Reply to BOB WOODWARD: Obama Is Showing 'A Kind Of Madness I Haven't Seen In A Long Time'

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "BOB WOODWARD: Obama Is Showing 'A Kind Of Madness I Haven't Seen In A Long Time' "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]
Can you explain this?  You mean like reporting on Benghazi? Reporting the news?  Let's see, where did the leak come from about Seal Team Six killing bin Laden?  Oh, yes, that would be from the White House........talk about putting our troops at risk.  The Seals were pretty upset about this.
You mean like reporting on Fast and Furious  CBS broke that story, but Fox was the only one that pursued it.  Do you mean reporting the news that Benghazi was not a result of a video? 
CNN found the memo that Stephens was worried about security--but Fox was the group that pursued it.

Tell me, please.  Why is Fox the only news agency that criticizes the White House?  Isn't that part of the job of the press?  The fourth estate?
[/quote]

Yes, all the media should be willing to report stories that are critical of the White House. But, let me ask you, did Fox do that during the Bush Administration? Here Republican Bruce Bartlett tells how he was banned from Fox after publishing a book critical of George W. Bush:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/publicist-confirms-it-fox-news-blacklisted-book-critical-of-george-w-bush/2012/11/28/0a59c044-3975-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_blog.html

Also, news organizations should be accurate when they report the news. Has Fox always been accurate? Here is a description of how Fox wrongly reported that the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi was broadcast by a live video feed from two drones. In fact, there were no such drones providing a live feed:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/fox-news-and-benghazi-video-for-real/2012/11/09/79410b04-29d8-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_blog.html

New organizations should not selectively edit video to change the meaning of what a speaker is saying. This is something Fox does routinely. Yet Fox famously selectively edited Obama's "you didn't build that" statement:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/07/16/fox-amp-friends-deceptively-edits-obamas-commen/187146

Here is another example involving taxes:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/21/fox-news-edits-clip-obama-taxes/

So, here is a "news" organization that changes its reporting style depending on which party holds the White House, misreports "facts" in order to further its political agenda, and selectively edits quotes in order to harm its political enemies. Is such an organization actually a legitimate "news" organization?

Plus, it is very difficult to get over the fact that repeated studies show that Fox News watchers are the most misinformed people of all news consumers. I thought "news" organizations are supposed to inform, not misinform.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics