View Full Version : White House Barring Mainstream News from briefings
Okay, it was only one briefing, but I am extremely disturbed by CNN and the NY Times being barred from a news briefing this week. Isn't the "news briefing" supposed to about "news" that the "news media" reports on? I am also disturbed that Trump has called the press "the enemy of the American people", and is trying to get away with calling legitimate and respected media "fake." Perhaps CNN and the NYT have a liberal bias, but they aren't fake and they don't make stuff up. They're more real than Breitbart. I strongly believe that an independant free press, along with universal education, is absolutely the bedrock foundation for a democracy. Trying to restrain the press is more frightening to me than anything else the current administration has done so far.
iris lilies
2-25-17, 11:20am
They make stuff up.
A more nuanced view is that mainstream media still owns the airwaves amd large distribution newspapers, picks 2 or 3 stories a day to hammer that are often tediously small things, and their headline summaries are almost always showing liberal bias.
iris lilies
2-25-17, 11:23am
I also agree with you that unversally accessible education, and a free press, are bedrock for the success of a strOng democracy.
The devil is in the details in defining what those things are.
They make stuff up.
.
True, but it's still news in itself when they make up fake terror attacks and fake statistics.
ToomuchStuff
2-25-17, 11:39am
Did the news report this story? As I have said before, they and Trump do feed each other.
Since they all seem suspect, I try to take in a variety of sources from news, including MSM, Internet sites, WikiLeaks, and best of all, communicating with those on the scene whenever possible. But everyone has a viewpoint, so you have to include many sources to arrive at something remotely plausible.
ApatheticNoMore
2-25-17, 2:22pm
There is no free press when it's all owned by a few giant corporations. True there are always even worse alternatives (Brietbart).
They make stuff up.
A more nuanced view is that mainstream media still owns the airwaves amd large distribution newspapers, picks 2 or 3 stories a day to hammer that are often tediously small things, and their headline summaries are almost always showing liberal bias.
I follow the NYT and Washington Post almost daily these days. They do pick up trivial issues and capitalize on them and that is a little annoying, but they do serve a purpose and are entitled to uninhibited press coverage without intimidation. At the least as much or more than the obscure alt-right Brietbart who was included in the briefing. I see some similarities between now and the Nixon administration and it was these two papers who were able to uncover Watergate.
They make up far less stuff than the present administration in my opinion.
iris lilies
2-25-17, 3:15pm
I follow the NYT and Washington Post almost daily these days. They do pick up trivial issues and capitalize on them and that is a little annoying, but they do serve a purpose and are entitled to uninhibited press coverage without intimidation. At the least as much or more than the obscure alt-right Brietbart who was included in the briefing. I see some similarities between now and the Nixon administration and it was these two papers who were able to uncover Watergate.
They make up far less stuff than the present administration in my opinion.
I think Donald Trump exagerates more than does the NYT, I'll give you that. But the NYT is highly selective in what it covers, and how. And given that every news outlooks looks each day to the NYT to take their content to disemminate, that is a more subtle yet equally problematic situation.,
Lord, how I miss Al Jazeera. Not that Trump and his unterfuhrer would have let them within a mile of their gaggle...
But I'm confident that a small army of leakers will keep us informed 'til the rats are driven from this sinking ship.
I think Donald Trump exagerates more than does the NYT, I'll give you that. But the NYT is highly selective in what it covers, and how. And given that every news outlooks looks each day to the NYT to take their content to disemminate, that is a more subtle yet equally problematic situation.,
IL, in your opinion, what national news print web site or publication does the best unbiased reporting of politics? I've looked through USA today and they really don't seem to have much investigative journalism and do not focus much on political details. I can't read the WSJ without paying a large amount to subscribe. No intention of offering an alternate opinion, I'm just curious.
flowerseverywhere
2-25-17, 4:03pm
I read the New York Times (we have a subscription) CNN, fox, al Jeezera and BBC online every morning every morning. I select only some articles obviously. It is amazing how often the same story is presented so differently by each network.
