The slow slide toward state run media

posted at 2:31 pm on March 2, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

In the aftermath of the increasing strange story about Bob Woodward being threatened by the White House, there seem to be a few competing entries in the, “what does it all mean” sweepstakes. There is clearly some debate over precisely how much of a “threat” it really was or was intended to be, but does that mean that it was a big nothingburger? Matt Lewis seems to be leaning that way, opining that we’ve all been played.

Sperling’s email eventually does say, “I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim.” But this is clearly not a veiled threat of retaliation, but rather a warning that the reporter was about to get the story wrong.

When Woodward tells of being warned he would “regret” challenging Obama, it sounds ominous. But if Politico’s reporting today is correct, it seems much more innocuous than that.

Looks like we were played.

Matt makes a couple of points which I won’t argue with. Woodward, even in this late stage of his career, is still in the business of selling books. And controversy is good for sales. This isn’t to say he lit this particular fire intentionally to gin up some action, but it’s also not terribly difficult to imagine how he wouldn’t rush to douse the flames, either. And the relationship between the author and Sperling may indeed be a cordial, long standing one, leading the aide to feel comfortable tossing around some phrases he might have chosen more carefully in a public forum.

But does that mean this should all be tosses aside? Kathleen Parker has a different take on the subject this weekend, with a look through a longer lens at some trends in how the White House manages the lines of communications.

Understandably, everyday Americans may find this discussion too inside baseball to pay much mind. Why can’t the president play a little golf without a press gaggle watching? As for Woodward, it’s not as though the White House was threatening to bust his kneecaps.

Add to these likely sentiments the fact that Americans increasingly dislike the so-called mainstream media, sometimes for good reason. Distrust of media, encouraged by alternative media seeking to enhance their own standing, has become a tool useful to the very powers the Fourth Estate was constitutionally endowed to monitor. When the president can bypass reporters to reach the public, it is not far-fetched to imagine a time — perhaps now? — when the state controls the message.

Her method of bringing blogging and other new media outlets into the mix is what makes this more of a valid discussion. The government is supposed to face the media as an opponent of sorts, trying to keep secrets while the media tries to expose them. When the media fell from grace and became distrusted by the public to do this important job, bloggers and other non-establishment entities stepped in to watch the watchers so to speak. But we need to remember that there are still key differences between social media and the mainstream.

Bloggers – at least the lion’s share of them – don’t have any direct access to the White House. (And the few exceptions who do are so far in the pockets of the administration that it’s not worth mentioning.) So they still rely on the mainstream White House press corps for all of the inside data. And rather than having the tools to challenge the administration directly, blogging quickly devolved into competing camps who almost exclusively challenged the media on the other side of the fence rather than scoring any points for transparency in government. Conservative bloggers take on MSBNC, liberals take on Fox. Does this somehow damage White House control of the message? Parker gets this part right.

This is no tempest in a teapot but rather the leak in the dike. Drip by drip, the Obama administration has demonstrated its intolerance for dissent and its contempt for any who stray from the White House script. Yes, all administrations are sensitive to criticism, and all push back when such criticism is deemed unfair or inaccurate. But no president since Richard Nixon has demonstrated such overt contempt for the messenger. And, thanks to technological advances in social media, Obama has been able to bypass traditional watchdogs as no other president has.

I still don’t know why it’s important that reporters get to watch Barack Obama play golf with Tiger Woods. And Bob Woodward is still able to write anything he wants. But if that’s the standard we set, how much else goes on that we’re actually missing? And how much spin gets passed off as news? In the end, the Woodward story was about a lot more than just Bob selling a few more books. It serves as a reminder that state influence over the media remains a danger, just as the Founders knew it could be when they drafted the Bill of Rights.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

There’s one big way to fight this: elect a Republican to the White House. The press will go right back to the jobs they should be doing in the first place.

thebrokenrattle on March 2, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Slow slide? Hell, they’ve been Barry’s whores since Day One. They just won’t accept their place.

GarandFan on March 2, 2013 at 2:36 PM

Wow, David Frum nails the women in the military article now Kathleen Parker gets this right. Crazy week!

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 2:39 PM

how much else goes on that we’re actually missing?

That is the true power of the Democrat Media. It’s not what they report, but what they don’t report.

Prime example: in March of 1991 the Fed announced that the economic recovery had started based on their statistics. But the Democrat Media never reported this, because if they had Pappy Bush would have been re-elected in 1992.

The NYT finally got around to publishing the fact that the economic recovery that Democrat Bill Clinton hogged the credit for did indeed begin in March of 1991, 18 months before they got him elected.

Their belated admission came in…1999. They sat on the story for 8 years.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM

Slow? It happend in the 60s! It’s been a state run media with few exceptions for decades.

Warner Todd Huston on March 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM

And Bob Woodward is still able to write anything he wants.

They don’t have to control a 100% of what is published in the mainstream press to have effective control of the media. 80% or 90% or even less achieves that just as effectively, and gives them deniability with those few random acts of journalism that actually make it through.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 2:44 PM

It serves the bhopress right! They are treated as a battered woman and still can’t get their heads around not going back for more abuse/can’t live without him syndrome? bho/team tell bhopress to hop and they say how high!

I do not feel one bit sorry for them, none!

All three of these are good, IMO.

http://www.desertlover.com/
L

letget on March 2, 2013 at 2:46 PM

The slow slide toward state run media

Stupid Fifth Column Treasonous Media insiders making stupid and misleading statements. The treatment of Bob Woodward proves one thing, that the majority of the Fifth Column Treasonous Media have an agenda. Not that they are sliding towards being a state run media. As long as the Obamanation Administration follows a path parallel to the Fifth Column Treasonous Media agenda, the Fifth Column Treasonous Media will give the Obamanation Administration what ever cover, protection and assistance that they are able to.

If the Obamanation Administration changes course then they will do whatever they can to return the Obamanation Administration to their desired agenda.

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 2:48 PM

What we have is far worse than “state-run media”. We have a media that is enthusiastically pushing for tyranny and the death of America without needing any prodding or threats from the state, at all. The state locks these turds in broom closets and the turds still write glowing poems about how great it is to be locked in a closet by the dog-eater.

No. The people who worked at Pravda generally had the excuse that they would be sent to a gulag or killed if they didn’t write what the state wanted. The MSM happily and enthusiastically lies and spreads anti-American state propaganda while assaulting any who challenge the state or the 84 IQ, Sukarno-knockoff, retard tyrant ruling it.

Pravda worked under duress and threats. The MSM uses all of its undeserved power to threaten and place under duress all those who don’t bow to the affirmative action lunatic and his junta. Very different media animals.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Easy solution here. Stop buying their papers. Eventually they will go out of circulation. This is already happening to the hometown papers across America. In Michigan, most daily papers are now online and only have home delivery 2 or 3 days a week. I would imagine few of those who used to take delivery are bothering to pay for online access instead. My elderly mother did exactly that. She doesn’t know how to use a computer, doesn’t want to learn, thus no longer reads the local paper any day.

