NYT: The White House conflict with Fox News is just like the war in Iraq
October 18, 2009 12:15 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
And Afghanistan, too!
The Times' David Carr belatedly joins a very long line of tsk-tsking pundits who in the last week have all said the exact the same thing (that's why it's called The Village), and announced that the White House was way off base when it criticized--when it fact-checked--Fox News. Fox News is just doing its job, Carr suggests. It's the White House that has to change its behavior. It's the White House that's out of line here.
I'm guessing that Kevin Jennings, the Dept. of Education official relentlessly targeted by Fox News as a statutory rape-loving "pervert" would disagree. But the elite pundits (the same pundits who have ignored the homophobic witch hunt of Jennings) have spoken: it's unseemly for the White House to call out the press by name.
Still, I couldn't help notice a rather warped sense of media self-importance in Carr's lede:
The Obama administration, which would seem to have its hands full with a two-front war in Iraq and Afghanistan, opened up a third front last week, this time with Fox News.
Really, criticizing the media is like sending U.S. men and women in combat? I realize the comparison isn't necessarily meant to be taken literally, but still. Seems like a painful, and inappropriate, stretch to me.
And speaking of The Village, where have I seen this Iraq/Afghanistan comparison before? Oh yeah, in the Times' direct competitor, the WashPost:
The White House is now fighting a three-front war: Iraq, Afghanistan and Fox News.
Good to know.
It is not a conflict that Fox News Hates Jews.
Fox News, It is what it is.
News Corp. "A Racist Enterprise" We can only hope someday that it hits the Skids.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Maybe Axelrod is too smart to repeat that error. Let's hope so.
1. It's OK for any conservative politician/administration to call out the news media.
2. It's not OK for a liberal/democratic politician or administration to call out the news media.
I see, once again, IOKIYAR. I get it now. And the thing is, when conservatives criticize, normally it's because the media are putting out negative stories, not un-true stories, but, negative stories. In the case of the Obama administration, it's straight up falsehoods, lies, and misinformation from FoxNews pretty much 24/7 against Obama.
Sure, why shouldn't they fight back against the lies and misinformation?
Amazing. I never saw (and if they're out there, I'd love to read them) media outlets, and journalists criticizing say, the Bush administration for them haranguing the media. I'm pretty sure, it never happened. How about someone calling out Palin for criticizing the media? Probably never happened either.
This is not in defense of FoxNews...it's just a little perspective on the validity of comments made my Pres.Obama...who has not been exactly a paragon of the truth.
Politifact has judged that Pres.Obama only tells the truth about half the time.
Covering the 20 most current statements by Pres.Obama...they find 8 were mostly true/true...12 were half true/barely true/false.
In total, they have analyzed 208 statements by Obama. They find 104 statements that were mostly true/true. They also find 104 statements that were half true/barely true/false.
I'll agree that the MSM does a poor job of reporting the news...which includes FoxNews...but the politicians, including Pres.Obama, are willing accomplices in spreading misinformation to the general public.
See, it's not that hard is it?
Of course it's about the politicians, and the media...FoxNews, NYTimes, etal...unless the comments section is reserved for those that only agree with Boehlert's every word.
You don't find me here defending FoxNews or virtually any of the other news organizations...they all do a pretty lousy job.
I find nothing wrong with the white house fact-checking FoxNews and speaking out about it...I just flipped the coin over to examine the other side. What I find is that politicians and advocates are just as complicit as FoxNews when it comes to distorting the truth.
I believe FoxNews is guilty of distorting the truth...and Politifact finds that Pres.Obama is only about half-truthful when communicating with the public.
They all need a swift kick in the pants.
Secondly, your depiction of Politifact's findings as Obama only tells the truth half the time is totally, 100%, false and is a distortion of their findings. What a louse you are, Wesley. Did you really think that no one here would know that your assertions was false, and that no one would do any research to debunk you? What a louse!!!!!
What kinds of things did they find fault with? Well, that Obama was told that an Illinois man died because of delayed treatment. Not a lie, nor anything that Obama should have known was untrue. They say he's not being accurate when he says he's not proposing any cuts to Medicare benefits to individuals. Their evidence? That the bill will cut funding to healthcare providers, not benefits to the users. That's listed as half true. It IS true. It's the Republicans who have been trying to falsely portray those cuts as cutting into benefits. They are the liars, not Obama.
They say that he's (he IS) a single payer supporter. He's not. He has said that if he could start from the beginning, if he thought he could get it passed, he would go that way, but that right now, he's not aiming towards that at all. So no, he is NOT a single payer supporter. Politifact distorts reality here to score a point against Obama. They also challenge him on his oft-repeated statement that this bill will not force anyone to change their healthcare plan. It's 100% true, but they object because he didn't include the caveat in there that employers can choose to make changes to plans. Well, they can do that right now, and so this plan doesn't change that!!!!
A couple of the things they got 'correct'? That Obama mispoke and talked about the millions of stimulus checks going out to residents of Indiana when he was addressing an audience there, but his staff member had done research on Illinois instead. That's not a fair thing to attack him about, since it was simply an honest mistake, but it is true that it was something that was false.
They said that Obama overestimated the cost of obesity to our nation. He was quoting numbers from a think tank. Looks like those numbers are wrong. They got one both "correct" and "right".
Otherwise, not so much.
Only us crickets.
Obama has been very accurate and honest with America.
If you check out the "pants on fire" posts by Politifact, on the other hand, 20 out the last 20 were lies from people or groups on the right, and only about 3 of the past 40 had anything to do with the left. Two of those 40? One was when Joe Biden pushed the widely-believed urban legend that germs from a sneeze circulate all through a plane's ventilation system. Omigod, what a "lie". The second one was when Obama said that, given the number of Muslims in the USA, we'd be considered one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. He was wrong. Omigod, what a "lie" again. Compare that with the lies from the other side about healthcare or Obama's birthplace, etc.
Progess.
It's not a matter of calling out those with whom they "disagree" but who are repeatedly, demonstrably dishonest. That's an important distinction. Moreover, I would suggest that if it were merely a matter of disagreement, even that would be a tacit agreement that Fox's "news" is blatantly opinionated and should not be treted as a journalistic source. The White House hasn't proposed any enemies list (as Fox has suggested). I have seen no evidence of subterfuge, sabotage, etc. directed from the White House to Fox. They're just stating the obvious. (As an aside, what was the proportion of Fox to non-Fox interviews done by Bush and Cheney?)
On your second question, yes, it is OK for a private company to be as fickle as it pleases with its advertising dollars. What would you propose as the alternative?
Regarding your third question, I think I agree with your rhetorical point that any such accusations should be substantiated. However, I haven't heard those claims, especially not from the White House. I think perhaps Fox and its apologists might be putting that out as yet another straw man. (Banned as hate speech? Who said that? Hannity while catastrophizing and martyring himself?)