Anita Dunn/White House

[Blau]

Anita Dunn and the White house are calling out Fox News for not being a "real" news network. It seems to me that Dunn and the White House can't see the difference between news, and opinion shows.

Most of the shows in the morning are News shows, just like any other network, that talk about the news of the day and the night shows are opinion shows like Beck, O'rielly and Hannity.

I think that Dunn's and the White House's attacks on Fox News are unwarranted and unconstitutional.

Discuss.

[iwpoe]

Originally Posted by zach92

Anita Dunn and the White house are calling out Fox News for not being a "real" news network. It seems to me that Dunn and the White House can't see the difference between news, and opinion shows.

Fox often, though not always, slants their reporting to favor and enforce the opinions expressed in the evening and self-consciously so. This doesn't make their stories untrue, though it does mean they do a sort advocacy programming. I can, if you like, point to a resent (Daily Show provided) example of the difference between Fox's coverage of the so called Tea Bagger protests this summer in Washington and the gay rights protests earlier this month. The two protests were comparably sized. The Tea Bagger protest received coverage all day (and, indeed, promotion for days before). The gay rights protest, well, not so much.

We typically speak as if news can avoid advocacy altogether and that "real news" doesn't do advocacy, though this isn't clear to me.

Originally Posted by zach92

Most of the shows in the morning are News shows,

Well let's just look at today's lineup...

(I'm going to say morning starts at 6am.)

1. Fox & Friends starts at 6am and ends at 9am.
2. America's Newsroom With Bill Hemmer and Megyn Kelly starts at 9am ends at 11am.
3. Happening Now starts at 11am ends at 1pm.
4. The Live Desk With Martha MacCallum and Trace Gallagher starts at 1pm ends at 3pm.
5. Studio B With Shepard Smith starts at 3pm ends at 4pm.
6. Your World With Neil Cavuto starts at 4pm and ends at 5pm followed afterward by Glen Beck's madness leading into a cavalcade of talkers.

Now, all of these with the possible exception of Happening Now (if my memory serves) engage in far more than reporting. Every one does what they call "analysis" which really means commentary on the news by either the host/hosts or pundits. Each show does this to a differing degree, but let's not pretend that from 6am to 5pm, Fox News is some just some chronicle merely listing the days events devolving into madness only as the sun begins to set.

Originally Posted by zach92

I think that Dunn's and the White House's attacks on Fox News are unwarranted and unconstitutional.

They clearly have some warrant, though I think they make their claims based on some presuppositions about the indifference of journalism that can't really be maintained. You would have had to outright ignore their coverage of Obama's presidency since November to think otherwise. As for it being unconstitutional...

Here is a link to an online version of the constitution:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut....overview.html

...We can all read. Show me where the constitution says that the specific actions by the Dunn & the White House are prohibited. (P.S. Before you jump to it, Amendment I of the Bill of Rights wont help you since this is not a matter of congress making a law abridging the freedom of the press).

[Blau]

I think it is unconstitutional, they are suppressing freedom of speech. But the White House and Anita Dunn, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod(spelling) have no place to call out Fox News for being right while the mainstream media is left. It's hypocritical and they are a network that you can choose to watch if you want to or not.

I don't like the mainstream media but if someone wants to watch it, it doesn't bother me. Those outlets can have they're point of view like Fox. I could very well say that the mainstream media isn't "real news". They put left spin on there news just as Fox puts right on theirs.

[iwpoe]

Originally Posted by zach92

I think it is unconstitutional, they are suppressing freedom of speech.

No law has been made abridging the freedom of speech (which is what is required to violate the first amendment). Fox has merely been criticized.

Originally Posted by zach92

But the White House and Anita Dunn, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod(spelling) have no place to call out Fox News for being right while the mainstream media is left. It's hypocritical and they are a network that you can choose to watch if you want to or not.

No, they seem to be calling them out for other reasons, and it's pretty clear why they would pick the incompetent network that attacks them regularly over the other incompetent networks which only attack them some times.

Originally Posted by zach92

I don't like the mainstream media but if someone wants to watch it, it doesn't bother me.

If you were the subject of their coverage I suspect you would have a different opinion.

Originally Posted by zach92

Those outlets can have they're point of view like Fox. I could very well say that the mainstream media isn't "real news". They put left spin on there news just as Fox puts right on theirs.

No, they put a stupid spin on the news. The media is the worst help any liberal could ask for. The right just calls it liberal because other networks don't advocate their causes strongly enough.

[irishamerican]

Dont you love how not a word is said about msnbc, hell that channel is worse then regis and kelly lol

[iwpoe]

Originally Posted by irishamerican

Dont you love how not a word is said about msnbc, hell that channel is worse then regis and kelly lol

No one watches msnbc. It's an embarrassment to any self-conscious liberal that one would look at it and take its silly caricature of liberalism as either helpful or as a worthy model of opinion or action.

[standardstate]

Originally Posted by zach92

Anita Dunn and the White house are calling out Fox News for not being a "real" news network. It seems to me that Dunn and the White House can't see the difference between news, and opinion shows.

Fox apparently doesn't know the difference between news and opinion either.

I think that Dunn's and the White House's attacks on Fox News are unwarranted and unconstitutional.

Which specific portion of the constitution do you think is being violated?

I think it is unconstitutional,

But, alas, that is hardly persuasive. Again, what part of the constitution do you think is being violated?

they are suppressing freedom of speech.

Really? Has Fox news gone off the air, or been forced to broadcast statements from the White House?

Or do you mean that some members of the White House staff are refusing to appear on Fox news? If so, you'll have to explain how that is unconstitutional.

But the White House and Anita Dunn, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod(spelling) have no place to call out Fox News for being right

Really? Wouldn't that be suppressing their freedom of speech?

while the mainstream media is left. It's hypocritical and they are a network that you can choose to watch if you want to or not.

And has the government prevented you from watching Fox news? No? So much for your claim of suppression of free speech.

I don't like the mainstream media but if someone wants to watch it, it doesn't bother me. Those outlets can have they're point of view like Fox. I could very well say that the mainstream media isn't "real news".

You can say whatever you want.

Saying something doesn't make it so (as in fox's claim of being "fair and balanced" for example.

The "mainstream media" generally tries to present different sides of issues with supporters of those sides. Fox news generally presents one side with conservative spokespeople. They have the right to do so, but this is exactly why they have been criticized by the white house and by media watchdog groups (undoubtedly all under the control of a vast left wing conspiracy).

They put left spin on there news just as Fox puts right on theirs

Just as not all sins are equal, not all spins are equal.

As noted above, most mainstream media tyr to present different points of view. Fox generally does not - or if it does, it does so in the context of the "right" and "wrong" point of view.

There is an excellent article about fox news in this week's issue of newsweek that makes this point.