Attkisson: “Chilling effect” from Obama administration on journalists

posted at 8:41 am on April 14, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Howard Kurtz interviewed recently-departed CBS News reporter, and asked her why she gave up on a 20-year career at one of the premier broadcast networks. Attkisson told Kurtz that political considerations were at play, but the bigger issue is the “chilling effect” of the Obama administration on journalists, but also “corporate interest” pressure as well, which don’t tend to balance themselves out but add together. Kurtz wondered aloud whether her growing reputation as a “conservative” journalist wasn’t an attempt to discredit Attkisson, and she agrees. When she went after the Bush administration, Attkisson noted, no one was calling her a “progressive” journalist — and her CBS bosses were delighted to run those stories (transcript via Newsbusters):

ATTKISSON: I didn’t run into that same kind of sentiment [at CBS] as I did in the Obama administration when I covered the Bush administration very aggressively, on its secrecy and lack of Freedom of Information responses, and its poor management of the Food and Drug Administration and the national laboratories, the Halliburton-Iraq questions of fraud. I mean, there was one thing after another. The bait-and-switch of TARP, the bank bailout program. All of those stories under Bush were met with a good reception. There were different managers as well, but no one accused me of being a mouthpiece for the liberals at that time.

Attkisson told Kurtz that the White House would pressure her to change or drop her reporting, and when that didn’t work, they worked her bosses instead. Kurtz asked how this differed from the “working the refs” actions that go on all the time in Washington, and Attkisson says that it went too far. “It’s just a lot of obfuscation, accusations, saying things are ‘phony scandals,’ ‘bogus,’ ‘not real,’ giving misinformation and false information. I mean, that’s provably true in some cases.”

Mediaite grabs another portion of the interview to capture Attkisson’s complaint about broadcast journalism in the age of Obama:

Now there’ve always been tensions, there have always been calls from the White House under any administration I assume, when they don’t like a particular story. But it is particularly aggressive under the Obama administration and I think it’s a campaign that’s very well organized, that’s designed to have sort of a chilling effect and to some degree has been somewhat successful in getting broadcast producers who don’t really want to deal with the headache of it — why put on these controversial stories that we’re going to have to fight people on, when we can fill the broadcast with other perfectly decent stories that don’t ruffle the same feathers?

If it’s just the “headache of it,” one would have expected that this would have also been true during the Bush administration. As Attkisson’s experience and our own shows, that’s just not the case. Perhaps the Obama administration exerts more pressure and plays Chicago sur le Potomac more than the Bush administration did — or perhaps the mandarins of journalism these days just see the Obama administration a lot more sympathetically.

By the way, Kurtz will have more from Attkisson next week, and NYU’s Jay Rosen will want to stay tuned:

Jay RT’d Howard’s response, to his credit. And yes, that will be a very interesting topic as well.


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

but the bigger issue is the “chilling effect” of the Obama administration on journalists, but also “corporate interest” pressure as well, which don’t tend to balance themselves out but add together.

= fascism.

Mussolini created fascism as a “third way” between capitalism and soviet communism. Big business working hand in hand with an authoritarian government is fascism.

rbj on April 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM

“Chilling Effect”, or as they say in Japan, “IRS Audit”.

Bishop on April 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM

I once heard that there is a fundamental right to a “free and independent press”…..
not sure where I saw that, but thought it was important.

ted c on April 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM

Jay RT’d Howard’s response

I didn’t see it.

mankai on April 14, 2014 at 8:53 AM

People, if you can’t say anything nice about Dear Leader, don’t say anything at all.

Or you’ll wind up on a list somewhere…

Anyway, time to go mail a check to my Uncle Sam, and Andrew Cuomo. There’s people out there in casinos, liquor stores and strip clubs all across the country depending on me.

trubble on April 14, 2014 at 8:55 AM

The ‘chilling effect’ is in large part because the media locked themselves in the ice house back in 2007 (or in some cases, after Obama’s 2004 DNC speech) when they decided it didn’t matter who he was, Obama had to be president.

