38 Journalist Groups slam Obama's Political Suppression Of The News

Misty

Misty

Member
Location
Illinois
Censorship: 38 journalism groups slam Obama's 'politically-driven suppression of news'

By Paul Bedard | July 9, 2014 | 11:21 am

In unprecedented criticism of the White House, 38 journalism groups have assailed the president's team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials and overall “politically-driven suppression of the news.”

In a letter to President Obama, the 38, led by the Society of Professional Journalists, said efforts by government officials to stifle or block coverage has grown for years and reached a high-point under his administration despite Obama's 2008 campaign promise to provide transparency.

Worse, they said: As access for reporters has been cut off, the administration has opened the door to lobbyists, special interests and “people with money.”
And as a result, they wrote, Obama only has himself to blame for the current cynicism of his administration. “You need look no further than your own administration for a major source of that frustration – politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies. We call on you to take a stand to stop the spin and let the sunshine in,” wrote David Cuillier, president of SPJ.

The administration has dismissed similar charges from other journalism groups, notably the White House Correspondents’ Association, but the new letter sent Tuesday provided several examples of censorship and efforts to block reporter access. Among them:
• Officials blocking reporters’ requests to talk to specific staff people.
• Excessive delays in answering interview requests that stretch past reporters’ deadlines.
• Officials conveying information "on background" — refusing to give reporters what should be public information unless they agree not to say who is speaking.
• Federal agencies blackballing reporters who write critically of them.
“In many cases, this is clearly being done to control what information journalists — and the audience they serve — have access to. A survey found 40 percent of public affairs officers admitted they blocked certain reporters because they did not like what they wrote,” added the letter.
In addition to asking for openness, the groups demanded Obama create an ombudsman position to help clear away barriers to news coverage.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/censo...ly-driven-suppression-of-news/article/2550647

It is also mentioned in the article that some suppression of the press was being done during the Bush administration too, but not to the extent that it is under Obama's administration.
 

You could tell by the coverage and pundits but when I saw one of the Watergate reporters speak out that was all the confirmation I needed that this administration has a very poor disclosure and cooperation record.
 
38 Journalist Groups slam Obama's Political Suppression Of The News

crying-baby.jpg
 

WhatInThe said:
You could tell by the coverage and pundits but when I saw one of the Watergate reporters speak out that was all the confirmation I needed that this administration has a very poor disclosure and cooperation record.
Click to expand...

I was surprised how forthcoming they were in their complaint's WhatInThe. Maybe since there are so many of them, they are not as worried about being audited, or spied on like happened to James Rosen or the Associated Press. I was proud of them, and hopefully it will work, and there will be more openness in reporting again.
 
It would be nice if the Obama administration would be more transparent as he promised, I wish everyone involved in the US government were not so secretive. But hasn't this been a problem with other presidents in the past also? http://www.globalresearch.ca/bush-s...ormed-u-s-government-from-open-to-closed/8763 .

I think there's a lot of funny business going on behind the scenes that they want to hide from the public. It seems like they've been withholding information, giving us disinformation, etc. for decades. They obviously have a lot to hide, I agree that all Americans should be concerned about government transparency.
 
I think there is a lot of information the public is better off not knowing.

For all kinds of reasons.
 
This is a good start, and maybe if enough of the news reporters stand together, something can actually be done about the cover-up and distortion of the news. I have read for a long time that the reporters have to only report what they are told to, or they lose their jobs, and are blackballed from the profession permanently. So, either they do as they are told, or their career is over.

You can see that most of them read from the same script, regardless of which news channel they are reporting from.
Even worse, some of the freelance reporters have died suspicious and mysterious deaths; such as Michael Hastings, who wrote the article about Sgt. Bowie Bergdahl, and several other investigative reports, and was supposed to be working on something even more important when his car crashed and blew up.
The major news networks are all controlled by about six gigantic corporations, so an independent newspaper or radio station is pretty hard to find nowdays.
 
SeaBreeze said:
It would be nice if the Obama administration would be more transparent as he promised, I wish everyone involved in the US government were not so secretive. But hasn't this been a problem with other presidents in the past also? http://www.globalresearch.ca/bush-s...ormed-u-s-government-from-open-to-closed/8763 .

I think there's a lot of funny business going on behind the scenes that they want to hide from the public. It seems like they've been withholding information, giving us disinformation, etc. for decades. They obviously have a lot to hide, I agree that all Americans should be concerned about government transparency.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the article, SeaBreeze...Very Interesting. The article I posted said that in prior years before Bush and Obama, journalists were more free to walk the halls and talk to staff people when they wanted to see them.

I feel the same that people should be concerned about transparency. I was looking forward to the transparency that Obama promised..that we could see bills before they were passed on a government website...that never happened. In fact, even Nancy Pelosi said the health care bill had to be passed so we could read it....quite backward.

We are the politicians employers, and they should be working for us, not special interests, or political paybacks, but that doesn't seem to be happening much either. Everything seems so political in many cases, instead of working for the people that elected them.
 
