Obama and Fox news at it again..

Originally posted by Newjak
The notion that you need to let things go if you are in a position of power is asinine.

No, it's really bad that he did that. The US already has a bad reputation for being one of the shittiest countries for the press.

https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

The US is at 46. Out of the modern countries on that list, we are really far down the list. Some poor 3rd world countries have us beat. Shouldn't we be ashamed?

Making a statement that makes it seem like the PotUS is censoring the press, even if the press is airing stupid news stories, is never a good thing especially if you consider the US's poor reputation with press censoring and maltreatment of the press.

He should wait until he's no longer in office to make those statements. (To make it more clear, it just comes off as petty partisan squabbling that does nothing to create positive change)

When he makes statements like those, people outside the US may see a similarity between a dictatorship propaganda machine (a la Putin) and dictators of the past. Since Obama already has a bad reputation for abusing The Office of the President, he's just digging a deeper grave.

A much better way for this same message to get out is if a major national news anchor does a 15-30 minute news piece on the shitty journalism in the US. That would reach more people and make the circuits on the internet. It would also have more of a sting than Obama's message because it would come off as much more neutral/bipartisan. Obama's rantings will only polarize the issue, not help it. People like you and others will just nod your head and agree. But remember what I posted about that? You already thought that so he's just stating what you already believed.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, it's really bad that he did that. The US already has a bad reputation for being one of the shittiest countries for the press.

https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

The US is at 46. Out of the modern countries on that list, we are really far down the list. Some poor 3rd world countries have us beat. Shouldn't we be ashamed?

Making a statement that makes it seem like the PotUS is censoring the press, even if the press is airing stupid news stories, is never a good thing especially if you consider the US's poor reputation with press censoring and maltreatment of the press.

He should wait until he's no longer in office to make those statements. (To make it more clear, it just comes off as petty partisan squabbling that does nothing to create positive change)

When he makes statements like those, people outside the US may see a similarity between a dictatorship propaganda machine (a la Putin) and dictators of the past. Since Obama already has a bad reputation for abusing The Office of the President, he's just digging a deeper grave.

A much better way for this same message to get out is if a major national news anchor does a 15-30 minute news piece on the shitty journalism in the US. That would reach more people and make the circuits on the internet. It would also have more of a sting than Obama's message because it would come off as much more neutral/bipartisan. Obama's rantings will only polarize the issue, not help it. People like you and others will just nod your head and agree. But remember what I posted about that? You already thought that so he's just stating what you already believed.

I've done research looked at the statistics around things like welfare. Fox News does do a horrendous job of showing the reality of welfare in our country and those that are on it. Trust me if I looked into welfare and saw massive abuse I would call for reforms but abuse is not wide spread.

Also your example seems to say hey the news should self regulate themselves. To me self regulation as the only means of truth has never worked. I understand that was only one example but it doesn't come off well.

Now treating news better is fine. We should respect freedom of the press. That does not mean the industry should not be called out on their shortcomings.

Also there are not too many statements on any subject a President could make that won't be drawn along partisan lines. So if a President should take that into account then no President should ever discuss or offer opinions on any subject matter.

Originally posted by Newjak
I think Obama is factually right. The news and more so Fox than others do often paint inaccurate portraits of the truth on certain topics, especially welfare.

I also do not think him calling them out on it is bad either. The notion that you need to let things go if you are in a position of power is asinine. Often times you need to be the one to call people out on BS because you have the platform to do so.

Obama is calling them out because they are the most popular concervativates, not because he has some higher dream of a pure media. Don't be foolish guys.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
You called me a douche out of desperation because once again you had no real argument. I wasn't stunned by this because I expect such behavior from you.

You must be confusing internet forum with real life. Even in room to room operation in Iraq and Afghanistan, I was never desperate. I called you a douche because you always have the same theory that "the government will save us" and expect anyone who doesn't believe that wrong and desperate.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Even in room to room operation in Iraq and Afghanistan, I was never desperate.

Man, you're a real hardass. Going door to door, CQBing the shit out of any mofo in your way. Clearly the fact that you feel you have to bring up your experience in combat, means that it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

Obama called Faux news out for being full of bullshit. Good for him; he should say stuff like this more often.

Originally posted by Lucius
Man, you're a real hardass. Going door to door, CQBing the shit out of any mofo in your way. Clearly the fact that you feel you have to bring up your experience in combat, means that it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

Obama called Faux news out for being full of bullshit. Good for him; he should say stuff like this more often.

