Trump White House blocks CNN, NYT, LA Times, Politico and others from media briefing

[FA_Q2]

How people imagine profit motive and a business model based around advertising is going to lead to the truth is just fucking beyond me. Have you ever been on a forum that had advertisers they had to cater to?

It is really very simple to be honest. The viewers simply have to value truth over confirmation bias and dishonesty. That is not the case right now.

The news stations are not slanted because of advertisers - all they care about are eyeballs on their adverts. They are slanted because the owners of those eyeballs are demanding it.

Clearly they do not

Or cannot

Again how do you think that's giong to happen?

It's not

I don't have an answer either, but I don't pretend the free market is going to solve it.

I never said the free market was going to solve it. I do stand by the assertion that the government cannot solve it. The free market is not the problem here - the consumers are. It goes back to culture. There is only one fix and that is bringing back truth and integrity as an important value in our culture over being 'right.'

No one 'fixes' this. It happens or it does not.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hey, you sure seem familiar with Pravda!

I got news for you comrade, you little coup is going to FAIL!

You have lost control over what information America has access to.

Without the ability to control what people can know, your fascist party is in deep shit.

CNN and the NY Times shrieked that reports of Donna Brazile were all lies. But it was they of the fascist Soros press who were lying. Time and time again the Soros press is busted outright lying. 2/3rds of the nation recognizes them as the liars that they are.

 

[FA_Q2]

No the free market will create functional monopolies

As it has already

And create Fox News

And no, some things are subjective or unknown. Others are to all rational humans known.

Like the world is fucking round not flat, go sit on top of a mountain if you doubt me

Or Saddam had weapons of mass destruction

Saddam did have WMDs. That's proven fact now.

There is no monopoly on the news. That's what you get when you destroy the free market and leave the reporting of the news to the government.

And nothing is ever truly "known" including reality. The best we can ever do is assume knowledge. We can have faith that we know, we can never know that we know.

LOL

"the main reason we went into Iraq, at the time, was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't," ~ George Bush, 8.21.2006

President Bush Holds a News Conference

Just thought that was worth a link.

 

[bendog]

The MSM shut out Trump on Sunday talk shows. Not just his surrogates but any message he might have wanted.

 

[easyt65]

CNN, MSNBC, Buzzfeed, NYT, & LA Times Pose
For a 'Solidarity' Photo Op in opposition to Trump
Preventing them from attending WH Meetings...

(Posed with stuffed animals to pass themselves off
as the 'victims'.)

 

[Uncensored2008]

We're talking about the President here. Freedom of the Press was put into the Bill of Rights for one reason, so they could report on the government so people would be informed of what the government is doing. The First Amendment prevents the US Federal Government from impeding the press from functioning. What Trump has done is getting close to, or over, the boundaries of the meaning for the First Amendment.

Bullshit.

There is no guarantee of access.

Soros Fascist propaganda organs like CNN are free to broadcast all the outrageous lies and fake news they please, and are doing so as we speak.

They have to EARN a seat at the grown up table, which they have proven they don't deserve. Space is limited, and there are more honest press organizations who are more deserving.

 

[hadit]

The first amendment guarantees the MSM a spot in the WH? Link?

The first amendment guarantees the MSM a spot in the WH? Link?

No only right wing media should be allowed. Only those who suck up to the (P)resident

And it wouldn't violate the 1st Amendment if they decided to do that.

 

[Never3ndr]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably...you know that they either are not American, or are American, but hate the nation they were born into.

Hint: If you call the NYT fake, but not Brietbart...you are either an idiot or maliciously lying...there is no in between here.

 

[Iceweasel]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably....

No one said that.

Fail.

 

[hadit]

Good Gawd you people are stupid. You would think the first thing a person tries to understand when discussing politics is the Constitution..

Yes the 1st amendment gives us a right to a free press

Which is not being violated today. Next faux (aka fake) outrage.

 

[easyt65]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably...you know that they either are not American, or are American, but hate the nation they were born into.

Hint: If you call the NYT fake, but not Brietbart...you are either an idiot or maliciously lying...there is no in between here.

I will go as far as to say that the Media sources themselves are not 'fake' - it's just the occasional Fake BS stories they choose to put out that are 'fake'.

A lack of journalistic integrity and / or honesty does not make one 'Fake News Media' - it makes you a Media that often puts out 'Fake News'.

 

[Never3ndr]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably....

No one said that.

Fail.

Absolutely everybody defending Trump is saying this. I'm just losing the flavoring on their word salad.

It doesn't matter your politics, the President should not pick and choose the news outlets he "gifts" information to...be it Democrat or Republican.

 

[Iceweasel]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably....

No one said that.

Fail.

Absolutely everybody defending Trump is saying this. I'm just losing the flavoring on their word salad.

It doesn't matter your politics, the President should not pick and choose the news outlets he "gifts" information to...be it Democrat or Republican.

No, you're a liar. You don't have an honest bone in your body.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The first step in fascism is eliminating dissent

/--- Who has been eliminated? CNN is still broadcasting and you can buy the Sunday edition of the New York Slimes. So tinkerbell who has been eliminated?

We're talking about the President here. Freedom of the Press was put into the Bill of Rights for one reason, so they could report on the government so people would be informed of what the government is doing. The First Amendment prevents the US Federal Government from impeding the press from functioning. What Trump has done is getting close to, or over, the boundaries of the meaning for the First Amendment.

