about the uproar over the initial decision, causing the Treasury Department to reverse their decision.

Fox News SVP of news and editorial programming Michael Clemente tells Mediaite the plan was to replace the Fox News interview with a Bloomberg interview instead. This was verified by an executive at another network. After the D.C. bureau chiefs at ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and Fox News discussed the decision, and pushed back at the unprecedented move, the Treasury Department relented and allowed FNC in. And according to Clemente, the decision was made by someone at the center of the White House vs. FNC feud. “They picked up the phone and called Anita Dunn, and Dunn said, ‘Fine let Fox in,’” he says of the Treasury Department.

“It was a very absolutely clear attempt to leave Fox out,” says Clemente.

The White House apologized to FNC yesterday for the move. “We were subsequently told it was a mistake by a low level person at the Treasury Department,” says Clemente. “Major [Garrett] was told that by Robert Gibbs and others.”

In the wake of the report Thursday on Fox News, the Treasury Department, a White House spokesperson and others have raised doubts about the original story, citing the fact that FNC did conduct the interview. “That’s what ultimately happened but that’s not what the initial planning was,” says Clemente. (Mediaite reporter Tommy Christopher has been in contact with Fox News before and after the publication of this article, and they cited the CBS Evening News report added to the article, rather than commenting directly.)

CBS News D.C. bureau chief Christopher Isham also serves as the pool chair. He tells Mediaite he convened a conference call and all the bureau chiefs agreed they were not comfortable with excluding one of the members of the pool in a pool interview.

The news has gotten a reaction from around the media world – with reports from CBS News and the AP, among others. And all show, once again, the White House losing the battle it has chosen to wage with Fox News.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/white-hou...ion-a-mistake/

[wm lopez]

Originally Posted by TheBigDave

Update from Mediaite:

Looks like FOXNEWS can be trusted and in Obama we can't.

[TheBigDave]

News Watch discussing the War On Fox:

[jfoobar]

Originally Posted by Brack

Ed's on at 6p. That's not prime time.

I will have to consider MSNBC the authority on what their own prime time lineup is. From:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080273/...bout_msnbc_tv/

Leading off the MSNBC primetime lineup is "The Ed Show," hosted by progressive radio talker Ed Schultz, 6-7 p.m. (ET).

Next.

[DeputyDave]

Originally Posted by jfoobar

I will have to consider MSNBC the authority on what their own prime time lineup is. From:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080273/...bout_msnbc_tv/



Next.

That's East Coast, what time are they one in the rest of the country? Prime time?

[Brack]

Originally Posted by jfoobar

I will have to consider MSNBC the authority on what their own prime time lineup is. From:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080273/...bout_msnbc_tv/

Next.

I always thought prime time was 8p-11p. I guess if they want to make up their own label for whatever time there is, they have every right to do so, but I still think that's pretty odd.

[Cheato]

Originally Posted by jfoobar

I will have to consider MSNBC the authority on what their own prime time lineup is. From:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080273/...bout_msnbc_tv/

Next.

Originally Posted by Brack

I always thought prime time was 8p-11p. I guess if they want to make up their own label for whatever time there is, they have every right to do so, but I still think that's pretty odd.

I disagree. They shouldn't to take a commonly accepted term and redefine it to suit their advertising purposes. Can I call my new candy bar "calorie free" because I am not charging anything extra for the calories? No, I can't. Well, I am not sure if I could or couldn't legally, but if I did, I would be a deceptive asshole regardless. They should put a little TM symbol next to the word, and maybe respell it or throw in some odd capitalization or something: "MSNBC prYmEtYme(tm) lineup." Brack is right about prime time. (And now all the naysayers scuttle off to Google and Wikipedia to find sites to cite to back up their defense of MSNBC's right to redefine language.)

[classicman2]

Leading off the MSNBC primetime lineup is "The Ed Show," hosted by progressive radio talker Ed Schultz, 6-7 p.m. (ET).

progressive -

Why not use the correct term - liberal?

[jfoobar]

Originally Posted by Cheato

(And now all the naysayers scuttle off to Google and Wikipedia to find sites to cite to back up their defense of MSNBC's right to redefine language.)

Perhaps the normal naysayers just don't feel compelled to derail this thread and get into a debate about the merits of the various definitions of "prime time."

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by classicman2

progressive -

Why not use the correct term - liberal?

Correct term -

Why not use the proper words - proper words?

[jfoobar]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Correct term -

Why not use the proper words - proper words?

??

Why not use the correct smilie, ?