However they are all to to some extent fake news. These 24 hour news outlets have 24 hours of news to fill. Depending on what they want to emphasize you get over and over coverage of sometimes seemingly minor stories that would have just died a normal death. Along came the tea party and Obama and the polarization started. They filled a void which has gradually gained momentum. Donald came right into that void with his tweeting, name calling, and so on. No matter how much you love him you have to admit some of his statements and fixation on his landslide victory and the hugest ever crowds have been ridiculous. But I honestly think he knows exactly what he is doing. if you continue to demonize the opposizing news and call them the enemy of the people, more will believe it. If you say I am the greatest ever over and over it becomes embedded in people's minds.
DH subscribed to Donald's tweets for a few weeks to see what he was tweeting. You should see some of the stuff he tweets. Some people love it. There were days I found it preposterous self aggrandizing half truths.
People see see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear.
By the way, when I went to my town hall meeting yesterday then read the local paper reports it was like we were in two different places. They played up the few rude people who shouted out when in fact almost everyone was polite and respectful. I personally thanked him for speaking to us, he came right out into the crowd. He didn't really answer most of our questions but at least he showed up and interacted. The paper failed to mention the long Prayer to Jesus the almighty savior (this area has a large Jewish population) and the group holding a Republicans against Trump sign. But they are ultra conservative and it did not fit their news agenda.
IshbelRobertson
2-25-17, 5:52pm
And, the BBC has had their press credentials for the White House removed!
Ho hum, your President, ANDBHIS press Secretary are officially NUMPTIES!
Ho hum, your President, ANDBHIS press Secretary are officially NUMPTIES!
Here, here! A pair of NUMPTIES.
In my fantasy news world the main stream "fake news", should make a practice of just ignoring any twitter or tweet he makes. I think it just feeds his ego to see their reactions. They are less news and more brain farts.
Ultralight
2-25-17, 6:58pm
Look, we live in a dystopia. This kind of thing was bound to happen.
Ishbel, have you seen this delicious send-up of Sean Spicer? A real tour de force.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWuc18xISwI
I agree rogar that ignoring 45's tweets and twitters would be productive. I like that news shows are starting to show facts after reporting stories about him. I don't know if all news outlets are doing this, but I noticed CBS evening news has. 24 hours news is such a disappointment. I foolishly thought it would mean in depth reporting but it is instead the same soundbites over and over. Again a reminder of the Andy Andrews book How do you kill 11 million people. Lie, lie, lie over and over and over until it is believed.
Is it possible that enough of the news media will work together so that a press briefing will be held and no media or too few actually show up?
gimmethesimplelife
2-25-17, 8:25pm
There is no free press when it's all owned by a few giant corporations. True there are always even worse alternatives (Brietbart).APN, here I could not possibly agree with you more. I do believe too that the media overall have a liberal slant - yes, this works for me personally, but I can see where it would not work for other people. When I was in Salzburg two years ago I was watching the English speaking Al Jazeera on cable and it was so refreshing - this was news with a non-American slant and it honestly gave both sides of the story (in my mind, anyway). I did not see a liberal or conservative slant to the few broadcasts I watched of Al Jazeera news. I wish we could have something like this in the US that was easily accessible to the masses. Rob
http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/default/files/images/kP4Yax1.jpg
gimmethesimplelife
2-25-17, 8:27pm
http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/default/files/images/kP4Yax1.jpgI wonder where Al Jazeera would fit in this spectrum? Rob
Razz's idea of no press showing up...one side of me thinks that would be great and would make 45 crazy, but the other side fears they would then choose to never have access and say the press asked for it. You know how good they are at twisting everything. The main goal seems to be shutting down the press, so it might be playing right into the Bannon program.
gimmethesimplelife
2-25-17, 9:20pm
Razz's idea of no press showing up...one side of me thinks that would be great and would make 45 crazy, but the other side fears they would then choose to never have access and say the press asked for it. You know how good they are at twisting everything. The main goal seems to be shutting down the press, so it might be playing right into the Bannon program.If this is true, that the main goal is shutting down the press, whatever slant said press might represent, then I truly have no hope for this country. This is how dictators entrench themselves - this is one of the steps. Don't believe me, I'm not the brightest and I'm certainly no genius, my only claim is that I can survive - but believe in history as history will bear this out. I can remember 42 years ago when I was 8 and I discovered that laws in the US are applied differently on the basis of skin color and social class and I can remember then thinking - something about this country just doesn't feel right.
