21 Journalists Make it Official: Leave News Media to Work Directly for Obama

[Harsh_77 718]

Is 21 high? In comparison to what? Obviously YOU have data you are not sharing.

My claim was to the effect that every administration hires professionals from the industries represented in the WH.

You are the one interjecting qualifiers such as 'high', 'large', etc. You mention figures, not I.

As I said, you have a friend in Google. Perhaps it would behoove you to support your claim and provide the parameters you established in order to qualify your opinions. It is quite simple, really.

ok lets say 21 is journalist is not high as you saying.... when do you think it is high number, you cannot produce any evidence to support your argument.

Press is supposed to work as check in the system asking questions and doing the investigative work on behalf of the citizens, unfortunately it seems for this admin they had few journalist who just did the pro-admin work and they were rewarded with position in WH.

[decocker 7,198]

Press is supposed to work as check in the system asking questions and doing the investigative work on behalf of the citizens

operative "supposed to work". the media has not functioned in this manner in a long time. way before obama.

[JohnR! 5,495]

ok lets say 21 is journalist is not high as you saying.... when do you think it is high number, you cannot produce any evidence to support your argument.

Press is supposed to work as check in the system asking questions and doing the investigative work on behalf of the citizens, unfortunately it seems for this admin they had few journalist who just did the pro-admin work and they were rewarded with position in WH.

Again, you are the one saying that 21 is a high number. I never qualified it one way or another. You should present the parameters you used to make that assessment, since you are so keen on evidence. Consider presenting some yourself.

Yes, this administration hired journalists that used to cover the WH, as did other administrations previously.

Last time I checked there were a lot of journalists sitting in the press room ready to perform the 'check in system' of which you speak.

I caption the obvious when I say that your feigned outrage has not gone unnoticed.

[Harsh_77 718]

operative "supposed to work". the media has not functioned in this manner in a long time. way before obama.

Does that give blank check to current admin?

Again, you are the one saying that 21 is a high number. I never qualified it one way or another. You should present the parameters you used to make that assessment, since you are so keen on evidence. Consider presenting some yourself.

Yes, this administration hired journalists that used to cover the WH, as did other administrations previously.

Last time I checked there were a lot of journalists sitting in the press room ready to perform the 'check in system' of which you speak.

I caption the obvious when I say that your feigned outrage has not gone unnoticed.

Get the numbes other admin did hire close to 21 prod-admin journalist and we will talk.

[decocker 7,198]

Does that give blank check to current admin?

i don't understand why the right feels comfortable with the propaganda sources they put their trust in. it's the same beast.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Press is supposed to work as check in the system asking questions and doing the investigative work on behalf of the citizens,

Huh, what?

The press is free in this country, meaning they can do whatever they want. They can talk about Kim Kardashian or Obama or Jesus or news.

There is no "supposed" to do anything. It is not a part of government or anything.

Now, that being said, many news sources find that the best and most profitable thing to do is quality journalism, with investigative reporting, secret sources, scoops, etc.

Other sources find that their best "angle" is to make gullible people riled up with anger at fake news and innuendo, skewed statistics and false logic.

Other sources work to further the interests of its owner. So Rupert Murdoch is a rich guy with lots of ties to Wall Street. So he buys the Wall Street Journal and he can "control" the news about Wall Street that people hear from that source and make more money for himself. He also owns Fox, and loads of other outlets, including UK tabloids, btw.

Other sources find their best angle is to expose silliness on other news sources, to "police" the news.

It is up to people to read these sources and use their brains to figure out if something is true or not, to figure out if it is meaningful, to ask important questions. To asses the quality and source of the information and make their own conclusions. The media generally can help with this, because people who ask important or interesting questions often write an article about it that gets printed. But not always.

If you think the news is a check in the system, then wow. That explains your views, doesn't it. You think these nut blogs are making exposes and fighting for the man! (That's what they want you to believe, btw).

This is a logical fallacy where someone looks for what they want to believe, thereby limiting their experience to things that reinforce what they think they know already, instead of looking at the world objectively and dealing with what comes.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Get the numbes other admin did hire close to 21 prod-admin journalist and we will talk.

Here:

www.giyf.com

Edited October 29, 2013 by Gegel

[Harsh_77 718]

Huh, what?

The press is free in this country, meaning they can do whatever they want. They can talk about Kim Kardashian or Obama or Jesus or news.

There is no "supposed" to do anything. It is not a part of government or anything.

Now, that being said, many news sources find that the best and most profitable thing to do is quality journalism, with investigative reporting, secret sources, scoops, etc.

Other sources find that their best "angle" is to make gullible people riled up with anger at fake news and innuendo, skewed statistics and false logic.

Other sources work to further the interests of its owner. So Rupert Murdoch is a rich guy with lots of ties to Wall Street. So he buys the Wall Street Journal and he can "control" the news about Wall Street that people hear from that source and make more money for himself. He also owns Fox, and loads of other outlets, including UK tabloids, btw.

Other sources find their best angle is to expose silliness on other news sources, to "police" the news.

It is up to people to read these sources and use their brains to figure out if something is true or not, to figure out if it is meaningful, to ask important questions. To asses the quality and source of the information and make their own conclusions. The media generally can help with this, because people who ask important or interesting questions often write an article about it that gets printed. But not always.

If you think the news is a check in the system, then wow. That explains your views, doesn't it. You think these nut blogs are making exposes and fighting for the man! (That's what they want you to believe, btw).

This is a logical fallacy where someone looks for what they want to believe, thereby limiting their experience to things that reinforce what they think they know already, instead of looking at the world objectively and dealing with what comes.

When they only report what admin wants them to report, they only cover that admin wants them to cover and in return admin awards them for being loyal to admin is no different than communist regime.

Are you suggesting that media has no moral responsibility and no role in democracy?

Here:

www.giyf.com

still no numbers from you.

[decocker 7,198]

Are you suggesting that media has no moral responsibility and no role in democracy?

do you live on this planet; what's your go-to media source?

[Harsh_77 718]

do you live on this planet; what's your go-to media source?

I guess you guys cannot have a valid response to why ppl who were pro-admin are being rewarded with position in WH.

Pro-admin get hired in WH, friends get contract to build website....nice going.

[decocker 7,198]

I guess you guys cannot have a valid response to why ppl who were pro-admin are being rewarded with position in WH.

Pro-admin get hired in WH, friends get contract to build website....nice going.

i see you're well versed in danno logic. shame.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I guess you guys cannot have a valid response to why ppl who were pro-admin are being rewarded with position in WH.

Pro-admin get hired in WH, friends get contract to build website....nice going.

I have a question, why don't you post the numbers of journalists hired before Obama, to give this some perspective.

I've looked and all I could find is a youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKMf4x_P1ao

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

When they only report what admin wants them to report, they only cover that admin wants them to cover and in return admin awards them for being loyal to admin is no different than communist regime.

You clearly have no clue what you're talking about when talking about how propaganda machines in communist regimes function.

[Harsh_77 718]

You clearly have no clue what you're talking about when talking about how propaganda machines in communist regimes function.

I am sure you have more experience since you are supporting one...

I have a question, why don't you post the numbers of journalists hired before Obama, to give this some perspective.

I've looked and all I could find is a youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKMf4x_P1ao

I presented number from one side, if you claim same has happened in past why don't you show the numbers?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i see you're well versed in danno logic. shame.

Not surprising, really. They do frequent the same "news" sources.