pepe63xnotuse Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 So having already fallen out with swathes of the mainstream media (aka" the enemy of the people" *-) ), it now seems that Trump had the following news organisations "banned"(not invited to?) to a White House news briefing: •BBC •The Daily Mail •The Guardian •CNN •The New York Times •Buzzfeed Banning/excluding(if that is what has happened here?) major news organisations because they don't happen to broadcast or ask the questions you like, is a very dangerous path to head down.... :-S (..although it is ironic that The Daily Mail, who rounded on some judges, claiming them to be enemies of the people, are also on the list.. (lol) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 edited ! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Why a very dangerous path ? ... He's banning certain media organisations that he feels twists the truth and who can blame him ... You don't have to look too far to see a list of countries who have banned much more than some biased press ... I'm sure The Tories would like to ban the very biased Beeb at times themselves ... https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/834821416587390977/photo/1 ... Sums up the media Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 What's the point of being " leader of the free world " if you can't shut people up who ask awkward questions ? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Is there such a thing as a unbiased media? :D ........ Reckon that's qualifies as a oxymoron (lol) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-02-25 3:03 PM Is there such a thing as a unbiased media? :D ........ Of course there is. They are the ones who agree with my point of view. ( ... and when I'm Prime Minister - the rest will be banned ). :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 pepe63 - 2017-02-25 10:38 AM So having already fallen out with swathes of the mainstream media (aka" the enemy of the people" *-) ), it now seems that Trump had the following news organisations "banned"(not invited to?) to a White House news briefing: •BBC •The Daily Mail •The Guardian •CNN •The New York Times •Buzzfeed The Fail??? LOL when a dictator see's a comic as "a threat" then you know he's seriously unhinged! He may as well ban the Beano. *-) Banning/excluding(if that is what has happened here?) major news organisations because they don't happen to broadcast or ask the questions you like, is a very dangerous path to head down.... :-S (..although it is ironic that The Daily Mail, who rounded on some judges, claiming them to be enemies of the people, are also on the list.. (lol) ) Indeed it is and indicative of a despot dictator running a Totalitarian state. He's following in the footsteps of Kim Jong-un and North Korea. Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PM Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. I doubt that is the case - yet. Not inviting people to hear your rants does not prevent freedom of speech. :-| p.s. ...and I understand that those media organisations who were invited - are sharing the " news " with those who were excluded anyway. Good on 'em ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 malc d - 2017-02-25 4:39 PM Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PM Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. I doubt that is the case - yet. Not inviting people to hear your rants does not prevent freedom of speech. :-| It is in Bullets world ... He'll grasp at anything ... How very sad ... Now Trumps Kim Dong Dung ... Impeachment it's coming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 malc d - 2017-02-25 4:39 PM Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PM Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. I doubt that is the case - yet. Annotation 6 - First Amendment....... http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/annotation06.html#1 Not inviting people to hear your rants does not prevent freedom of speech. :-| It's certainly sparing their sanity! (lol) p.s. ...and I understand that those media organisations who were invited - are sharing the " news " with those who were excluded anyway. Good on 'em ! Good God.....they will get dragged before some kangaroo court accused of being political subversives and a threat to the Trump state! 8-) Trump is resurrecting McCarthyism......a very nasty and dangerous man for those who remember it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerC Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PMpepe63 - 2017-02-25 10:38 AMSo having already fallen out with swathes of the mainstream media (aka" the enemy of the people" *-) ), it now seems that Trump had the following news organisations "banned"(not invited to?) to a White House news briefing:•BBC•The Daily Mail•The Guardian•CNN•The New York Times•Buzzfeed The Fail??? LOL when a dictator see's a comic as "a threat" then you know he's seriously unhinged! He may as well ban the Beano. *-) Banning/excluding(if that is what has happened here?) major news organisations because they don't happen to broadcast or ask the questions you like, is a very dangerous path to head down.... :-S (..although it is ironic that The Daily Mail, who rounded on some judges, claiming them to be enemies of the people, are also on the list.. (lol) )Indeed it is and indicative of a despot dictator running a Totalitarian state. He's following in the footsteps of Kim Jong-un and North Korea.Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. Whilst his/his team's actions regarding the handling of the press are concerning as I see it he/his team are 'not' controlling what the press publish, therefore I fail to see where or how he/his team is in breach of constitutional law? Freedom of the press does not entitle the press to go wherever and whenever they please it is merely a tool by which what they print (within enabled legislation limits) is not interfered with by Governmental diktat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 RogerC - 2017-02-25 5:49 PMBulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PMpepe63 - 2017-02-25 10:38 AMSo having already fallen out with swathes of the mainstream media (aka" the enemy of the people" *-) ), it now seems that Trump had the following news organisations "banned"(not invited to?) to a White House news briefing:•BBC•The Daily Mail•The Guardian•CNN•The New York Times•Buzzfeed The Fail??? LOL when a dictator see's a comic as "a threat" then you know he's seriously unhinged! He may as well ban the Beano. *-) Banning/excluding(if that is what has happened here?) major news organisations because they don't happen to broadcast or ask the questions you like, is a very dangerous path to head down.... :-S (..although it is ironic that The Daily Mail, who rounded on some judges, claiming them to be enemies of the people, are also on the list.. (lol) )Indeed it is and indicative of a despot dictator running a Totalitarian state. He's following in the footsteps of Kim Jong-un and North Korea.Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law.Whilst his/his team's actions regarding the handling of the press are concerning as I see it he/his team are 'not' controlling what the press publish, therefore I fail to see where or how he/his team is in breach of constitutional law?Freedom of the press does not entitle the press to go wherever and whenever they please it is merely a tool by which what they print (within enabled legislation limits) is not interfered with by Governmental diktat. Barring certain media from a *so called* press briefing and only allowing pro-Trump friendly media in is certainly controlling. I fail to see how else it could be described?Trump is well known for being thin skinned, cannot accept critical, probing detailed questions, and as he's not a politician, is completely out of his depth when faced with seasoned political journo's. Trump's forte is tweet like soundbites and rhetoric which appealed to the gullible and not so bright at campaign rallies.....but those days are over now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerC Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 6:27 PMRogerC - 2017-02-25 5:49 PMBulletguy - 2017-02-25 4:23 PMpepe63 - 2017-02-25 10:38 AMSo having already fallen out with swathes of the mainstream media (aka" the enemy of the people" *-) ), it now seems that Trump had the following news organisations "banned"(not invited to?) to a White House news briefing:•BBC•The Daily Mail•The Guardian•CNN•The New York Times•Buzzfeed The Fail??? LOL when a dictator see's a comic as "a threat" then you know he's seriously unhinged! He may as well ban the Beano. *-) Banning/excluding(if that is what has happened here?) major news organisations because they don't happen to broadcast or ask the questions you like, is a very dangerous path to head down.... :-S (..although it is ironic that The Daily Mail, who rounded on some judges, claiming them to be enemies of the people, are also on the list.. (lol) )Indeed it is and indicative of a despot dictator running a Totalitarian state. He's following in the footsteps of Kim Jong-un and North Korea.Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so yet again he's in breach of constitutional law. Whilst his/his team's actions regarding the handling of the press are concerning as I see it he/his team are 'not' controlling what the press publish, therefore I fail to see where or how he/his team is in breach of constitutional law? Freedom of the press does not entitle the press to go wherever and whenever they please it is merely a tool by which what they print (within enabled legislation limits) is not interfered with by Governmental diktat. Barring certain media from a *so called* press briefing and only allowing pro-Trump friendly media in is certainly controlling. I fail to see how else it could be described?Trump is well known for being thin skinned, cannot accept critical, probing detailed questions, and as he's not a politician, is completely out of his depth when faced with seasoned political journo's. Trump's forte is tweet like soundbites and rhetoric which appealed to the gullible and not so bright at campaign rallies.....but those days are over now. Determining who or which media representative is or is not allowed access to a press briefing is the prerogative of those delivering the conference/presentation. It is in no way controlling what the press publish which is what the first amendment delivers.... First Amendment explanation extract from Cornell University Law faculty: It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general. Trump's forte is tweet like 'soundbites'? That may be so but the master of that method........of..............delivery.................was.............................................(pause once more for effect)................Tony B'liar so Trump is..............................not................the first................to do.............................................it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 RogerC - 2017-02-25 8:37 PM Determining who or which media representative is or is not allowed access to a press briefing is the prerogative of those delivering the conference/presentation. It is in no way controlling what the press publish which is what the first amendment delivers... Of course it is! Didn't you read the link i posted earlier which states the First Amendment in full on freedom of expression - speech and press? The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state...Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press...To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted... To be honest, i've got no problem if Trump wishes to go down this dangerous path as it just makes him look even more stupid than i've thought all along. There is no point holding press briefings when you exclude those you don't like and invite only those who print "nice things" about you. That's not democracy......it's autocracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerC Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Bulletguy - 2017-02-25 9:13 PMRogerC - 2017-02-25 8:37 PMDetermining who or which media representative is or is not allowed access to a press briefing is the prerogative of those delivering the conference/presentation. It is in no way controlling what the press publish which is what the first amendment delivers...Of course it is! Didn't you read the link i posted earlier which states the First Amendment in full on freedom of expression - speech and press?The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state...Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press...To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted...To be honest, i've got no problem if Trump wishes to go down this dangerous path as it just makes him look even more stupid than i've thought all along. There is no point holding press briefings when you exclude those you don't like and invite only those who print "nice things" about you.That's not democracy......it's autocracy. So what you are claiming is that 'the press' has free and unfettered access to wherever and whenever they wish it if they feel there is a story in it? Do you consider only having 'embedded' journalists accompany the coalition forces during Gulf War I & II to be in breach of the First amendment? because by only allowing a selected group into the press briefing it is in essence no different to restricting war correspondents to a select group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 RogerC - 2017-02-25 10:38 PM So what you are claiming is that 'the press' has free and unfettered access to wherever and whenever they wish it if they feel there is a story in it? Do you