WH tries to exclude FOX News from interview

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

Who approved? FOX Noise did. Now that they are the network at odds with the adminsitration they like to pretent that this sort of thing is apalling and unprecedented. It isn't. And they know it. Fair and balanced my patoot.

[HAL 9000 96]

Fixed News at what they do best: Whining.

Confusing FOX with your President and friends are you? We have what you wanted, a superficial, thin skinned, egotist of a man that can't take criticism of any kind.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, hmm-hmm-hmm........

Whining detected.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Like most broadcast organizations, cable news is a business. First and foremost, their objective is to make money. Love 'em or hate 'em, Fox has hit upon a formula that works for them because their ratings are consistently nearly 3 times higher than their nearest competitor, CNN. In fact, on average, Fox viewers represent nearly half of all people watching any of the 5 major cable news networks. To cut off that many viewers because you don't like the spin their commentators are going to put on the coverage is just stupid.

You're right about the first part. I disagree with your last sentence. They produce what used to be referred to as yellow journalism, and while all corporate news media dabbles in yellow journalism, Rupert Murdoch has built his empire on unabashedly promoting yellow journalism. I liken it to the popularity of the Jonas Brothers or Walmart - two icons of American popularity which obviously do not reflect quality.

Good for the White House to finally call a spade a spade. Rupert Murdoch can, in those famous words from ####### Cheney, "go ** himself."

If this is a principled stand why not cut out msnbc too. It comes down too the fact Obama doesnt like how he is portrayed by commentators at fox news. It not a stand against yellow journalism.

MSNBC has left leaning political commentators with their own shows. That doesn't make it yellow journalism. They are doing op/ed journalism. Fox News deliberately and habitually blurs the line between commentary and actual news, for one. Second, they have a track record with media watch dog groups for inaccuracies in their news reporting - often where they don't bother retracting after it is brought to their attention. Their subtitles or ticker tapes are known for being blatantly editorial and inaccurate yet are used during regular news broadcasts. And the worst offense - the network is run by a Republican stratagist who is not shy about trying to promote a particular political agenda. They have become nothing but a Right Wing propaganda machine.

[HAL 9000 96]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Care to elaborate on that in 3-4 extra threads to refresh people's selective memories?

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

If only that logic was applied to all other lines of reasoning in this society...

Like most broadcast organizations, cable news is a business. First and foremost, their objective is to make money. Love 'em or hate 'em, Fox has hit upon a formula that works for them because their ratings are consistently nearly 3 times higher than their nearest competitor, CNN. In fact, on average, Fox viewers represent nearly half of all people watching any of the 5 major cable news networks. To cut off that many viewers because you don't like the spin their commentators are going to put on the coverage is just stupid.

You're right about the first part. I disagree with your last sentence. They produce what used to be referred to as yellow journalism, and while all corporate news media dabbles in yellow journalism, Rupert Murdoch has built his empire on unabashedly promoting yellow journalism. I liken it to the popularity of the Jonas Brothers or Walmart - two icons of American popularity which obviously do not reflect quality.

Good for the White House to finally call a spade a spade. Rupert Murdoch can, in those famous words from ####### Cheney, "go ** himself."

If this is a principled stand why not cut out msnbc too. It comes down too the fact Obama doesnt like how he is portrayed by commentators at fox news. It not a stand against yellow journalism.

I sense a rush of upcoming Youtube clips talking about the difference in primarily factual reporting vs the kind championed by FNC.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

Who approved? FOX Noise did. Now that they are the network at odds with the adminsitration they like to pretent that this sort of thing is apalling and unprecedented. It isn't. And they know it. Fair and balanced my patoot.

Do you have proof of this? This was a petty move by the President and it does no good to make excuses for him.

[HAL 9000 96]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

Who approved? FOX Noise did. Now that they are the network at odds with the adminsitration they like to pretent that this sort of thing is apalling and unprecedented. It isn't. And they know it. Fair and balanced my patoot.

Do you have proof of this? This was a petty move by the President and it does no good to make excuses for him.

Indeed. Petty reactions to horrible journalistic ethics should never occur nor should they become the focus instead of the purpose of the game being played out by said practitioners of such yellow journalism. At the least the programming on FNC needs to be divided so that news can be covered factually and commentary can be delivered independent of this. FNC is the leader alright- in blending fallacy into the factual side of the news and that is dangerous in a country where a significant segment of the population is downright easily led.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Like most broadcast organizations, cable news is a business. First and foremost, their objective is to make money. Love 'em or hate 'em, Fox has hit upon a formula that works for them because their ratings are consistently nearly 3 times higher than their nearest competitor, CNN. In fact, on average, Fox viewers represent nearly half of all people watching any of the 5 major cable news networks. To cut off that many viewers because you don't like the spin their commentators are going to put on the coverage is just stupid.

You're right about the first part. I disagree with your last sentence. They produce what used to be referred to as yellow journalism, and while all corporate news media dabbles in yellow journalism, Rupert Murdoch has built his empire on unabashedly promoting yellow journalism. I liken it to the popularity of the Jonas Brothers or Walmart - two icons of American popularity which obviously do not reflect quality.

Good for the White House to finally call a spade a spade. Rupert Murdoch can, in those famous words from ####### Cheney, "go ** himself."

If this is a principled stand why not cut out msnbc too. It comes down too the fact Obama doesnt like how he is portrayed by commentators at fox news. It not a stand against yellow journalism.

MSNBC has left leaning political commentators with their own shows. That doesn't make it yellow journalism. They are doing op/ed journalism. Fox News deliberately and habitually blurs the line between commentary and actual news, for one. Second, they have a track record with media watch dog groups for inaccuracies in their news reporting - often where they don't bother retracting after it is brought to their attention. Their subtitles or ticker tapes are known for being blatantly editorial and inaccurate yet are used during regular news broadcasts. And the worst offense - the network is run by a Republican stratagist who is not shy about trying to promote a particular political agenda. They have become nothing but a Right Wing propaganda machine.

I think your downplaying msnbc and exagerratting about fox news but with that said I would agree that there is some yellow journalism going on, I often see it come Christmas when the countless stories about how the left is trying to take Christ out of Christmas, although there is no shortage of lefties that want exactly that I think they make it more of a issue than it really is, I think Bill O'Reilly does go out of his way to point out that its no a majority of the left. I think they have done this with Obama too but considering that you want to down play msnbc I dont know how to convince you that this is not a principled stand.

[zqt3344 21]

FOX NEWS = FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR RIGHT WING

CNN = LIBERAL LEFT WING NOW, NO LONGER THE MOST TRUSTED NAME IN NEWS NOR IN THE CENTER!

MSNBC = FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR LEFT WING

ABC = MIDDLE OR CENTER

NBC = SEE MSNBC ABOVE

CBS = MIDDLE TO LEFT CENTER

CNBC = THE ONLY DAMN NEWS CHANNEL THAT TELLS IT LIKE IT IS!

BLOOMBERG = THE ONLY DAMN NEWS CHANNEL THAT TELLS IT LIKE IT IS!

Like most broadcast organizations, cable news is a business. First and foremost, their objective is to make money. Love 'em or hate 'em, Fox has hit upon a formula that works for them because their ratings are consistently nearly 3 times higher than their nearest competitor, CNN. In fact, on average, Fox viewers represent nearly half of all people watching any of the 5 major cable news networks. To cut off that many viewers because you don't like the spin their commentators are going to put on the coverage is just stupid.

You're right about the first part. I disagree with your last sentence. They produce what used to be referred to as yellow journalism, and while all corporate news media dabbles in yellow journalism, Rupert Murdoch has built his empire on unabashedly promoting yellow journalism. I liken it to the popularity of the Jonas Brothers or Walmart - two icons of American popularity which obviously do not reflect quality.

Good for the White House to finally call a spade a spade. Rupert Murdoch can, in those famous words from ####### Cheney, "go ** himself."

If this is a principled stand why not cut out msnbc too. It comes down too the fact Obama doesnt like how he is portrayed by commentators at fox news. It not a stand against yellow journalism.

