« Happy Monday | Main | Captain Rob Yllescas »

December 01, 2008

Obama: Changing the Tone in Washington

So far, Fox News is O for 5 on getting a single question answered at an Obama press conference:

As we've been documenting, Fox News hasn't gotten a question in during President-elect Barack Obama's five press conferences since the election.

Today was another. Questions instead went to such outlets as ABC, New York Times, CBS, Reuters and the Associated Press.

>UPDATE: Questions went to Liz Sidoti (AP), Caren Bohan (Reuters), Jake Tapper (ABC), Peter Baker (NYT), John McCormick (Tribune), Tribune, Dean Reynolds (CBS).

Comment of the day (in response to the charge that Obama is within his rights to ban Fax as some form of petty retaliation for Sean Hannity, who is not even a news anchor):

... is that fair? One voice on the network (a commentator, at that), results in a full ban of the network?

Should Republicans ban MSNBC because of Olbermann or Maddow? Heck, should they ban all of NBC? Should they ban the NYTimes and other new organizations that have said negative things against the party or candidate?

The real issue here is media censorship, and media objectivity. If this administration (or any administration) decides that they'll only talk to groups that say what they want them to say, then have in fact imposed a gag order on all objective reporting. IMO, that's a dangerous thing.

If the media are afraid to report, for fear that they will get banned from participating and thusly cost their parent company money... we (further) lose journalism, in favor of straight propaganda.

To which the predictable "free speech" reply ensued:

...ridding the world of faux news would do the opposite..a win for "journalism" and a fail for "straight progaganda"

The First Amendment and freedom of the press: great concepts... so long as they are only used to protect speech progressives happen to agree with.

It's going to be a fun four years, folks. One quasi-conservative news network out of how many? And it's already being blacklisted by the future President of the United States.

Impressive. Really impressive. Thank God we have a Constitutional lawyer in charge. I feel my rights are safer already.

Posted by Cassandra at December 1, 2008 05:08 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2567

Comments

Did you really expect different? These are the same people who banned a Florida station for asking Biden *tough* questions like whether or not Xerxes,..um, Obama's plan to "spread the wealth" was Marxist and what Biden meant by his "he [Obama] will be tested" prediction.
Leopards and spots and all that, just remember, a zebra is nothing more than a jackass in striped pajamas.
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at December 1, 2008 05:57 PM

Zebra? That's racist!

Posted by: BillT at December 1, 2008 06:01 PM

The idea that controlling the flow of information, and thus the flow of criticism, also controls the mob goes back, um eight thousand years?

I can understand that as FOX repeatedly pissed the Obama campaign off, there shuold be no surprise that payback is a bitch for the losing team. Based upon my own quasi-liverwurstian principles, Obama surrogates should be able to talk only to those who they like, and to damn the rest from a seat at the table of truth, half-truths, inuendo, smears and out-right lies.

As the the President, however, Obama will speak for all Americans. As such, if the questions asked, or the questioner, aren't playing to the script, well, then, that's just tough shit.

Forty-six percent of Americans voted against Obama for Chief Executive. That's a mighty slim margin to tee of before you even assume office.

I'm betting that it doesn't continue past the "pound of flesh" between election and inauguration.

But some say I'm a dreamer.....

Posted by: spd rdr at December 1, 2008 06:19 PM

Comment of the day (in response to the charge that Obama is within his rights to ban Fax as some form of petty retaliation for Sean Hannity, who is not even a news anchor):

That is one of the various ways to control and manipulate the media, Cass. Just because Bush wasn't willing to do it doesn't mean it isn't part of the arsenal of the office of the President.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 1, 2008 07:11 PM

I didn't say it wasn't a weapon. He can do as he likes - up to and including things he said he wasn't going to do.

I presume I'm still free to say I don't think much of the tactic.

And I don't. Nor do I think Bush should have been willing to do it.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 1, 2008 07:16 PM

Should Republicans ban MSNBC because of Olbermann or Maddow? Heck, should they ban all of NBC?

Uh, noo... because Republicans don't have the power to do so. Just like saying "should I nuke the world...", well no, if you don't have the power to carry it through so it is a moot point.

IMO, that's a dangerous thing.

The MSM has already done that on topics like Vietnam, Iraq, and the economy.

The "free press" doesn't only include the media peeps. It includes anyone able to publish. The MSM voted in a master, and they are getting what they voted for. What's the big surprise?

And it's already being blacklisted by the future President of the United States.

Nobody said that just because the US won't execute people quickly that China and the Islamics will follow the same model. Actually, some crazies may have.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 1, 2008 07:17 PM

I presume I'm still free to say I don't think much of the tactic.

It works. Such things doesn't care what we think of it, what only matters is who wins. And Obama has won precisely because he was better at propaganda than Bush. Now if Bush could equal Obama's propaganda by using similar, but not the same, methods, then all power to him. But that is not certain.

Ever since Nixon went down in flames, GOP Presidents have been very careful about the media and what not. Such behavior is fine, up to a point, but the MSM has shown you that you will receive no mercy simply because the GOP goes easy on the media.

Sarah Palin isn't excluded. Regular citizens like Joe the Plumber aren't excluded. Nobody is excluded for the victor writes the history books and the rules of conduct.

Bush got all the negative attributes of using manipulation policies, lying, bait and switch, and NONE of the benefits because he didn't use them. So now everybody thinks that it is now fair to return the favor. It doesn't matter that what they believe is false. What matters is that they believe it.

