Transparency of Propoganda,

Home Forums Politics Transparency of Propoganda,

  • This topic contains 0 voices and has 117 replies.
Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 118 total)
  • Author
  • #606535

    HMC Rich

    This weekend the DC Press Corp was basically told to stay away and shut up by the President and his staff. They should be getting used to this.



    the media drives so much rancor, misinformation. I don’t really blame him. What is it you want to know, Rich? Pretty soon we’ll even know his bathroom schedule..heaven forbid some White House stuff is not public knowledge. Must be a cover-up of some sort, huh…



    If you get past the sensationalist headline, this is a pretty interesting article.

    as i read it, the largest complaint that is leveled here is that instead of working through the print media to release news and shape public opinion

    the Obama White House has taken it’s show on the road… bypassing them

    It would be too easy to blame that on the way the media has covered the top stories of his first term.. but i agree with them that it is more than that… this President is pretty much bypassing the White House beat to release what has passed as newsreporting.

    if the print media wants to retain it’s viability, reporters are going to have to do more than camp out in the press room at the White House to get their stories..

    i don’t necessarily see that as a bad thing



    This complaint gets recycled with every new administration, going back at least to Reagan.

    So . . . the White House Press Corps doesn’t like it when the mean old Pwezident won’t hand them the story on a silver platter?

    Guess what, guys. Getting the news is supposed to be YOUR job. So quit bitchin’ about the Internet and go out and get some.



    Real reporters embed themselves with “unnamed” administration officials and act as their mouthpiece, right? I mean, Judith Miller’s relentless, unapologetic front page screeds for Iraq WMD in that left wing rag NYT, showed the true power of journalistic integrity.



    So what are you saying, wake?

    That I’m defending Miller?

    That I’m defending the NYT?

    Hardly. I hold all news providers to the same standard of journalistic integrity. The NYT has a good reputation overall, but nobody is above criticism in my book. The hoodwinking of Judith Miller was merely a variation on the theme of political manipulation of “the news.” The Times’ reputation took a beating over that one, and rightly so.



    Hey DBP, I wasn’t implying any of that. I was just decrying the state of what passes for reportage these days.

    I don’t LIKE that Obama’s chosen to overfly the WH press corps, but I get why they think it’s a reasonable idea to try. Although I wonder WHO is going to ask tough questions of the administration? On some level, that’s a moot point since all administrations now rely on spin and double-speak as the cornerstone of all communication, but maybe it was ever thus…

    All I know is the fourth estate is a wreck. Unless you watch PBS and/or Democracy Now. :-)



    Oh, and if you think Judith Miller was hoodwinked, you have a different impression of her than me. I think she did what 95% of all “journalists” do now. Which is to sell your soul for access and dutifully report whatever you’re fed. But she also took it a step further and Stockholm Syndromed it.

    Very much like Andrew Sorkin did with his pandering tome, “Too Big To Fail”.

    These folks want to be rich and famous. “Journalism” is a means to an end.



    If the first question upon regaining access to the POTUS is “Did you beat Tiger?”, then I am inclined to keep them at bay as long as possible.

    Gas prices?




    Who cares?!



    wakeflood: I stand corrected. You’re right about Miller.

    You know who’s the best journalist out there today? It’s not even a journalist.

    Photo: Graeme Robertson for the Guardian



    Hi Julian, what did your hosts offer you for breakfast today? A little sardines and tea? Petit Dejeuner?

    You know who is still a great journalist and works his butt off to dig out the dirt, regardless of who is implicated is Robert Scheer, once of LA Times, now of Truthdig. The guy’s relentless and doesn’t pander.

    He was ditched by the LA Times for the insufferable crime of being a journalist after they were bought by a conservative dude. Like that never happens. Looking at you Rupert…



    Which brings me to a related point. Smitty, you’re offended by stupid questions lobbed at politicians?

    Why do guys like Murdoch and other conservatives who buy media outlets (Clear Channel, etc.) always get rid of actual journalists and replace them with tv-friendly idiots or sycophants with tape recorders???



    For (what feels like) the umpteenth time, I do not watch Fox. And no, I am offended that they cry foul when access is limited only to ask a stupid question when access it is opened back up. I don’t care what their leanings are – Fox, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, WaPo, NYT, etc.

    You could probably say the same for that liberal Turner and what he has done to CNN, no?

    I use to listen to Left, Right & Center all the time and absolutely adore Scheer. I have never listened to anyone more consistent and critical of both sides. One of my favorite progressives.



    I don’t like it when journalists pretend that they DON’T have opinions. Come on, guys! Everyone’s got opinions. Just admit it upfront and try to keep those opinions under control.