I haven’t had a subscription in years. I got so tired of the lefty yellow journalism.

karenhasfreedom on March 2, 2013 at 2:52 PM

I still don’t know why it’s important that reporters get to watch Barack Obama play golf with Tiger Woods. And Bob Woodward is still able to write anything he wants.

You’re missing the point. Yes, the golf thing is a little goofy, but the point is that we’ve ceded too much ground to statists. That is the default position. The obama media is, by default, the “legitimate” or “mainstream” media and they get all of the perks and privileges of such, while anyone who presents a different story is the “alternative” media who still must rely on stories written and pushed by the legitimate media.

In other words, I think we’re past the point of “slowly sliding” to state run media, we’ve already arrived.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Woodward, Frum and Parker all in one week what the Sam Hill is going on. Has the sheen finally wore off of the boy king? I know that to maintain some sort of credibility they must speak the truth on the sequester because it will soon be obvious to anyone with a heartbeat that the world didn’t end at midnight. Maybe this is just that. Random acts of journolism to cover the fact that they went all-in with barky and the doomsayers the past couple of weeks.

D-fusit on March 2, 2013 at 2:56 PM

The slow slide toward state run media

…”slide”?…the press fell off the jouralistic cliff… in 2008!…now they edit out any ‘mistakes’ the government spokespeople make…even one or two taped words… “to save time”

KOOLAID2 on March 2, 2013 at 2:58 PM

They still love him.

d1carter on March 2, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Random acts of journolism to cover the fact that they went all-in with barky and the doomsayers the past couple of weeks.

D-fusit on March 2, 2013 at 2:56 PM

The media is absolutely shameless. They write stories that are demonstrably false regularly and when caught, they ignore it. I think you’re just seeing the house conservatives do what they’re hired to do — pretend to oppose the statists so that the papers can say they’re bi-partisan and present all views — big government and bigger government.

These “conservatives” and fake republicans do more damage then the democrats, since they have allowed the media to shift the overton window to the point where the only acceptable “mainstream” views are big, statist government or bigger statist government.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:00 PM

One thing we can do right now with the House we have against the media is to forbid the direct hiring of anybody from any media company by any member of the House.

Right now, employees of local press outlets vie for openings in their local liberal Congressman’s office. And these Congressmen can make it quite clear that personnel selection will have a lot to do with favorable coverage from said media outlets. So make these media employees have to work five years for some outlet *not* reporting the news before they can be considered for political employment.

Let’s say Janice at Channel 5 wants to work for Congresswoman Libby McGungrab. If she’s at Channel 5, there will be way too much temptation for Janice to audition by “shaping” Channel 5′s coverage in a way favorable to the Congresswoman and her party. If she has to quit Channel 5 and write press releases for Wally’s Widgets for five years, she will come to the Congresswoman as an employee of Wally’s Widgets, not Channel 5. Janice can’t prevent unfavorable stories at Channel 5, and the Congresswoman can no longer expect her to have done so, and retaliate against her for unfavorable coverage on Channel 5.

Sekhmet on March 2, 2013 at 3:03 PM

The slow slide toward state run media

Before his second term is up, expect…

– increasing state control via bailouts (e.g. NYT) and crony capitalism (e.g. NBC-GE-Immelt)

- new FCC rules virtually shutting down talk radio as we know it and asserting authority over the internet

petefrt on March 2, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Janice can’t prevent unfavorable stories at Channel 5, and the Congresswoman can no longer expect her to have done so, and retaliate against her for unfavorable coverage on Channel 5.

Sekhmet on March 2, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Your theory would be more solid for me if there was evidence of that being true with local reporters wanting to work for republicans. Maybe it’s just that the journalist schools and colleges in this country indoctrinate young reporters in liberalism, their bosses encourage that bias, and what we see as quid pro quo is just like minded people sticking together.

In other words, the reporting wouldn’t change whether or not there was a possibility of a job down the line. We also never see people who DIDNT get the job then switching local coverage to be anti-liberal.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:08 PM

“Back, back in the USSR…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3FbeIv4hFU

You don’t know how lucky you are.
Moscow girls really make me sing and shout.

albill on March 2, 2013 at 3:09 PM

The MSM have been libs for decades. What is different is that they are more out in the open with who they are now more than ever. And I think conservatives pushed them to come out of the closet. Now we see how really ugly and sick their intentions are and we have to stop them, damaging their brand for as long as we possibly can, if not permanently. They are not a friend to free people they are the witch with the poison apple. All the people who want to get along with these people, do so at your and the country’s peril.

Charm on March 2, 2013 at 3:10 PM

Lookit MSM, being servile is not getting you access. Try something new, like doing your jobs. It’s worth a try. The cycle of abuse needs to be broken.

forest on March 2, 2013 at 3:11 PM

One thing we can do right now with the House we have against the media is to forbid the direct hiring of anybody from any media company by any member of the House.

Sekhmet on March 2, 2013 at 3:03 PM

And maybe require that their employment contract with the gubmint stipulate that they agree not to work/consult for a media company for at least five years after leaving the government.

petefrt on March 2, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Anyone who wants to see what a state run media looks like need only tune into MSNBC anytime during the week.

Then tune in on the weekend to watch back-to-back LOCKUP……as a warning to those who dare to stray!

pilamaye on March 2, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Slow slide?

They’re going downhill like that pig in the commercial going ‘WEEEEEEEE!’

trigon on March 2, 2013 at 3:16 PM

There is no slide, slow or otherwise.

The MSM is in the tank for Obama, mere propaganda elements.

Liam on March 2, 2013 at 3:19 PM

There is clearly some debate over precisely how much of a “threat” it really was or was intended to be, but does that mean that it was a big nothingburger?

it wasn’t a threat threat…..

@whoopi

ted c on March 2, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Yes, most reporters are liberals, they always have been. The dangerous combo is liberal reporter plus prospective employment by liberal politician. Closing the revolving door between media and politics will bring integrity back to both

Sekhmet on March 2, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Closing the revolving door between media and politics will bring integrity back to both

Sekhmet on March 2, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Heh. No it won’t. I think that ship already sailed.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Not to try being offensive here, Jazz…

But you realistically have no idea what’s going on.

You toss out things without any knowledge or even a concept of us around here, and without any consideration of us. Well, except for the horrid ghoulish trolls that you refuse to finally ban when they have more than deserved it time and times again.

Liam on March 2, 2013 at 3:27 PM

The slow slide toward state run media

bullcrap. Its more like waking up to the fact we have had a state run media for the last 70 years. only the fact of a growing right leaning media are we able to compare and contrast.

for those waking up now would it seem that we are sliding towards a state run media. For those of us who have been awake for awhile we see we have always had a state run media. this is why liberals hate fox news and talk radio. They make people wake up. While the liberals are taking over fox news in leaps and bounds they still haven’t been able to take over talk radio.

unseen on March 2, 2013 at 3:28 PM

They make people wake up. While the liberals are taking over fox news in leaps and bounds they still haven’t been able to take over talk radio.

unseen on March 2, 2013 at 3:28 PM

…they’re working on it!…everything is in increments

KOOLAID2 on March 2, 2013 at 3:32 PM

It’s even better for the dems than state controlled. The MSM and dems share the same agenda, there is effectively no difference between the state message and the MSM message because they both share the same objectives.