The pressure works because even though the bloom may be off the rose a lot in the Obama-media love affair, for many of those same people, being put under heavy pressure by the White House doesn’t make them angry, as it would if Bush or any other Republican had done it; instead it stirs up Battered Wife Syndrome, where the media feels both guilt for being even the tiniest bit harsh on their love interest, and fearful of any full break with him, out of fear of what life might be like with a Republican back in power (and it doesn’t matter here if the Republican is Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Jeb Bush or Chris Christie).

jon1979 on April 14, 2014 at 8:55 AM

If it’s just the “headache of it,” one would have expected that this would have also been true during the Bush administration. As Attkisson’s experience and our own shows, that’s just not the case. Perhaps the Obama administration exerts more pressure and plays Chicago sur le Potomac more than the Bush administration did — or perhaps the mandarins of journalism these days just see the Obama administration a lot more sympathetically.

Sorry, but I don’t buy this “headache” argument. That’s a convenient excuse for what amounts to these sycophantic producers and reporters(aside from rare exceptions like Attkisson) willingly running interference for Obama and the Democrat Party.

If it was solely due to pressure from the White House, then why did Obama get such favorable coverage BEFORE he was President? Why do news organizations bury most scandals involving Democrats and not just ones potentially linked to Obama(see CNN’s refusal to cover Leland Yee)? And why can’t all of these networks and newspapers unite in resistance to the regime’s efforts to stifle their reporting? There’s no way Obama could have a “chilling effect” on journalists if they all refused to go along with it.

The truth is Attkisson was thrown under the bus because CBS didn’t want her reporting these stories. Not because the Obama Administration was creating headaches for the network. But because Attkisson herself was.

Doughboy on April 14, 2014 at 8:56 AM

Well, the major outlets are so in the tank and in the pocket of the left that there really is no “chilling effect” per se. Although independent and honest journalists like Ms. Atkisson are being pressured into silence by their own editors because of that relationship.

Aside from talk radio and the internet, there is no independent watchdog media in this country. Probably never was, but it took said talk radio and internet to make that statement obvious.

Rixon on April 14, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Somehow I don’t think Presstitute Organs is descriptive enough. Maybe Presstitute (Praetorian) Guard?

Steve Eggleston on April 14, 2014 at 8:59 AM

“Chilling effect” from Obama administration on journalists

Let’s see…. You have Obama official Ben Rhodes calling up the President of CBS News to complain about Attkisson’s reporting. And with CBS News being run by Ben Rhodes’ brother- I call that as incestuous as it is chilling.

You’ve got Jay Carney married to a senior ABC correspondent and the administration if filled with individuals with connections to the media. Hitler’s propaganda machine was not this impressive. Any truth that gets out is purely by accident.

Happy Nomad on April 14, 2014 at 9:02 AM

This might have more influence over CBS’ editorial decision-making than some “headache” BS:

Top Obama official’s brother is president of CBS News

rcpjr on April 14, 2014 at 9:06 AM

I’ll bet those media companies are kind of like a Chinese village. Some of them are complicit and others are afraid to even speak out in their own office for fear of who might be listening and retribution.

crankyoldlady on April 14, 2014 at 9:09 AM

Obama is the Thug In Chief.

ConstantineXI on April 14, 2014 at 9:09 AM

Obama is a failure, a fraud and one who lies.
He needs the media to protect him and keep him in power.

The main stream media is not about facts and the truth, but rather it is the propaganda arm of the Democratic party whose only goal is to keep the liberals in power.

albill on April 14, 2014 at 9:15 AM

HotAir didn’t cover the BLM/Cliven Bundy standoff until after it was over. This should have been a huge story, screaming for coverage and discussion everywhere. I can understand why the lefties wouldn’t cover a potential Waco. But I’m scratching my head why not here.