MSNBC has left leaning political commentators with their own shows. That doesn't make it yellow journalism. They are doing op/ed journalism. Fox News deliberately and habitually blurs the line between commentary and actual news, for one. Second, they have a track record with media watch dog groups for inaccuracies in their news reporting - often where they don't bother retracting after it is brought to their attention. Their subtitles or ticker tapes are known for being blatantly editorial and inaccurate yet are used during regular news broadcasts. And the worst offense - the network is run by a Republican stratagist who is not shy about trying to promote a particular political agenda. They have become nothing but a Right Wing propaganda machine.

I think your downplaying msnbc and exagerratting about fox news but with that said I would agree that there is some yellow journalism going on, I often see it come Christmas when the countless stories about how the left is trying to take Christ out of Christmas, although there is no shortage of lefties that want exactly that I think they make it more of a issue than it really is, I think Bill O'Reilly does go out of his way to point out that its no a majority of the left. I think they have done this with Obama too but considering that you want to down play msnbc I dont know how to convince you that this is not a principled stand.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Care to elaborate on that in 3-4 extra threads to refresh people's selective memories?

and yet you take no issue with the diversion tactics at play here, let your partisan colors shine bro

If only that logic was applied to all other lines of reasoning in this society...

Enough with the "he did it too" whining .

I sense a rush of upcoming Youtube clips talking about the difference in primarily factual reporting vs the kind championed by FNC.

Yeah because thats been my MO in the past.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It certainly won't do the WH any favors taking this approach.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Indeed. Petty reactions to horrible journalistic ethics should never occur nor should they become the focus instead of the purpose of the game being played out by said practitioners of such yellow journalism. At the least the programming on FNC needs to be divided so that news can be covered factually and commentary can be delivered independent of this. FNC is the leader alright- in blending fallacy into the factual side of the news and that is dangerous in a country where a significant segment of the population is downright easily led.

Hal how much do you actually watch fox? I sense a sort of you tube mind set of fox news going on here, and yes I have had issues with how fox news and I have addressed it before, yes theres hints of yellow journalism but over all its been blown way out of proportion.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

Who approved? FOX Noise did. Now that they are the network at odds with the adminsitration they like to pretent that this sort of thing is apalling and unprecedented. It isn't. And they know it. Fair and balanced my patoot.

Do you have proof of this? This was a petty move by the President and it does no good to make excuses for him.

Take a look here - a one minute clip containing two obvious misrepresentations.

First, Fox Noise claims that Newsweek has called the White House's attack on FOX "Un-American". The reality, of course, is quite different. Newsweek's column actually referred to Fox News as Un-American.

The O’Garbage Factor

Fox News isn't just bad. It's un-American

They then tried to get Bush's former Press Secretary to state that the Bush White House didn't freeze out MSNBC. But the Press Secretary actually responded that: "Towards the end we didn’t do a lot with MSNBC. That’s, that is the case."

And here's former White House counsel Ed Gillespie slamming NBC for airing an edited interview with Bush. You know, 'cause no other news station, let alone FOX, would ever edit any interview...

Now, do I think it's wise for any administration to attack a network that engages in political entertainment? No. No matter what side of the spectrum the respective administration or the network is on. If you don't like them, ignore them. Don't attack them and give them more attention than you would like them to have. It's a silly move. If was silly when Bush did it to MSNBC and it's equally silly now that Obama is doing it to FOX.

What Obama's squibble with FOX News isn't, however, is something new, unprecedented or never before seen. We've been here before. That's all I'm saying.

[kaydee457 13]

I do think Fox is very dishonest. Take their coverage of health reform for instance - they take extreme cases from the news in the UK, France or Germany and try to use them as counterpoints to public health insurance.

Never mind that the systems are very very different in those countries, or indeed that they're only showing a very narrow snapshot which by itself cannot be a fair judge.

I also find it amazing that Fox spends so much time slagging off other news sources. Perhaps its the nature of the news here to be partisan, but when you are so blatantly biased "fair and balanced" can only be what it is - nothing more than a trademarked slogan.

