« Public Option May Still Be Included in Senate Bill | Main | Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/37111.
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Biting the hand that created them:
» Brutally Honest linked with Biting the hand that created them
Send e-mail tips to us:
Get Wizbang in your inbox by submitting your email address below.
Section Editor: Maggie Whitton
Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert
Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port
In Memorium: HughS
All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.
Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361
Hosting by ServInt
Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.
Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.
Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.
Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.
Comments (22)
Hopefully the reason for th... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 6:58 AM | Score: 12 (14 votes cast)
Hopefully the reason for this is that the other news organizations have realized that they too can be in the crosshairs of the White House if they decide to report unfavorably on anything this administration does.
On one hand they have the bandwagon - on the other, the bus.
1. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 6:58 AM |
Score: 12 (14 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 06:58
2. Posted by Falze | October 23, 2009 6:58 AM | Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Not often you get to praise the press, but they get an 'attaboy' for this one. It's about time they acknowledged that what they're trying to do to Fox could be done to them next.
2. Posted by Falze | October 23, 2009 6:58 AM |
Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 06:58
3. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 7:23 AM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Falze -
I think this was a real wakeup call for them - as you said, what happens with one could happen to all. They've been so enamored with their 'power', electing a virtual unknown to the Presidency - that they essentially ignored his background and forgot the possibility that he might have his OWN agenda, and that his may not exactly coincide with theirs.
I'm kind of looking forward to the usuals coming on and explaining just how good for the nation it is to have a President demanding (pardon, 'suggesting') that the other 4 news agencies exclude the fifth because it's not really reporting 'news' in his opinion.
Even Nixon didn't go that far when he was in fully paranoid mode...
3. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 7:23 AM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 07:23
4. Posted by Eric | October 23, 2009 7:27 AM | Score: 14 (14 votes cast)
The First Amendment isn't a selective freedom, it protects everyone, Left and Right.
Whether you like Fox or not, everyone should be very, very concerned about the President of the United States targeting a legitimate news organization. Think very carefully about what it means if the President is successful in shutting down Fox.
Does anyone think he would stop there? Who would be next?
4. Posted by Eric | October 23, 2009 7:27 AM |
Score: 14 (14 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 07:27
5. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 7:41 AM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Does anyone think he would stop there?
No, that's not the "Chicago" or Alinsky way.
Who would be next?
Whichever displeases His Majesty. After all, the peasants cannot be allowed to have their own ideas - who knows what sort of trouble they might get into without proper guidance!
From what I've been able to gather, the Alinsky rules are great for disrupting the system that's supposedly oppressive, but piss-poor when it comes to actually providing a structure to replace what was disrupted. I think it's starting to hit people that Obama doesn't really know anything BUT how to be disruptive in the Alinsky mode (IE 'creative' destruction for 'progressive' purposes) and he has no concept at all of what to do once the Alinsky goals have been achieved.
Alinsky's all about sticking it to the Man. Obama is now the Man. He'd better stop sticking it to himself and figure out where he goes from here.
5. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 7:41 AM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 07:41
6. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | October 23, 2009 8:49 AM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
They finally realized how dangerous a precedent this would be. If Obama's administration didn't turn on them (the center left and far left media) a future Republican administration might.
6. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | October 23, 2009 8:49 AM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 08:49
7. Posted by Falze | October 23, 2009 8:51 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
From what I've been able to gather, the Alinsky rules are great for disrupting the system that's supposedly oppressive, but piss-poor when it comes to actually providing a structure to replace what was disrupted.
Translation - communism sounds great until the communists actually have to run things ;)
7. Posted by Falze | October 23, 2009 8:51 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 08:51
8. Posted by epador | October 23, 2009 9:40 AM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Impeach now before it is too late.
8. Posted by epador | October 23, 2009 9:40 AM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 09:40
9. Posted by WildWillie | October 23, 2009 10:01 AM | Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
I am amazed at the level of immaturity this man operates with. ww
9. Posted by WildWillie | October 23, 2009 10:01 AM |
Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:01
10. Posted by Les Nessman | October 23, 2009 10:03 AM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
JL: " They've been so enamored with their 'power', electing a virtual unknown to the Presidency - that they essentially ignored his background and forgot the possibility that he might have his OWN agenda, and that his may not exactly coincide with theirs. "
-
Not sure I totally agree. I think plenty of the MSM knew, and supported, Brocko's Leftist agenda. Even now, I think a large minority (maybe majority?) of them WANT to see Fox suppressed. I'd be relieved to be wrong on that; I guess we'll see.