Fenris on April 14, 2014 at 9:18 AM

Once you start to see the MSM as the Ministry of Truth, it all falls into place and makes sense.

Occams Stubble on April 14, 2014 at 9:19 AM

I once heard that there is a fundamental right to a “free and independent press”…..
not sure where I saw that, but thought it was important.

ted c on April 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM

Only when a Republican is President

Roy Rogers on April 14, 2014 at 9:26 AM

No matter who is the next president, Pravda is still controlling the news.

vityas on April 14, 2014 at 9:29 AM

“…Attkisson told Kurtz that the White House would pressure her to change or drop her reporting, and when that didn’t work, they worked her bosses instead…”

Almost sounds like CBS was forwarding ‘Courtesy Advance Copies’ of the news to some Editor-In-Chief for final approval prior to broadcast.

TimBuk3 on April 14, 2014 at 9:34 AM

Liberal bias? @HowardKurtz asked @SharylAttkisson about that. Unsolved mystery of who broke into her computer? Nope. http://t.co/zayBxK0A92

— Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) April 13, 2014

What a tool. Even if he hadn’t asked her about it, so what? I’ve never heard of this dude before, but I’m betting he’s not sitting there dissecting what probing questions the Dem press isn’t asking Obama.

changer1701 on April 14, 2014 at 9:34 AM

You were given freedom of the press to fight against the chilling effect of the president.
Do your damned jobs and report the news and hold the government accountable. Chilling effect be damned. In fact, the chilling effect should be front and center every single day until you force the government to relent.

astonerii on April 14, 2014 at 9:34 AM

Attkisson made her bed, now she can sleep in it. What she failed to understand is that the media’s prime purpose is to serve as the conduit for announcing government policy and policy changes.

“Journalists” such as Attkisson only confuse and frustrate the American public by discussing obscure and miniscule issues…all designed to create doubt and weaken our citizens’ faith and loyalty to the government.

Americans simply don’t have time to read, research and be distracted by allegations and rightwing fables, so for the good of our country and/or leaders, we must ensure only accurate and/or positive stories about the government are disseminated.

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

heh heh gonna see some heads explode soon :)

dmacleo on April 14, 2014 at 9:36 AM

Once you start to see the MSM as the Ministry of Truth, it all falls into place and makes sense.

Occams Stubble on April 14, 2014 at 9:19 AM

That’s MiniTrue to us proles.

Steve Eggleston on April 14, 2014 at 9:37 AM

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Did you jump the gun and get a numbered tattoo on your arm already?

docflash on April 14, 2014 at 9:43 AM

As long as Attkisson is confined to Fox News and book writing, the MSM is happy to ignore her.

The important thing for the MSM is that her reporting not reach the persuadable low information Obama supporter.

commodore on April 14, 2014 at 9:44 AM

asked her why she gave up on a 20-year career at one of the premier broadcast networks.

Now that’s funny.

rrpjr on April 14, 2014 at 9:57 AM

Says Howie in the twilight of his career…

d1carter on April 14, 2014 at 9:59 AM

… or perhaps the mandarins of journalism these days just see the Obama administration a lot more sympathetically.

Good grief, Mr. Morrissey, I know you’re not THAT stinking clueless.

Cleombrotus on April 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM

The truth is Attkisson was thrown under the bus because CBS didn’t want her reporting these stories. Not because the Obama Administration was creating headaches for the network. But because Attkisson herself was.
Doughboy on April 14, 2014 at 8:56 AM

Take notes, Mr. Morrissey.

Cleombrotus on April 14, 2014 at 10:08 AM

Is it still surprising we have a corrupt mainstream media..?

d1carter on April 14, 2014 at 10:10 AM

People, if you can’t say anything nice about Dear Leader, don’t say anything at all.

It is obvious how the references to Obama in the news have increasingly been replaced with vague references to “the White House” and other blah-words. Used to be they couldn’t say their hero’s name often enough.

Ray Van Dune on April 14, 2014 at 10:12 AM

She better watch her back…

d1carter on April 14, 2014 at 10:14 AM

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Heh. Let us all stand and sing together:

Be glorious, our free motherland,
A reliable stronghold of peoples’ friendship!
The Party of Obama, the strength of the people,
Leads us to the triumph of Obamaism!

Through tempests the sun of freedom shone to us,
And the great Obama illuminated our path,
To a just cause he raised up the peoples,
To labour and heroic deeds he inspired us!

TarheelBen on April 14, 2014 at 10:24 AM

…perhaps the mandarins of journalism these days just see the Obama administration a lot more sympathetically.

Nah! They ask King Barack such difficult questions. Like, ‘how is it to own you own airplane?’ Or ‘how do you keep such a sharp crease in your trousers?’

Cutting edge stuff!

GarandFan on April 14, 2014 at 10:32 AM

“Chilling Effect”, or as they say in Japan, “IRS Audit”.

Bishop on April 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM

I was not aware that you spoke Japanese so fluently, Bishop.

Attkisson made her bed, now she can sleep in it. What she failed to understand is that the media’s prime purpose is to serve as the conduit for announcing government policy and policy changes.

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Um… no. No it isn’t. The “news” media’ prime purpose should be to report the news. You simply don’t accept any questioning of your Dear Leader. Lemmings such as yourself have bought into your delusional view of what the news media purpose is.

FAIL

ghostwalker1 on April 14, 2014 at 10:40 AM

TarheelBen on April 14, 2014 at 10:24 AM

Gave me goosebumps…and a thrill up my leg. Thank you.

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 10:49 AM

Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Um… no. No it isn’t. The “news” media’ prime purpose should be to report the news. You simply don’t accept any questioning of your Dear Leader. Lemmings such as yourself have bought into your delusional view of what the news media purpose is.

FAIL

ghostwalker1 on April 14, 2014 at 10:40 AM

That’s called sarcasm, you have just be Bishoped…

oscarwilde on April 14, 2014 at 10:55 AM

Most transparent administration ever.

You know if you quit using your 1st amendment right, someone is going to take it away from you one of these days.

COgirl on April 14, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Attkisson’s tenure at CBS served a purpose, that purpose was to provide a false appearance of objectivity to the mainstream media. Even now, in her radical expose as she departs, she is serving in that capacity. Misdirecting the general public by placing the blame for the mainstream media’s mendacious malfeasance, not on a criminally complicit media, but on the Obama Administration.

In short she is asserting, it’s not our fault we have not been faithful in our obligation to honestly and objectively hold the government accountable, the Obama administration intimidated us.

Sharyl Attkisson is willfully and with a full forethought of malice spreading disinformation designed to whitewash the mainstream media’s deception of the American people. She is attempting to follow in the footsteps of Walter Cronkite, adopting the false mantle of the peoples champion. And just like Walter Cronkite, is every bit as complicit as Cronkite, who the Verona Paper’s proved beyond any shadow of doubt, was a paid KGB operative.

oscarwilde on April 14, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Perhaps the Obama administration exerts more pressure and plays Chicago sur le Potomac more than the Bush administration did — or perhaps the mandarins of journalism these days just see the Obama administration a lot more sympathetically.

Misspelled “sycophantically.”

Lolo on April 14, 2014 at 11:19 AM

The AP etal are willing chilling members of the press. Obama does not have to scare them nor the others of ABC, NBC, CNN, PBS, CNN etal New York Times. More to the point they carry the ball for the commie way by lustful choice.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on April 14, 2014 at 12:20 PM

I remember the FRANK LIB types in the past when the GOP was in charge,,,his types would always want to investigate anything the Republicans would do. Even if the GoP made gaffes that would be front page news for days while Frank says the media should only concentrate on MAJOR stories. Spelling potato correctly Frank is not a major story. Frank the media is suppose to be the watch dog of the gov’t instead of its lapdog. You are a fool.

garydt on April 14, 2014 at 12:23 PM

One out of what 100,000 of the msm.

