TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › White House vs. Fox News
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

White House vs. Fox News

post #1 of 93
10/19/09 at 2:30pm
Thread Starter 
In the past couple of weeks on the weekend news shows the White House Officials have really stepped up their attacks on Fox News.

The White House has not made any official available to Fox for interviews since August when Chris Wallace, the Fox News Sunday host, fact-checked *gasp* a White House official who had been a guest on their show. Even before that, Obama refused to make an official available during the stimulus debates to Neil Cavuto, who has hosted the afternoon financial show on Fox News, and is a major host on Fox Business because "it's not a financial show". Yes, Neil had been critical of some decisions made by Obama Administration, but he had also been quite critical of decisions made by the Bush Administration.

Now they are saying that Fox is a "wing of the Republican Party", and "not a real news network" as well as encouraging other networks not to treat Fox as a real news network, since President Obama and the White House won't treat them as such.

Obama Team Continues Effort to Isolate Fox News
White House Urges Other Networks to Disregard Fox News

Funny, I thought the media was supposed to fact check government officials and hold their feet to the fire to get to the heart of the matter and not just be a puppet and mouthpiece of the government. Seriously, can you imagine the backlash if Bush had said that MSNBC wasn't a "real news network" because of the criticism of him on their opinion shows?

I just don't quite understand their motives here, beyond the selfish aspect of silencing the dissention. Are they going to continue this in 2012 when Obama's up for re-election? Or will they cave when they see that Fox has a large share of the viewing audience and realize that they won't be able to "control the media," in the words of WH Communications Director Anita Dunn, if they don't consider Fox a legitimate news source for the droning masses?

Even though I disagree with the commentators on MSNBC, I would have been quite upset if Bush had attempted to silence them as a news organization during his presidency. The First Amendment is there for a reason, and this is precisely the reason! We have recognized that state-controlled media is a bad thing for many years. Well, since the Founding Fathers penned and signed the Constitution. It seems that the Obama White House is straight up trying to eliminate the largest source of disagreement in the media, and that bothers me a lot. I believe most of them had to be sworn into office, which means that they swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Thoughts?
Reply
post #2 of 93
10/19/09 at 2:48pm
Has there been an administration and Congress that handles criticism as poorly as they do? Grow up. If you don't have thick skin to deflect the barbs you shouldn't be in such a dirty game as politics to begin with.

Why do they feel a need to "control the media"? If anyone needs to be "controlled" in this country it's the politicians.
Reply
post #3 of 93
10/19/09 at 3:15pm
I think there are some legitimate and hard hitting journalists who work for FOX and who have a conservative bent, which is fine. They uncovered some things about ACORN for example that needed to see the light of day.

However, FOX also is a haven for people like Glenn Beck, and things like this IMO go well beyond what any network should be doing.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535942,00.html
Reply
post #4 of 93
10/19/09 at 3:37pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5d...layer_embedded

Be afraid, be VERY afraid. I truly believe if allowed to keep on, Barack Hussein Obama is going to bring this country down.

The United Nations Climate Change Treaty
If this treaty is signed by Barack (and it will be) in Copenhagen in December, he will sign our freedom away. It will supersede our Constitution. We will no longer be governed under our Constitution. We will be required to pay off our "climate debt" to third world countries. We will be subject to the whim of the United Nation's.


I have never seen a President who acts like this man. Who ever thought the White House in the United States of America would have a freaking website devoted to dissing a News Channel that criticized them?
I have said it before and I will say it again, Barack Obama is nothing but another Chicago thug. Except this Chicago thug made it to the White House.

13.3% unemployment in Nevada, 13.9% unemployment in Las Vegas. Predicted to hit 15% unemployment in a few months. But truth be told, the economy is the least of our worries right now as Barack gets ready to give our countries sovereignty away. All in the same of "social change" you know.

God help us all
Reply
post #5 of 93
10/19/09 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
I think there are some legitimate and hard hitting journalists who work for FOX and who have a conservative bent, which is fine. They uncovered some things about ACORN for example that needed to see the light of day.