Here I am 42 years later and not only does this not feel right, it's like a large flashing obnoxiously loud alarm going off that only some people can hear.....I guess I'm grateful that not only can I hear it, those closest to me and almost all I live close to can hear it, too. I hope this is not the start of upheaval of historical proportions but I'm not feeling much faith, I'm really not. Time will tell and it's up to all of us to react to this in the way that seems most appropriate.....no surprise to anyone I'm sure that my take is to prep to run. Rob
frugal-one
2-25-17, 10:23pm
And, the BBC has had their press credentials for the White House removed!
Ho hum, your President, ANDBHIS press Secretary are officially NUMPTIES!
I agree!
When reporting is in Trump's favor all is well and good. When not, it is fake news. Sheesh! It is said the first thing a dictator does is denounce the media. I heard some Republicans protesting as well. Some of the media that was allowed to cover the briefings also protested. Wish we could ban Trump from tweeting his fake news!!
iris lilies
2-25-17, 11:04pm
I agree!
When reporting is in Trump's favor all is well and good. When not, it is fake news. Sheesh! It is said the first thing a dictator does is denounce the media. I heard some Republicans protesting as well. Some of the media that was allowed to cover the briefings also protested. Wish we could ban Trump from tweeting his fake news!!why do you read the tweets if they bother you so much?
Befree's chart was interesting enough that I did a google image search on it. I'd not seen it before and it seems to have gone viral. The woman who is the originator went through a fairly objective process in it's design. I'd still quibble a few points about her selection criteria. I did not read all of it but enough to convince me it is a legitimate attempt to be accurate rather than something just cobbled together. It was an interesting discussion.
http://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse.com/?p=65
IshbelRobertson
2-26-17, 4:41am
why do you read the tweets if they bother you so much?
I am extremely glad I don't use Twitter, Facebook or similar.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/default/files/images/kP4Yax1.jpg
I loved this chart enough to visit the author's blog where she provides a well reasoned explanation of her placement of various news sources and explains that this may be an ongoing process. Here's the latest version.
http://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/News-Quality.V5.png
Speaking of fake news:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/25/who-is-nils-bildt-swedish-national-security-advisor-interviewed-by-fox-news-is-a-mystery-to-swedes/?utm_term=.3a8da76031e6
Who is Nils Bildt? Swedish ‘national security advisor’ interviewed by Fox News is a mystery to Swedes
The chart clearly has the NY Times and the BBC smack-dab in the middle of the most reliable, non-partisan news sources. The journalists in these organizations do not "make stuff up." Yet they were 2 of the groups denied access to press briefings. I agree with the poster who said other responsible, respected media shouldn't boycott the press briefings because then the current administration has even more control of whatever press continues to show up, since these will be the groups with the least journalistic integrity who will only ask soft questions, print whatever they are told to print, and not call the administration on their "alternative facts." Instead, I hope the journalists will always be sure there is at least one among them to say, "why does the administration want to censor ______, who they have not allowed into the press briefing today?" And then they should report on it, because that is news! (bad news for the U.S., anyway)
IshbelRobertson
2-26-17, 5:33pm
Ishbel, have you seen this delicious send-up of Sean Spicer? A real tour de force.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWuc18xISwI
Thanks for the link. I don't recognise the actor, but she's GOOD!
Thanks for the link. I don't recognise the actor, but she's GOOD!
