The 'Yeah, Whatever' Washington Press Corps

[bfp]

http://media.nationalreview.com/080693.asp

Effin press, at it again. No class, whatsoever.

[patpx]

Yep...the media is driven by negative things.

[djetaine]

You are surprised?

[Edwin Watson]

and they were so much better behaved during "Whitewater"

[Bill Spillz]

I can't believe you read the National Review (actually, wait, yea I can). That article was in no way real news - simply conservative propaganda. Anyway, the press' job is to hold our elected officials accountable for their actions, and the White House Press Corps does a fine job.

If you think the "effin press is at it again," then you obviously don't watch C-Span and the daily White House press conferences. Yelling out crazy, disrespectful questions is an EVERYDAY occurance. And thank God; our corrupt officials would run even more of a muck otherwise.

"The only news out of Iraq that they care about today is the 2,000th military death, and what really interests them is shouting out obnoxious questions that they know will go unanswered but that they hope will earn them a mention in Dan Froomkin's column." -from your article

that's just humorous. Firstly, it is implying that the 2,000th death in Iraq is not a HUGE FUCKING DEAL. Secondly, who gives a fuck about Dan Froomkin, really? I know the Press Corps doesn't.

[J. Fees]

the press corp have actually been really soft on Bush, and his dumbass antics.

[Bill Spillz]

Originally Posted by J. Feez

the press corp have actually been really soft on Bush, and his dumbass antics.

oh i agree totally - thats why it is crazy for someone to say that the press has gone overboard in White House criticism. But then again, this is the National Review we're talking about here.

[Edwin Watson]

Originally Posted by J. Feez

the press corp have actually been really soft on Bush, and his dumbass antics.

100% correct!!!! without a doubt.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by bfp

http://media.nationalreview.com/080693.asp

Effin press, at it again. No class, whatsoever.

They know that the American viewship - ie "their audience" - is more concerned about the corruption of the Bush administration than they are the president's stupid Iraq cliches. Anyway, I wouldn't really put too much stock in a blog advertising the "52 most dangerous liberals" in the sidebar. And they wonder why they're not considered to be "journalists."

[bfp]

Originally Posted by Ryan

They know that the American viewship - ie "their audience" - is more concerned about the corruption of the Bush administration than they are the president's stupid Iraq cliches. Anyway, I wouldn't really put too much stock in a blog advertising the "52 most dangerous liberals" in the sidebar. And they wonder why they're not considered to be "journalists."

I doubt that's the case. They have been this way, even throughout the war when 60-70 percent agreed that it was the right decision. Should they have tilted to a war supporting media circus? No, they shouldn't have. The press isn't there to be favorable to the public vis-a-vis the presidents approval ratings. They are one reason the presidents ratings are in the dump.

At a press conference regarding the Kurdish president, it's commonplace to ask questions regarding his visit, and other related issues, yet one of the press corps spits out: 'What did the VP know, and when did he know it?".

There is virtually nothing coming out of the press that is positive as it pertains to the war in Iraq. The press was silent for one week when there were no attacks, but were on the case when a hotel was attacked. Reuters, The AP, etc. purchase photos from arab cameramen who are practically embedded with the insurgents, doing photo-ops, hanging out with them almost daily.

How do you expect the approval of the war to hold strong when it does nothing but publish photos of insurgents taking arms in the alleys, while hiding our heros that put their life on the line to protect this country?

This isn't rocket science.

[bfp]

Originally Posted by Edwin Watson

100% correct!!!! without a doubt.

What planet have you been living on?!

[J. Fees]

There is virtually nothing coming out of the press that is positive as it pertains to the war in Iraq

maybe there is nothing positive to say about the war. What would you say was positive?

The AP, etc. purchase photos from arab cameramen who are practically embedded with the insurgents, doing photo-ops, hanging out with them almost daily

How do you expect the approval of the war to hold strong

I don't know when the War in Iraq had strong approval.


Do you really think this war is that great of an idea? Where do you see this whole thing going? There is no 'win', we won, we took out Saddam. Now we are just getting our troops killed, with no end in sight.

[Bill Spillz]

Originally Posted by bfp

How do you expect the approval of the war to hold strong when it does nothing but publish photos of insurgents taking arms in the alleys, while hiding our heros that put their life on the line to protect this country?

Quite an ironic statement considering the press in not allowed to publish photos of so-called heros that have put their life on the line and died.

It sounds to me that you want a pro-war/pro-military/pro-government press. Well thats is simply not going to happen - and it shouldn't. I think you are looking at the press the wrong way.

Many poliical scientists, these days, consider the press as the 4th branch of governemnt. The press is around to keep the other branches checked. The press will not and should not support another branch of government; they should question and criticize the other branches every step of the way.

As stated before, if the institution of journalism did not exist, corruption would run even more of a muck than it already does.

So go ahead, criticize journalists for doing their job - it is so much easier than to criticize the real problems and problem starters.

[J. Fees]

Bill, you obviously hate the U.S. and all it stands for, you commie traitor. (that was a joke)

[Bill Spillz]

Originally Posted by J. Feez

Bill, you obviously hate the U.S. and all it stands for, you commie traitor. (that was a joke)

hate is a strong word.

I do feel that nationalism ultimatly causes conflict due to nothing more than arrogance.

so, I do not have a strong sense of nationalism.

My sense of globalism is off tha chain though. And then once we discover extra terrestrials within our glalaxy (the milky way), my sense of galaxialism will dominate.














But, ultimatly, the isms divide us!