Some Press Organizations Locked out of White House Briefing

Post Reply New Topic

I hope this isn't a harbinger of things to come. I hope Trump isn't seeking to limit Freedom of the Press in the United States---one of the hallmarks of its Constitution.

CNN, The New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times were among the news organizations locked out.

Only the ones which people tend to associate with being "conservative" were allowed in.

Considering Trump called the press the enemy the other day this is could be only the beginning. I seriously doubt there will be laws or enforced executive orders limiting press freedom. This is Trump so he will continue to try and bully the press. A bully can get only as far as he is allowed. Trump is very very good at bullying. During the campaign he successfully bullied many tough experienced people who are bullies themselves. "Little" is going to stick with Marco Rubio the rest of his life. Jeb Bush was politically destroyed by Trump.

The White House press offices and briefing room are painfully small. As such, choices must be made about who is credentialed into the White House let alone the press secretary's suite. Such choices are made to accommodate as many news media reporters as possible, but, certainly not every reporter from every medium will be approved. For those who aren't credentialed, various other services apart from actual attendance are made available (press statements, adviseries and releases, images, and audio actualities). Are credential "choices" offered fairly and equally? No. As the final word within the White House residence and the Executive Office of the President, every president is accorded a certain amount of discretion. Now, is the current president keeping some media reporters at arms length? Yes, but it isn't as if they can't do their jobs anyway.

Sounds like the NY Times & Co. don't like having their overweening sense of entitlement challenged.

I'd like to see the White House offer a calendar of rotating one-month access granted to 100 randomly chosen small and medium-sized newspapers drawn from all 50 states. But then I do tend to prefer republican democracy to oligarchic aristocracy.

Rotation is done for smaller news sources and foreign correspondents. I agree that doing the same kind of rotation credential for American media would be more fair.

Freedom of the press gives you the right to say what you want,
but not the right to talk to whomever you want.

I posted in my Trump thread the times that Obama shut out the Conservative media, so it has happened with the Democrats as well.

There were also some Democrat press let in. - it wasn't all Republican.

It seems to me like CNN and the NY Times decided to go to attack Trump writing one hit piece after another, which get applauded by the left. But when Trump reciprocates, that's supposed to be dictatorial suppression of the media.

Don't forget "Lying Ted Cruse". But idk if that's bullying. They took shots at him as well. Trump was just a lot better at it.

Repeated demeaning attacks on a personal level designed to intimidate and destroy the reputation of another person, I would call that bullying. I agree that other candidates tried to bully Trump but got outbullied. Unlike Rubio and Bush I think Cruz more then held his own. Trump implied Cruz's dad was involved in the Kennedy assasination.

Well the press is all liberal enemies of the state don't you know, so damn right he's going to limit freedom of the press...with that fear mongering excuse.

CBC: New York Times, CNN, BBC among media outlets barred from White House briefing

He's a dictator. His first move is to shut down the free press which once curtailed will be unable to expose Trump/Bannon's misdoings.

America has numerous checks and balances to prevent the rise of dictatorship. Even if Trump refuses to allow media outlets into the White House, they are still free to criticize Trump and create awareness for his actions.

What's more or less the White house is still obliged to release details on major laws and initiatives it is passing.

New York Times: How Republics End

America is different, their you have country that values freedom and having a voice. If someone were to try and take that away their would be widespread anger. The president actually has very little power himself in
the grand scheme of things, executive orders can only carry him so far and to a large level is actually subject to congress and the courts, each of which have the power to halt the president's agenda.

I thought the same as you until Trump, now I'm not so sure. Trump has no respect for freedom or for the architecture of government. He could bring America down; he already has tarnished America's reputation around the world.

It's worth noting that dictators like Stalin took power while still maintaining the illusion of a functioning government.

The president in this literally does not have the governmental powers to exercise the power of a dictator. People like Stalin did have this power and people like Hitler had militias that could carry out his order. In the case of Trump their is no such thing.

Even look at the powers Trump has over the military their is no such way to give him the power to target civilians.

Last edited by Shahunshah on 25 Feb 2017, 6:09 am, edited 1 time in total.