AZfederalist on March 2, 2013 at 3:35 PM

Yes, all administrations are sensitive to criticism, and all push back when such criticism is deemed unfair or inaccurate.

The problem is that this White House deems it “unfair and inaccurate” when someone dares to expose the White House lies.

The Rogue Tomato on March 2, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Fox News…Juan…Geraldo…Jess Jackson’s bed partner…Scott Brown…Dennis Kusenich…etc…soon FOX will be recruiting from MSLSD!

KOOLAID2 on March 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Not to try being offensive here, Jazz…

But you realistically have no idea what’s going on.

You toss out things without any knowledge or even a concept of us around here, and without any consideration of us. Well, except for the horrid ghoulish trolls that you refuse to finally ban when they have more than deserved it time and times again.

Liam on March 2, 2013 at 3:27 PM

Personally I give Jazz a break, since I write my own blog I understand how difficult it can be to constantly come up with really god articles to write. Jazz gets paid to write articles that generate traffic, same as with Ed, Allahpundit and Ericka. They try to throw up a constant stream of articles that they think their readership is interested in.

Each one of them attempts to give their article a personal touch and say something that will provoke discussion. Trust me when I tell you this, writing 4, 5 or 6 articles a day that achieve that goal is no small task.

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 3:40 PM

You toss out things without any knowledge or even a concept of us around here, and without any consideration of us. Well, except for the horrid ghoulish trolls that you refuse to finally ban when they have more than deserved it time and times again.

Liam on March 2, 2013 at 3:27 PM

Eh, no use in arguing with it. HotAir is and has been a mouth piece of the establishment for a while. And they all write articles aimed at idiots, where half of the post is going over stuff we all know and don’t need to waste our time reading.

I just like the comments. If somewhere else had a good commenting section with good commenters, I’d leave hotair in a second.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM

In the end, the Woodward story was about a lot more than just Bob selling a few more books.

Yeah, IMHO it was really about Woodward saying the White House was displaying a kind of “madness” he had not seen in a long time (“I am not a crook”, hint, hint.) That “madness” phrase sure has been pushed down the memory hole effectively, hasn’t it?

ps. “I am not a dictator.” – Barack Obama

drunyan8315 on March 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM

In other words, I think we’re past the point of “slowly sliding” to state run media, we’ve already arrived.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 2:55 PM

I really dont think all the comments to this effect are helpful or accurate.

Places that have ACTUAL state-run media would laugh at us. Move to North Korea, Cuba, China or Soviet Russia then report back to me please.

Our media is highly culpable in a lot of ways and things right now. That’s really not even debatable. But to say that we’re state-run at this point is hyperbolic at best. If we’ve been state-run for decades why did GWB have such a hard time with them?

The issue isn’t state-run. It’s an engrained bias towards leftism that they don’t want to admit. And those are two very different things.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Each one of them attempts to give their article a personal touch and say something that will provoke discussion. Trust me when I tell you this, writing 4, 5 or 6 articles a day that achieve that goal is no small task.

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Yeah, I mean, I’m sure. But I’d rather see a “here’s a post, nothing to say on the topic since I’m very misinformed and/or tired and/or hung over. Have at it in the comments.” then “let me opine on something when nearly everyone who reads this will disagree with my assessment” or “let me say something so blatantly obviously to everyone who reads this that it’ll annoy them in to not reading the words I spent a decent amount of time typing”

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

…they’re working on it!…everything is in increments

KOOLAID2 on March 2, 2013 at 3:32 PM

yes they are but so far there is still too many real right leaning talk radio shows so the moderate liberal ones can’t compete. With fox news being the only “right leaning” news they are easier to take over since people have no other option.

same goes for right leaning web sites. I’ve noticed hotair has gone done a lot in comments as they move to the middle.

unseen on March 2, 2013 at 3:45 PM

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

more ideology run than state run but the end is the same only approved stories are printed and reported.

unseen on March 2, 2013 at 3:47 PM

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Yeah, I mean, I’m sure. But I’d rather see a “here’s a post, nothing to say on the topic since I’m very misinformed and/or tired and/or hung over. Have at it in the comments.” then “let me opine on something when nearly everyone who reads this will disagree with my assessment” or “let me say something so blatantly obviously to everyone who reads this that it’ll annoy them in to not reading the words I spent a decent amount of time typing”

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

I suggest you start your own blog and try writing 5 or 6 articles a day then. Remember, the whole point is t get people to participate in a discussion of the subject matter of the article. Every blogger goes about that in a slightly different way, but the goal is usually the same, to generate traffic and comments.

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 3:48 PM

Our media is highly culpable in a lot of ways and things right now. That’s really not even debatable. But to say that we’re state-run at this point is hyperbolic at best. If we’ve been state-run for decades why did GWB have such a hard time with them?

The issue isn’t state-run. It’s an engrained bias towards leftism that they don’t want to admit. And those are two very different things.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Well, I don’t have a better way to describe it. Yes, they’re not ACTUALLY a branch of our government, but what we have is almost worse, isn’t it? They pretend to be impartial, but they clearly aren’t.

And Bush was a republican, the entire government apparatus worked against him the entire time he was in office.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Media problem?

What are David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs up to these days

At least in the past the media was bias and leaned left
Reporters were rewarded for getting an exclusive which may include some objective issues
And permoted based on their skill

Now its how can we bury the story

Benghazi
Fast and furious
The fallacy of the sequester hikes
Run up to $17 trillion debt on whose watch?
The list goes on

audiotom on March 2, 2013 at 3:51 PM

we should wrap the media around obamas neck and watch them both drown.

the continued insistence of the republicans to kowtow to the left by appearing on their shows only lend credence to their side.

sd

renalin on March 2, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Terrible spelling
Promoted
Biased

Must remember to hit preview button

audiotom on March 2, 2013 at 3:53 PM

I suggest you start your own blog and try writing 5 or 6 articles a day then. Remember, the whole point is t get people to participate in a discussion of the subject matter of the article. Every blogger goes about that in a slightly different way, but the goal is usually the same, to generate traffic and comments.

SWalker on March 2, 2013 at 3:48 PM

Eh, I don’t have the time for that, nor do I think anyone cares what I have to say on a subject enough to read what I’m saying. Just like I can fix my own plumbing, and judge other plumbers work, but wouldn’t hire myself out as a plumber.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:56 PM

And Bush was a republican, the entire government apparatus worked against him the entire time he was in office.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Again, hyperbole. The entire government apparatus? That’s just not true.

And in the aftermath of 9/11 even the media gave him a holiday, at least for a short time. Their sense of patriotism for a while overroad their political bias.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM

The slow slide toward state run media
posted at 2:31 pm on March 2, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

What’s this “slow slide” you speak of?…

Gohawgs on March 2, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Again, hyperbole. The entire government apparatus? That’s just not true.

And in the aftermath of 9/11 even the media gave him a holiday, at least for a short time. Their sense of patriotism for a while overroad their political bias.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Yeah, the entire apparatus. The career bureaucrats in every organization from the CIA to the EPA to the state department on down (and yes, including the media) did everything they could to discredit bush and undermine him. Not that I have any love for Bush, but I mean — come on.

And I remember about a week after 9/11 where Bush was mostly left alone. after that, 9/11 was bush’s fault, he spent too much time vacationing, he was such an idiot that he didnt understand a memo that alluded to AQ using planes against buildings, he spent too much time golfing, our economy was in a recession because of bush’s tax cuts for the rich, bush was a war criminal who supported black sites and torture. Bush invaded Iraq because Saddam tried to kill his dad and because Cheney wanted to throw halliburton & his oil buddies some business…

Do you really not remember all of this?

Intelligence agencies and the iaea even went so far as to say Bush was crazy and that the iranians didnt have a nuclear weapon, didn’t want one, and weren’t trying to get one.

Come on, there are tons of examples… This didn’t happen THAT long ago, do you really not remember?

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Their sense of patriotism for a while overroad their political bias.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Their sense of what the American people would tolerate briefly overrode their politics.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Their sense of what the American people would tolerate briefly overrode their politics.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Right. And patriotism = nationalism which was what the nazi’s were all about. The left is a fan of internationalism where borders don’t exist, because that’s the only way for our international socialistic workers paradise to come to fruition.

The US is the land of slavery, the KKK, ignorant gun-shooting animal-eating, country music listening, inbred, IDIOT white-privileged racists who scour the earth stealing resources and enslaving indigenous populations.

You really need to bone up on your progressive 101.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Jazz Shaw:

I still don’t know why it’s important that reporters get to watch Barack Obama play golf with Tiger Woods.

Here’s the reason, as Republican Senator Jeff Sessions explains, like no media reporter would:

The President had 18 months to develop reforms to improve the government, but instead he announced furloughs of federal workers….

Yet, his golf weekend at the yacht club with Tiger Woods cost taxpayers over a million dollars—enough money to save 341 federal workers from furlough.”

That’s why it’s important that reporters get to watch Barack Obama play golf with Tiger Woods, even though they do nothing with the info other than whine about access, or lack thereof.

Cavalry on March 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM

The MSM types were well trained long before Barry came along.

There have been many stories over the years that they have ‘agendized’ in their editing and almost reporting of what matters…

They have tweaked for race, sexual proclivity, party affiliation, national origin… you get the drift. Barry has all the right code keys in his makeup to activate the maximum caretaker response from the media.

You might have thought that Sarah had the same level of access to the MSM’s sensitivities, but her pro-life, independent, moral and fiscal conservative nature stop them dead in their tracks. The way the press went after her you would have thought that she was an evil woman in every way. They never gave her an ounce of respect. Anytime it seemed they were willing to listen or give her an equal forum… it was a trap.

They didn’t hate her for her foibles, they hated her for her All American Family/Mother/God Centered Woman Image…

They respect Hillary above most every other woman in politics
Why? She stays in line with the radical leftist agenda… and with that all sins can be forgiven. Even selling out the women who that perv Billy Bob took advantage of was a badge for her; like a service medal she earned…

Obama is anti everything that made America great and they love him. He massages their ‘we care’ buttons so perfectly that they get orgasmic thrills in the legs. (Hey Chrissy, how far up your leg did that thrill go?)

On a rare occasional one of them will call Barry out, publicly denouncing some policy or piece of a speech of his. Hell, even Madcow ranted about NDAA and the Civilian Security Force that Barry called for. But as scary as those two things are, especially if used together (and let’s not talk about spy drones)… Madcow still loves him and will defend his rule.

Barry is like crack to their need to be caring and tolerant (heh).
This is the MSM I’m referring to. Not the LIV who just want free stuff, legalized pot, and gay marriage… Remember when he ‘evolved’ on gay marriage. Who was surprised? By the timing?

That evolution was strictly about power… But the MSM types love him for it all the more… No matter where his quest for power leads. So long as he feeds their need they will lick his boots. And of course free government paid abortions, for high schoolers, without parental notification is on the list… Hell they might even be coerced eventually… I have Zero trust for BIG GOV…

Radical leftist governments with media control and an army of propagandists can pull off damn near anything.
The last couple centuries are full of the actions of unaccountable dictators.

Mr. “I am not a dictator” needs to keep repeating this because it is what he wants to be, and he needs someone in the media to shout out with a headline “HE SHOULD BE”.

RalphyBoy on March 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM

You really need to bone up on your progressive 101.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM

and by “you” I mean

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:12 PM

The US is the land of slavery, the KKK, ignorant gun-shooting animal-eating, country music listening, inbred, IDIOT white-privileged racists who scour the earth stealing resources and enslaving indigenous populations.

You really need to bone up on your progressive 101.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Yeah, that is pretty much how they view the world. Everything wrong in the world is the fault of the west in general, and America in particular.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Yeah, that is pretty much how they view the world. Everything wrong in the world is the fault of the west in general, and America in particular.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:17 PM

I mean, I know that’s what I was taught in school. Luckily I was never the kind of person to just accept what an authority figure (teacher) tells me, but most of my generation and younger is brought up hearing those lessons every single day.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:21 PM

The issue isn’t state-run. It’s an engrained bias towards leftism that they don’t want to admit. And those are two very different things.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

The issue may be worse than “state-run” for, as Breitbart said, the true insidious nature of our media is its pious ostentation of “objectivity.” If the state isn’t actually running what is in effect an industry-wide corruption of core journalistic principle and tradition, and the media’s collusion in the cause of a corrupt power is voluntary, then what are we dealing with here as a society?

A veteran of the old Pravda news service wrote a piece a few months ago claiming that the American media is more embarrassing and less independent than they were in the heyday of the Soviet Union. He made good points.

And Matt Lewis is an idiot.

rrpjr on March 2, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Mark Steyn described them as the “eunuchs of the Obama court”, but concubines will do too.

Sir Napsalot on March 2, 2013 at 4:26 PM

I still don’t know why it’s important that reporters get to watch Barack Obama play golf with Tiger Woods

I’ve read a lot of this sentiment and I think it is wrong thinking.

Local talk radio has a host who used to be in the trenches as a White House reporter for Fox News. He explained that everytime the rat-eared wonder(or any President)goes on a golf outing to Andrews, Fort Belvior, or wherever the press pool has to go along. This is the pool that was standing by when GWB got the news about the WTC attack whilst reading a story about a goat. The pool generally gets to take a few shots (pictures not the other kind) of the President at the first tee then they are herded back into the officer’s club or wherever they are stored until the golf outing is over.

Well when it came to this particular vacation, the press pool wasn’t even allowed on the property. I suspect that it was all concern over the optics. Sequestration was looming and the rat-eared wonder was golfing with a golf legend on a luxury golf course in Florida. During the same weekend his worthless and racist wife and the mini-moochers were in Aspen at another location only millionaires can afford. And all travel for these vacations being paid for by the American taxpayers. We didn’t get pictures of the “Obama women” either.

And BTW, the rat-eared wonder got to Florida via Chicago and a speech against the Second Amendment he could have made from the East Room. The very next weekend his worthless spouse who inspires references to a certain furry Star Wars character was in Chicago also campaigning against the Second Amendment. Since Presdident’s Day Weekend, both the rat-eared traitor and his biotch have logged thousands of miles on the public dole.

GWB couldn’t get three weeks at the family home in Crawford without it becoming a “scandal.” How many times have rat-ears and (rhymes with) Gooey been to their mobster-provided home in Chicago? They stay in luxury hotels when they hit Chicago because the Secret Service “insists” they do so.

This is why that access to the Tiger Woods golf outing is a big deal. Bringing the press along and telling them to get lost until the flight back is a breech in the understanding of transparency as it has been understood. Stalinesque in its manipulation of the media. That even gives the worthless propagandists who adore the rat-eared traitor pause.

Happy Nomad on March 2, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Mr. “I am not a dictator” needs to keep repeating this because it is what he wants to be, and he needs someone in the media to shout out with a headline “HE SHOULD BE”.

Former Enron advisor and current NYT economic genius Paul Krugman came pretty close to saying so. His oft-expressed admiration for a command economy like China’s must be assumed to include an admiration for a Commander.

drunyan8315 on March 2, 2013 at 4:30 PM

In Michigan, most daily papers are now online and only have home delivery 2 or 3 days a week. I would imagine few of those who used to take delivery are bothering to pay for online access instead.

karenhasfreedom on March 2, 2013 at 2:52 PM

I was living in MI when this change was announced to the string of papers you’re talking about. By the time it happened the papers were a joke anyway. A few paltry pages of cut and paste from the Associated Press, Op-Ed pieces from liberals in Lansing about state politics, and little original content.

So sad. I know the top two people who ran the Grand Rapids Press for years. This is not the kind of product they would have allowed out the door. Part of it is the decline of print media but part of it is that the paper became nothing more than an “analog” version of news you can get on-line.

Happy Nomad on March 2, 2013 at 4:35 PM

J. Christian Adams was on F&F this a.m. talking about how BO admin plans to create new rules which will punish whistleblowers. Unfortunately I can’t find a link to it to share.

Buy Danish on March 2, 2013 at 4:36 PM

OT- That ad asking if Rachel Madcow is the most liberal media personality may be a point of contention. That she is one ugly dude is not.

Happy Nomad on March 2, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Before his second term is up, expect…

– increasing state control via bailouts (e.g. NYT) and crony capitalism (e.g. NBC-GE-Immelt)

- new FCC rules virtually shutting down talk radio as we know it and asserting authority over the internet

petefrt on March 2, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Yes. I was expecting to see some of this in the first term. I think we would have if our candidate hadn’t been a sure loser and Obama had been more worried.

The internet is too fat and sweet a target. Imagine the havoc caused to the opposition with internet shutdowns based on “perceived threats” to cyber-security.

rrpjr on March 2, 2013 at 4:39 PM

I mean, I know that’s what I was taught in school. Luckily I was never the kind of person to just accept what an authority figure (teacher) tells me, but most of my generation and younger is brought up hearing those lessons every single day.

Timin203 on March 2, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Just out of curiosity, how old are you Tim? When I was in school quite a few years ago, the “white man as plunderer” was subtle, not overt, but I graduated from High School in 77. The only place it was really pushed was in American history and the suppression of the Indians and slavery. As I say, it was subtle and still tended more toward truth than drama. I’m wondering when the full slide toward the “evil white man” narrative was started. It certainly was in effect when I was in college, but that was at the college level.

AZfederalist on March 2, 2013 at 4:44 PM

I really dont think all the comments to this effect are helpful or accurate.

Places that have ACTUAL state-run media would laugh at us. Move to North Korea, Cuba, China or Soviet Russia then report back to me please.

Our media is highly culpable in a lot of ways and things right now. That’s really not even debatable. But to say that we’re state-run at this point is hyperbolic at best. If we’ve been state-run for decades why did GWB have such a hard time with them?

The issue isn’t state-run. It’s an engrained bias towards leftism that they don’t want to admit. And those are two very different things.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

“State Run” is a bit of a misnomer. Agenda run is more accurate. i.e., the MSM and the dems share the same agenda. Because:

Media problem?

What are David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs up to these days

At least in the past the media was bias and leaned left
Reporters were rewarded for getting an exclusive which may include some objective issues
And permoted based on their skill

Now its how can we bury the story

audiotom on March 2, 2013 at 3:51 PM

The MSM and the dems are one and the same. You ask why was GW Bush excoriated? Because he was not a dem, most especially because he was not a marxist dem. The MSM and those in charge of the democrat party are exactly that. Many of them rotate between government, lobbyist, and media positions. Look at Stephanopolis, Carville, and Matthews. You think they left their marxist politics at the threshold when they stepped into the newsroom? No, they were hired into those newsrooms to continue to market that agenda.

AZfederalist on March 2, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Lost in all the commentary, including this one, is the claim of threat was not an email. The email was an attempt to cover up the threat by putting it in a different context.
Woodward made it clear the threat was delivered orally, over the phone, accompanied by a great deal of cursing and ‘we will get you’. This has morphed into a ‘I regret that you do not understand the obvious’. After the incident was reported.
The latter a good lawyer’s tactic to dampen controversy.The MSM plays along, and now Woodward is clearly scared even if he acts otherwise.
I would expect a story that attempts to disclose the malicious behavior of the and the attempts of the media to turn Woodward inton a dithering halfwit to get the narrative to a point it is understandable. Anything less and you are compounding the intent of these obfuscating emails.

pat on March 2, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Yeah, that is pretty much how they view the world. Everything wrong in the world is the fault of the west in general, and America in particular.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:17 PM

-
In English 101 at the county college our text book had nearly every white guy as the villain… and most minorities or women as the victims or at most neutral.

I called the professor out on it during an open Q&A session. At least she nodded in agreement of my assertion. She was always supportive of me and even said that I should go into politics. I was at the time in a politically charged position in a non-profit and told her ‘not a chance’.

This was ~20 years ago… My guess is she was not a lib and was just using the recommended material.

Former Enron advisor and current NYT economic genius Paul Krugman came pretty close to saying so. His oft-expressed admiration for a command economy like China’s must be assumed to include an admiration for a Commander.

drunyan8315 on March 2, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Yeah, I’ve seen some of those musings too. I’m wondering how long till it’s front page above the fold.

