It reads like most of Obama's press 'attacks' where on trying to clamp on national defense whistle blowers, and not leaks of personal ventures/business dealings. Since when is the right so aligned w/traitorous spying/leaks? Where's the latitude when Hillary was accused of doing the same?
Trump bars CNN and NYT from press briefing.
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
Didn't even read article, I consider Huffpost trash mostly, but the reporter interview was telling. I'm sure other venues will report on it soon.
**Edit; just skimmed through it, couldn't see any opinion in the reporting, just reaction quotes from those involved/present. So no, it isn't an opinion piece.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-briefing.html
Yeah you nailed it, no other candidates do anything to try to stop press they dont like.
The Fix
The Clinton campaign is roping off reporters. But who will cry for us?
By Aaron Blake July 6, 2015
It was the big story on Beltway Twitter over the weekend: The Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign, at a Fourth of July parade in New Hampshire, kept reporters behind a moving rope line so as not to get too close to their candidate.
The images were striking and quickly earned snide comments from reporters who have long been frustrated with their access to Clinton's campaign, as well as from others who saw the effort as heavy-handed.
239 years ago America declared independence. Today Hillary celebrates that by roping off the press like wild animals. pic.twitter.com/ya0BjsdSKB
— Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) July 4, 2015
Clinton advance aides create a rope line for the press, moving with the candidate pic.twitter.com/9S7CpVt7x4
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 4, 2015
And it's not hard to see why people are frustrated. We would hardly be the first to suggest that it looks like the media are being herded like cattle or sheep.
Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri took to “Morning Joe” on Monday and gamely tried to defend the tactic, with limited success.
“We try and allow the press as much access as possible, but my view is it can't get in the way of her being able to campaign,” Palmieri said as the hosts laughed. See for yourself here:
And it's an important story: Is a candidate for the highest office in the world allowing the press sufficient access as she seeks that office? Will the press be allowed to actually do its job and provide the kind of scrutiny and coverage that this process requires?
We've written about this plenty before. No, Clinton isn't required to do anything, but we would posit — and yes, journalists can't help but be biased in this regard — that transparency and a healthy media vetting process are good things for democracy.
It's a debate that means a lot to people like us. Unfortunately, it's likely to be of very little concern to actual voters, which is precisely the gamble that the Clinton campaign has been taking from Day One of this campaign.
The Constitution Center in 2013 asked people what they thought the the most important freedom was. Just 1 percent cited “freedom of the press.” It ranked behind the right to bear arms and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Gallup poll last month showed fewer than a quarter of Americans say they have at least “quite a lot” of confidence in both newspapers and TV news. Those numbers have basically never been lower.
And another Gallup poll in 2014 showed just 10 percent of Americans had a “great deal” of confidence in the news media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly.
Hillary Clinton’s problem is honesty. The GOP’s is empathy.]
In addition, you can make an argument that it exacerbates a problem that Clinton already has: honesty. Poll after poll has shown more people see her as dishonest than honest, and roping off the media could reinforce the idea that she has something to hide.
5-Minute Fix newsletter
Keeping up with politics is easy now.
But when it comes to whether this actually shifts the paradigm in any meaningful way, color us skeptical.
As with all the previous clashes between the media and the Clinton campaign, this is about an internal struggle. Some campaigns try to cater to the press to improve relations with reporters and prove they have nothing to hide; others try to keep reporters at arm's length.
The Clinton campaign is very much taking the latter approach, hoping that roping off reporters allows their candidate greater freedom to campaign and talk with average voters — not to mention avoiding the kind of unscripted, videotaped moments that can really hurt a candidate.
The debate over how Clinton's campaign treats the press will surely continue — and this is as good a flashpoint as any. Perhaps it also reinforces the negative perception of Clinton as dishonest.
But if you're looking for a sympathetic victim in all this, the news media is hardly your ideal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-who-will-cry-for-us/?utm_term=.56801afcb630
Yeah you nailed it, no other candidates do anything to try to stop press they dont like.
The Fix
The Clinton campaign is roping off reporters. But who will cry for us?
By Aaron Blake July 6, 2015
It was the big story on Beltway Twitter over the weekend: The Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign, at a Fourth of July parade in New Hampshire, kept reporters behind a moving rope line so as not to get too close to their candidate.
The images were striking and quickly earned snide comments from reporters who have long been frustrated with their access to Clinton's campaign, as well as from others who saw the effort as heavy-handed.
239 years ago America declared independence. Today Hillary celebrates that by roping off the press like wild animals. pic.twitter.com/ya0BjsdSKB
— Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) July 4, 2015
Clinton advance aides create a rope line for the press, moving with the candidate pic.twitter.com/9S7CpVt7x4
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 4, 2015
And it's not hard to see why people are frustrated. We would hardly be the first to suggest that it looks like the media are being herded like cattle or sheep.
Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri took to “Morning Joe” on Monday and gamely tried to defend the tactic, with limited success.
“We try and allow the press as much access as possible, but my view is it can't get in the way of her being able to campaign,” Palmieri said as the hosts laughed. See for yourself here:
And it's an important story: Is a candidate for the highest office in the world allowing the press sufficient access as she seeks that office? Will the press be allowed to actually do its job and provide the kind of scrutiny and coverage that this process requires?
We've written about this plenty before. No, Clinton isn't required to do anything, but we would posit — and yes, journalists can't help but be biased in this regard — that transparency and a healthy media vetting process are good things for democracy.
It's a debate that means a lot to people like us. Unfortunately, it's likely to be of very little concern to actual voters, which is precisely the gamble that the Clinton campaign has been taking from Day One of this campaign.
The Constitution Center in 2013 asked people what they thought the the most important freedom was. Just 1 percent cited “freedom of the press.” It ranked behind the right to bear arms and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Gallup poll last month showed fewer than a quarter of Americans say they have at least “quite a lot” of confidence in both newspapers and TV news. Those numbers have basically never been lower.
And another Gallup poll in 2014 showed just 10 percent of Americans had a “great deal” of confidence in the news media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly.
Hillary Clinton’s problem is honesty. The GOP’s is empathy.]
In addition, you can make an argument that it exacerbates a problem that Clinton already has: honesty. Poll after poll has shown more people see her as dishonest than honest, and roping off the media could reinforce the idea that she has something to hide.
5-Minute Fix newsletter
Keeping up with politics is easy now.
But when it comes to whether this actually shifts the paradigm in any meaningful way, color us skeptical.
As with all the previous clashes between the media and the Clinton campaign, this is about an internal struggle. Some campaigns try to cater to the press to improve relations with reporters and prove they have nothing to hide; others try to keep reporters at arm's length.
The Clinton campaign is very much taking the latter approach, hoping that roping off reporters allows their candidate greater freedom to campaign and talk with average voters — not to mention avoiding the kind of unscripted, videotaped moments that can really hurt a candidate.
The debate over how Clinton's campaign treats the press will surely continue — and this is as good a flashpoint as any. Perhaps it also reinforces the negative perception of Clinton as dishonest.
But if you're looking for a sympathetic victim in all this, the news media is hardly your ideal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-who-will-cry-for-us/?utm_term=.56801afcb630
Again, she's not the president, just like Obama wasn't a president w/his so-called plane ban. This is not a tightly secured press room, it's the street. And again, I'm immune to opinion pieces, no matter how much hyperbole is in them.
Max is right. You liberal cuckolds are nothing but hypocritical sacks of shit.
Crickets when Obama does it. Tears when POTUS does it.
You little bitch.
You don't even live in the country, what do you care?
'member this?
Obama holds off-record meeting with MSNBC hosts, liberal pundits
By DYLAN BYERS 11/21/13 11:26 AM EST
President Obama held an off-the-record meeting with MSNBC hosts and liberal pundits on Thursday, POLITICO has learned.
Present at the meeting: MSNBC's Ed Schultz and Lawrence O'Donnell, Washington Post economics blogger Ezra Klein, Mother Jones Washington bureau chief David Corn, Talking Points Memo editor and publisher Josh Marshall, ThinkProgress editor-in-chief Judd Legum, Atlantic senior editor Garance Franke-Ruta, Salon political writer Brian Beutler and Fox News contributor Juan Williams.
The participants agreed to an off-the-record classification for the meeting, though sources familiar with President Obama's remarks said that Williams later appeared on Fox News and cited some of the president's remarks, which he attributed to administration officials.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment regarding the meeting.
As I reported earlier this month, Obama has held several meetings with thought leaders from across the political spectrum during his presidency. The liberal confabs are seen by the White House as an opportunity to shape talking points and shore up support from the base -- something that has grown all the more important for the administration as Obama's approval ratings hit record lows.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media...eting-with-msnbc-hosts-liberal-pundits-178078
Obama holds off-record meeting with MSNBC hosts, liberal pundits
By DYLAN BYERS 11/21/13 11:26 AM EST
President Obama held an off-the-record meeting with MSNBC hosts and liberal pundits on Thursday, POLITICO has learned.
Present at the meeting: MSNBC's Ed Schultz and Lawrence O'Donnell, Washington Post economics blogger Ezra Klein, Mother Jones Washington bureau chief David Corn, Talking Points Memo editor and publisher Josh Marshall, ThinkProgress editor-in-chief Judd Legum, Atlantic senior editor Garance Franke-Ruta, Salon political writer Brian Beutler and Fox News contributor Juan Williams.
The participants agreed to an off-the-record classification for the meeting, though sources familiar with President Obama's remarks said that Williams later appeared on Fox News and cited some of the president's remarks, which he attributed to administration officials.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment regarding the meeting.
As I reported earlier this month, Obama has held several meetings with thought leaders from across the political spectrum during his presidency. The liberal confabs are seen by the White House as an opportunity to shape talking points and shore up support from the base -- something that has grown all the more important for the administration as Obama's approval ratings hit record lows.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media...eting-with-msnbc-hosts-liberal-pundits-178078