Tea Party convention hosts Palin and bans the press. Except Palin employer Fox News
January 14, 2010 10:53 am ET by Eric Boehlert
If news pros still actually convened ethics panels, I'd suggest they hold a new one, because this Tea Party convention is just getting nuts on so many levels. And who knows? Maybe the Beltway press will finally start asking questions about the confab set for Nashville next month.
Here's the bottom line: The right-wing convention is basically locking out reporters. Tea Party followers, who have built their political movement by rallying around the need for transparency, are going to hold a political convention and listen to speeches from, among others, Sarah Palin. But journalists are banned. Well, not all "journalists." The Tea Party convention is going to allow Fox News, which employs Sarah Palin, to be among the select few "reporters" allowed to cover the convention, where Sarah Palin will speak.
Now, I realize ethics and journalism guidelines do not exactly rule the day within Fox News headquarters, but I would think that even Murdoch execs can admit that they're facing a rather gargantuan conflict of interest with regards to the Tea Party convention.
Question: Will Fox News actually accept the tainted Tea Party credentials for the Sarah Palin show even though Fox News pays her, and even though Fox News understands that all other news orgs have been banned from the convention?
And yes, I wrote "all other news orgs" are banned because the other outlets that Tea Party convention officials are letting in consist of dubious, partisan sites such as WND, Townhall, and Breitbart.com. And, oh yeah, the WSJ made the cut, although I'm assuming the credentials are for its dubious, partisan opinion page and not the news team.
But if the WSJ news team did get credentials, I can't imagine editors there would accept them, knowing the extreme restrictions that are attached.


















The funny (and sad) part of this is that the people complaining so much about the lack of transparency, in the current administration, do not see the hipocracy of their own actions when they "filter" the reporting on their convention.
I'm sure everyone understands this already but; the reason people go to sites like WND and BigGovernment, is that they are looking to have their opinions confirmed. If they were looking for news or information they would try to find sources that are not biased. (as hard as that might be)
---------------------------------------------------------------
At what point do they relaize that THEY are source of the ills they rail against?