No. Trump has opened the briefings to outlets that have been shut out. He's expanding the press.

The mainstream press doesn't like that. They want to be the only asses getting kissed.

What outlets had been shut out, exactly? And are they getting in now?

Townhall and Breitbart to start with.

President Ohwhatafuckup had banned Fox for a time.

You of the left are rightfully paralyzed with fear over unfiltered news reaching the American people. The Soros press has ensured that the news was massaged to fit the goals of the party. If the actual facts get to the people, all hell could break lose.

 

[easyt65]

Absolutely everybody defending Trump is saying this. I'm just losing the flavoring on their word salad.

It doesn't matter your politics, the President should not pick and choose the news outlets he "gifts" information to...be it Democrat or Republican.

1. There are no absolutes, so right away: FAIL!

2. There is more than enough to criticize Trump on without having to MANUFACTURE 'fake news'. The 'All-In media is over-playing their hand / working too damn hard to humiliate / 'take down' Trump. Don't get 'greedy'...let it 'come to you'.

 

[hadit]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably...you know that they either are not American, or are American, but hate the nation they were born into.

Hint: If you call the NYT fake, but not Brietbart...you are either an idiot or maliciously lying...there is no in between here.

It doesn't really matter if the president chooses like minded outlets or not. Think about the preceding presidents. Who did they agree to do interviews with? Obviously, those they knew would ask no inconvenient questions and who would allow them to tell the story they wanted told. Hence, Obama would sit down with Oprah, David Axelrod, and NPR, but not with anyone from FOX News. It's just not a 1st Amendment issue who a president agrees to take questions from.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You know, when people on the forums here start saying that the President should only choose news sources that cover him favorably...you know that they either are not American, or are American, but hate the nation they were born into.

Hint: If you call the NYT fake, but not Brietbart...you are either an idiot or maliciously lying...there is no in between here.

The NY Times is fake news, that is a fact.

Regardless of what Breitbart may or may not be, Carlos Slim's NY Times is propaganda for the party.

 

[Juicin]

No the free market will create functional monopolies

As it has already

And create Fox News

And no, some things are subjective or unknown. Others are to all rational humans known.

Like the world is fucking round not flat, go sit on top of a mountain if you doubt me

Or Saddam had weapons of mass destruction

Saddam did have WMDs. That's proven fact now.

There is no monopoly on the news. That's what you get when you destroy the free market and leave the reporting of the news to the government.

And nothing is ever truly "known" including reality. The best we can ever do is assume knowledge. We can have faith that we know, we can never know that we know.

Bro he had no WMDs

He had a bit of degraded gas that wouldn't be worth employing as a weapon

You've just proven why the free market will not solve our media problem hahahaha

Either you've been co opted by people with an agenda or you're so jaded from for profit media you can't tell when they're speaking the truth

 

[Boss]

You've just proven why the free market will not solve our media problem hahahaha

The only media problem we have are the media outlets posing as "journalists" who are the de facto public relations wing of the Democrat party.

 

[Flopper]

Funny that the same people that cheered over Obama's treatment of FOX are now calling Trump a dictator because he did not invite CNN to a gaggle.

I happen to agree with the sentiment here though (and did as well through Obama's attempts at controlling the media) - there is no reason to support Trump in excluding any news agency in briefings and certainly not when he is specifically targeting left agencies as he was here. This is not a first amendment issue though - the agencies are free to report at will. For the most part, the news stations will handle this on their own (at least I hope so). Bret Baier, surprisingly, tweeted a proper response to this though:
"Some at CNN & NYT stood w/FOX News when the Obama admin attacked us & tried 2 exclude us-a WH gaggle should be open to all credentialed orgs"
White House blocks CNN, New York Times from press briefing hours after Trump slams media

The news organizations should, and will IMHO, stand against this kind of action against the media in general. I have no problem with Trump calling them out for the shit reporting that we get these days but I do have a problem with Trump using the system to try and punish specific organizations.

I think we need to revisit the Fairness Doctrine. Media outlooks intermix news and news commentary to a appoint that it is difficult to determine sometimes where news reporting ends and commentary begins. Most cable news hardly even tries any more to keep them separate.

Back in the 1950's TV stations reported the news at least attempting a degree of fairness. Commentary was proceed by an announcement that following is editorial content and does not necessary represent the views of the station. Although this degree of separation was not required in newspapers, it was a mark of fine journalism to keep commentary on the editorial page. Slanting the news was a no no. Today it's treated as a mark of excellence.
Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia

I cant support governmental control over media because the consumers want to consume shit rather than quality. One, it does not fix anything at all as the consumers are the ones that dictate direction and they will find what they are looking for somewhere else if the government tries to determine what is allowed to be aired. Two - and the largest problem here - the government should not be determine what is or is not 'balanced.' This is an executive function. Just imagine for one second that we handed the power to determine if a news station was being balanced and fair in its approach to reporting to Trump.

That is what you are advocating here.

No, I not saying government should require anything. I'm thinking of a seal of professional journalism, awarded to news media outlets that clearly separates news and commentary, similar to the fairness doctrine, the principals that every journalist student learns and dismisses with his first job.

There was a time when there were newspapers that prided themselves on the quality of news reporting. In many newspapers today, their attempt at unbiased news reporting could be put on one page and the remains of the paper labeled editorial or news commentary.