Phil Cooke

AT YOUR NEXT EVENT
"MASTERING OUR CULTURE OF TECHNOLOGY,
DISRUPTION AND DISTRACTION..."
MORE INFO >>

Posted On
11/09/2009

Comments
6 Comments »

Is The White House Suppressing Dissent?


According to the Los Angeles Times, at least one Democratic strategist has been instructed by the White House to never appear on Fox News. The administration has made no secret of it’s animosity toward the network, and in September, when the President appeared on 5 talk shows, he avoided Fox.  But to actively warn Democratic consultatants and strategists to stay off the network starts to look like censorship.  After all, even after the regular beatings former President George Bush took from networks like MSNBC, I don’t know of
any time he took them on like President Obama is doing with Fox.  From a media perspective, this isn’t a good thing at all, and even those on the Left tend to agree. 

For a President that campaigned on a post-partisan platform, the White House’s critical stance toward Fox – or any media outlet – leaves even  Democrats troubled, according to the Times.  As Dan Fowler, former Democratic National Committee Chairman told the paper, “This approach is out of sync with my conception of what the Obama administration stands for.”  He added he hoped Obama will think better of it. 

I do too.  When a President starts controlling the media at any level, that’s not a good thing for a democracy.

This entry was posted on Monday, November 9th, 2009 at 12:03 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Mark Owens

    I think this is totally in line with this administration’s agenda.  Though Obama was very media savvy during his campaign, but his true colors are begining to show.  He used his unique background and created a great story.  His campaign was a showcase of branding except for the fact that you can not brand a lie.  That’s a little strong, he didn’t actually lie, he purposely used words to deceive, by having a different definition of those words than that of he audience.  I guess that means, he lied. All that means is that he too is part of the fallen world we live in and needs our prayers desparately, not just for the leading of this nation, but for the saving of his soul.

  • Bret Teegarden

    are we presuming the adminstration wants democracy?

  • http://danielhahn.me/blog Daniel Hahn

    Well, Bret T. beat me to the punch!  This is exactly what the administration is working toward: Marxism.

  • Charles Hauppage

    Last line of the post (“When a President starts controlling the media at any level, that’s not a good thing for a democracy”) is probably going a little too far. He’s not controlling the media, only selectively deciding who his friends are, as any administration does. The Bush Administration did not spend too much time on MSNBC or Huffington Post…

     

    The Obama Administration’s treatment of FOX News is childish and immature, and arguably out of line with their “new tone,” but not really anything un-democratic or un-American. Just a matter of taste and maturity.

  • Phil

    Charles – well said.  However, other administrations haven’t actually done this.  They might not have liked certain networks, but I’ve not seen another administration tell their people to boycott appearances on a specific news outlet.  My concern is what that says for this President’s view of the value of differing ideas.

  • bygracenotmerit

    I have wondered if it is because Obama has such difficulty engaging in a discussion with someone who doesn’t agree with him if he doesn’t have his telepromter.  He appears to be totally lost.  Of course, if you are appearing to be a “centrist” (throw in chuckle here) while you are really a far, far, far left liberal, it would be very hard to keep things straight, I would imagine~

    Remaining Steadfast, Dominique

    http://www.aup2.com


Phil Cooke © 2012. All Rights Reserved.