However, FOX also is a haven for people like Glenn Beck, and things like this IMO go well beyond what any network should be doing.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535942,00.html
And what, pray tell, is wrong with being a "Constitutional Watchdog?" God knows our politicians are not guarding the constitution. And many on the Left say, "The Constitution in Outdated", blah blah blah
Reply
post #6 of 93
10/19/09 at 4:17pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
I think there are some legitimate and hard hitting journalists who work for FOX and who have a conservative bent, which is fine. They uncovered some things about ACORN for example that needed to see the light of day.

However, FOX also is a haven for people like Glenn Beck, and things like this IMO go well beyond what any network should be doing.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535942,00.html
Thank you for separating the Glen Becks from the hard news. That's really the point, IMO. Yes, Fox has conservative commentators doing opinion shows; but those aren't news. Just like the liberal/progressive commentator-based opinion shows on MSNBC don't negate the news on that channel.

I'll certainly grant you that Glen Beck is out there. He's much further out there than Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. I don't watch Beck, and IF I read his column (that's a big IF) I take it with a giant helping of salt. Sometimes he has a well founded point, sometimes he's just out there. He's controversial, and that is a ratings draw whether we like it or not.

But I have to say that he hasn't said anything that isn't on par with what Keith Olbermann, and Chris Matthews have said on MSNBC, just the other side of the aisle. They are also controversial, particularly Olbermann, which is a ratings draw. Some of the things he said about Bush were horrid, just like some of the things Beck says about Obama are horrid. 6 one way, 1/2 dozen the other, IMO. It's all about the ratings.
Reply
post #7 of 93
10/19/09 at 4:40pm
I would love to be able to watch the shows. I only get the scoop on the radio the next day about things. The sad fact is the White House doesn't want the truth to come out to the American public. Even if 1/2 of the things they say are true - our country is in deep deep trouble under Obama's plans.

We are losing our freedoms one by one and no one wanted to see or hear that back in the campaigns. We all will suffer for it.

Obama has not done any of the so called "promises" he talked about - instead he has hidden much more then the people think and is taking the country in the wrong direction.

When things came out about his top people in positions that were revealed - he has done nothing to remove them from office. His agenda is NOT what people thought it would be and it will get a heck of a lot worse in the next year.
Reply
post #8 of 93
10/19/09 at 4:47pm
I can't help but to think that the whole situation is really quite funny.
Reply
post #9 of 93
10/19/09 at 5:01pm
Personally I think a White House that tries to ruin and discredit the ONE news network that doesn't let them control the content (as Anita Dunn has stated they have done) is really kinda scary.

The other stations need to stop and take a long look at this. This is what will happen to you if you don't toe the line.
Reply
post #10 of 93
10/19/09 at 5:19pm
Just for the record I find Olbermann repugnant and offensive. Rachel Maddow too. I'm not familiar with Mathews. Yes I am left of center but I think there are limits and they cross a line. If they are getting high ratings it certainly isn't from me!
Reply
post #11 of 93
10/19/09 at 5:23pm
Has anyone seen Fox's "Redeye" with Greg Gutfeld?

Fox has an interesting mix of news and commentary. I don't like Beck, but I didn't like him on CNN, either.

But research has shown Fox has a pretty large liberal fan base.
Reply
post #12 of 93
10/19/09 at 5:25pm
I predict that all this will just increase Fox's ratings. Because people here always want to do the opposite of what they are told, and they want to see what Fox is saying that the White House doesn't want you to hear.
Reply
post #13 of 93
10/19/09 at 5:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
Just for the record I find Olbermann repugnant and offensive. Rachel Maddow too. I'm not familiar with Mathews. Yes I am left of center but I think there are limits and they cross a line. If they are getting high ratings it certainly isn't from me!
The networks don't care who the ratings come from, as long as they get them. Even if the people watching are doing so just hoping they can catch errors in the report, lack of facts, or outright lies; they don't care. All they care about is that they are watching when the advertisers are advertising.

We are not customers to the networks, we are assets. Their customers are the advertisers. Even if honey does work better, they'll still put out the vinegar if it will catch a fly or two.
Reply
post #14 of 93
10/19/09 at 9:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
The networks don't care who the ratings come from, as long as they get them. Even if the people watching are doing so just hoping they can catch errors in the report, lack of facts, or outright lies; they don't care. All they care about is that they are watching when the advertisers are advertising.

