It’s disturbing enough when the federal government intrudes into the private sector, and takes upon itself the control and manipulation of our national economy. It’s more alarming yet when it begins to call the shots in our banking system, and downright frightening when it promises more money to more people and more organizations – including the International Monetary Fund — than it will ever even begin to recoup.
But the federal government channelling itself through the mainstream media is about as dangerous as it gets.
It’s been said that the United States Government has four branches — the executive, the legislative, the judicial and the press. The first three, of course, are the official branches, each having its own unique role within the structure of our government, with none more powerful than the others. The Founding Fathers intentionally designed the system with checks and balances, to safeguard against any of the three becoming too powerful or overbearing.
The press, too, has its unique and worthwhile place. Since the earliest days, the media — news print, radio, television – has been the vehicle through which politicians and citizens alike have voiced opinions, warned of dangers, and exercised their First Amendment rights. It has been the purveyor of news and information, the announcer of crises and disasters, the bearer of dramatic events both good and bad, historic and notorious. The media has announced calls-to-action, been used to inspire and encourage the American people and to keep them abreast of ongoing events such as wars, court trials and moon walks.
Of necessity, the press was never intended to be an arm of the federal government; indeed, its greatest value has been to observe, inquire, investigate and report on the activities of the government. It has long acted as the peoples’ watchdog, keeping an eye on the government lest it overstep its bounds. In that pursuit, many a scandal has been brought to light, and many a politician found out and banished from the halls of governing responsibility. To accomplish such things, the press must do so free from bias and conflicts of interest — and so a natural barrier has always existed separating the reporters from the ones being reported on. It’s called impartiality. Or objectivity, if you prefer. The essence of it is that the press remains neutral and never takes it upon itself to shape public thinking or opinion. Such is the essential difference between the three branches of government and the media.
At least, that was the difference. The Times, they are a-changin’.
From The Drudge Report, June 16, 2009: ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!
Highlights on the agenda:
ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.
The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.
The Director of Communications at the White House Office of Health Reform is Linda Douglass, who worked as a reporter for ABC News from 1998-2006.
(The remainder of the article, including a reprint of a letter of complaint filed with the head of ABC News sent by Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay, can be found here.)
‘This is all about transparency,’ President Obama will tell us. ‘It’s about getting our message on health care reform straight to the American people, unhindered by clutter that keeps getting in the way – things like, say, Fox News and right-wing talk radio and — well, other opinions in general.‘
Other bloggers have written on this topic, pointing out the troubling implications of the whole idea (see links below). Oddly enough, the mainstream media is covering its own coverage most objectively, as if this sort of alliance has happened a hundred times, (‘move along, nothing to see here’) — as if it’s just run-of-the-mill standard operating procedure. They seem to be completely unaware of the new ground being broken — the birth of the state-run media – nor of the similarites between the Obama White House pushing policy using a major network and Soviet Russia’s use of Pravda to propagandize and deceive the masses.
Of course, they’re not unaware at all.
In case you’re failing to see just how crazy this whole thing is, ask yourself: What would have happened if, back in 2005, George W. Bush had tried to monopolize an entire news network for an evening, broadcasting nationwide from the White House with no opposing views allowed, in order to push his private account-based Social Security reform proposal? Or talk about the war on terror?
How far would that have gotten?
– RB Stratford
Related Posts:
Michelle Malkin: ABC: The All Barack Channel
Malkin: Attention, ABC News: Get John Stossel on your Obamacare infomercial
Malkin: All Barack Channel wasn’t the first to pimp socialized medicine
Hot Air: Video: Obama whines about Fox News
Hot Air: ABC to broadcast town hall on health care — from the White House
Hot Air: Michelle: Will libertarian John Stossel be part of ABC’s Obama infomercial?
The Frugal Cafe: Good Morning, Socialist Media! Obama Now Officially in Charge of ABC News to Force ObamaCare on Americans… Castro Should Be Proud
The Other McCain: ABC goes MSNBC
Gateway Pundit: State Run Media Won’t Allow GOP to Respond to Obama Infomercial
TownHall: Socializing the Marketplace of Ideas
Examiner: ABC News turns programming over to Obama White House
Patterico’s Pontifications: ABC to make Obamacare Infomercial
Q and O: Obama Media
Q and O: ABC: Absolutely Shameful (update)
——————————————
Previous Post: Letterman’s Apology Much Like the Joke — His Intent Very Different From Our Perception
