4 ms·

Under another administration I would be hopeful, but the Trump administration appears openly interested in choosing organizations that only ask the kind of ques

by XaspR8d 10y ago

Under another administration I would be hopeful, but the Trump administration appears openly interested in choosing organizations that only ask the kind of questions they want to answer.

makomk 10y ago
Traditionally, the White House press corps was not exactly famed for its willingness to ask uncomfortable questions.
Alupis 10y ago
> Under another administration I would be hopeful, but the Trump administration appears openly interested in choosing organizations that only ask the kind of questions they want to answer How about we wait and see before passing judgement. After all... this is brand new, and obviously done under the new administration.
- noobermin 10y ago
  We already had the first press conference in the new admin as well as Trump's last personal conference...going to say they have already set the precedent.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > We already had the first press conference The first two, though no questions were permitted at the first one (which itself is something of a signal.)
- thenewwazoo 10y ago
  Wait and see what, exactly? A self-proclamed "war" with the media, and taking zero questions on day 1 of the administration is enough for me. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. That makes me disinclined to "wait and see".
  - threeseed 10y ago
    Not sure if everyone here actually saw all of the Sunday press shows. But it's far more than just your every day "war with the media" that other Presidents have gone through. Every White House reporter including Hume and Wallace from Fox News have said that what Spicer/Trump did was unprecedented in all their years of covering administrations. To have a Press Secretary berate the press corp and demand they fall in line whilst simultaneously flat out lying is pretty extraordinary and very concerning. It's something straight out of 1984 and has Bannon's fingerprints all over it. Video from Fox News Sunday panel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsV305yfG2o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsV305yfG2o
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Every White House reporter including Hume and Wallace from Fox News have said that what Spicer/Trump did was unprecedented in all their years of covering administrations. As, incidentally, have former Press Secretaries of both parties.
      - Alupis 10y ago
        > As, incidentally, have former Press Secretaries of both parties. That's part of what gets me, really. If this were another administration, people would celebrate this as something progressive and new. However, it's Trump, so it must automatically be terrible, regardless of the reasons put forth for this thing (which sound good and "progressive", honestly). People aren't willing to even give it a chance before condemning it. Of course people should be skeptical, especially since previous behavior has clearly lent reason to be skeptical... however, we shouldn't become jaded and start to view everything new from this administration as automatically bad or full of ulterior motives.
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > If this were another administration, people would celebrate this as something progressive and new. No, berating the press corps for failing to fall in line while spouting outright lies would not be seen as "progressive" under a different President. While this administration's manifestation has been correctly been called unprecedented in modern American history, that's a matter of degree; a lesser form was seen in the waning days of the Nixon Administration as the siege mentality during the Watergate scandal had taken hold, and that wasn't seen as progressive either. (Maybe you meant this as a comment on the Skype seats, but if so it has nothing to do with the post you respond see to or the part you quoted.)
- tw04 10y ago
  I'm happy to wait and see. I'd just like to point out everything thus far I've waited to see has turned out to be WORSE than I was expecting.
orthoganol 10y ago
Can you support the viewpoint that such preferences are abnormal for a presidential administration?
- XaspR8d 10y ago
  I don't think such preferences are abnormal, not at all. It is a natural desire for an administration to want softball questions. However I don't think most administrations would attempt to achieve them by disrupting the press corps. That claim probably can't be tested or evaluated fairly, partially because it's a fairly novel action, and partially because it's a complex hypothetical. I must admit it is just my political leanings driving me to this conclusion. I guess another (unfair) way to look at is: I would rather have someone appear not to attempt to manipulate public opinion, regardless of if they actually are, because when you are at that level of power, I at least want you to ave your act together enough to keep halfway-decent PR. Thus the fact that it appears to me that they are making such weak attempts to manipulate says something, independent of the ethics of the action itself.
- losteric 10y ago
  Obama preferred liberal news organizations, and that was OK because he still answered questions he didn't like from the right. Trump goes beyond preferences... he only wants favorable questions from organizations that will cover him favorably.
  - makomk 10y ago
    If he only accepted questions from organizations that cover him favourably, that'd exclude most of the media. From what I've seen so far he only seems to refuse questions from media that delve into conspiracy-theory tier reporting - Russian piss orgies, "secret communications with Russia" that somehow look in every way like junk email about Trump hotels from an outsourced service he doesn't even control, that kind of thing. (Which is probably still a little ironic given his role in birtherism.)
  - jlarocco 10y ago
    Obama spent 2122 days as president. Trump has been president for less than 3 full days so far. It may turn out that you're correct, but there's not enough data to make a meaningful comparison yet.

by XaspR8d 10y ago

Under another administration I would be hopeful, but the Trump administration appears openly interested in choosing organizations that only ask the kind of questions they want to answer.

makomk 10y ago

Traditionally, the White House press corps was not exactly famed for its willingness to ask uncomfortable questions.