We are not customers to the networks, we are assets. Their customers are the advertisers. Even if honey does work better, they'll still put out the vinegar if it will catch a fly or two.
The networks wouldn't like me. I'm a poor asset- no converter box and no cable tv.
Reply
post #15 of 93
10/19/09 at 9:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
The networks wouldn't like me. I'm a poor asset- no converter box and no cable tv.
Me neither. I put up a deep fringe digital antenna last year on a 30' mast, and after the conversion, I've found I can pick up 58 channels of stuff not worth watching for free, so I called Dish and told them they were fired.
Reply
post #16 of 93
10/19/09 at 9:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Thank you for separating the Glen Becks from the hard news. That's really the point, IMO. Yes, Fox has conservative commentators doing opinion shows; but those aren't news. Just like the liberal/progressive commentator-based opinion shows on MSNBC don't negate the news on that channel.
Exactly! I agree with you completely. Glen Becks show is an OPINION show, just like anyone else's. He is stating his opinon, NOT the news. There is a big difference. And there are similar shows on other networks that go the other way. You can't condemn one network because they show one biased opinion show (which is their right) and embrace another network that does the same thing just because you agree with that ideology.

I haven't had cable for the past few months, so I can't say anything about any show or network. But, you will always have the far right and far left having shows on whatever network will take them. That doesn't mean it affects the news itself. I get my info from the internet and I read whatever I can when I have the time. I'm not the most informed but I know the difference between an opinion show and an actual "news" show.
Reply
post #17 of 93
10/20/09 at 4:14am
I wish they would move Beck to after Hannity (who I also have a hard time listening to) and move Greta's show to his spot.

The Republicans are never fond of NPR and PBS, who for eight years have been the "What illegal, immoral or stupid thing has the Bush administration done this week?" network, but they still appeared there. Of course, since those networks are publicly funded, they're in a little bit different position.
Reply
post #18 of 93
10/20/09 at 4:27am
My guess is that Greta's day at Fox are numbered. They just need an excuse to cut her loose.
Reply
post #19 of 93
10/20/09 at 6:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
I can't help but to think that the whole situation is really quite funny.
Well said.

I always thought of Fox as being in the same category as the Enquirer so personally wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting them to report my news.
Reply
post #20 of 93
10/20/09 at 7:18am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
I can't help but to think that the whole situation is really quite funny.
Mike, can you clarify what you think is funny? Do you think Fox deserves the treatment the White House is giving them? Do you think the WH is showing their true colors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Well said.

I always thought of Fox as being in the same category as the Enquirer so personally wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting them to report my news.
Linda, just curious but have you actually watched Fox News during their news broadcast hours? I'm not talking about O'Reilly, Hannity (formerly Hannity & Colmes), Greta. I'm talking about the actual news reporting. Because comparing them to the Enquirer is pretty inflammatory, IMO.

I don't care for MSNBC's commentary (I keep coming back to them because they are the furthest left of the other networks), but their news reporting is still done professionally even if it is generally done with a more liberal bias (i.e. not many negative stories on Obama and his agenda). I would say the same for most any of the networks.
Reply
post #21 of 93
10/20/09 at 7:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Linda, just curious but have you actually watched Fox News during their news broadcast hours? I'm not talking about O'Reilly, Hannity (formerly Hannity & Colmes), Greta. I'm talking about the actual news reporting. Because comparing them to the Enquirer is pretty inflammatory, IMO.
Just my opinion Heidi.
Reply
post #22 of 93
10/20/09 at 7:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Mike, can you clarify what you think is funny? Do you think Fox deserves the treatment the White House is giving them? Do you think the WH is showing their true colors?
I think part of what is coming from the White House is true (the networks ARE geared to make money, that's the real reason they exist), and part not. I just think that it's funny that either camp is getting excited about what the other thinks. Politics seems to be going from professional to little league (naa, naa, pitchers got a big butt).
Reply
post #23 of 93
10/20/09 at 9:20am
Im not a very political person and Im also one who was guilty of not exercising my voting privilages this past election. But I didnt vote because I didnt have the internet and worked a lot and didnt have enough time to research either party or candidate! I felt IMO that it was better for me to not vote rather than vote and afterwards felt I made a big mistake because every vote does count.
I know I dont know much about politics but I do know what Im going through in my community and IMO I feel that this administration has done nothing to help us economically and stimulas...WHAT??? Where is that stimulas for the average joe??? I may be way off base here and Im sorry if I am but I feel that Obama and his administration should be open to the same criticism and scrutiny as the Bush admin and the other before him. Look at Clinton and his scandal...As humans we have all made mistakes but black balling a group for saying things that they dont like is just like holding your hands over your ears and saying I DONT HEAR YOU! Its immature and childish. But again thats just my opinion.
So short version..Obama and his admin should have to put up with the same scrutiny as past admins and should just get some cojones and deal with it in a mature manner to factually go out there and prove them wrong. If they can prove them wrong!