" Who would be next? "
-
Blogs/the Internet.
10. Posted by Les Nessman | October 23, 2009 10:03 AM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:03
11. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 10:07 AM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
"Translation - communism sounds great until the communists actually have to run things ;)"
Bingo, Falze! And just because it's failed miserably ELSEWHERE in the world doesn't mean anything - WE have really REALLY smart people here who'll do it RIGHT!
God help us.
11. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 10:07 AM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:07
12. Posted by jim m | October 23, 2009 10:08 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
The press has seen enough people kicked off the campaign plane to understand that it takes only one story to get them on Obama's enemies list. I think it is also dawning on them that as they cater to his petty antics the threshold for getting cast out is becoming lower and lower.
The move to isolate Fox news was an attack on all journalists and punishing them for their association with an out of favor news service. Because of editorializing by Glenn Beck straight news reporters were going to be punished by their association with the same network. People throw the term fascist around a lot, but this effort really does smack of totalitarian beliefs and behavior.
It appears that the media recognized what was at stake for them here. But I would caution that it took them an extended meeting to agree to boycott the interviews if Fox were frozen out. I don't think that this was as clear cut as it is being portrayed.
12. Posted by jim m | October 23, 2009 10:08 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:08
13. Posted by jim m | October 23, 2009 10:14 AM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
"Translation - communism sounds great until the communists actually have to run things ;)"
13. Posted by jim m | October 23, 2009 10:14 AM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:14
14. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 10:16 AM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
"I think plenty of the MSM knew, and supported, Brocko's Leftist agenda."
You might be right - but I think the difference is in the details. There's a large difference between being 'progressive' as an ideal, and then seeing the results of your 'progressive' philosophy writ large. (For one thing, the cost of dreaming of a 'progressive' world is much, much less than the reality, and far LESS likely to end in an abysmal mess.)
14. Posted by JLawson | October 23, 2009 10:16 AM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 10:16
15. Posted by JustRuss | October 23, 2009 11:24 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
If the WH had offered individual interviews to the networks none of them would have had a problem with it. But because FOX pays into the pool just like they do they knew they couldn't get away with it.
More likely they were afraid of being sued/demonized on FOX than actually afraid of the administration.
I do hope though that it was a stand against controlling the media outright. They probably wanted to show that supporting the President is much different than actively attacking a peer at the Presidents behest.
At least one way or another, they DO have some sort of conscience.
15. Posted by JustRuss | October 23, 2009 11:24 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 11:24
16. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 12:40 PM | Score: 1 (11 votes cast)
As an aside, I'd like to personally thank the troll who regularly gives me (and has been doing so for a long time) one negative vote everytime I post. It's heartening to know that I'm still getting under your skin. It makes my day.
16. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 12:40 PM |
Score: 1 (11 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 12:40
17. Posted by OregonMuse | October 23, 2009 1:00 PM | Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
Oyster, I just gave you another negative vote so I could double your pleasure and double your fun on this Friday.
17. Posted by OregonMuse | October 23, 2009 1:00 PM |
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 13:00
18. Posted by Tim | October 23, 2009 1:54 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Someone must have countered OM's negative, so I threw another one in for ya, Oyster. Oh, I gave OM one, too.
18. Posted by Tim | October 23, 2009 1:54 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 13:54
19. Posted by GarandFan | October 23, 2009 2:27 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Talk about the administration just taking a slap up side the head.
Wonder what their response will be today, having been told by the media that FOX IS A NEWS ORGANIZATION!
19. Posted by GarandFan | October 23, 2009 2:27 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 14:27
20. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 3:14 PM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Thanx!
20. Posted by Oyster | October 23, 2009 3:14 PM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 15:14
21. Posted by Flu-Bird | October 23, 2009 5:53 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Quit calling it the whitehouse its now the NEW KREMLIN
21. Posted by Flu-Bird | October 23, 2009 5:53 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 17:53
22. Posted by klrtz1 | October 23, 2009 6:21 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I think the other 4 networks in the pool just wanted to avoid a lawsuit that they would lose. With all the lawyers Obama has working for him you'd think at least one of them would have read the network pool contract.
I uprated Oyster for being polite enough to say Thanx!
22. Posted by klrtz1 | October 23, 2009 6:21 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 23, 2009 18:21