Alupis 10y ago

> Under another administration I would be hopeful, but the Trump administration appears openly interested in choosing organizations that only ask the kind of questions they want to answer How about we wait and see before passing judgement. After all... this is brand new, and obviously done under the new administration.

noobermin 10y ago
We already had the first press conference in the new admin as well as Trump's last personal conference...going to say they have already set the precedent.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > We already had the first press conference The first two, though no questions were permitted at the first one (which itself is something of a signal.)
thenewwazoo 10y ago
Wait and see what, exactly? A self-proclamed "war" with the media, and taking zero questions on day 1 of the administration is enough for me. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. That makes me disinclined to "wait and see".
- threeseed 10y ago
  Not sure if everyone here actually saw all of the Sunday press shows. But it's far more than just your every day "war with the media" that other Presidents have gone through. Every White House reporter including Hume and Wallace from Fox News have said that what Spicer/Trump did was unprecedented in all their years of covering administrations. To have a Press Secretary berate the press corp and demand they fall in line whilst simultaneously flat out lying is pretty extraordinary and very concerning. It's something straight out of 1984 and has Bannon's fingerprints all over it. Video from Fox News Sunday panel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsV305yfG2o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsV305yfG2o
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > Every White House reporter including Hume and Wallace from Fox News have said that what Spicer/Trump did was unprecedented in all their years of covering administrations. As, incidentally, have former Press Secretaries of both parties.
    - Alupis 10y ago
      > As, incidentally, have former Press Secretaries of both parties. That's part of what gets me, really. If this were another administration, people would celebrate this as something progressive and new. However, it's Trump, so it must automatically be terrible, regardless of the reasons put forth for this thing (which sound good and "progressive", honestly). People aren't willing to even give it a chance before condemning it. Of course people should be skeptical, especially since previous behavior has clearly lent reason to be skeptical... however, we shouldn't become jaded and start to view everything new from this administration as automatically bad or full of ulterior motives.
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > If this were another administration, people would celebrate this as something progressive and new. No, berating the press corps for failing to fall in line while spouting outright lies would not be seen as "progressive" under a different President. While this administration's manifestation has been correctly been called unprecedented in modern American history, that's a matter of degree; a lesser form was seen in the waning days of the Nixon Administration as the siege mentality during the Watergate scandal had taken hold, and that wasn't seen as progressive either. (Maybe you meant this as a comment on the Skype seats, but if so it has nothing to do with the post you respond see to or the part you quoted.)
tw04 10y ago
I'm happy to wait and see. I'd just like to point out everything thus far I've waited to see has turned out to be WORSE than I was expecting.

orthoganol 10y ago

Can you support the viewpoint that such preferences are abnormal for a presidential administration?

XaspR8d 10y ago
I don't think such preferences are abnormal, not at all. It is a natural desire for an administration to want softball questions. However I don't think most administrations would attempt to achieve them by disrupting the press corps. That claim probably can't be tested or evaluated fairly, partially because it's a fairly novel action, and partially because it's a complex hypothetical. I must admit it is just my political leanings driving me to this conclusion. I guess another (unfair) way to look at is: I would rather have someone appear not to attempt to manipulate public opinion, regardless of if they actually are, because when you are at that level of power, I at least want you to ave your act together enough to keep halfway-decent PR. Thus the fact that it appears to me that they are making such weak attempts to manipulate says something, independent of the ethics of the action itself.
losteric 10y ago
Obama preferred liberal news organizations, and that was OK because he still answered questions he didn't like from the right. Trump goes beyond preferences... he only wants favorable questions from organizations that will cover him favorably.
- makomk 10y ago
  If he only accepted questions from organizations that cover him favourably, that'd exclude most of the media. From what I've seen so far he only seems to refuse questions from media that delve into conspiracy-theory tier reporting - Russian piss orgies, "secret communications with Russia" that somehow look in every way like junk email about Trump hotels from an outsourced service he doesn't even control, that kind of thing. (Which is probably still a little ironic given his role in birtherism.)
- jlarocco 10y ago
  Obama spent 2122 days as president. Trump has been president for less than 3 full days so far. It may turn out that you're correct, but there's not enough data to make a meaningful comparison yet.