"To Referee Public Debates"
According to Time, the Obama administration decided the press was “falling down on the job” after three perfectly sensible stories appeared in the media: The New York Times reported that parents objected to the idea of a presidential address to the nation’s schoolchildren, several outlets covered public outrage over health-care reform, and The Washington Post ran two op-eds by members of Congress who objected to the president’s reliance on advisors who were not subject to Senate confirmation or congressional oversight. It seems that the White House staff didn’t object to the stories themselves, but to the fact that the press — in the words of White House communications director Anita Dunn — “didn’t even question” the criticisms public officials, parents, and the public had made of the administration. “Obama aides,” Time reports, are disappointed “they can’t rely on reporters to referee public debates.”
Of course, were the press to take it upon itself to denounce parents, the public, and members of Congress for criticizing the administration — or, as it seems the White House staff would prefer, to exclude these “misleading” criticisms from news coverage — it would be “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” Yet those are precisely the words Dunn employed to denounce the Fox News Network for being too opinionated. It’s not clear, exactly, what the White House wants from the press. When Dunn appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources to explain her comment, it became even more confusing.
“It’s not ideological,” said Dunn. Obviously, there are many commentators who have conservative, liberal, centrist [views], and everybody understands that.” But the problem is that Fox “operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.” But then she suggested it was ideological, explaining that President Obama will go on Fox News “because he engages with ideological opponents.” The real problem is that the ideology doesn’t affect “just their opinion shows,” but “there is a very different story selection.” Then it turned out the real problem was not the reporting, but the opinion shows. “I’ve differentiated between Major Garrett, who we view as a very good correspondent, and his network,” Dunn explained. Howard Kurtz asked her to clarify her position: “You are making a distinction, just before I move on, between the opinion guys, O’Reilly, Hannity, Glenn Beck, and people like Major Garrett.” Dunn replied: “I’m not talking about people like Major Garrett. I’m talking about the overall programming.”
Dunn’s particular charges — that during the campaign Fox focused more than other networks on Bill Ayers and ACORN and that Fox failed to cover Senator Ensign’s affair and scandal — turn out, according to Noel Sheppard to be false. Dunn also complained that Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday — in Dunn’s words — “fact-checked an administration guest on his show.” This, of course, seems not only appropriate but common. And if Fox were indeed the only network to check the facts that public officials offer to the news media, that would seem to make Fox the most responsible news gathering organization we have.
Anyway, Dunn’s comments seem to amount to the charge that Fox News has some good news coverage and some “opinion journalism” she doesn’t like. It’s no secret that the opinion journalism on Fox News is largely conservative, but so what? “Opinion journalism” is still journalism, and the idea that the White House believes some opinions are somehow illegitimate for the news media to hold is more outrageous than anything aired on Fox News. It seems that Dunn is throwing out charges in order to discredit negative coverage of the administration, and when pressed on what, exactly, she means, she backtracks and qualifies and seems not to have anything serious to say.
The White House “can’t rely on reporters to referee public debates” — which is great. Here’s hoping the White House itself doesn’t succeed in refereeing public debates, either.
Over the past 10 years the conservative part of the country has become completely disenfranchised from contemporary culture…..science, academe, the arts, pop-music, film.
So conservatives made their own sub-culture which is wildly popular with, you guessed it, conservatives.
FOXnews and right-wing talk radio are part of that culture.
When FOXnews declines to cover the President of America’s public speeches, that kinda says it all.
You made your bed, now lie in it.
— matoko_chan · Oct 19, 06:20 PM · #
also, too.
stop whining.
more pewpew, less QQ please.
— matoko_chan · Oct 19, 06:24 PM · #
WTF does that last post even mean, Matoko? The infinite chasms of your linguistic predilections are too opaque to convey rational thought. I suppose it’s not too much to assume the thoughts are rational?
— Erik Vanderhoff · Oct 19, 06:43 PM · #
How so, “opinion”, when the criticism is that the news made absolutely no effort whatsoever to determine whether these criticisms had any basis in fact? (They did not, of course.)
If it’s the job of the news to report facts, then when someone lies and you report that they’re lying, and that the actual fact of the matter is something other then what they’re saying – how is that “opinion”?
Isn’t it, in fact, a symptom of the problem that progressives and the Obama administration are talking about – where you’ve been trained to immediately confuse media fact-checking with “opinion journalism”?
Bullshit. It’s quite clear what they want – when a prominent Republican stands up and says “the new health care bill creates ‘death panels’, so keep your government hands off my Medicare”, someone in the media reporting on that should also report that Medicare is a government program and that there are no “death panels” in the health care bill. What we get now is coverage akin to “Shape of the Earth – opinions differ.”
Christ, how old are you, Erik? A hundred? “More pewpew, less QQ” means “quit yer bitchin’ and get to work.” Or “a little less talk, a lot more action.” These phrases should not be opaque to anyone under 35, I assure you.
— Chet · Oct 19, 06:55 PM · #
‘Of course, were the press to take it upon itself to denounce parents, the public, and members of Congress for criticizing the administration — or, as it seems the White House staff would prefer, to exclude these “misleading” criticisms from news coverage — it would be “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”’
I don’t think that’s what they prefer, at all. Use your own quote: “they can’t rely on reporters to referee public debates.” What the WH wants are reporters to work both sides of an issue, not trot out the ones who are complaining the loudest. They are asking for investigation, not denunciation. You used the words denounce, not they.
— Geoff in DFW · Oct 19, 06:55 PM · #
Interesting that he would choose the start of the financial crisis as his starting point and end it 2 months later. Think he might have cherry picked his results? So, we have one of two possibilities here.
1) If we carried the survey out to a more meaningful time, and a time when election news and financial news were not the major coverage, the results would hold. That means Fox does not exaggerate ACORN. It also means conservatives are wrong about CNN and it has been vilified for no reason.
2) There is a difference, more likely would be my guess, in ACORN type coverage when there are not other major ongoing stories.
Steve
— steve · Oct 19, 07:01 PM · #
Mr. Menashi may not yet know, being new to TAS, that makoto_chan is an unmitigated ass and should be ignored at all costs
— anonymous · Oct 19, 07:24 PM · #
“Christ, how old are you, Erik? A hundred?”
First, Chet, why are you such an asshole? Second, I’m thirty, and while an avid gamer, I rather prefer plain English to juvenile “133tsp3ak.” It is not a language. We can converse in English, Spanish, French or even American Sign Language; but please, for the love of all things holy and profane, at least make your language of choice comprehensible.
— Erik Vanderhoff · Oct 19, 07:56 PM · #
Oh, did I hurt your feelings, Erik? Who are you, exactly, to address Matoko in such a tone and then turn around and complain about mine? Why so touchy?
No, it’s a slang. You know, like the word “gamer” that you used. (And, look, playing Bejeweled a couple of times doesn’t make you a “gamer.”) Also, this isn’t an example of l33t.
Wow, your post was full of fail. Did you manage to say a single thing that was true?
— Chet · Oct 19, 08:22 PM · #
Vanderhoff, if it helps, M_c isn’t actually at the level of a human being and therefore isn’t worth talking to and Chet is abysmally stupid and, judging by his actually trying to diss someone for not playing a lot of video games, an unimaginable loser. Go straight for Menashi.
— Sanjay · Oct 19, 09:32 PM · #
awww, sanjay….i just speak truth.
Aren’t you going to defend the Iraqi Rape Squad?
Guess, not, cuz they got caught.
;)
I dunno Erik….gamer culture has infiltrated our languange, our film, and now music….
here is the first crossover tune to break the alternative top 40 that is also a video game.
I for one welcome Our New Gamer Overlords.
All your base are belong to us.
<3
— matoko_chan · Oct 19, 10:05 PM · #
Sanjay, I assume, is claiming a Ph.D in Video Game Design, now.
— Chet · Oct 19, 11:21 PM · #
This thread is amazing! I am 38, I have never heard the pewpew qq thing, I don’t play video games, and if “gamer culture” has infiltrated our language that’s news to me. Triumph the insult comic dog would have a field day in here. Keep gaming, guys!
— Lasorda · Oct 20, 01:04 AM · #
Chet says above that the WH wants the MSM to report facts. People say this all the time, but rarely set a standard to distinguish facts from their own opinions. I think of a fact as roughly something verifiable by the senses.
On the story about czars, according to the Time article that only 23 of the czars were appointed without Senate confirmation, and so the critics were factually wrong, at least if they said that all 32 got their jobs without confirmation. This is not really important at all and unlikely to change anybody’s views about the desirability of czars.
Regarding the death panel matter, obviously there is not a provision in any bill referred to in that bill as a “death panel,” but I don’t think that is what Sarah Palin or anybody else meant. Rather, they were basing their claims on an interpretation of the bill’s likely consequences: insofar as a reform bill makes the public more dependent on insurance and/or government for their health care, and the government has to make decisions on the distribution of finite resources, we are setting into motion a chain of events that causes experts to make life and death decisions. This is a criticism already frequently leveled at private insurance companies, especially by people on the Left; the administration itself sometimes flirts with this line of attack, depending on whether they are pro- or anti-insurance company at the moment.
It is true that stories on criticism of the speech to school children came out before the text of the speech was released. Then Obama released the text in response, and the media reported that, too. Not a huge problem.
— Aaron · Oct 20, 01:09 AM · #
Palin:
Judge for yourself, I guess. Regardless of what Palin meant, people certainly perceived her as talking about provisions in the bill where you would appear before a panel to justify your worthiness for lifesaving care.
— Chet · Oct 20, 02:36 AM · #
Reading Palin’s comments again, I can agree about the specific comments; government effectively deciding whether society “needs” you to have health care is a likely outcome, but that need not and in practice will not involve measurement of your personal worth to society. Anglo-American bureaucracies won’t just kill you intentionally like that. Whether age becomes a factor is a different question, however, and that was the topic that drew specific complaints in the Time article.
— Aaron · Oct 20, 04:51 AM · #
/sigh
Lasorda has never heard the term epic fail either i guess.
“also, too” is a palinism….a zero-sum verbal tick often used by La Palin her bigself.
My point being, if FOXnews wants Presidential face time, then throwing a poutrage fit and refusing to carry his speeches was a fail move.
In gamespk……rage-loggers get no loot.
— matoko_chan · Oct 20, 04:59 AM · #
Sure, but that was never the provision under discussion. The provision Palin objected to, the one that she pinned “death panels” on, was the provision to analyze health care outcomes across a number of different metrics to determine their effectiveness. The fallacy, of course, turns on the little-known fact that the elderly in hospice live longer (and at a higher quality of life) than the elderly who are receiving heroic but ultimately futile interventions to “prolong” their lives. Even if Palin was right – absolutely right about government bureaucrats deciding whether or not Grandma is worth the money – we should properly call them “life panels”, since in the aggregate they’d be prolonging lives, not cutting them short by negligence – and saving money to boot.
It’s never going to be the government deciding whether “society needs you to have health care.” Please, don’t give Palin’s absurd distortions credence. At worst we’d have government doctors deciding whether you need specific procedures. The idea that they’d deny genuine lifesaving care seems like a nonstarter. What’s their incentive to? Isn’t it the conservative critique of government, in fact, that it has little incentive to reign in spending? Why is that suddenly turned on its head when conservatives want to argue against health reform? Why would health care be the one thing – not wars, not welfare, not stimulus – that the government refuses to print money for?
— Chet · Oct 20, 07:16 AM · #
And then Menashi has the damn gall to whine about it.
Oh please, drop the victimhood.
Only your personal low information WEC base believes this crapola.
What do you think the percent WEC is in the GOP right now?
If I had full Rassmussen access I could figure it out…but im not payin 20$ a month for house bias…..don’t you guys want to know if the GOP has devolved to a purely religious caucasian party?
— matoko_chan · Oct 20, 01:12 PM · #
I agree with Matoko. Dunn and Obama are total whiners, and I am tired of their QQ about Fox. If they don’t want Fox to pwn them, maybe they could get to work fixing the economy, or denuclearizing Iran instead of going on TV and crying about how mean people are to them. N00bs.
— J Mann · Oct 20, 02:58 PM · #
“Oh, did I hurt your feelings, Erik?”
Chet, you are an idiot. Seriously. Are you twelve? I’ve been playing video games since the Atari was the shiznit.
J Mann wins the thread on pure humor.
— Erik Vanderhoff · Oct 20, 03:08 PM · #
J Mann, at 22% you aren’t winning anything.
Upon being disenfranchised from teh media, conservatives simply made their own.
FOXnews should be called WECnews.
The only audience that WECnews can permeate is WECs.
and the democgraphic timer on non-hispanic caucs goes tick….tick…….tick…..
Obama is not whining…..Obama is winning.
Simply full of win.
J Mann wins the thread on pure humor.
Oh Erik….J Mann is obviously a scrub and terribad. He shows up for these raids in greens with no chants or buffs, and expects to get carried to welfare epics.
— matoko_chan · Oct 20, 03:19 PM · #
pardon, i violated theme protocol……i should have said….
J Mann, at 22% you aren’t pwning anything.
— matoko_chan · Oct 20, 03:27 PM · #
Why are you such an asshole, Erik?
— Chet · Oct 20, 04:28 PM · #
Jake Tapper: It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one.
Me: Mr. Tapper, do you consider the Christian Broadcast Network one of your “sister news organizations”? Do you treat them as a important source of unbiased realtime news stories?
I thought not.
Perhaps the FOXnews Network should just be renamed the FOX-WEC-News Network.
We would be happy with simple truth in advertising..until then….. caveat emptor.
— matoko_chan · Oct 20, 07:44 PM · #
Quit your QQ, matoko.
— J Mann · Oct 20, 08:58 PM · #
You mistake meh.
Its pewpew, baddie.
— matoko_chan · Oct 21, 12:14 AM · #
hahahaha
now this is sweet.
FOXnews and Obama are sellin’ the GOP for parts.
rawr.
— matoko_chan · Oct 21, 12:23 AM · #
Correction…… 20%
— matoko_chan · Oct 21, 01:31 PM · #