This was something I read in 08… and now the only references to it are things others wrote… I think it’s been scrubbed. This is how his followers think.

Philadelphia Daily News ^ | September 2, 2008 | Fatimah Ali

If McCain wins, look for a full-fledged race and class war, fueled by a deflated and depressed country, soaring crime, homelessness – and hopelessness!

It was at the time said to be ‘permission’ by a local reporter to riot if Barry lost. Pretty much… it was.

RalphyBoy on March 2, 2013 at 5:12 PM

I really dont think all the comments to this effect are helpful or accurate.

Places that have ACTUAL state-run media would laugh at us. Move to North Korea, Cuba, China or Soviet Russia then report back to me please.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Well, I have been listening to those state-run media outlets since Lyndon Johnson was President-namely the old Radio Moscow (now called Voice of Russia), the old Radio Peking (now called Radio Beijing), Radio Tirana, Radio Pyongyang, and the still active Radio Habana Cuba.

In 2004, the Associated Press (or as I like to call them, “al-AP”) successfully sued the Bush White House for his military records, while at the same time making a deal with his Democrat “opponent” that they would keep his military records a secret. That “opponent” is now our Secretary of State.

And the appalling lack of curiosity by the 2007-present Democrat Media over the background of our Dear Leader, along with their total lack of interest about the Fast and Furious scandal and what really happened at Bengahzi, are in fact conclusive proof that they are State Run Media, just as much so as any of the examples I cite above.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2013 at 5:25 PM

So, you have the Chicago Way in the deal.
So, you have union goons in the deal.
So, you have Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Clinton in the deal.
So, you have black liberation theology and Rev. Wrigh in the deal.
So, you have a commie studies media in the deal from the big deal to now.
So, you have a “you owe me” vote base that has been taught lies and the welfare state for 4 generations.
So, you have the other half of the cult just in the deal for the ear marks.

There is no reason they will not go for the GNN.
Goebbles News Networks.

Think of how bad they want to be, double that you get the result.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on March 2, 2013 at 5:27 PM

And in the aftermath of 9/11 even the media gave him a holiday, at least for a short time. Their sense of patriotism for a while overroad their political bias.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 4:00 PM

You’re funny.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2013 at 5:27 PM

When the media fell from grace and became distrusted by the public to do this important job, bloggers and other non-establishment entities stepped in to watch the watchers so to speak.

Maybe so, but the problem with bloggers is that the information and the different take on the news that they present doesn’t get heard by the majority of the public. In fact, people have to be proactive and look it up on the Internet to find it. It’s not like the general public can just turn on their TV and have it told to them. They have to actually go look it up and read about it, something the general public can hardly do anymore. Thus, the low information voter is created in the middle of the information age.

Dollayo on March 2, 2013 at 5:29 PM

Matt Lewis has all the conservative bona fides of Meggie Mac.

As far as the media being played, or increasingly influenced by the White House: they’ve taken a look at their balance sheets and made a financial decision that this is the best hope for their survival. Bailouts, as we know, are all the rage. For individual journalists- it’s a function of their education. They’re already predisposed to believe what is coming out of this administration so accepting it without scrutiny seems natural and right.

BKeyser on March 2, 2013 at 5:29 PM

Conservatives need to get into the media business and present their alternative points of view. Until that happens liberals and socialists and other people with only a limited grasp of reality will continue to broadcast their fantasies unchallenged.

YiZhangZhe on March 2, 2013 at 5:35 PM

No. The people who worked at Pravda generally had the excuse that they would be sent to a gulag or killed if they didn’t write what the state wanted. The MSM happily and enthusiastically lies and spreads anti-American state propaganda while assaulting any who challenge the state or the 84 IQ, Sukarno-knockoff, retard tyrant ruling it.

Pravda worked under duress and threats. The MSM uses all of its undeserved power to threaten and place under duress all those who don’t bow to the affirmative action lunatic and his junta. Very different media animals.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Heh. Don’t hold anything back now, TPOP. :)

TarheelBen on March 2, 2013 at 5:37 PM

Conservatives need to get into the media business and present their alternative points of view. Until that happens liberals and socialists and other people with only a limited grasp of reality will continue to broadcast their fantasies unchallenged.

YiZhangZhe on March 2, 2013 at 5:35 PM

I respectfully disagree.

Conservatives are presenting their alternative points of view all over the place. They are in the media business.

The deck is stacked against them. The liberal media defines the terms and dictates what is covered and what is not. For example, a breathless Ann Curry (administration and spokeswhore at ABC) will talk about the House GOP refusing to agree with the rat-eared wonder in the White House about raising taxes as if they are unreasonable in their dissent. And let us not forget that any tax legislation has to start in the House by law.

What conservatives need to do is pick about four key issues and do nothing but discuss them. My choices would be protection of religious freedom (repeal of the HHS mandate and support of DOMA), support of the Second Amendment (and elimination of most of the anti-Constitutional measures being pushed by treasonous groups like Brady and Giffords’ organizations), fiscal sanity (cutting the size and scope of government), and national security (highlighting the way the current administration is failing miserably including putting an anti-Semite idiot who wants unilateral disarmament in charge of our nuclear weapons ).

Happy Nomad on March 2, 2013 at 5:46 PM

It’s not really a slow slide. The media has tilted left since the start of the 20th century. Look at how Ben Bradlee and others covered for JFK during the early 1960s. Look at how the media attacked Goldwater in 1964.

The difference is that Watergate attracted a new breed to the media, people who wanted to use the media as political activists rather than report the news. In the past 25 years members of the media have become open cheerleaders.

bw222 on March 2, 2013 at 5:48 PM

No. The people who worked at Pravda generally had the excuse that they would be sent to a gulag or killed if they didn’t write what the state wanted. The MSM happily and enthusiastically lies and spreads anti-American state propaganda while assaulting any who challenge the state or the 84 IQ, Sukarno-knockoff, retard tyrant ruling it.

Pravda worked under duress and threats. The MSM uses all of its undeserved power to threaten and place under duress all those who don’t bow to the affirmative action lunatic and his junta. Very different media animals.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Very true today’s media exercises a self-imposed censorship.

bw222 on March 2, 2013 at 5:54 PM

As far as the media being played, or increasingly influenced by the White House: they’ve taken a look at their balance sheets and made a financial decision that this is the best hope for their survival. Bailouts, as we know, are all the rage. For individual journalists- it’s a function of their education. They’re already predisposed to believe what is coming out of this administration so accepting it without scrutiny seems natural and right.

BKeyser on March 2, 2013 at 5:29 PM

And then there is this.

RalphyBoy on March 2, 2013 at 6:15 PM

In 2004, the Associated Press (or as I like to call them, “al-AP”) successfully sued the Bush White House for his military records, while at the same time making a deal with his Democrat “opponent” that they would keep his military records a secret. That “opponent” is now our Secretary of State.