consider only having 'embedded' journalists accompany the coalition forces during Gulf War I & II to be in breach of the First amendment? because by only allowing a selected group into the press briefing it is in essence no different to restricting war correspondents to a select group. No i'm actually not saying anything......the US First Amendment is! It's the countries constitution. The "licenser" in the following para specifically being Trump who is exercising his own personal control over them and that's not good for a democratic country. To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted... Embedded journalism in all arenas of conflict from whatever country has long been controversial as propaganda 'weapons' and ironically US certainly led the way in that! The Chelsea Manning case is a good example. However the vast difference is for obvious reasons all embedded journo's have to be officially approved and sign whatever the countries equivalent is of official secrets act etc. They have restrictions on what they can and cannot photograph. A White House press briefing bears no resemblance at all to embedded journo's in war zones! That said Trump has declared "war" on selected journalists by railing against them as 'enemies of the people' and 'fake news'!! It's always 'fake' when something he doesn't like is published......funny that. http://www.cjr.org/opinion/trump_press_freedom.php https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/business/trump-calls-the-news-media-the-enemy-of-the-people.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Britain's Unelected head of state hides behind the Official Secrets Act, is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, refuses to talk to the media at all, refuses to give interviews, and refuses to answer questions. If Trump gets to that stage at least he can be voted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek pringle Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 hi, As far as Trump is concerned he has probably been surrounded by 'yes' men and women in his businesses, all telling him how lovely his hair looks and how right all his theories are[you dont castigate the billionaire boss] and now with the press he is hearing things he doesnt like. Trouble is, for all the faults of the press, the ones IN the conferences will not like the fact that other titles are banned. So I think he will get it in the neck either way. cheers derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 derek pringle - 2017-02-26 9:40 AM hi, As far as Trump is concerned he has probably been surrounded by 'yes' men and women in his businesses, all telling him how lovely his hair looks and how right all his theories are[you dont castigate the billionaire boss] and now with the press he is hearing things he doesnt like. Trouble is, for all the faults of the press, the ones IN the conferences will not like the fact that other titles are banned. So I think he will get it in the neck either way. cheers derek I think you're right. He may be no fool as a business man/ reality TV celebrity - - but is clearly out of his comfort zone in politics. He has now declined to attend the traditional White House Press Dinner with journalists. I suspect that is because he knows they will run rings round him ( but it will appeal to his supporters) ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Isnt this exactly what Hitler did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Barryd999 - 2017-02-26 11:20 AM Isnt this exactly what Hitler did? When he invades Poland I'll give your loony lefty rantings some credit Barry :D .......... As I understand it he is against getting involved in other peoples wars B-) ........ Maybe if Bush/Blair and Obama had been the same perhaps the middle East wouldn't be in such a mess, and neither would there be millions of people on the move trying to get into Europe *-) ........ Perhaps those ranting loony lefties should have a long hard look at themselves? >:-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-02-26 11:36 AM Barryd999 - 2017-02-26 11:20 AM Isnt this exactly what Hitler did? When he invades Poland I'll give your loony lefty rantings some credit Barry :D .......... As I understand it he is against getting involved in other peoples wars B-) ........ Maybe if Bush/Blair and Obama had been the same perhaps the middle East wouldn't be in such a mess, and neither would there be millions of people on the move trying to get into Europe *-) ........ Perhaps those ranting loony lefties should have a long hard look at themselves? >:-) ........ Screeching hysterical over the top reactions seem to be the norm these days ... This being a top draw example ... "Isn't this exactly what Hitler did ?"... Gawd help us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Here's another one that wants locking up.........for speaking the truth >:-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4260908/Swedish-policeman-blames-migrants-violent-crime.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Barryd999 - 2017-02-26 11:20 AM Isnt this exactly what Hitler did? Not really. Hitler enjoyed making speeches - I think it's clear that Trump doesn't - in fact when he does he is likely to make a fool of himself ( e.g. " Last nights terror attack in Sweden " ) He is really only good at slogans. My theory is that his White House team phoned up John Bercow and pleaded with him to prevent Trump from making a speech to parliament. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerC Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 John52 - 2017-02-26 9:08 AMBritain's Unelected head of state hides behind the Official Secrets Act, is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, refuses to talk to the media at all, refuses to give interviews, and refuses to answer questions. If Trump gets to that stage at least he can be voted out. Blah blah blah........same old same old.....just can't resist it can you. As for not giving interviews or hiding behind the OSA....well one I can explain quite easily.... The Queen never voices in public her own thoughts and opinions on matters political or other sensitive areas whereby doing so could either influence outcomes or be interpreted differently by some over zealous journo......in other words if the press has no ammunition they can't fire the gun. Being, by virtue of the office she holds, 'apolitical' any public expression of her own determination regarding the political aspect, any leanings or dislikes would make her position extremely difficult should the party she 'dislikes' be required to form a government. The second point....hiding behind the OSA please enlighten me/us....those of us less fortunate than you with your insight into the activities and 'hiding' activities of the Monarch.....chapter and verse would be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.