Why are journalists obsessed with knowing what goes on behind closed doors, what happened to 'In confidence'............ let the guy get on with his job, from this side of the pond he appears to be doing okay!
 
romfty said:
Why are journalists obsessed with knowing what goes on behind closed doors, what happened to 'In confidence'............ let the guy get on with his job, from this side of the pond he appears to be doing okay!
Click to expand...

By Journalists being allowed to publish articles freely, as long as they are not considered confidential information, that's how we find out if our President and administration are doing their jobs, Romfly. :)
 
MrJim said:
I think there is a lot of information the public is better off not knowing.

For all kinds of reasons.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you, Mr Jim....when I vote, I want to be informed, and not just vote for a political party.
 
Happyflowerlady said:
This is a good start, and maybe if enough of the news reporters stand together, something can actually be done about the cover-up and distortion of the news. I have read for a long time that the reporters have to only report what they are told to, or they lose their jobs, and are blackballed from the profession permanently. So, either they do as they are told, or their career is over.

You can see that most of them read from the same script, regardless of which news channel they are reporting from.
Even worse, some of the freelance reporters have died suspicious and mysterious deaths; such as Michael Hastings, who wrote the article about Sgt. Bowie Bergdahl, and several other investigative reports, and was supposed to be working on something even more important when his car crashed and blew up.
The major news networks are all controlled by about six gigantic corporations, so an independent newspaper or radio station is pretty hard to find nowdays.
Click to expand...

The good news is that the anger of the journalists not being allowed to do their jobs, has grown from just the White House Correspondents Association, to 38 groups of Journalists, and as you mentioned, HappyFlowerLady, if enough of the news reporters continue to stand together, something can be done. Journalists used to have high marks from readers, but not much anymore...they are being used for political purposes. This is not just a right or left side of the aisle issue, it's important for both sides to be informed.

Thanks for all the information you shared, HappyFlowerLady. :)
 
Im going with jim on this one.
I think there is a lot of information the public is better off not knowing.

For all kinds of reasons.

It seems lately any news from the White House to the media is at times totally taking out of contents and twisted to their thoughts,anything for good rating .
Anytime the President says "Yes,this is the way we're going to do it" all hell breaks loose with their version what the President just said and member of Congress are not far behind either. This is why this country is going to hell.
 
Very Interesting video's, SeaBreeze, and it was surprising to me, just how many news organizations are owned by corporations. Thanks for sharing. :) On a side note it was recently in the news that Robert Redford is going to play Dan Rather in a movie about Rathergate, and his resignation.
 
Misty said:
Very Interesting video's, SeaBreeze, and it was surprising to me, just how many news organizations are owned by corporations. Thanks for sharing. :) On a side note it was recently in the news that Robert Redford is going to play Dan Rather in a movie about Rathergate, and his resignation.
Click to expand...

The more things like this that I'm made aware of, the more skeptical I am when watching news reports from Fox or Msnbc...both play the game to the point where I feel somewhat insulted. They think if they tell the story from their perspective (or the one they were instructed to have), with the right emphasis on certain words and expressions, we'll all believe and follow like sheep. :p

I often notice also that important issues that affect us in America and the world are hardly mentioned....just repeated slams on the other party. Seems you get a more complete and honest news report from the UK about the US. Will be interesting to see the movie with Redford playing Rather. :D
 
SeaBreeze, I agree with you ! The news channels seem to fill up the time with drivel, even when there is actual news going on that they could report, and thee only things that they do cover are the agendas that they have been instructed to push. While they are talking about some new television show, we have had huge earthquakes in Mexico that I didn't even see mentioned, and many other newsworthy stories that they could have covered. There was yet another of those mysterious train crashes where they are full of oil, or another important carge that is flammable, and people were being evacuated. I found that on one of the "outsider" news sites.
Even Russia seems to have better coverage of what is happening here than we usually get.


HappyFlowerLady
 
SeaBreeze said:
The more things like this that I'm made aware of, the more skeptical I am when watching news reports from Fox or Msnbc...both play the game to the point where I feel somewhat insulted. They think if they tell the story from their perspective (or the one they were instructed to have), with the right emphasis on certain words and expressions, we'll all believe and follow like sheep. :p :D
Click to expand...

I remember before Fox and Msnbc, the story was pretty much from the other perspective.
 
makes sense to me, why wouldn't he want to hide everything he and others are up to? I think this has always gone on, like, the public gets to know what we want them to know.
 
Sid said:
I remember before Fox and Msnbc, the story was pretty much from the other perspective.
Click to expand...

Yes, all the facts should be given out in the news, but nowadays it seems like whoever has the biggest bank-roll gets to choose what is broadcast and what is not. I'm glad for Fox, at least we get to hear both sides, but at the same time, for myself, I don't know what is truth or fiction most of the time:(
 
nwlady said:
Yes, all the facts should be given out in the news, but nowadays it seems like whoever has the biggest bank-roll gets to choose what is broadcast and what is not. I'm glad for Fox, at least we get to hear both sides, but at the same time, for myself, I don't know what is truth or fiction most of the time:(
Click to expand...

Hi NwLady :) Happy to see you back.:love_heart: I'm a fan of fox news, and also read newspages of Cnn, Msnbc, abc, nbc, etc, but get the most news on Fox news. British newspages have interesting news too, that are not found here many times.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top