White house goes after Fox News

[Slim]

Because of your politics, and ridiculous gung ho attitude about it all, along with your stubbornness and lack of respect for other people's opinions.

Yeehaa. I guess you're one of them sensitive types, huh? Dont get upset. We're just having a little fun here. Aint that right, BillyBob?

If its too much, you can always get back in your Prius drive yourself back to the Castro district. Toodles.

[Purple Fencer]

Well, your special needs classmates should be very proud of you.

Why aren't you, then??

[I_luv_saber]

Because of your politics, and ridiculous gung ho attitude about it all, along with your stubbornness and lack of respect for other people's opinions.

That's... pretty offensive.

Seriously though - as an aside, I've always found it funny that "Southerners" are one group it's OK to hate on.

Don't you dare drop the n-bomb, but "redneck" and "honky" are okay, right? Just payback? Southerners are just a bunch of dumb hicks, and that's okay to talk about - but let's not talk about black people being ghetto and gangsters. How about we use the same standard all around rather than hiding behind it when convenient, and other times ignoring it to attack other groups....

It's always been a peeve of mine - then again hypocrisy in all of it's forms is annoying.

(Also as an aside, I've found most Southerners are far more polite than people on this coast - but that's just a generalization.)

[TrainingDummy]

Here is a video of Dana Perino saying the Bush administration snubbed MSNBC the way the Obama administration is snubbing Fox.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/19/perino-msnbc/

[Hauptman]

That's... pretty offensive.

Seriously though - as an aside, I've always found it funny that "Southerners" are one group it's OK to hate on.

Don't you dare drop the n-bomb, but "redneck" and "honky" are okay, right? Just payback? Southerners are just a bunch of dumb hicks, and that's okay to talk about - but let's not talk about black people being ghetto and gangsters. How about we use the same standard all around rather than hiding behind it when convenient, and other times ignoring it to attack other groups....

It's always been a peeve of mine - then again hypocrisy in all of it's forms is annoying.

(Also as an aside, I've found most Southerners are far more polite than people on this coast - but that's just a generalization.)

This is true. I don't have a problem with Slim because he's southern, conservative, or Republican.

I have a problem with Slim because he is rude, dismissive, insulting, and contributes absolutely nothing of value to any discussion here.

[I_luv_saber]

FWIW, I think what I said applies to almost no one on this board. It was more a general complaint about society in general.

[keith]

Heh. Nice one. But I'll have you know that you silly liberals consistently and without fail take the bait of this low rent troll.

On the main politics page click on the linky for the replies number.

At your posting rate you hardly even qualify for low rent

[Slim]

FWIW, I think what I said applies to almost no one on this board. It was more a general complaint about society in general.

Shame on you. Backpeddling. At least stand your ground.

I wish I could take back my reps to you.

[Slim]

This is true. I don't have a problem with Slim because he's southern, conservative, or Republican.

I have a problem with Slim because he is rude, dismissive, insulting, and contributes absolutely nothing of value to any discussion here.

It makes me feel all warm inside. :-)

[jeff]

...that's your bladder control problem, Slim.

[Purple Fencer]

...that's your bladder control problem, Slim.

Rep given!!

[Slim]

...that's your bladder control problem, Slim.

Wow. Would never have expected such a low-brow retort from you. Watch yourself or you may find yourself drinking Bud from a can and stuffing dollars in G-strings.

[Slim]

On the main politics page click on the linky for the replies number.

At your posting rate you hardly even qualify for low rent

I know. I need a new hobby.

[tchwojko]

Saw the thread title, and hoped that there might be some discussion about the tactics and strategies of this action.

But no, mostly just name calling and ignorance. No surprise.

Oh well...

I find this media relations judo move interesting politically and in terms of media relations.

Calling Fox News as a non-news source induced Fox to defend itself as a news organization, bringing credibility to the question.

Those who follow Fox and MSNBC aren't going to be swayed. They have their viewers on the solid right and left respectively, and those viewers aren't going to change their opinions.

So what about the middle? Who do they watch? And how are their opinions of both Obama and Fox changed by this move? How will this affect Fox as a news organization?

[Slim]

Saw the thread title, and hoped that there might be some discussion about the tactics and strategies of this action.

But no, mostly just name calling and ignorance. No surprise.

Oh well...

I find this media relations judo move interesting politically and in terms of media relations.

Calling Fox News as a non-news source induced Fox to defend itself as a news organization, bringing credibility to the question.

Those who follow Fox and MSNBC aren't going to be swayed. They have their viewers on the solid right and left respectively, and those viewers aren't going to change their opinions.

So what about the middle? Who do they watch? And how are their opinions of both Obama and Fox changed by this move? How will this affect Fox as a news organization?

If you assume the political leanings of the average TV news viewer follow a normal distribution, where the left wackos and right wingnuts are on the tails of the curve, then based on ratings its obvious that the majority of them watch Fox News.

When power attacks an organization or group of people, such as this administration did to Fox or Nixon did to his "enemies", the result is typically that the one being attacked comes out stronger.

Fox has news. It also has opinion and commentary. As does MSNBC and CNN. Those here claiming one is worse than the other are simply not being intellectually honest.

Obama has given Fox more credibility and caused more people to tune in to see what all the noise is about. It's Obama's ego getting bruised that has caused this political faux-pas and strengthened Fox's viewer base.