And the appalling lack of curiosity by the 2007-present Democrat Media over the background of our Dear Leader, along with their total lack of interest about the Fast and Furious scandal and what really happened at Bengahzi, are in fact conclusive proof that they are State Run Media, just as much so as any of the examples I cite above.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2013 at 5:25 PM

You defeated your own point for me. The AP sued the Bush White House. If it was State-Run media the Bush White House would’ve been controlling the AP.

Again, it’s agenda-driven, Leftist-oriented media. That’s not the same as state-run.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 6:27 PM

You defeated your own point for me. The AP sued the Bush White House. If it was State-Run media the Bush White House would’ve been controlling the AP.

Again, it’s agenda-driven, Leftist-oriented media. That’s not the same as state-run.

MikeknaJ on March 2, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Would it make you feel better if we were to say that it is “state run” when the democrats are in power? Because that is really the crux of it.

You are correct, it is agenda and ideology driven. The press and the extreme left of the democrat party are one and the same thing. Since the extreme left of the democrat party is running things right now, the MSM is effectively a branch of the state and willingly so. Only when a Republican is in office (doesn’t matter how liberal the Republican is BTW), only then will the MSM go into full-on assault and personal attack mode.

AZfederalist on March 2, 2013 at 6:40 PM

I do remember an interview with Connie Chung and the question to Connie was, “How do you know what to report in the news”, her answer was, “it all goes through the White House”. Connie Chung disappeared as a news person and not seen for at least two years but never again as a news reporter. So if you want to keep your job, obey the rules from the White House. So in reality the reporters are between a rock and a hard spot. The internet is about the only way to get a decent news report and they too are edited some what.

mixplix on March 2, 2013 at 7:24 PM

It’s not so much that political entities control the press, it’s that they are in large part “fellow travelers”.

And by “fellow travelers”, I mean a symbiotic cluster-fluke of power mad whack-jobs and self-righteous, flap-jawed, know-it-all pieholes.

S. D. on March 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Jazz, I recognize that you’re in the “news business”, but really I have a very successful business and private life even with all the sturm and drang of President Jizzle and his douche nozzles. How do I do it? I completely ignore the stupid man. You can do it, too. Go report on things conservative and all will be well.

DevilsPrinciple on March 2, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Slow slide? Hell, they’ve been Barry’s whores since Day One. They just won’t accept their place.

GarandFan on March 2, 2013 at 2:36 PM

That is exactly my first thot when I read the thread topic. What?
Slow slide?????

bluefox on March 2, 2013 at 9:37 PM

It serves as a reminder that state influence over the media remains a danger, just as the Founders knew it could be when they drafted the Bill of Rights.

We citizens can never approach a President, ask a hard question about policy, and get an answer. That ability has, over the years, migrated to the fourth estate — and a supposed antagonism between those in the fourth estate and the executive and legislative branches of our Government.

Part of the Imperial Presidency is the collapse of the fourth estate — there are no press conferences whereby the President is put on the spot and forced to answer the hard questions. And, as much as some in the fourth estate might want to blame the President, in reality, they have themselves to blame — having deliberately muzzled themselves — or worse — because they support this President politically.

Now that the front row is rarely lit nowadays, and the President has chosen to control every aspect of the message, he no longer needs his (mostly) synchophant press corps — he has discarded them. No more possibility of a Bob Woodward speaking truth to power.

I don’t even think most Americans notice, and that’s sad.

unclesmrgol on March 2, 2013 at 9:48 PM

The Left destroy the land.

Schadenfreude on March 2, 2013 at 11:13 PM

Ever since the beginnings of the so called new media we have heard how the multitude of sources would undermine the power of traditional media and undermine collectivist governments. Glenn Reynolds has been a big proponent of this “Army of Davids” concept. I have always been skeptical of this. On many occasions and in many professional information campaign forums I have argued the contrary. Joseph Goebbels would have exploited and dominated the new media.

The body politic throughout world is increasingly dominated by a low information population who are easily exploited. Social media has negative information content. It is little more than a combination of the game of telephone and a gossip column. It is the perfect environment to plant false information to a self centered uninformed group of people. The old media isn’t dying because it is being replaced by a better alternative. It is dying because the younger Gen Xers and the Millenials are incapable of reading and understanding sophisticated in depth analysis. This problem cuts across political lines. Information has been reduced to 140 character bumper stickers.
This is why Obama won the election by dominating the under 30 age group. Their lack of knowledge makes them perfect tarkets for propaganda. They will believe anything that comes across their twitter accounts. How else to explain how the hardest hit generation continued to enthusiaticaly support the candidate that is destroying their future?

jerryofva on March 2, 2013 at 11:30 PM

The Left destroy the land.

Schadenfreude on March 2, 2013 at 11:13 PM

Unreal. He deserves the worst things that can happen to a human.

tom daschle concerned on March 2, 2013 at 11:59 PM

Using the phrase “you will regret” is an attempt to persuade by means other than facts, logic, and reason.

It is an appeal to the fear of the consequences of continuing along the path that leads to “regret”.

Now that can mean many things. But when a very high government official, one in the president’s inner circle, says that in an email shortly after yelling at you over the phone for about a half an hour, the number of things it can mean narrows considerably.

A rational human being must assume the very real possibility that it means one or more of “the president’s men” may become agents of that “regret” in one way or another.

Add in the fact that this admin seems to be getting a reputation among many reporters and pundits, even with Lanny Davis for chrissakes, for playing hardball with media folks that dare disagree with them publicly. Then consider this latest charge is coming from Woodward, a lifelong liberal Democrat.

At a bare minimum Woodward is publicly telling the admin to back off, if not for himself then for his friends and colleagues in the media. That is, he is telling the admin they are getting out-of-hand and either crossing over or pushing the line of what is acceptable.

farsighted on March 3, 2013 at 10:37 AM

That is the true power of the Democrat Media. It’s not what they report, but what they don’t report.

Prime example: in March of 1991 the Fed announced that the economic recovery had started based on their statistics. But the Democrat Media never reported this, because if they had Pappy Bush would have been re-elected in 1992.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM

I remember this well. The media’s anti-GHWB jihad was obvious. The stories of how people were still suffering in that economy were unending, repeated daily. Thanks in part to Perot the MSM also harped non-stop about the deficit. I severed my last tie to the MSM in the week after the election, cancelling my subscription to Newsweek. I have had little but contempt for the MSM ever since.

Now contrast that with how they treated a Dem incumbent POTUS presiding over a much, much worse economy and deficit this past election year. The contrast is stark. It is practically as close as you can get to a black and white difference.

farsighted on March 3, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Yeah, that is pretty much how they view the world. Everything wrong in the world is the fault of the west in general, and America in particular.

sharrukin on March 2, 2013 at 4:17 PM

The rest of the world was a utopian paradise before white European males showed up several hundred years ago, or so one would think from the propaganda.