Sarcastically calling me a hard ass while trying to be a hard ass on the Internet. 😂
Priceless

Do me a favor shove your head up Obamas ass a little more. I didn't even critize Obama and wasn't even talking to you. Is your name Omega?

#Hardasspwnd

Originally posted by Newjak
It's not something I believe it is something I know dd.

If you want to split hairs over words, you literally know nothing. The sum of your knowledge is a set of subjective experiences that cannot be proven to be actual Objective Knowledge.

We can get less pedantic if you want. You still do not know this is true because there could be some sort of massive and pervasive conspiracy to make you think Fox is wrong but Fox is right this whole time (ha).

We can get even less pedantic than that and say that you factually do not know this because you have not personally sampled every single major city, collecting a representative sample, and verified that the samples have statistical significance.

But, really, it is something you believe. It is something many people believe and it is a safe belief, too. But if we split hairs over "belief and knowledge", we will go down a very deep philosophical rabbit whole whose result is nebulous ignorance.

Originally posted by Newjak
Now treating news better is fine. We should respect freedom of the press. That does not mean the industry should not be called out on their shortcomings.

They should but not by an incumbent president especially when the US is already suffering, PR-wise, from "lack of freedom of the press." If we were Finland and a Finnish and a specific news agency was spewing factually incorrect information, it still would not be okay for a politically powerful person to imply censorship of the press.

Originally posted by Newjak
Also there are not too many statements on any subject a President could make that won't be drawn along partisan lines. So if a President should take that into account then no President should ever discuss or offer opinions on any subject matter.

Specifically attacking a partisan position, a hot topic for both sides, is pretty obvious. It wasn't a mistake. It wasn't a misunderstanding: it's simply partisan shit-slinging. There definitely is a difference between incidental partisan discussion and overt shit-slinging.

If you'd like to talk about this more specifically in a historical context, take a look at the Hutchins Commission.

I don't know if this is all of it:
https://archive.org/details/freeandresponsib029216mbp

After digging through that (it may be a dull read), let me know if you think the press is so out of control and causing harm that regulation is a necessity. If you think that, in what ways would you recommend the press be regulated (be very specific so people don't play word games). If you think the press is fine, then what do you think we should do about Fox, if anything?

Originally posted by Henry_Pym
Obama is calling them out because they are the most popular conservatives, not because he has some higher dream of a pure media.

👆

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Do me a favor shove your head up Obamas ass a little more.

haha, wtf, man?

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, it's really bad that he did that. The US already has a bad reputation for being one of the shittiest countries for the press.

https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

The US is at 46. Out of the modern countries on that list, we are really far down the list. Some poor 3rd world countries have us beat. Shouldn't we be ashamed?

Making a statement that makes it seem like the PotUS is censoring the press, even if the press is airing stupid news stories, is never a good thing especially if you consider the US's poor reputation with press censoring and maltreatment of the press.

He should wait until he's no longer in office to make those statements. (To make it more clear, it just comes off as petty partisan squabbling that does nothing to create positive change)

When he makes statements like those, people outside the US may see a similarity between a dictatorship propaganda machine (a la Putin) and dictators of the past. Since Obama already has a bad reputation for abusing The Office of the President, he's just digging a deeper grave.

A much better way for this same message to get out is if a major national news anchor does a 15-30 minute news piece on the shitty journalism in the US. That would reach more people and make the circuits on the internet. It would also have more of a sting than Obama's message because it would come off as much more neutral/bipartisan. Obama's rantings will only polarize the issue, not help it. People like you and others will just nod your head and agree. But remember what I posted about that? You already thought that so he's just stating what you already believed.

Also, there's a huge gulf between Obama calling FOX News out on their bullshit and him using his position as president to try to paint FOX as treasonous, as guys like Erdogan in Turkey regularly do to opposition news media.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You must be confusing internet forum with real life. Even in room to room operation in Iraq and Afghanistan, I was never desperate. I called you a douche because you always have the same theory that "the government will save us" and expect anyone who doesn't believe that wrong and desperate.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
This is only a problem if you're incapable of seeing the difference between criticism and censorship. I would think you intelligent enough to perceive that difference, although you may have a point that less intelligent people may not. 😉

Also, there's a huge gulf between Obama calling FOX News out on their bullshit and him using his position as president to try to paint FOX as treasonous, as guys like Erdogan in Turkey regularly do to opposition news media.

So, I'm a "douche" because I disagree with you. Interesting.

