It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by Aggie Man
If Fox News is so bad, why are they Number 1 in the ratings?
Answer: Fair and Balanced
Also, we got cute blonds on Fox!
The entire "Tea Party" idea was STARTED by Rick Santelli on CNBC,
Originally posted by Tartarspoon
FOX was at the interview sign up meeting and able to get Feinberg interviews and they CHOSE to not sign up. This sounds like staged theatrics put on by Fox to play a 1st amendment victim.
Originally posted by whackamole
The bottom line is this - The whitehouse has the right to not give interveiws to specific new organizations - there is nothing illegal about it, nothing immoral about it and there are no "rights" involved in this move.
Fox News is not really a news network as much as it is a propaganda machine for the very far right....they are not fair and balanced, they just are not.
Originally posted by whackamole
The bottom line is this - The whitehouse has the right to not give interveiws to specific new organizations - there is nothing illegal about it, nothing immoral about it and there are no "rights" involved in this move.
Fox News is not really a news network as much as it is a propaganda machine for the very far right....they are not fair and balanced, they just are not.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
All 5 news organizations got together and decided to say "no"
to the White House. Take all 5 of us or none of us.
Team Obama thought about it for a while and then blinked.
OK. All 5 including Fox News.
Another defeat for Team Obama. More defeats are on the way.
Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
This is rather telling of the relative immaturity of the administration. But, this is also somewhat like the classic actual investigative news reporter vs a corrupt company/agency/etc...
like many have been saying.. "Transparency, my foot!"
Now, why in the world would this administration only want to have the news agencies report only what they say they should report. wtf, is this China or something?
A Fox News executive told the Huffington Post Saturday that the network "absolutely" did request an interview with Obama administration "pay czar" Kenneth Feinberg and that the White House acknowledged a mistake on the part of a Treasury department staffer in failing to initially include Fox News in the round of interviews Feinberg conducted Thursday.
"Of course we requested an interview," Fox News Senior Vice President Michael Clemente told the Huffington Post.
This directly contradicts reports by the Associated Press and Talking Points Memo, both of which reported that the White House had excluded Fox News because it did not request an interview.
Whether Fox News requested an interview was irrelevant in this case, however, as the interview was conducted a pool including ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and Fox News.
Clemente said that CBS News Washington Bureau Chief and current pool chairman Chris Isham — who did not respond to phone or e-mail requests for comment Saturday — received a call from the Treasury Department Thursday saying that Feinberg would be available to speak to all of the networks in the pool except for Fox News, and that Bloomberg would be included instead.
Clemente said that when Isham presented that scenario on a conference call with the other pool members — including Fox News — "they unanimously said, instantly, no, that's not gonna fly. Either Fox is in or none of us is doing it."
"All the networks said, that's it, you've crossed the line," Reid said.
Fair-minded Jake Tapper of ABC News came to Fox’s defense by questioning Robert Gibbs about the legitimacy of the attack:
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 –
(Crosstalk)
Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.
Tapper: But that’s a pretty sweeping declaration that they are “not a news organization.” How are they any different from, say –
Gibbs: ABC -
Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?
Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon.
Tapper: I’m not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I’m talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a “news organization” — why is that appropriate for the White House to say?
Gibbs: That’s our opinion.
We paid $3 billion for these television stations. We will decide what the news is. The news is what we tell you it is!"
Originally posted by whackamole
[Can you just imagine the Bush Administration trying this trick?