Except for the fact the the rest of the world did things at least as horrible, and usually worse, to their neighbors on a regular basis for all of recorded history. And they were doing them right up to the time the white European males showed up.

And then there is all the good white European males brought to the world. Watch any film clip from anywhere in the world and start tabulating the things you see that were brought to the people there by western civilization. Start with the clothes, and the vehicles, and the infra-structure — all of which are the product of the science and technology and low-cost manufacturing processes western civilization has given to the world. Not to mention the concepts of humans right and freedoms and consensual government. And so on ans so forth.

Seems human beings cannot resist tearing down and destroying that which does them good if it does someone else a bit more good. There is an envious self-destructive streak in human nature. And that is what socialists and demagogues like Comrade O exploit to gain power.

farsighted on March 3, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Perhaps we ought to be a little more realistic here.

There is a huge difference between a state run media and a state compliant media, or our “model.”

The latter, it seems to me, risks becoming a far more sinister historical development. I suppose one basic reason is that the illusion of a free and independent media makes it a more difficult phenomenon to discredit any particular news purveying organization in a macro way, than if it was one identified as the either the “official” government, or even the “official” party organ.

Back in the fall of 2004, for example, the alternative media certainly succeeded in discrediting Dan Rather and ultimately his producer, Mary Mapes on the 60 Minutes Wednesday attempt to bring down Bush with a story the network knew was false. But they did not succeed in fully discrediting CBS as a “credible” news purveying organization, nor even of undermining that show, CBS 60 Minutes Wednesday. While it is true that CBS News did suffer considerable rating losses thereafter, it survived. And so did that show.

More recently, it is at least arguable that those at CBS 60 Minutes Wednesday and perhaps others at CBS News finally got their revenge this past fall by intentionally sitting on that key “Q & A” exchange between Steve Kroft and President Obama during the interview on September 12th, the day following the terror attack in Benghazi, Libya.

This one:

* * *
KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word “terrorism” in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

OBAMA: Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.”
* * *

What cannot be credibly argued is that the suppression of that exchange in the interview from the CBS 60 Minutes Wednesday show that aired that very evening (Wednesday, September 12th), gave the show’s viewers a false and incomplete impression of the President’s reaction to the attack. After the interview, did any of the President’s communications staff ask Kroft, or anyone else at CBS to kill that question and answer? We don’t know, and likely never will.

Nor can it be credibly argued that the decision on the part of CBS News to quietly hold onto and fail to release that portion of the interview until a few days prior to the election – without any fanfare – was a highly partisan political act on its part. What we don’t know is who and how many within the CBS News family were aware of that suppressed Q & A during the run up to the election, and who kept quiet about it. Certainly Steve Kroft and his producer knew, along with the film staff. But did Bob Schieffer – the moderator of the third debate know? Did higher ups in the CBS News management organization know? They are not talking, and no one is pressing them for an answer.

“B’rer Fox, he lay low.”

As we also all know, over one month later, that very topic became a matter of a somewhat heated exchange between the two Presidential contenders during the second Presidential debate “moderated” by Candy Crowley of CNN. We also know that Candy’s inappropriate interjection as a “fact checker” during that exchange (in clearly taking the side of the President) was fundamentally in error. Only later in the evening, when far fewer viewers were watching, did she finally concede that Mitt Romney had been at least partially correct. We now know that Mitt was actually spot on, and that the President was lying. Mr. Obama initially refused to publicly call the attack a terror attack, and he told Steve Kroft that on September 12th, hours after the incident in which four Americans were brutally murdered by terrorists.

Remember, the issue was over Obama’s stated claim during the debate, that he had called the attack in Benghazi a terrorism attack right from the start. Mitt disputed that, but Candy jumped in to save the President’s bacon. The “state compliant” media to the rescue!

Therefore, right after that second debate, or even the next day would have been another perfect time for CBS News to release that tape, and to do a story about on the news that evening. It was entirely newsworthy. But they decided to sit on it which essentially gave the lie to the President.

You really also have to wonder if the President and his media team played any active role in persuading CBS News to keep that tape quiet throughout the campaign? Or, did the network suppress it all on their own? Either way, the “state compliant” media came to the rescue!

At this point in our history, we’d never fall for the old Soviet model, for example, of an official party feeding the line to the official party organ.

Even the Soviet people became aware as expressed through their wonderful old joke regarding Pravda (the Truth) and Izvestia (the News) –- and that public knowledge knowledge ultimately helped to bring down the USSR.

“There is no truth in the News, and no news in the Truth.”

Trochilus on March 3, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Using the phrase “you will regret” is an attempt to persuade by means other than facts, logic, and reason.

It is an appeal to the fear of the consequences of continuing along the path that leads to “regret”.
. . . .

farsighted on March 3, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Excellent comment. One of several, I might add.

Context is so important in this regard.

For a high government official to tell a reporter that he would “regret” pointing out very clearly that the President was attempting to mislead the American people, had to be taken as a veiled threat. Sending your “regrets” regarding an invitation to a garden party is not.

Sperling is a sophisticated enough guy to know that he neither could nor should ever directly threaten any reporter.

But this public kerfuffle was for all the marbles. Barack Obama needed to establish a baseline from which to pursue his second term agenda, even if it meant openly lying to the American people by telling them things about the sequester, including its origin, that were patently false. And even if it meant directly blaming Republicans for all his political ills — the guy is the classic example of the “sore winner!” I personally think it’s the Community Organizer thing.

But when a reporter of considerable note was pursuing a story line that in some ways undermined that path, the President obviously sent out one of his officials to try to “persuade” the reporter otherwise — to get him to back down. And Sperling was expected to succeed, not just try.

So he chose to deliver a message that could be interpreted in a few ways, one of which was as a direct threat — You will “regret” is Chicago for a snarly, “You catch my drift, eh?”

The consequence, however, could likely cause the opposite reaction:

As the gap between us grows wider and wider,

Barack will become known as The Great Divider.

Trochilus on March 3, 2013 at 1:57 PM

Let’s put first things first, we know today that the sequester was the President’s idea, the White House has admitted that. Now, looking at the Woodward thing through that prism, Sperling called up to tell Woodward he’d be sorry for taking that tact and making the comments he didn’t about how strange he thought it was that Obama was doing things with National Security and blaming it on the sequester. Woodward it one thing, just imagine some lesser-light in the press corps (and there are a few of them around) getting yelled at for a 1/2 hour by Sperling. I’d call that intimidation, especially if it weren’t Woodward.

Pravda and Izvestia have done the whole country a disservice, with their treatment of Democrats in General and this President specifically. The Republican Party not only has to fight the President and Democrats on every issue, it also has to fight the media perception put out. In that regard, the whole country is at a disadvantage and not being given the free press it deserves and which the constitution was written to protect.

bflat879 on March 3, 2013 at 2:34 PM

But, locking reporters in closets aside… What other proof do you have of State Controlled Media during Obama’s Reign of Unquestionably Benevolent Authoritarian Leadership?

RalphyBoy on March 3, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2