Obama's Media Machine: State Run Media 2.0?

[JJ_BPK]

We have talked around this in a couple earlier posts. This time ABC News sounds the alarm.

To me it is a harbinger of a future were the news is owned by the news makers.

A time when the News is presented not as a view from an independent entity, but the view of the creator of that news.

Granted we have the right, the left, and all political/religious niche views of what is happening in the world. With few isolated exceptions, they are not making the news.. They report it as they see it,, generally with a bias, but they tell you they're bias..

Some of the instances where POTUS-TV has manipulated the presentation of national news to their exclusive end,,, IS VERY SCARY...

The fact that ABCNEWS is raising the flag is even scarier...

I think we may see this topic in the courts. The next election season is about to start, and I envision at least one candidate asking why he can't get his message out in the same "unbiased" venue???

Obama's Media Machine: State Run Media 2.0?

White House Hones Online Messaging Operation Ahead of 2012 Campaign

By DEVIN DWYER, WASHINGTON, Feb. 15, 2011

As the 2012 presidential campaign kicks into gear, President Obama's White House media operation is demonstrating an unprecedented ability to broadcast its message through social media and the Internet, at times doing an end-run around the traditional press.

The White House Press Office now not only produces a website, blog, YouTube channel, Flickr photo stream, and Facebook and Twitter profiles, but also a mix of daily video programming, including live coverage of the president's appearances and news-like shows that highlight his accomplishments.

"Advise the Adviser: Your Direct Line to the White House," the administration's latest online program launched last week, encourages viewers to offer "advice, opinions and feedback on important issues" and promises a response from a senior administration official in return.

"We're striving to not just have a passive website where people can read about what's happening but create a method of interaction and feedback," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest.

It joins "Open for Questions," a periodic series of live moderated video chats with officials, "West Wing Week," a magazine-style show featuring the president behind the scenes, and other live-streaming events, including an annotated version of the State of the Union address, all intended to more directly disseminate the administration's message.

But while these innovative communications tools ostensibly offer greater transparency and openness, critics say they have come at a troublesome expense: less accountability of the administration by the independent, mainstream press.

Over the past few months, as White House cameras have been granted free reign behind the scenes, officials have blocked broadcast news outlets from events traditionally open to coverage and limited opportunities to publicly question the president himself.

Obama's recent signing of the historic New START treaty with Russia and his post-State of the Union cabinet meeting, for example, were both closed to reporters in a break with tradition. And during a recent question and answer session with the president and visiting Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the White House imposed an unusual limit of just one question each from the U.S. and Canadian press corps.

"The administration has narrowed access by the mainstream media to an unprecedented extent," said ABC News White House correspondent Ann Compton, who has covered seven administrations. "Access here has shriveled."

Members of the press have always had quibbles with White House media strategies, calling cut-backs in access an affront to transparency, even as administration officials insist they're simply taking advantage of new technologies.

But some say the current dynamic is different, and dangerous.

"They're opening the door to kicking the press out of historic events, and opening the door to having a very filtered format for which they give the American public information that doesn't have any criticism allowed," said University of Minnesota journalism professor and political communication analyst Heather LaMarre.

continued...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/presi...ry?id=12913319

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

To me it is a harbinger of a future were the news is owned by the news makers.

Unless you're talking about FOX, the news has been owned by the news makers for quite a while, IMO.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Dusty

Unless you're talking about FOX, the news has been owned by the news makers for quite a while, IMO.

Dusty, You're correct,, but there was THE MEDIA and THE CANDIDATE separation.

This shit cuts out the middle man entirely..

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Dusty, You're correct,, but there was THE MEDIA and THE CANDIDATE separation.

This shit cuts out the middle man entirely..

Roger that. Will definitely get worse.

[Dozer523]

Originally Posted by Dusty

Unless you're talking about FOX, the news has been owned by the news makers for quite a while, IMO.

Thank goodnesss for FOX and Robert Murdock.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by Dozer523

Thank goodnesss for FOX and Robert Murdock.

OK, you got me, Bro; I agree about "thank goodness for FOX (news)", but what do Emerson, Lake and Palmer have to do with it?

[Dozer523]

Originally Posted by Dusty

. . . what do Emerson, Lake and Palmer have to do with it?

__________________
Same thing as Reagan

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by Dozer523

__________________
Same thing as Reagan

Oh.

[GratefulCitizen]

Don't see any problem with what the White House is doing.
It's just new media. Old media needs to quit whining and deal with it.

However.
If the government starts suppressing new media (read: internet kill switch, net neutrality issues, big sis snooping), then it's a problem.

[Wiseman]

The internet is essentially the last bastion of raw and unedited content. YOU, the user have the option of seeing EVERY opinion.