That is the real story.

What is up with the other 99,999?

APACHEWHOKNOWS on April 14, 2014 at 12:25 PM

ps

First Hot Air Operators, “Know Thyself”.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on April 14, 2014 at 12:27 PM

garydt on April 14, 2014 at 12:23 PM

Speaking of which, where is Henry Waxman these days? It just does not seem “balanced” not seeing his huge flaring nostrils as a Committee Chair calling for investigations or issueing subpoenas.

Has the irrelevant finally caught up with him?

Roy Rogers on April 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Goebbels loves the Carneys.

Schadenfreude on April 14, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Frank Lib is Bishop’s stepbrother.

Schadenfreude on April 14, 2014 at 12:39 PM

HotAir didn’t cover the BLM/Cliven Bundy standoff until after it was over. This should have been a huge story, screaming for coverage and discussion everywhere. I can understand why the lefties wouldn’t cover a potential Waco. But I’m scratching my head why not here.

Fenris on April 14, 2014 at 9:18 AM

The claim was made on some independent blogs that did cover the standoff, that the White House was exerting extreme pressure on mainstream media outlets to NOT cover the story, threatening loss of access to government officials. I’d like to see Attkisson look into those threats; ask Fox News and Townhall very specifically, -were you pressured?

slickwillie2001 on April 14, 2014 at 1:19 PM

were you pressured?

slickwillie2001 on April 14, 2014 at 1:19 PM

You will either receive no answer, or a flat denial. HotAir will post nothing that in any way shape or form might be construed as an advocacy of insurrection or armed conflict against the Government of the United States of America.

oscarwilde on April 14, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Government Agencies Under Obama
All Being Politicized And Weaponized

VorDaj on April 14, 2014 at 3:01 PM

Sharyl Attkisson is willfully and with a full forethought of malice spreading disinformation designed to whitewash the mainstream media’s deception of the American people. She is attempting to follow in the footsteps of Walter Cronkite, adopting the false mantle of the peoples champion. And just like Walter Cronkite, is every bit as complicit as Cronkite, who the Verona (sic) Paper’s proved beyond any shadow of doubt, was a paid KGB operative.

oscarwilde on April 14, 2014 at 11:10 AM

I didn’t see anything about Uncle Walter in the Wiki article on the Venona Project (some of the more interesting excerpts below) or in this annotated list of names, so would be interested in seeing your source linked; however, I found this still-on-point comment to Doctor Zero’s not-too-flattering obit.

I don’t remember exactly when it was that I first learned how Uncle Walter had skewed his coverage of the Vietnam War, but I do remember the feeling I felt in my gut, like that of being kicked by a mule. It was at that moment that my faith in everything coming at me in the name of reporting and journalism was forever shattered.
I guess the only difference today is that most journalists are out of the closet, so to speak, and put their biases right out there for us to see. What is now less clear is where the line from commentators like Hannity and Madddow starts and news reporting stops.
While I will take the time to investigate stories that interest me, I don’t have time to check everything that is fed to me from the newspapers and tv, and that is where the vast majority of Americans are. We know that what is being fed to us is probably only about 50% correct but we have to accept it and move on.
Until those in the journalism profession can regain some sort of credibility and regain some shred of integrity they will continue to be viewed as well dressed, well coiffed and made up teleprompter readers hired for their photogenic appeal rather then their ability to report the news.

