Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder They're refusing to air Obama's upcoming press conference, instead choosing to run their own press conference. This is petulant, petty partisan crap. The other three are airing it, because that's what the major networks do when a president asks. "Fair and balanced" was always a gimmick anyway, and now it's an outright lie. <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/28/fox-wont-air-obamas-prime-time-press-conference-2/" target="_blank">http://politicalticker.blogs.c...rence-2/</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Well, how about that for a typo? That should read "choosing to run their own programming". It's early, what the heck.
Originally Posted By DAR It's Fox Broadcasting that won't be showing the press conference. It will still be seen on Fox News and Fox Business.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Big deal. They've releated him to the minors. Same thing. Believe it or not, some people still don't get cable.
Originally Posted By Mr X Actually, this isn't a big deal (though FOX was a joke a LONG time ago), since they also didn't carry a Bush presser four years ago... <a href="http://www.demconwatchblog.com/diary/1411/fox-passing-on-obama-press-conference" target="_blank">http://www.demconwatchblog.com...nference</a> "FOX and CBS passed on showing a Bush news conference in 2005" (that is assuming the above link is correct, of course. I don't check em, I just copy-paste em as Darkbeer might say)
Originally Posted By Mr X This DOES bring up a salient point though (since it is true that some don't get cable, and are still entitled to hear what the leader of the nation has to say regardless)... Isn't there some way to balance "fair coverage" with "bottom line" in this sort of situation? Is it REALLY necessary for all networks to cover the thing simultaneously? (makes for an annoying night of channel flipping if you're looking for something else, am I right?) Couldn't they just cover the conferences on a rotational basis, with the other networks offering a scroll underneath with something as simple as "Live press conference by the President happening now, tune to NBC if you care!"?
Originally Posted By DAR From a Yahoo article: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090428/ap_en_tv/us_tv_obama" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...tv_obama</a> <<Executives at Fox, owned by News Corp., would not comment on the decision Monday. It's not without precedent for the network; Fox didn't carry a prime-time speech by President George W. Bush in November 2001 despite a request from the White House.>> Also the article indicates that executives at the other networks might not carry the next news conference. It's the start of Sweeps period and that means big money for the networks. They're going to want to show as much of their original programming.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Couldn't they just cover the conferences on a rotational basis, with the other networks offering a scroll underneath with something as simple as "Live press conference by the President happening now, tune to NBC if you care!"?>> That would be ideal. ABC tonight is carrying According to Jim(yes it's still on) that would be a perfect station to carry it.
Originally Posted By DAR And unless your name is Ted Kaczynski then you'll have a way of at least hearing the press conference.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Big deal. They've releated him to the minors. Same thing. Believe it or not, some people still don't get cable.<< However, there's practically nobody who only gets the Fox station.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf I imagine, with the volume of press conferences conducted by this administration, Fox felt they could afford to skip one. I mean, I voted for the guy and all, but I'm getting really sick of seeing his mug everywhere all the time.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< And unless your name is Ted Kaczynski then you'll have a way of at least hearing the press conference. >>> Actually, I think that that Kaczynski will be able to see and hear the press conference just fine, as his cell in Florence comes equipped with a TV.
Originally Posted By mele I gotta say, I am usually glad to find stations that aren't playing a presidential speech when 20 other channels are playing it. I guess if people want to get a little charge over the fact that they think FOX is sticking it to Obama, I say let them have this puny little thing to gloat about. Says a lot about them.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Here's where I'm coming from with this. Fox has already gone on record as being proud to disagree with him. With so much going on right now, from Iraq to Afghanistan to the economy and now Swine Flu, one would think they'd put him on the main network. Given their recent track record, tome it seems they're making sort some of petty statement.
Originally Posted By gadzuux So what is fox airing instead of the presidential press conference? "Lie To Me". How perfect is that. And for the record - I can see their point. Unlike abc, nbc and cbs, fox doesn't have a network news division to cover this. Instead they have an "advocacy division". All the 'before and after' puntitry is being done on the fox news channel. And some people have no interest in what the president has to say. Fox knows their demographic.
Originally Posted By mele They may be making a petty statement but I think the more people talk about it, the more they win and the more of a statement it becomes. I think we sound petty, too, if we make too much of it. Gives them more satisfaction.
Originally Posted By dlkozy Doesn't sound like "petulant, petty partisan crap" but rather a smart business move on their part. Afterall, anyone that would have watched Obama can see it played over and over and over again and then hear various views on it over and over and over again, if they want. And just to be clear-it is not just Obama's speeches that are replayed to the point of adnauseam-Bush's were too, (and Clinton's and so on and so forth).
Originally Posted By DAR Bottom line is this: Lie to Me doesn't cut into American Idol. The President possibly could. American Idol is Fox's cash cow. The President isn't.
Originally Posted By ecdc While I think it's probably a fairly harmless decision, Fox brings the criticism on itself with all the other nonsense it pulls. The list of Fox News stupidity is so long and distinguished that it's only natural to question their motives in this case. Maybe it is just a "business decision," but you can't fault people for raising their eyebrows at this bunch. And there is a legitimate argument that with everything we're going through, Fox has a public responsibility to carry the conference. After all, it's Fox that tells us we're being ruled by a tyrannical, socialist, statist liberal and that America is falling apart. Glen Beck simulated pouring gasoline on the average American and lighting a match, claiming it was what Obama was doing to Americans. That really doesn't qualify as important enough to carry the devil's press conference so we can see what evil plan's he's up to now?
