Comments on: Do You Want Your OTV? (Part III)

By: jo porter

jo porter — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 14:42:00 +0000

This is probably off the subject but can’t find any other way to comment on BP oil spill….has anyone given thought that this could be terrorist act exploding a bomb or other devise to break these pipes and cause this disaster? Obama gave 2 Billion dollars to Petroleum-Bra for deep water oil well drilling, one of his best friends is owner of this company and they are one of BP’s main competitors.

By: V. Brame

V. Brame — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:23:44 +0000

Ever hear of fireside chats? President Obama is not the first president to keep the public informed in times of war and economic crisis. The President is comforting to some of us. In addition, what is up with all the crap about the “tax payer’s money”? This taxpayer wants’ to know what is happening at the White House! Get a grip Tapper and stop trying to feed into the paranoia, hate and hysteria of the right wing kooks. They are still tripping over Obama’s birth certificate and his teleprompter. Don’t give them anything else to go crazy about.

By: Talking points

Talking points — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:12:53 +0000

Every news outlet should unequivocally have to clearly label where all of their news is coming from as in today’s world so much of it is derived from political talking points and corporate press releases (requiring a copy of the actual release to be available would also be a good idea as they are sometimes cut and reworded). We also need more watchdog groups to monitor the news agencies, but unfortunately these groups are often smeared as partisan when one’s own side is called out. As for OTV… big deal… where are these pieces even being aired, can they be considered news in any sense, do they pose any real threat to journalism? It seems like they are aimed more at humanizing the office (clearly being PR pieces – something all administrations create), but at least they are forward about it instead of trying to embed it in the news or pass it off as journalism. The issue of funding may be more problematic, but so long as it is being funded out of an existing PR budget that corresponds to those of previous administrations there really isn’t anything to complain about there either. All in all, it’s more a bvd-bundler for conspiracy theorists and anti-Obama people than anything.

By: MarkLeavenworth

MarkLeavenworth — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:44:54 +0000

kjhk- Thanks for the feedback. But do you, or anyone else, happen to recall the name of Stalin’s prolific painter?

By: moderate

moderate — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:04:39 +0000

Ryan, I’ll try again to help you understand my point. Yes, I consider the WH creating and disseminating (outside the WH website, that is) news product, complete pieces rather than raw footage, indefensible. It does not matter for the purpose of this debate who has done what in the past, here or in other countries, under which party’s administrations. I clearly stated that I think the WH is wrong to do this. I did not include any statements along the line of “Republicans would never do such a thing” or “Bush never did that.”
You suggest that your line of argument, which drags in extraneous examples of the Bush era and of Fox News, is simply that “the right wing” is hypocritical, stating, “I was making a point of the complete insincerity and hypocrisy of the right wing on this issue.” Nonsense. Try seeing the world through a more nuanced prism, for starters– is everything left and right for you? And please note that at least some of us expressing reservations about the practice are NOT “right wing.” In fact, you made these comments about alleged right wing insincerity while addressing my earlier comment, quoting me and responding to each point.
Let’s try again– not everyone who disagrees with you, or with President Obama (after all, the two of you never seem to disagree on anything), is right wing. And, to be fair, I should also point out that being far right is not actually synonymous with being automatically wrong or beneath contempt, as you frequently imply.
You can keep trying to bring up Fox News as well as past “journalistic” scandals, but that does not change the present WH action or make it appropriate. Maybe you should move to another thread or another subject.

By: kjhk

kjhk — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:30:07 +0000

Posted by: MarkLeavenworth
re” “Flowers for Stalin”
I believe that like the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the pix in question vanished with the Commisars, a very (re) touching moment.
But in all seriousness, we know for sure that most of the images from that time period and subject matter now reside in the secret private art collection of president Obama.
In fact, altho’ it is not commonly known, there is a direct global underground transportation system at Obama’s disposal so he can secretly worship and study in the shadow of the Lenin memorial.

By: Ed

Ed — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:24:41 +0000

why hasn’t Obama filmed a cigarette commerical? Considering his addiction and the hardtimes coming for US tobacco companies (and many poor tobacco farmers some of whom are black)?

By: Axey

Axey — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:17:54 +0000

===FoxNews was but a single example.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 12, 2009 5:09:22 PM===
It’s apples to oranges. One is using tax payer dollars, the other isn’t.

By: Axey

Axey — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:15:17 +0000

===And the WH should cut it out.===
Why should they? With only 1 journalist questioning it, and being tagged a right winger for doing so, it’s a win/win for them.

By: Ryan C

Ryan C — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:09:22 +0000

“- the Obama administration does something indefensible”
Doing their own packaged video clips and being clear about who produced them is indefensible?
Should I even bother to ask what your rationalization was when Bush not only produced their own video clips but that they were disseminated to local news media and broadcast without any identification of the source?
“OTV is a bad idea, so you are trying to insist that the “real” issue of importance is not the WH behavior but Fox News.”
Not at all. I was making a point of the complete insincerity and hypocrisy of the right wing on this issue.
FoxNews was but a single example.