Unbelievable and chilling. Any guesses on what they might do next?
Unprecedented: White House tries to ban FOX from press pool
Today the White House stepped up its attack on Fox News, announcing that the network would no longer be able to conduct interviews with officials as a member of the Press Pool. The Pool is a five-member group consisting of ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and NBC organized by the White House Correspondents Association. Its membership is not subject to oversight by the government.Dan Riehl:
Before an interview with "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg, the administration announced that Fox News would be banned from the press pool. This marks the first time in history that an administration had attempted to ban an entire network from the press pool.
To their credit, the other networks objected. They told the White House that if Fox were banned, none of the other networks would participate. The White House relented, but in an apparent act of petulant retaliation, it restricted each network to a two-minute interview instead of the standard five.
This weak administration is now certifiably insane. For the first time in my life I'm actually uncomfortable knowing that this guy has control of our military and Federal police forces. If he thinks he can simply shut down a member of the press on a whim, how long before he goes full Chavez?Allahpundit:
The other networks deserve the praise they’re getting for standing up to the Baby-in-Chief, but if they had acquiesced in this freezeout, a precedent would have been set that would have been eagerly used by future Republican presidents to close them off too. And don’t think they weren’t all keenly aware of it.Click here for Charles Krauthammer's reaction.
*Friday morning updates:
The Weekly Standard's coverage includes video from the FOX News panel with Fred Barnes and Mr. Krauthammer. Note the word "escalate" in TWS's headline, as in Alinsky's "identify, isolate, freeze and escalate."
Reactions: AoSHQ, Moe Lane, many more at Memeorandum.
Follow-up: "This is what dictators do."
Linked at Michelle Malkin (buzzworthy)
Most recent posts here.
I can put a positive spin on that.
ReplyDelete'Obama tries to ban Fox from cess pool.'
Once again - the right has a very short and selective memory.
ReplyDeleteFox News is not a real news organization. The pearl clutching from the right would have some credibility if they hadn't been cheering when Pres. Bush did things that were genuinely dangerous to freedom of the press.
The White House is trying to treat Fox like the ideological leper that it is. I think they're silly to try - but I don't care. They aren't inviting Air America into the Press Pool either.
When the White House is kicking all of a media outlet's reporters off the plane (Like Bush did), or is staging bogus press conferences (Like Bush did) or stocking the networks with co-opted pundits (Like Bush did) then the right will have something to be shocked about.
Even then, it'll be a pity they missed it the first time around.
murph, seriously? You are trying to equate some poll with ACTUAL ACTION taken by the Obama WH to ignore the First Amendment? You are a retard. A poll said so, it must be true.
ReplyDeleteMurph, Did you read the post?
ReplyDelete"The Pool is a five-member group consisting of ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and NBC organized by the White House Correspondents Association. Its membership is not subject to oversight by the government."
Even though you are free to grind your ax, see this from above:
"This marks the first time in history that an administration had attempted to ban an entire network from the press pool."
Obama has also done all you accused Bush of doing, but even Bush didn't do THIS. That's why people are calling it unprecedented.
Oh, and Air America can't even stay on the air. Apparently you and your cousin are not enough to sustain the costs.
ReplyDeleteI would say child-like in their attitude towards those who oppose their agenda. Except history is full of examples of similar reactions by governments and individuals that did far more damage to humanity than any child. I posted here earlier about Codevilla's article in the American Spectator regarding a "stakeholder" government. It is valuable reading.
ReplyDeleteToday I had an interesting conversation with a very bright friend who cannot grasp the possibility our President may in fact be rogue. He attempts to explain all of his actions and the actions of his backers using the old set of rules followed in the past by all politicians. As I watch commentators struggle with the same problem, it becomes apparent to me that I was right all along when I made this statement-
The biggest problem with being inside a revolution is that of perspective. You cannot get far enough away from the events to see the whole picture. Because of that, you tend to dismiss or argue what you see based on experiences you have had in the past. You take each event individually and because most people in this country tend to see the good in others (a bad fault to possess if the others intentions are no good) you refuse to entertain the possibility that you are under assault. A good example was that of the Jews in Germany who by and large got on the trains, walked to the chambers and died, not willing to accept the horror of what man could do to other men. I do not confuse Obama or his people with Nazis. That is not who he is. He is a megalomaniac convinced he is in this place and time for a purpose. That gives him a special exception to do what he deems necessary to move his agenda forward. His backers are more pragmatic, seeking power, money and control. Throw in the ideological segment- those who hate America or think we don't deserve the life we lead, and you have a stew of control, hatred, greed and insanity that would poison anything living.
I challenged my friend to think of the events in the light of "what if they were actually trying to distablize the nation? How would they do that? What would it take?
The reason I asked him to work from this perspective was I already had back in 1997 when I wrote a manuscript for a novel titled "Revolt." It was more an exercise in the "what ifs" as I attempted to lay the groundwork necessary for a rogue President to feel he could take over the nation.
In 2008 I pulled the manuscript down from the shelf and dusted it off. People back then laughed when I showed it around. I noticed they aren't laughing now, and neither I am.
Here's the website- www.revoltthebook.com. It will be out in a month or so.
Carter Novak et al
ReplyDeleteYou need to click the "continue reading" link on Glenn's post. He catalogs the transgressions of the Bush administration against a free media. The poll is irrelevant to my argument.
If that's too much for you to do, here's a shorter list.
and
Sorry, darlin' but your assertion that Pres. Obama has done everything that Bush has done would have to be backed up by more than your say so.
The unprecedented nature of this action is something I'd like to see verified in something other than breathless Fox coverage - but again - saying Fox isn't going to be given access to a government official is far from unprecedented. Witness the way the Bush administration denied access to its officials to networks it didn't agree with.
I recall statements by Pres. Bush on how he wanted to "bypass the filter" of these other news organizations and speak directly to the people.
Of course, what he really wanted was to speak to a reporter who would toss softballs and accept his spoonfed talking points (a cornerstone of Fox covering GOP members of government).
Much is going to be made of the White House corrupting the pool - but I'd lay good odds what they said was - "we'll make our guy available to you four, but not Fox."
You can call that unprecedented if you want - but denial of access is just par for the course in Washington. Fox just whines more.
And before I'd attribute any lofty motives to the press pool - I imagine the cost sharing aspect of their arrangement looms larger in their calculations. 1/5 the costs of covering the white house is less than 1/4th.
Again, I think its silly to try and wall out Fox news - since they're already so obsessed with right wing victimhood. But they're free to do so. Press secretaries have the power to shun, and they do it all the time.
What's funny to watch is how the right sees draconian intent behind this little dust up, yet somehow missed Bush's attempts to prosecute reporters and repeal shield laws. Laughable.
For a well-documented discussion of FOX's independence see Stephen Spruiell.
ReplyDelete