**I hope noone thinks Im stupid for posting this Im really not a political person but after this year and the election I feel that some opinions should be shared. If Im way off base here I hope noone gets mad or offended or thinks Im dumb. I just had an opinion and wanted to share it and try and express it in a clear way.**
Reply
post #24 of 93
10/20/09 at 10:26am
3CatsN1Dog, you are just as entitled to your opinion as anyone else here, no worries.



Many people that disparage Fox are not able to give specifics as to why, I have found Heidi.
Reply
post #25 of 93
10/20/09 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
3CatsN1Dog, you are just as entitled to your opinion as anyone else here, no worries.



Many people that disparage Fox are not able to give specifics as to why, I have found Heidi.
Not sure if you meant me, but I just find I personally cannot take them as seriously as more reputable news channels - but like I said to Heidi, that's just me and my feelings (prejudices ). The same with Canadian news - I much prefer to listen to CBC than CITY TV for example - just personal preferences and more believable to me. The news, and just the news without the slants and biases.
Reply
post #26 of 93
10/20/09 at 10:58am
As one of the previous posters stated, this is nothing but comical and ridiculous...and more than a little sad.

I don't care what administration is in the White House, picking fights with a media outlet - whether as a propaganda-laden means to discredit, or just a PR catfight - is just sad. You're the acting Presidential Administration for god's sake, be above all of that nonsense, or at least act like it.

The old adage about "bringing yourself down to their level" seems to apply here (not that I'm saying that Fox News is "down there", but if the White House is asserting that it is, then engaging them with this tit-for-tat just comes off as childish).

It makes me angry to think that the offices of the Commander in Chief of the United States can be reduced to childlike name-calling spats with a media outlet, regardless of the validity of their complaints. Just do your job. If you do it with success, no one will be watching or listening to the naysayers, anyway (I know that's not necessarily true, but it has to be assumed so one can do their job without the fear of undue backlash).
Reply
post #27 of 93
10/20/09 at 6:16pm
Well so far, I've not seen Obama ACT like he's the president of the United States.
Reply
post #28 of 93
10/20/09 at 6:54pm
The old advice on not picking a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel should apply here. Fox has 24 hours per day to show the ridiculous song and dance coming out of the White House, and if they don't put in an appearance, they have only themselves to blame.
Reply
post #29 of 93
10/20/09 at 6:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
My guess is that Greta's day at Fox are numbered. They just need an excuse to cut her loose.
Really? What makes you think that? Her news coverage is very different from the other opinion guys.
Reply
post #30 of 93
10/20/09 at 11:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keycube View Post
As one of the previous posters stated, this is nothing but comical and ridiculous...and more than a little sad.

I don't care what administration is in the White House, picking fights with a media outlet - whether as a propaganda-laden means to discredit, or just a PR catfight - is just sad. You're the acting Presidential Administration for god's sake, be above all of that nonsense, or at least act like it.

The old adage about "bringing yourself down to their level" seems to apply here (not that I'm saying that Fox News is "down there", but if the White House is asserting that it is, then engaging them with this tit-for-tat just comes off as childish).

It makes me angry to think that the offices of the Commander in Chief of the United States can be reduced to childlike name-calling spats with a media outlet, regardless of the validity of their complaints. Just do your job. If you do it with success, no one will be watching or listening to the naysayers, anyway (I know that's not necessarily true, but it has to be assumed so one can do their job without the fear of undue backlash).
Couldn't have said it better myself. Obama doesn't like Fox, because he can not control them, they tell the truth and they don't have a love affair with him, like all the other networks do
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › White House vs. Fox News