Originally Posted By Mr X For those of you who hate him (or think he's a "sick puppy" lol), take note...he ain't no nobody no more! <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/1009/Who_joined_Maddow_Olbermann_at_the_White_House.html" target="_blank">http://www.politico.com/blogs/...use.html</a> ***Both Fox's Gretchen Carlson and Bret Baier mentioned on-air that Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow paid a visit to the White House this week for an off-the-record chat with the president.*** ***While Olbermann is a new addition, several of the people on this list -- Dionne, Robinson, Seib, Maddow, Dowd, Rich -- met with Obama shortly before inauguration.*** Uh oh. I bet Daddy Bush ain't none too happy 'bout this.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 So the President admonishes one opinion based news organization but welcomes with open arms another? Both Fox and MSNBC are crooked, it just so happens that one is crooked towards Republicans and the other towards Democrats....
Originally Posted By Mr X Pretty much. But on the other hand, President Obama met with conservative journalists at George Will's house. When did Bush ever meet with any from the liberal side?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Both Fox and MSNBC are crooked, it just so happens that one is crooked towards Republicans and the other towards Democrats.... >> While I don't enjoy the partisan bent on either of these news stations, I can't say that I have seen any incidence on MSNBC where the news organization just plain made things up or repeated faulty information to win specific political points. Unfortunately, I am subjected to Fox News nearly constantly in my workplace, so I see the extreme cases of lying and perversion of facts there on a regular basis. On the occasions where I have tuned in to MSNBC, I notice the partisan bent, but not so much the lying and damaging propaganda. I think there is a difference between how the two networks uphold standards. Of course, Rupert Murdoch ran some of the worst international tabloids in the world before buying up Fox, so its not really surprising that they would head in that direction under his leadership.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I wonder how fast Olbermann got on his knees.*** lmao. I thought the same thing. Maddow seems a lot better at separating power from policy (probably why she got an interview with the Prez during the campaign, and even Jon Stewart did as well, but Olbermann probably has no prayer of such a thing).
Originally Posted By Mr X ***While I don't enjoy the partisan bent on either of these news stations, I can't say that I have seen any incidence on MSNBC where the news organization just plain made things up or repeated faulty information to win specific political points.*** You're forgetting the most basic talking point of all... "well, yeah maybe it's not exactly cool but THE OTHER SIDE DOES IT TOO!" (a valid reason for a multi-party system if I ever heard one, honestly...it would be far more difficult to throw that herring out if there were more than two "official" voices doing the talking) In that sense, I sometimes wish MSNBC had never existed. But on the other hand I would assume the above talking point would've just been pointed at whatever group was perceived to be "the most liberal" no matter what so I guess I'm glad they're going for broke.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox DAR opined: <<So the President admonishes one opinion based news organization but welcomes with open arms another? Both Fox and MSNBC are crooked, it just so happens that one is crooked towards Republicans and the other towards Democrats.... >> Mr X followed with: <<But on the other hand, President Obama met with conservative journalists at George Will's house. When did Bush ever meet with any from the liberal side?>> Precisely the main point being overlooked. Obama met with conservative media types before the inauguration at Will's house in Georgetown. He made the effort to reach across media party lines. BUSH NEVER DID THAT ONCE DURING HIS EIGHT YEARS IN OFFICE. Bush shut out "liberal" media all throughout his Presidency. Conservative "journalists" were routinely invited to the WH for one-on-one sessions with Bush, not just press conferences. But Bush never invited progressive journalists, ever. So who cares if Obama invited Keith and Rachel and others to the WH for dinner and dessert? He isn't playing favorites like Bush clearly did. And Obama has every right to call Fox News on their trash talking and misrepresenting facts to spin their pro-conservative agenda in a thinly veiled guise of "news."
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Who cares, really. I'm just glad Obama called Fox News on their crap.
Originally Posted By DAR But you attributed a quote to me that I never said. That was William's quote. So you were wrong.
Originally Posted By ecdc I do notice a recurring theme whenever Fox News comes up. Immediately people go, "Oh yeah, what about Olbermann and MSNBC?" Well, we have multiple examples, posted here, of Fox News' distortions, lies, etc. We have them in their news reports and we have them in their commentary shows. We have yet to see an example of that with MSNBC. I haven't had cable for about a year, but when I watched MSNBC their regular reporting through the day was much, much different than their commentary shows at night. Andrea Mitchell did the news, along with others, and at most you could argue it leaned left. It was absolutely not this hyperbolic screed against conservatives or Republicans. Fox News, on day one of Obama's Presidency, was doing teasers and reports on "Is Obama Dangerous for America?" You can't make this stuff up. Until we see evidence of MSNBC's wrongdoings and misinformation, distortions, etc., it's just more lazy thinking when people trot it out as the Fox News of the left.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Until we see evidence of MSNBC's wrongdoings and misinformation, distortions, etc., it's just more lazy thinking when people trot it out as the Fox News of the left.>> Thank you. When MSNBC makes a factual error, they report it and apologize for it as soon as they become aware of it. Fox News never apologizes for their misrepresented info and factual distortions. Why would they not do so, unless those distortions were deliberate.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Glenn Beck, Keith Olbermann, Rachael Maddow, Bill O'Reilly -- none of them are reporters. They are commentators, so it is no surprise that they would have a more willing access with a like-minded administration. The bias that maters is the bias in the actual coverage of a news story. As the line continues to blur between oped material and reporting, especially in broadcast news, it's getting more difficult to separate the commentary from the news coverage. I see people claiming bias on news stories all the time because the event itself casts their candidate in an unflattering light. If you cover a governor "hiking up the ol' Appelachian Trail" it is news, it is worth reporting, and doing so doesn't automatically mean that the reporter is showing a "liberal" bias.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Bush shut out "liberal" media all throughout his Presidency. Conservative "journalists" were routinely invited to the WH for one-on-one sessions with Bush, not just press conferences. But Bush never invited progressive journalists, ever. >> I would have to offer up some credit to the Bush W.H. on the access they gave to Bob Woodward from the Washington Post, which resulted in several books documenting the administration. I think that Bob Woodward is a true journalist without any particular bent, but his books did reveal several WH episodes that were not flattering to the administration -- and they continued to give Woodward a lot of access even after the first book was published.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan The Bush administration took all this stuff even one step further -- they had an actual plant (not a ficus) amongst the press corp to ask softball questions. Remember "Jeff Gannon" of "Talon News"? It takes a lot of chutzpah for the right to talk about journalistic principles.