[Hauptman]

If you assume the political leanings of the average TV news viewer follow a normal distribution, where the left wackos and right wingnuts are on the tails of the curve, then based on ratings its obvious that the majority of them watch Fox News.

When power attacks an organization or group of people, such as this administration did to Fox or Nixon did to his "enemies", the result is typically that the one being attacked comes out stronger.

Fox has news. It also has opinion and commentary. As does MSNBC and CNN. Those here claiming one is worse than the other are simply not being intellectually honest.

Obama has given Fox more credibility and caused more people to tune in to see what all the noise is about. It's Obama's ego getting bruised that has caused this political faux-pas and strengthened Fox's viewer base.

But do your assumptions hold true?

Sure FOX has good TV ratings, but what does that mean in regards to the voting public?

First off, there is only one far right network so the others split the rest of the political spectrum. That makes FOX appear bigger than any individual competitor, but not bigger than the whole. It's like the PC industry, compare Mac versus PC and Mac loses big time, but compare Apple to any individual PC manufacturer and they look pretty strong.

Second, the last election showed a very clear correlation between age and voting preference. The Republicans do very poorly among young voters and gain votes as the age increases until you see most seniors voting conservative. This relates to TV viewing in that seniors are much more likely to get their news from TV while the younger demographic has shifted online. This means that Republicans are probably over-represented as a percentage of the TV news viewing population which would skew ratings away from actual voting trends.

Finally, there are some who believe that at some point you must speak truth to idiocy and not just sit silently and hope it will go away. There are many who believe that Obama has been far too conciliatory to the frothing naysayers, and that he needs to get tough and wield the power he's been given as he sees fit; it worked for Cheney.

Note: Your commenting on intellectual honesty was a good laugh. Certainly there are biases in commentary from various networks, but FOX blatantly lies and distorts to support their agenda, and that is unacceptable. Intellectual honesty would be nice though...

[keith]

So what about the middle? Who do they watch? And how are their opinions of both Obama and Fox changed by this move? How will this affect Fox as a news organization?

The trouble is classifying FoxNews, MSNBC or whomever as news. They are the equivalent of the OpEd page, which is frequently more interesting than reading through the tedious goings on the world in an attempt to keep up to date. The other similarity to OpEd is that it is a rather suspect assumption that people only follow it because they agree .

Nothing wrong with spending you time watching any of it of course but it's all the same game as reality TV, eyeballs for advertisers.

So no don't think it matters at all, after all the only blistering assault from FoxNews since the interview snub is the contention that it is no longer PC to quote Mao. Hardly counts as bringing out the big guns.

[migopod]

Finally, there are some who believe that at some point you must speak truth to idiocy and not just sit silently and hope it will go away. There are many who believe that Obama has been far too conciliatory to the frothing naysayers, and that he needs to get tough and wield the power he's been given as he sees fit; it worked for Cheney.

Well, it certainly didn't help Cheney's approval ratings any. Otherwise you're quite right. I would hope that Obama learned an important lesson from the "Swiftboat Veterans for Truth" hit-job on Kerry. Call out Fox as being what they are and get just accused of "whining" or the ridiculous GOP/Fox talking point about making an "enemies list", or appear too weak by just sitting there and letting the GOP/Fox fling their own dung at him unanswered.

I think his administration made the right call in the end. It may have elevated Fox's standing to "legitimate news outlet" in a few eyes, but to a great many people it elevated Obama's status from "chordata" to "vetrebrata".

[Inquartata]

The only problems I have with the Administration's attitude are:

1) They go beyond saying "We are not going to treat them like a news organization" to urging other news organizations that "you shouldn't, either".

2) They are frittering away their time and attention on a petty squabble that means little and will probably accomplish less, at a time when there are a few little issues to which they might just more profitably devote that time and attention. ( I mean, deciding what to do about Afghanistan, maybe? )

I also shake my head at all of these statements about what the Bush administration did. Whatever happened to the Obama administration's moral high ground, its supposed superiority to the tactics and practices of "the worst President in history"? Now he's adopting some of the same tactics and practices, and it's suddenly OK?

[Hauptman]

The only problems I have with the Administration's attitude are:

1) They go beyond saying "We are not going to treat them like a news organization" to urging other news organizations that "you shouldn't, either".

2) They are frittering away their time and attention on a petty squabble that means little and will probably accomplish less, at a time when there are a few little issues to which they might just more profitably devote that time and attention. ( I mean, deciding what to do about Afghanistan, maybe? )

I also shake my head at all of these statements about what the Bush administration did. Whatever happened to the Obama administration's moral high ground, its supposed superiority to the tactics and practices of "the worst President in history"? Now he's adopting some of the same tactics and practices, and it's suddenly OK?

It depends on how you define "frittering". The administration needs to deal with the opposition, and unfortunately the voice of the opposition isn't in congress, it's on FOX news. That is an unfortunate reality.

And I hope you realize my remark about Cheney was somewhat sarcastic. But it's also a matter of degree. When Cheney's reponse to public opinion was, "So?", I found that offensive as was the Bush administrations continual end-run around the other branches of gov't.

On the other hand, Obama is trying too hard to win over people who have made it fairly clear that they won't cooperate under any circumstances; now that is frittering away valuable time and energy.