Who's Afraid of the Big, Bad, Fox?

So why is the White House targeting the only network in town that doesn't fawn on them? Besides that, I mean. Note that the White House has specifically warned off the other networks from reporting Fox stories.

And what stories have been reported first, and sometimes ONLY, by Fox? Here's a few:

ACORN
Van Jones
The admiration that Obama's Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings has expressed for a man who gave political cover and often spoke for NAMBLA.
The Eugenics espoused by Science Czar Holdren

the FCC Diversity Czar, Mark Lloyd, and his disdain for free speech and admiration of Hugo Chavez
White House communications chief Anita Dunn, who has expressed her admiration for Chairman Mao (which, for those with reading comprehension is not remotely the same as recommending a biography of Mao) and who is on video tape explaining to the Domincan government how the Obama campaign managed to 'control' the press (think they're still at it? Of course they are).

Jake Tapper notes that the White House has not only taken the unprecedented step of declaring open war on a news organization, but they have warned off the rest of the Press, telling the other reporters and news agencies that they should not treat Fox as a news organization.

The White House also, as Anita Dunn acknowledged a few months ago, wants to control the news media and make sure it only reports what the White House thinks is important, from the WH's perspective. And they specifically mention ACORN as a story that shouldn't have been too important:
“And then you had a couple days of breast-beating from The Washington Post and The New York Times about whether or not they were fast enough on the ACORN story,” the official said. “And it's like: Wait a second, guys. Let's make sure that we keep perspective on what are the most important stories, and what's being driven by a network that has a perspective. Being able to make that point has been important.”

So is the Whitehouse concerned just in general about other possible stories Fox is going to break and they wish to prevent those stories from gaining any traction by a preemptive strike, or is there something specific they know is coming out and they need to neutralize Fox ASAP?

I think Jake Tapper can read the handwriting on the wall, and he realizes, as just about the only Non-Fox journalist who ever tries to hold the White House accountable for anything and who ever asks hard questions, that he will be next if the WH succeeds in directing the agenda of the New Media in this openly raw fashion (and they've already succeeded in directing the media to a significant degree).

P.S I wrote the above yesterday, and early this morning noticed that ACE says the same thing, only better. I've also learned that Andrea Mitchell, whom the WH apparently does consider a 'journalist,' doesn't think George Soros is left wing and is the WH really holding behind the scenes briefings with partisan hacks like Olberman and Maddow present?


What is so frightening to him about what FOX can say that Obama Can Talk With Ahmadinejad But Not FOX News?

As this administration tries to quarantine all Fox news from the public, they also are looking further at censoring the internet through so called 'net neutrality. I think it's no coincidence that the two biggest sources of information that hasn't already been cut and framed by the Obama Whitehouse are the two sources of information the President wishes to neutralize the most.

Pin It

Pin It