Her own mother probably wouldn't recognize her. She's Melissa McCarthy.
The chart clearly has the NY Times and the BBC smack-dab in the middle of the most reliable, non-partisan news sources. The journalists in these organizations do not "make stuff up." Yet they were 2 of the groups denied access to press briefings. I agree with the poster who said other responsible, respected media shouldn't boycott the press briefings because then the current administration has even more control of whatever press continues to show up, since these will be the groups with the least journalistic integrity who will only ask soft questions, print whatever they are told to print, and not call the administration on their "alternative facts." Instead, I hope the journalists will always be sure there is at least one among them to say, "why does the administration want to censor ______, who they have not allowed into the press briefing today?" And then they should report on it, because that is news! (bad news for the U.S., anyway)
The administration may find that it cuts both ways - White House press briefings are not releasing new information as much as they are spinning what's already out there. And these these excluded news organizations may start putting out stories without the White House spin even mentioned.
The administration may find that it cuts both ways - White House press briefings are not releasing new information as much as they are spinning what's already out there.
Ya. I'm not thinking the free press is hampered much by not hearing the latest silliness of the day coming out of those "briefings" and getting sucked into the instant-response Tweet-cycle. Be a better use of time to do real reporting....
Ya. I'm not thinking the free press is hampered much by not hearing the latest silliness of the day coming out of those "briefings" and getting sucked into the instant-response Tweet-cycle. Be a better use of time to do real reporting....
I am ready to ignore the government and get on with life, except where they interfere. Unfortunately there are a lot of things they are doing I can't probably ignore for long. But at least I can pay attention to actual news.
iris lilies
2-27-17, 6:34pm
IL, in your opinion, what national news print web site or publication does the best unbiased reporting of politics? I've looked through USA today and they really don't seem to have much investigative journalism and do not focus much on political details. I can't read the WSJ without paying a large amount to subscribe. No intention of offering an alternate opinion, I'm just curious.
I dont know. They all have biases, and it is good that understand the bias of the one you are consuming.
i dont watch Video news and I read precious little newspaper news. Mostly, I listen to radio which is full of headline news and talk show discussion. If something ng interest me I look it up.
Today I heard a panel discussion about transgender bathroom use by students on NPR, you know, the source that is without bias. Hahahah, it was typical NPR programming, biased as hell. there was a group of people on the show, and only one representing the conservative point of view.
He was an attorney arguing the Illinois case which, if I can present it accurately, is using an existing Supreme
Court case that riled there is NO promise of complete privacy for students, that right must be balanced by the school administration for the education and good of all.
I guess the attorney's argument is that trans persons may not expect to use whichever bathroom they choose if it is disruptive to other students.
Not sure thats a good argument and it already lost at the District level, but we shall see.
Back back to NPR, the host bullied the lawyer when the lawyer did not call the subject of the case "she" as the transperson prefers (this persn was not on the panel.) There were other attitude problems with Mr. host.
Thanks IL, I was out doing errands today and heard the same program in the car. I actually cringed a little it was so slanted. I think NPR does a pretty decent job most of the time, but I have a liberal slant in my blood. I have my liberal favorites but none are perfect and as long as it's quality reporting I like to try to understand the other side. Which is a reason I asked. There are some news sources like CNN and Fox that I don't think are quality sources.
When all the Trumple started I tried to sample what I could online to see how they compared and get the straight scoop. The Boston Globe, the NYT, L.A. Times, the Chicago Herald, the Washington Post, and whatever. The all seem to be a little different slant on the same stories. Some get a little more carried away. They are all a little left of center and maybe have a spinkling of fake or at least sensationalist news by my account, but none seem radically so. I actually have a little agreement with what some label the "Coastal Elite". Growing up in a blue collar town and having lived all my life in the west, there are some liberal views that just don't jive with me.
frugal-one
2-27-17, 8:06pm
I am extremely glad I don't use Twitter, Facebook or similar.
I don't either. I don't read the tweets. They are all over the news!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.