Just A Grunt on July 19, 2009 at 11:47 AM

* * *

(Wikipedia) The Venona project was a counter-intelligence program initiated by the United States Army Signal Intelligence Service (a forerunner of the National Security Agency) that lasted from 1943 to 1980.[1] The program attempted to decrypt messages sent by Soviet Union intelligence agencies, including its foreign intelligence service and military intelligence services.[2] During the program’s four decades, approximately 3,000 messages were at least partially decrypted and translated.[3] The project produced some of the most important breakthroughs for western counter-intelligence in this period, including the discovery of the Cambridge spy ring[4] and the exposure of Soviet espionage targeting the Manhattan Project.[5] The project was one of the most sensitive secrets of United States intelligence. It remained secret for over a decade after it ended and was not officially declassified until 1995.

To what extent the various individuals were involved with Soviet intelligence is a topic of dispute. While a number of academics and historians assert that most of the individuals mentioned in the Venona decrypts were most likely either clandestine assets and/or contacts of Soviet intelligence agents,[8][9] others argue that many of those people probably had no malicious intentions and committed no crimes.[10][11][12]

On 20 December 1946, Gardner made the first break into the code, revealing the existence of Soviet espionage in the Manhattan Project.[19] Venona messages also indicated that Soviet spies worked in Washington in the State Department, Treasury, Office of Strategic Services, and even the White House. Very slowly, using assorted techniques ranging from traffic analysis to defector information, more of the messages were decrypted.

The existence of Venona decryption became known to the Soviets within a few years of the first breaks.[citation needed] It is not clear whether the Soviets knew how much of the message traffic or which messages had been successfully decrypted. At least one Soviet penetration agent, British Secret Intelligence Service representative to the U.S., Kim Philby, was told about the project in 1949, as part of his job as liaison between British and U.S. intelligence.

For much of its history, knowledge of Venona was restricted even from the highest levels of government. Senior army officers, in consultation with the FBI and CIA, made the decision to restrict knowledge of Venona within the government (even the CIA was not made an active partner until 1952). Army Chief of Staff Omar Bradley, concerned about the White House’s history of leaking sensitive information, decided to deny President Truman direct knowledge of the project. The president received the substance of the material only through FBI, Justice Department, and CIA reports on counterintelligence and intelligence matters. He was not told the material came from decoded Soviet ciphers. To some degree this secrecy was counter-productive; Truman was distrustful of FBI head J. Edgar Hoover and suspected the reports were exaggerated for political purposes.

The dearth of reliable information available to the public—or even to the President and Congress—may have helped to polarize debates of the 1950s over the extent and danger of Soviet espionage in the United States. Anti-Communists suspected many spies remained at large, perhaps including some known to the government. Those who criticized the governmental and non-governmental efforts to root out and expose communists felt these efforts were an overreaction (in addition to other reservations about McCarthyism). Public access—or broader governmental access—to the Venona evidence would certainly have affected this debate, as it is affecting the retrospective debate among historians and others now.

Victor Navasky, editor and publisher of The Nation, has also written several editorials highly critical of John Earl Haynes’ and Harvey Klehr’s interpretation of recent work on the subject of Soviet espionage.[30] Navasky claims the Venona material is being used to “distort … our understanding of the cold war” and that the files are potential “time bombs of misinformation.”[10] Commenting on the list of 349 Americans identified by Venona, published in an appendix to Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, Navasky wrote, “The reader is left with the implication— unfair and unproven— that every name on the list was involved in espionage, and as a result, otherwise careful historians and mainstream journalists now routinely refer to Venona as proof that many hundreds of Americans were part of the red spy network.“[10] Navasky goes further in his defense of the listed people and has claimed a great deal of the so-called espionage that went on was nothing more than “exchanges of information among people of good will” and that “most of these exchanges were innocent and were within the law.”[11]

According to historian Ellen Schrecker, “Because they offer insights into the world of the secret police on both sides of the Iron Curtain, it is tempting to treat the FBI and Venona materials less critically than documents from more accessible sources. But there are too many gaps in the record to use these materials with complete confidence.”[65]

Schrecker believes the documents established the guilt of many prominent figures, but is still critical of the views of scholars such as John Earl Haynes, arguing, “complexity, nuance, and a willingness to see the world in other than black and white seem alien to Haynes’ view of history.”[66]

Despite the objections raised, however, the majority of historians remain convinced of the historical value of the Venona material. Intelligence historian Nigel West believes that “Venona remain[s] an irrefutable resource, far more reliable than the mercurial recollections of KGB defectors and the dubious conclusions drawn by paranoid analysts mesmerized by Machiavellian plots.“[67]

Love that closing graf.

