Skip to content

The Rosett Report » First They Came for Fox News…

October 19, 2009

The Rosett Report

obama_murdoch_ailesOctober 19th, 2009 1:11 am

First They Came for Fox News…

You don’t have to love Fox News to see how dangerous it is when the President of the United States gives his staff and advisers a green light to single out and denigrate by name a specific news organization. As we surely all know by now, this is what the White House has been doing to Fox.

The Sunday morning talk shows just brought us White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod opining to George Stephanopoulos, on ABC’s “This Week,” that Fox is “Really – not news — it’s pushing a point of view.” Axelrod advised that ABC and other non-Fox outlets take his cue and expunge Fox from the brethren of news services: “And the bigger thing is that other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way, and we’re not going to treat them that way.” Meanwhile, on CNN’s “State of the Union,” White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was hammering home the same message, that Fox “is not a news organization so much as it has a perspective,” and urging “More importantly is not have [sic] the CNNs and the others in the world basically be led in following Fox, as if what they’re trying to do is a legitimate news organization… .”

This would be a very good moment for all those other news organizations — CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, the newspapers and the news web sites – to offer President Obama the perspective that it is utterly inappropriate for White House personnel to be opining publicly on the overall fitness of specific news outlets. The president has sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” That includes protecting free speech, not dispatching White House staff and advisers to hold forth publicly as media critics denouncing news outlets they don’t like.

via The Rosett Report » First They Came for Fox News….

Advertisements
3 Comments
  1. RICHARD ROTENBERGER permalink
    October 20, 2009 5:23 AM

    If my mother was still alive she would call Obama what he really is; a real live Bull shi***.

  2. sedonaman permalink
    October 20, 2009 8:21 AM

    I used to watch The MacNiel/Lehrer Report religiously because it would examine a single subject and take it apart with guests from conservative to liberal and in between. Later when it became The News Hour With Jim Lehrer, I continued until it went hard Left with only Leftist reporters. I used to watch the “Sabbath Gasbags” also, until I noticed they were all the same. The typical News Hour / “Gasbag” program would go something like this:

    Question # 1 liberals want answered.
    Answer # 1 liberals want to hear.

    Question # 2 liberals want answered.
    Answer # 2 liberals want to hear.

    Question # 3 liberals want answered.
    Answer # 3 liberals want to hear.
    .
    .
    .
    Question # n liberals want answered.
    Answer # n liberals want to hear.

    Finally,
    Question # 1 conservatives want answered.
    Host: “Well, we’re out of time; we’ll have to re-visit that on a later program.”

    The “later program” never came, of course.

    Even though I generally agree with their political positions, I quit watching Bill O’Reilly and Hannity & Colms; they are more for entertainment value than news. I have not seen much of Glenn Beck, but he seems to follow a similar pattern. [I will give O’Reilly credit for hammering at the leniency of the courts in child abuse cases.] My complaint with O’Reilly, et al, is the format: they interrupt even the guests who agree with them! If these hosts want a monologue, they should not have guests.

    The only news program I watch is the Brit Hume [now Bret Baier] “Panel”. I don’t see how they can be dismissed as not real news because they have both conservative and liberal commentators. My only complaint is that the segment is too short. Finally, one observation I have made is that a news program is labeled “conservative” if so much as a single conservative is allowed to express an opinion. The old “Firing Line” was considered “conservative” even though liberals got 50% of the time to talk.

  3. carterthewriter permalink
    October 20, 2009 11:26 AM

    Because the government now controls the money, they think they have the right to tell everyone how to spend it while setting a very bad example, themselves. If we no longer have a right to question them, we will soon be broke, morally and physically and all that fall in between.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: