Posted on 10/22/2009 8:29:18 AM PDT by BAW
By brazenly declaring war on a member of the Fourth Estate, the Obama administration is making a first-rate error in judgment.
Just because White House officials, and maybe even President Barack Obama himself, don't like Fox News doesn't mean they have the right to decide that the network is — in the words of White House Communications Director Anita Dunn — “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” Nor does it have the right to try to isolate Fox News by urging other networks to shun their colleagues because, as White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel put it, Obama does not want “the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox.” And it certainly doesn't have the right to call on other media outlets to do what Obama senior adviser David Axelrod wants them to do: join the administration in declaring that Fox is “not a news organization.”
Come again? Did we really just hear top White House officials try to rally the media to gang up on a single network because the administration doesn't like the stories it produces? What would James Madison say? The father of the Constitution took pains to establish the idea of a free press acting as a watchdog on government. Whether the levers of power are controlled by Republicans or Democrats, and whether the press is liberal or conservative, makes no difference. What matters is that the press be able to do its job, and that government stay out of the way.
Not only is it dangerous and wildly inappropriate for the White House — any White House — to start compiling enemies lists, it's also not very smart. Government should not make a habit of insulting and isolating a major news organization. Better to just ignore whatever bothers you. Otherwise, people might get the idea you have a thin skin and that you have something against being asked tough questions.
And the next thing you know, there are tough questions coming from all directions. Earlier this week at the White House press gaggle with reporters, ABC News' Jake Tapper tore into White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. Tapper wanted to know why the administration thought it was appropriate to single out a specific news organization as inauthentic and then invite everyone to pile on in an attempt to marginalize critics. Gibbs couldn't come up with a good answer, and he frankly seemed surprised at the question. After all, isn't ABC News part of the club? Why would one of its reporters defend the opposition instead of just going along? The best that Gibbs could do was to insist that this was the White House opinion and it was sticking by it.
Bravo to Tapper. But shame on the White House. It's behavior is outrageous and petty. It can't win this battle, and it should never have engaged the fight. It's time to stop picking on Fox News, and start showing some maturity. Freedom of the press is not something to be trifled with — especially when it makes the powerful uncomfortable.
Yeah
He’s sure trying very hard to do it. His approval rating should be 30%.We have that many left wingers. America has been “dumbed down” pretty well.
Actually, even Hill is critical of the Obama tactics:
Former FNC Lib: CNN and MSNBC Further Left Than Fox Is Right
Recently fired liberal Fox News contributor Marc Lamont Hill claimed Tuesday the White House attacks on his former employer reek of propaganda.
Speaking with WOR radio's Steve Malzberg, Hill also agreed that the two other cable news networks he used to contribute to, CNN and MSNBC, are far more to the left than Fox News is to the right.
Greta last night and her guest Susan Estrich were amazed at the lack of outcry from the rest of the media at the attack on Fox. I don’t understand why they are surprised.
Interesting, I guess I’m mistaken. Thanks.
It seems a bit of the fair and balanced rubs off on the most liberal of the Fox commentators. Look at Juan Williams being steamed after being called “a house Negro and Uncle Tom” as he put it after he pointed out to another Black commentator about who authored the term “Barack the Magic Negro.” That commentator told Juan to “go sit on the porch.” They may be libs, but they hear a different point of view and it can’t help but influence them, even just a little.
I totally agree. Libs are usually the least tolerant of those who dare express an opinion different than theirs. Afriend once pointed out the problem: Liberals are so sure that their way is the right way, the “good” way, that any dissension could only be the product of PURE EVIL, and that is the reason for their visceral reaction to dissent.
Similar to the jihadis and taliban types, strict “fundamentalism” is dangerous on all levels, and that is what we are facing, a new “religion” Liberal Fundamentalism, or Progressivism, or Obamaism, and it can only hurt us or seriously damage us as a nation.
Narcissists are notoriously thin-skinned, any criticism reflects on their “perfection”, and if they are as perfect as they think, any criticism is merely the work of an enemy.
The next question is whose skin will prove thinner: O or “Beloved Leader” in NK, and look what that has caused
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
