BEAT THE PRESS: Reporters reveal how the Obama administration threatens and controls the media

Yeah, sure. We've been over this before. No one cares that our rights are being lessened on a daily basis. But just so you know, here is another article you can ignore:

As coverage of last week’s flare-up between Bob Woodward and the White House devolved into the granular parsing of words and implications and extrapolations and possible intent, the larger point was roundly missed: the increasing pressure that White House correspondents feel when dealing with the Obama administration — to follow their narrative, to be properly deferential (!), to react to push-back by politely sitting down and shutting up.

“The whole Woodward thing doesn’t surprise me at all,” says David Brody, chief political correspondent for CBN News. “I can tell you categorically that there’s always been, right from the get-go of this administration, an overzealous sensitivity to any push-back from any media outlet.”

A brief recap: After the Washington Post ran a Woodward op-ed in which he claimed that the administration was “moving the goalposts” on the eve of the potential sequester, the veteran journalist went on to assert that economic adviser Gene Sperling said, in an e-mail, “I think you will regret staking out this claim.”

While Woodward spent a lot of the week on cable news going back and forth on whether that was a threat, few reporters, if any, asked why a high-level administration official spent so much time — Sperling admittedly shouted at Woodward during a 30-minute phone call, followed by that e-mail — attempting to control an opinion expressed in a newspaper.

The answer, say former and current White House correspondents, is simple: This administration is more skilled and disciplined than any other in controlling the narrative, using social media to circumnavigate the press. On the flip side, our YouTube culture means even the slightest gaffe can be devastating, and so you have an army of aides and staffers helicoptering over reporters.

Finally, this week, reporters are pushing back. Even Jonathan Alter — who frequently appears on the Obama-friendly MSNBC — came forward to say he, too, had been treated horribly by the administration for writing something they didn’t like.

“There is a kind of threatening tone that, from time to time — not all the time — comes out of these guys,” Alter said this week. During the 2008 campaign swing through Berlin, Alter said that future White House press secretary Robert Gibbs disinvited him from a dinner between Obama and the press corps over it.

“I was told ‘Don’t come,’ in a fairly abusive e-mail,” he said. “[It] made what Gene Sperling wrote [to Woodward] look like patty-cake.”

“I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,” says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c--t, a--hole.” He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.”

Notice the Obama administration's particularly sensitive approach to female journalists. Bitch, cunt, asshole. Yeah, we get it, Obama.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...nc5zuBZTiZ6aUL

snick

It is amazing how lazy the so called journalists have become.
It truly is "Idiocracy".

It is amazing how lazy the so called journalists have become.
It truly is "Idiocracy". Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Cite us up to the journalists who you think aren't lazy. And who don't represent the idiocracy. Would those folks happen to agree with your outlandish whackadoo opinions? Let me guess.

I just want to get this right before I start in on you. You support Gore Vidal's statements on government, liberalism and conservatives?

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Gore Vidal has had his moments. I'm not aware of all his statements, but I agree with this one. I side with liberals a lot of the time. In case you hadn't noticed, in another thread I castigated the SCOTUS because the 5 conservatives screwed up an opinion, and the libs got it right. It happens. I supported the libs back when they were anti-war, but that has changed now. I generally support the liberal position on civil rights, but that was awhile back, when they used to support civil rights.

You can't characterize me as liberal or conservative, as much as it would make your life easier. One of my all time favorite congressmen was Dennis Kucinich. Go figure. At least he was honest, and right much of the time. I have supported Ron Wyden, and even Dianne Feinstein and Al Franken on occasion.

But because I use one Vidal quote doesn't mean I endorse everything he ever said. But I bet I support more of what he has said than you might think.