AesopFan on April 14, 2014 at 3:34 PM

TarheelBen on April 14, 2014 at 10:24 AM
Gave me goosebumps…and a thrill up my leg. Thank you.
Frank Lib on April 14, 2014 at 10:49 AM

Goosebumps to go with your goose steps, you mean.

Some word class trollery there. Well done.

kim roy on April 14, 2014 at 3:39 PM

were you pressured?

slickwillie2001 on April 14, 2014 at 1:19 PM

You will either receive no answer, or a flat denial. HotAir will post nothing that in any way shape or form might be construed as an advocacy of insurrection or armed conflict against the Government of the United States of America.

oscarwilde on April 14, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Could be. As good an explanation as any.

Fenris on April 14, 2014 at 3:53 PM

This might have more influence over CBS’ editorial decision-making than some “headache” BS:

Top Obama official’s brother is president of CBS News

rcpjr on April 14, 2014 at 9:06 AM

Our governing class is almost as inbred as the Hapsburgs.

SubmarineDoc on April 14, 2014 at 4:47 PM

The title is righter than right. There is a chilling affect on journalists…….real journalists…. not on the regime reporters in abc, cbs, nbc, ap, nytimes and cnn.

PaCadle on April 14, 2014 at 5:09 PM

Aside from talk radio and the internet, there is no independent watchdog media in this country. Probably never was, but it took said talk radio and internet to make that statement obvious.

Rixon on April 14, 2014 at 8:58 AM

There never was; we just didn’t catch on to it.

As far as Hot Air not covering the Nevada cattle ranch story
until it was over (at least this round is over), that is not
unusual. It happens often. Hot Air, like many so called conservative sites, aren’t really conservative at all.

At any rate, in my opinion, what makes Hot Air a great site is
the content of many posters; one just has to scroll past the trolls.

Amjean on April 14, 2014 at 7:37 PM

Oh yeah, the liberals are so tolerant of diversity except when its diversity of opinion.

SparkPlug on April 14, 2014 at 10:15 PM

CBS – Commie Bolshevik Sycophants

SparkPlug on April 14, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Don’t diss the Mocha Messiah!

Media Lickspittle Motto No. 1.

profitsbeard on April 15, 2014 at 1:10 AM

Most journalists are lined up to kiss Obama and the Left’s ass. After all, it is who they are these days. Freedom of the press means to them to slavishly grovel before any progressive cause. It is more than chilling for the few honest journalists who go off the reservation and critically report the truth.

mcgilvra on April 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM

The Damage is done.

Broadcast media and Newspapers across the country lost their credibility along time ago being a front for Liberalism,the Left and the Democrat Party. On the other hand I’m not standing up for the Republican Party as it is today or the last 25 years.

I rarely ever tune-in to ABC-CBS-NBC or any of their cable offsets. During a calendar year I tune-in to broadcast TV 2 times – Superbowl and NCAA March Madness. If they haven’t sold me anything during those 2 events their advertisers are wasting their money advertising with them.

As for FOX, they are the lessor of evils – but you have to crosscheck their stories. In my opinion they seem to leave out important details sometimes to embellish a story the way they want. In fact I crosscheck everybody’s stories with various sources across the net to decide what I believe is real.

This story involving Ms Atkinson only validates the mistrust ALL THE MEDIA HAS CREATED. In the words of Reagan, “Trust but Verify.”

Nat George on April 16, 2014 at 8:16 AM