Fair enough. So is he.
1 Like
Yes. And interesting you bring up Obama and Fox. Rosen.
James? Rosen.
In the interest of Fairness and all, sure. 
I don’t care. I don’t track news outlet ratings. Why would anyone? Is there some sort of game being played were people pick news outlets and bet on their ratings?
The more important point is the idea that people believe the President of the United States should be actively trying to reduce the viewership of new organizations which he doesn’t approve of. I’d say “let that sink in,” but it won’t. So why bother? Just wanted a little confirmation, that’s all.
People should only be viewing networks with the approval of the current Administration. I mean that totally screams First Amendment, doesn’t it?
2 Likes
Has Trump done what Obama did to Rosen?
What a pathetically low standard you set for the fourth estate. Do you work for CNN. Brian, is that you?
Obama didn’t do the same to Hannity?
This should be fun.
What’s the “job” of a non-government, for-profit news organization?
The other side has a propaganda network with little regard for the truth," Obama said in the video about Biden,
You do care. He was elected to represent the interests of the common man and to speak truth to power in the Congress, Senate, press, fed, internationally, etc. on the common man’s behalf. He’s doing a great job at that. If he exposes abuses of power in the fourth estate that are undermining the common man, and makes a convincing case so the common man ditches the guilty sectors of the press, that’s a good thing, right?
I’m sure you could pick some instance and make a case. Maybe I’d even agree. Then we could discuss an entire first term of Trump spent constantly attempting to instigate and discredit news organizations and individuals who don’t show loyalty and adoration. His supporters would either disagree or claim he is entirely justified. So what’s the point in comparing them anyway?
Well if we’re comparing, Obama excluded a couple of reporters from WH briefings. Meanwhile, Trump has excluded entire networks. Totes the same.
To present facts to their audience.
Where’s the Kool-Aid? Missed it on the way in. Most people are horrified with the idea of the central government actively manipulating private corporations and new outlets which they feel threaten their popularity and message. Now that’s fighting on the common man’s behalf?
Like I said, it won’t sink in. So what’s the point?
So the principle is ok, it’s a question of degree?
I already gave you an example. Do we agree?
LOL. As soon as you say it’s part of Trump’s job to present facts to the American people maybe you could argue that. Seems like it’s cool when Trump calls out news organizations when he believes they aren’t presenting the facts. Just not when that happens in reverse. Got it.
Unless we’re really scared…
Who has argued it’s not cool in the reverse?
Has anyone stopped CNN presenting what they believe are facts? But CNN has been advocating that Trump be taken off the air, twitter, etc. and not be permitted to broadcast what he believes are facts.