    Another thing I don’t like: News outlets pretending like every opinion they air has to be balanced by an equal and opposite counter-opinion. That can be very misleading.

    Example: Let’s say there’s a huge public demonstration at Westlake against the war. Meanwhile, across the square is a tiny counter-demo in favor of the war. So in order to give listeners “both sides” of the story, the TV news anchors give 20 seconds of coverage to the anti-war side and 20 seconds to the pro-war side, implying that the two sides are of equal importance to “the story” of the demonstration.




    Smitty, I stand corrected on my misguided assumption regarding your media diet. Apologies.

    Thanks for the clarification. And let’s get folks like Scheer as much play as we rank and file can figure out how to do.

    Sunlight’s the best disinfectant…



    And yes, DBP, false equivalencies are now the defacto gold standard for journalistic balance.

    Which is why tv newsertainment no longer gets my eyetime.



    Don’t get me wrong, I am a Conservative. I really do appreciate Scheer though.

    I miss Tony Blankley…..those two had some epic discussions on LR&C, one of the last civil debate programs I can find.

    They haven’t found a decent sub for Tony yet, and it just hasn’t been the same….



    Smitty, you needn’t qualify your political leanings. That much I caught. ;-)

    You know what old civil debate program I miss??

    Remember the roundtables on PBS hosted by Fred Friendly? Those should be required watching by every schoolkid. I mean that quite seriously. Almost every major topic of debate about our society and government was hashed out on that program – and virtually all of it relevant today. Everything from national security to health care, to religion, to money in elections.

    And it wasn’t talking heads doing the answering, it was professionals and thoughtful, knowledgeable people involved in the issues at hand.

    Remember those shows? I’ll look for them online again and see if they can be bought. I’d buy a copy for every high school I can afford to…

    …after I rewatch them!



    When ABC covered the Democratic convention, they featured George Will front and center. They asked him what he thought Obama would say when he came on stage. George explain the origins of the term “mulligan” (a golf term for when the first tee is botched: you can declare a mulligan and start over). George thought Obama would declare his first four years a mulligan and ask to start over.

    How right was he? Well, Obama came out proclaimed the victories that were made during the first four years. At that point, ABC should’ve given Will his walking papers. He has deviated so far from reality that he can’t even see straight.

    We don’t need “political pundits”, we need intelligent news reporters who can do the job. Access to the White House is not as critical as reporting the bills that get proposed.




    Here’s some things that don’t get talked about on newsertainment.

    Since Obama took office, there’s been over 230 filibusters, 1-in-8 Federal Judgeships remain vacant and 190+ of Obama’s appointees remain unconfirmed.

    But, you know, government is broked. Don’t werk none. I seen it on teevee.



    George Will is a particularly useless appendage. This guy is just a third-rate hatchet-man posing as some kind of scholar.

    I don’t get why anybody reads the editorial pages or listens to TV pundits anyway. Seriously: Do you really need some rich Harvard wonk telling you what your opinion should be? I sure as hell don’t.


    Hey, since we’re reminiscing, does anyone remember when the Nightly News Hour actually had news on it? I mean, you know, before Reagan started gutting public TV and everything. They had some good investigative reporting on there backinnaday, didn’t they? They had people who would go out, scoop up some facts, and challenge the official story. It was great!

    If there was a US-sponsored dirty war going on somewhere, the News Hour would send reporters out to see what things looked like on the ground. (Pretty eff’d up, usually.)

    And now, today, what do they got for war coverage? Some talking heads from the freakin’ State Department and the Rand Corporation!!!

    You want news? Go to Wikileaks.

    Or better yet, go out and dig some up yourself. That’s what more people should be doing . . . right here on the Blog.


    HMC Rich

    The good news is that there are more outlets than ever to get news. Plus there are gems at each of the Networks that get stonewalled by the President and his staff.

    Sharyl Attkisson from CBS is my favorite mainstream journalist. I like Jake Tapper too from ABC. Obviously I gravitate towards the few right leaning TV stations and the numerous talk radio hosts, but you probably have figured that out too. I have not watched FOX News for two years. I would if I had it, but I don’t.

    That said, It shouldn’t matter if the reporters or organizations are right or left. They should be holding Obama, Boehner, Reid, etc accountable. They should get their information as best as they can and not be fed from the Ministry of Propaganda from any administration. And for a President to attack media organizations, that is just below the office.




    you need to read the article dude..

    there was no attack

    just sour grapes


    name the President that the media has not complained about…



    I read this article about Politico this weekend and found it quite interesting.



    Smitty, Rich, you gonna make me gobble up this low-hanging fruit all by myself?

    Do you really need some rich Harvard wonk telling you what your opinion should be?

    The country answered yes to that question two elections in a row.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 118 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann