No surprise at all. Interesting that on more than one occasion, I've seen a Fox host/anchor chide a guest from the "liberal" side for spouting off talking points, but never one from the "conservative" side.

Was it a host, such as O'Reilly or Hannity, or was it an anchor such as Chris Wallace? There is a difference and to continue to blur the distinction between political commentary and news is really just misleading.

And back to the topic, it is interesting that Fox News is the station that has been so blessed. Any theories as to why?

 

Why?

Ummm...Rupert Murdoch?

What I find disappointing is that they only sent them to Fox and not NBC, ABC, and CBS, also. As press secretrary it was McCellan's job to get the Presidient's message to the public and the networks are one of the most effective tools. Limiting the president's message to one network is a disservice to the president. Also, I have no problem with the government communicating to the public (or as you call it spreading propaganda) through the networks. If this does concern you, then I would caution you to be careful what you wish for. The alternative is a government that doesn't let the people know what it is doing or the rational behind what it is doing.

 

I agree. The fact that its only Fox though is what's disturbing. That's why I used the term "propoganda." If they had sent this out to all of the outlets then I can call it "communicating to the public."

 

IF we assume this is true, Shooter, should we think that President Bush was not aware of it?

 

So, what may or may not be my last comment on anything before the election is.. I don't honestly don't know who all in all the races I will be voting "for" but I am 100% positive that I will be voting "against" Obama.

 

edit

Edited July 27, 200818 yr by Clyde

Alan Colmes is a raving lefty.

 

He's the token liberal. He's there to make the raving righty look better.

He's the token liberal. He's there to make the raving righty look better.

:thumb:

He's the token liberal. He's there to make the raving righty look better.

 

And he sure does do that, that's for certain.

I found the same thing. It appears that the assertion made in the first post that McClellan fed talking points to Fox News Channel's main anchors it simply not true.

 

Commentators on all news channels receive information from party insiders. Hannity and O'Reilly are no different than Matthews, Carville, or Olbermann in that regard.

Does anybody want to correct the mistake in this thread's first post, admit that McClellan's comments were mischaracterized, and set the record straight? Two pages of Fox-bashing based on a phony accusation with no supporting link or other documentation seems like quite enough.

A few comments relating to this thread.

 

- If you think Alan Colmes is the only "liberal" on Fox News, you do not watch a lot of Fox News.

 

- Fox and Friends in the morning is the most right wing show on cable.

 

- O'Reilly is deemed by many on the left as a hardcore Republican. Again, if you watch O'Reilly, you definitley know that is not the case.

 

- Fox News has the hottest anchors and contributors on cable behind G4 (with the exception of Greta).

 

- Agenda aside, Fox News is really good at what they do. They were smarter than other cable news outlets in hiring people that were not only good at what they know, but also entertaining. Bottom line, Fox News is better television. Sort of like the Yankees. No matter how good or bad the product is, they are at least interesting.

I found the same thing. It appears that the assertion made in the first post that McClellan fed talking points to Fox News Channel's main anchors it simply not true.

 

Commentators on all news channels receive information from party insiders. Hannity and O'Reilly are no different than Matthews, Carville, or Olbermann in that regard.

 

All news channels represent themselves as being objective, as well they should. The notion that only Fox News portrays itself as an objective news source is ridiculous.

 

[/indent]

 

I'm not sure what you disagree with. McClellan said he sent it to talking heads and commentators and not journalists. Who else would he be talking about? Steve Young of the Huffington Post says that McClellan later confirmed that Bill was one of the main recipients of the talking points.

 

Secondly, he never said anything about commentators from other channels. As a matter of fact, Matthews challenged him on that and said he had NEVER received ANYTHING from the White House.

 

So, with that, what is your issue with what I reported? Has McClellan said he gave it to any other network?

Was it a host, such as O'Reilly or Hannity, or was it an anchor such as Chris Wallace? There is a difference and to continue to blur the distinction between political commentary and news is really just misleading.

I know the difference between an anchor/host and a political commentator.

 

One of them was Linda Vester (no longer with Fox, I believe) on her late morning/early afternoon show ... the one in question was during the 2004 election.

 

I don't remember who the other anchor was, but it was on one of the afternoon shows.

A few comments relating to this thread.

 

- If you think Alan Colmes is the only "liberal" on Fox News, you do not watch a lot of Fox News.

 

- Fox and Friends in the morning is the most right wing show on cable.

 

- O'Reilly is deemed by many on the left as a hardcore Republican. Again, if you watch O'Reilly, you definitley know that is not the case.

 

- Fox News has the hottest anchors and contributors on cable behind G4 (with the exception of Greta).

 

- Agenda aside, Fox News is really good at what they do. They were smarter than other cable news outlets in hiring people that were not only good at what they know, but also entertaining. Bottom line, Fox News is better television. Sort of like the Yankees. No matter how good or bad the product is, they are at least interesting.

Correct on all points.

I'm not sure what you disagree with. McClellan said he sent it to talking heads and commentators and not journalists. Who else would he be talking about? Steve Young of the Huffington Post says that McClellan later confirmed that Bill was one of the main recipients of the talking points.

 

Secondly, he never said anything about commentators from other channels. As a matter of fact, Matthews challenged him on that and said he had NEVER received ANYTHING from the White House.

 

So, with that, what is your issue with what I reported? Has McClellan said he gave it to any other network?

McClellan specifically distinguished between the night time commentators and the Fox News anchors. Yet, in your opening post, you described the Fox News representatives as main anchors. What you did was the equivalent of smearing NBC news anchor Brian Williams with the same broad brush as one might reasonably reserve for Keith Olbermann. Your post was misleading to say the least and I asked for the basis of your assertion that Fox News' main anchors were involved.

 

Do you have anything to back up the assertion on which you based this thread?

I know the difference between an anchor/host and a political commentator.

 

One of them was Linda Vester (no longer with Fox, I believe) on her late morning/early afternoon show ... the one in question was during the 2004 election.

 

I don't remember who the other anchor was, but it was on one of the afternoon shows.

According to her bio on Wikipedia, Linda Vester was never a Fox News Channnel "anchor." She hosted an afternoon news/talk show called "Dayside" before she left the network. She had previously worked as an anchor/correspondent for NBC News.

McClellan specifically distinguished between the night time commentators and the Fox News anchors. Yet, in your opening post, you described the Fox News representatives as main anchors. What you did was the equivalent of smearing NBC news anchor Brian Williams with the same broad brush as one might reasonably reserve for Keith Olbermann. Your post was misleading to say the least and I asked for the basis of your assertion that Fox News' main anchors were involved.

 

Do you have anything to back up the assertion on which you based this thread?

 

So this is a semantics issue? I'd be hard pressed to distinguish between an "anchor" and a "commentator" on Fox. Aren't they all commentators/anchors? If I'd have used MSNBC instead of Fox I would not have been smearing Brian Williams as I would have said "MSNBC" which would preclude Mr. Williams from most people's mind.

 

In this case, I "heard" it as O'Reilly/Hannity since they are the two biggest shows. As I said, it was reported that McClellan later verified that O'Reilly was one of the recipients.

 

So, I guess if your argument is that Brit Hume was impuned, I stand corrected. I think most read this and immediately thought of O'Reilly/Hannity but if you didn't, I've clarified my point. With that, how does that change the story that the two most watched Fox News guys were not speaking independently and were, in essence, puppets?