Funny, too, how our friends on the right have all forgotten about the war the Bush White House led against MSNBC and how supportive FOX was of the Bush administration's decision to do so. Dishonest hacks they are.

Who approves of what Bush did?, did I miss something? Two wrongs dont make a right and further more how much do you actually watch fox news? Dam everytime anything is pointed out about Obama we have hear this well Bush did this nonsense.

Who approved? FOX Noise did. Now that they are the network at odds with the adminsitration they like to pretent that this sort of thing is apalling and unprecedented. It isn't. And they know it. Fair and balanced my patoot.

Do you have proof of this? This was a petty move by the President and it does no good to make excuses for him.

Indeed. Petty reactions to horrible journalistic ethics should never occur nor should they become the focus instead of the purpose of the game being played out by said practitioners of such yellow journalism. At the least the programming on FNC needs to be divided so that news can be covered factually and commentary can be delivered independent of this. FNC is the leader alright- in blending fallacy into the factual side of the news and that is dangerous in a country where a significant segment of the population is downright easily led.

Fortunately for we "righties" you're clearly in the minority in your opinions. FOX is number one in viewership because those that matter, the independents, have tuned them in for puposes of absorbing information that's clearly unbiased. Can't get that from CNN and certainly not from MSNBC!

Unfortunately for Hussein this likely will make him a one termer.

Enjoy the next three years for it took only 9 mo's to this country to turn around and have its fill of these looney lefty Dems and their ilk....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Ah popularity = quality. That old ####### eh?

If that were the case then Transformers would be like, the best movie ever!

[HAL 9000 96]

Like most broadcast organizations, cable news is a business. First and foremost, their objective is to make money. Love 'em or hate 'em, Fox has hit upon a formula that works for them because their ratings are consistently nearly 3 times higher than their nearest competitor, CNN. In fact, on average, Fox viewers represent nearly half of all people watching any of the 5 major cable news networks. To cut off that many viewers because you don't like the spin their commentators are going to put on the coverage is just stupid.

You're right about the first part. I disagree with your last sentence. They produce what used to be referred to as yellow journalism, and while all corporate news media dabbles in yellow journalism, Rupert Murdoch has built his empire on unabashedly promoting yellow journalism. I liken it to the popularity of the Jonas Brothers or Walmart - two icons of American popularity which obviously do not reflect quality.

Good for the White House to finally call a spade a spade. Rupert Murdoch can, in those famous words from ####### Cheney, "go ** himself."

If this is a principled stand why not cut out msnbc too. It comes down too the fact Obama doesnt like how he is portrayed by commentators at fox news. It not a stand against yellow journalism.

MSNBC has left leaning political commentators with their own shows. That doesn't make it yellow journalism. They are doing op/ed journalism. Fox News deliberately and habitually blurs the line between commentary and actual news, for one. Second, they have a track record with media watch dog groups for inaccuracies in their news reporting - often where they don't bother retracting after it is brought to their attention. Their subtitles or ticker tapes are known for being blatantly editorial and inaccurate yet are used during regular news broadcasts. And the worst offense - the network is run by a Republican stratagist who is not shy about trying to promote a particular political agenda. They have become nothing but a Right Wing propaganda machine.

I think your downplaying msnbc and exagerratting about fox news but with that said I would agree that there is some yellow journalism going on, I often see it come Christmas when the countless stories about how the left is trying to take Christ out of Christmas, although there is no shortage of lefties that want exactly that I think they make it more of a issue than it really is, I think Bill O'Reilly does go out of his way to point out that its no a majority of the left. I think they have done this with Obama too but considering that you want to down play msnbc I dont know how to convince you that this is not a principled stand.

So its time to do comparisons then. Best way to do that is to have a side by side comparison of 'opposing' network

1. news coverage video.

2. written transcripts that correspond to the video.

# watch out for discrepancies in the 'facts' being stated on the news aspect of the video with what is visibly shown.

# score these discrepancies.

sound fair to you?

and balanced?