No not at all, acting like a knowledge supremicst with a condesending tone, and acting like your views are righteous compared to others. Anyways this wasn't even the thread I called you that.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
This is only a problem if you're incapable of seeing the difference between criticism and censorship. I would think you intelligent enough to perceive that difference, although you may have a point that less intelligent people may not. 😉

Also, there's a huge gulf between Obama calling FOX News out on their bullshit and him using his position as president to try to paint FOX as treasonous, as guys like Erdogan in Turkey regularly do to opposition news media.

You missed a very important part of Obama's message where he addresses regulating the Media:

"We're going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we're going to have to change how the media reports on these issues and how people's impressions of what it's like to struggle in this economy looks like, and how budgets connect to that. And that's a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news."

Changing how the media reports on these issues, huh? He's skirting as close to the edge as possible without actually saying, "We need to regulate the media and throw out our already shaky idea of 'Freedom of the Press.'"

Edit - INB4 "He meant that the media needs to change, not that he would is saying to regulate it." Of course Obama will always wiggle out of an obviously stupid thing he implied. That's what politicians do. But I think if democrats want to be honest, they won't pretend Obama was talking about internal change: external regulation. How naive does a person have to be to think Obama is really going to change how News Corp. conducts business with just some passing comments about changing them? Is News Corp. really going to think, "Oh, wow, Obama is soooooo right. We need to change how we report the newssss! To the conference rooms! WEEE!" No, obviously they aren't going to do that so there's no room for "Obama didn't mean to regulate!" That's not correct. Obama meant regulation. He wants to overturn the conclusion of the Hutchins Commission and bring about regulation.

Originally posted by Newjak
I think Obama is factually right. The news and more so Fox than others do often paint inaccurate portraits of the truth on certain topics, especially welfare.

I also do not think him calling them out on it is bad either. The notion that you need to let things go if you are in a position of power is asinine. Often times you need to be the one to call people out on BS because you have the platform to do so.

Absolutely nothing will be achieved by it. As a candidate you can complain about the press all you want. With his civil rights records this is a dangerous precedent.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If you want to split hairs over words, you literally know nothing. The sum of your knowledge is a set of subjective experiences that cannot be proven to be actual Objective Knowledge.

We can get less pedantic if you want. You still do not know this is true because there could be some sort of massive and pervasive conspiracy to make you think Fox is wrong but Fox is right this whole time (ha).

We can get even less pedantic than that and say that you factually do not know this because you have not personally sampled every single major city, collecting a representative sample, and verified that the samples have statistical significance.

But, really, it is something you believe. It is something many people believe and it is a safe belief, too. But if we split hairs over "belief and knowledge", we will go down a very deep philosophical rabbit whole whose result is nebulous ignorance.

They should but not by an incumbent president especially when the US is already suffering, PR-wise, from "lack of freedom of the press." If we were Finland and a Finnish and a specific news agency was spewing factually incorrect information, it still would [b]not be okay for a politically powerful person to imply censorship of the press.

Specifically attacking a partisan position, a hot topic for both sides, is pretty obvious. It wasn't a mistake. It wasn't a misunderstanding: it's simply partisan shit-slinging. There definitely is a difference between incidental partisan discussion and overt shit-slinging.

If you'd like to talk about this more specifically in a historical context, take a look at the Hutchins Commission.

I don't know if this is all of it:
https://archive.org/details/freeandresponsib029216mbp

After digging through that (it may be a dull read), let me know if you think the press is so out of control and causing harm that regulation is a necessity. If you think that, in what ways would you recommend the press be regulated (be very specific so people don't play word games). If you think the press is fine, then what do you think we should do about Fox, if anything?

👆

haha, wtf, man? [/B]

Originally posted by Newjak
So your rebuttal to me saying I'm not blindly following someone because I go and look up statistics is to say well who really knows anything?

I take your point, but in the end we'll all die anyways, so does it really matter?

Wille Clinton had the same issue with Rush Limbaugh. Forget griping about it, just have everyone at Fox audited by the IRS. Have the jackbooted thugs of the IRS seize all their bank accounts for a few years and then when it checks out the tax returns were filed correctly, unfreeze the funds and say oops, my bad.

Originally posted by Newjak
So your rebuttal to me saying I'm not blindly following someone because I go and look up statistics is to say well who really knows anything?

No.

I thought I was being pretty clear that you were making unnecessary, pedantic, clarifications over "belief and knowledge."

But if that's the only thing you wanted to respond to from my post, I think we're good. 👆