The only way to get rid of these tactics by Obama would have been to show that it wouldn't work. But Bush has shown that it does work and it works very well, not because Bush used them but because they were used on Bush. If Democrats could have such success using propaganda and they weren't even in the President's office, what do you think they now will do with Presidential power?

When bad and unethical behavior is rewarded, more of it happens. When pirates take hostages and captures ships and they get rewarded in the hundreds of millions, more piracy occurs.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 1, 2008 07:25 PM

Heh. I was going to post on this story, and then I decided I should hop over here and see if you already had... :)

Posted by: TigerHawk at December 1, 2008 07:31 PM

I think that Fox will either beg to be admitted to the Cirque of Life, thus basking in the holy aura, or will start doing some serious journalism; the likes we have not seen for many a year.

I think their spines are made of wet noodles.

Posted by: Cricket at December 1, 2008 10:44 PM

I'll take my spaghetti with cheese on top, please.

Posted by: HomefrontSix at December 1, 2008 11:27 PM

He can do as he likes - up to and including things he said he wasn't going to do.

I'd be happier if he didn't do the things he *said* he was going to do -- and so far, that's exactly what's happening.

Heh. I was going to post on this story, and then I decided I should hop over here and see if you already had... :) Posted by: TigerHawk at December 1, 2008 07:31 PM

Still checking ya out, iddenee?

Posted by: BillT at December 2, 2008 12:45 AM

Id what?

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 02:56 PM

I think their spines are made of wet noodles.

Bill's spine is certainly no match for Sarah's.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 02:57 PM

Neither is my thorax.

Posted by: BillT at December 2, 2008 03:19 PM

I didn't know you were the Bill O'Reilly on Fox, Bill. You been holding out on us man.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 04:01 PM

I read an article in Psychology Today or something like that concerning how rumors were spread. Even though the author had a Democrat bias, in terms of mentioning the swiftboat "rumors" on John Kerry, there were still some useful stuff for the propaganda and psychological warfare fronts.

It is true that the more rumors were repeated, the more people started believing they were valid. A rumor repeated many times would lead the target population thinking it had come out of some scholarly journal, when in fact it came out of the National Inquirer. This is one of the tools in the MSM's arsenal when it comes time to deceive and lie to the American public. They don't need to print anything except repetitions of what somebody else has printed, like Kos or the National Inquirer. They defend Democrats like Edwards by refusing to talk about it, and thus ensure that the "rumors" die off. Even when the truth comes out, nobody has had the rumors in their mind so they hadn't been thinking about it, so the truth doesn't really change anything.

Another reason for the spread of rumors concerns envy. The article detailed some interesting tid bits concerning how celebrities have incredible rumor mills going on. In fact, the author of the stories went into more detail concerning such episodes than he did concerning John Kerry, Bush, or Obama combined. (That should be a sign to somebody concerning the judgment of the author)

The argument was made, and it seems to make more sense than not, that particularly masculine celebrities are envied for their ability to attract women so there is a natural tendency to take those celebrities down a notch by spreading and believing in rumors that they are gay, have sex with dogs, swallow cum in orgy parties, and what not.

I am not exactly "plugged" into the Hollyweird scene, one may say, so I haven't checked up on this data. It, however, fits what I do know about Hollywood. They say it is a tough town and certainly it is, given the amount of envy and neuroses flying around.

Sarah Palin, taken in this light, is a celebrity and her strong point is her appeal to women. This means that many people envy her success and want to take her down a notch, if only because crabs in a bucket won't let any other crab climb out of it. This means that they are more likely to both spread and believe in rumors concerning Sarah Palin making rape victims pay for their own rape kits. This means that they are more likely to believe in rumors and to talk about rumors concerning Sarah Palin being mean or stupid or unfit and so forth.

The more people talk about it, the more other parts of the target population start believing it has some validity. Even denials of rumors tend to actually reinforce in the minds of people that they are true. Which is why a Main Sewre Media blackout is often the only real way to stop rumors in their tracks. There was a rumor going on that the Surge was working and violence was going down in Iraq, but since the MSM never reported about it, including to deny it, most Americans have no idea: all they know is that Iraq is a mess and we need to get out. So even when we say that we are withdrawing forces, people will immediately think "we need to get out of that violent nation and the mistakes Bush made" rather than think "violence has gone down due to American problem solving know how".

These traits in rumor mongering are one of numerous mechanisms used to control the mob. Bush took the high road and refused to use any of these methods after 2003, and so now we have a President to Be and a Main Sewer Media that now will use it all the time. Because they have done so and suffered nothing in return, while getting major loot.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 04:16 PM

I didn't know you were the Bill O'Reilly on Fox, Bill.

I didn't either. That's the heartbreak of CRS.

Now, how do I get out of Iraq and back to the Fox studios?

Posted by: BillT at December 2, 2008 04:29 PM

When next you get AL Sharpton and Jesse Jackson your show, Bill, be sure to give them my message.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 04:52 PM

Oh, okay.

Uhhh -- who *are* they?

Posted by: BillT at December 2, 2008 06:17 PM

remember how we've heard that Obama and his illuminati are building a cabinet of people who will "challenge him"? That's obviously only the case when he can control how he is challenged..

Posted by: ew at December 2, 2008 07:07 PM

Uhhh -- who *are* they?

Not who are they, what are they.

They are black, that's what. Don't make me report Fox News to Obama now. O'Reilly agreed to worship the blackness in return for an interview with Obama and it is stipulated in contract so you can't Bush your way out of it.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at December 2, 2008 08:18 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)