NewCliche21 Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 well the people who seem to be supportive of Baier's behavior points to the fact that his interview time got cut short so he had to rush through the questions...then wouldnt it make more sense to just ask few really tough questions and let Obama actually try to answer them? Instead we got an interview with basically Baier constantly asking question after question on top of each other and Obama would be constantly get cut off from answering them. Baier supposedly was promised a 25 min interview that was cut down to 15 min by the White House so Baier decided to take that 15 mins interview into complete waste of time by his behavior... Seriously regardless of what's your political views, it was poor journalism. I don't see how this can be disagreed with. And fansince62, you need to calm the **** down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 I don't see how this can be disagreed with.And fansince62, you need to calm the **** down. and learn to multiquote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Obama Umms all the time, as do many public speakers, this is nothing new and irrelevant frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoBob Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Obama handled himself well, but I also understand the interviewer's frustration - Obama was not willing to answer the lower level detail questions, rather he wanted to talk the general merits of health care. I think this underlies the fundamental fight - The high level "goals" of the health bill are generally agreeable, but the details are where the problems are.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeInJc aka M.I.A. Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Let's not forget how Obama blew off Fox News while he was busy fellating the likes of ABC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. I would come off a little harsh to if I knew my organization was being declined interviews left and right. Obama has been one of the most, if not thee most, interviewed/televised President EVER, and he now finally agrees to go on Fox after a year and two months into his Presidency? Come on!!! The smart thing to do is NOT be afraid of your opposition. He should have interviewed with them straight up and he would not have looked like the chicken **** he is by avoiding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 I would come off a little harsh to if I knew my organization was being declined interviews left and right. Actually you would think that would give them an incentive to conduct a professional interview. You think anyone at Fox is going to have a prayer at getting a 1on1 interview with Obama again for quite some time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Looks like Obama just plain couldnt answer teh the questions was he not allowed his telprompter? Look up Obama's interview with Bill O'Reilly. Watch it. Come back. Let us know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeInJc aka M.I.A. Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 You think anyone at Fox is going to have a prayer at getting a 1on1 interview with Obama again for quite some time? It will just expose him as the most biased President ever if he would go that way. The smart thing to do is throw your opposition a bone every now and then so that it's harder for you to be seen as one sided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 It will just expose him as the most biased President ever if he would go that way. The smart thing to do is throw your opposition a bone every now and then so that it's harder for you to be seen as one sided. I agree, but there are conservative media folks outside of Fox "News" that you could grant interviews to instead. If I was in Obama's shoes, no way anyone associated with Fox would get another interview until election year. Not after that level of unprofessional conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Let's not forget how Obama blew off Fox News while he was busy fellating the likes of ABC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. I would come off a little harsh to if I knew my organization was being declined interviews left and right. Obama has been one of the most, if not thee most, interviewed/televised President EVER, and he now finally agrees to go on Fox after a year and two months into his Presidency? Come on!!!The smart thing to do is NOT be afraid of your opposition. He should have interviewed with them straight up and he would not have looked like the chicken **** he is by avoiding them. Ladies and gentlemen: EXACTLY why Fox News did not get their interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Actually you would think that would give them an incentive to conduct a professional interview. You think anyone at Fox is going to have a prayer at getting a 1on1 interview with Obama again for quite some time? This. Now, I'm a small fish reporter, but I've gotten some pretty big fish... McCain, Joe Gibbs, Cokie Roberts, Jim Lehrer, Robin Williams, Amy Adams... one of the things I do know (and it goes both ways) is that if I treat these guys like a __________ they aren't going to agree to work with me again. Also, if they are miserable, I'll find my material elsewhere. Now, this is the President. He's got his choice. If he wants to talk he can find a mic at any time day or night. Therefore, if you want him to come back with you be fair, be honest, be tough, but also be respectful. Otherwise, why would he choose to inteview with you again? Would you? It's not like he's without options for media souces eager to carry and convey every word he says. He's the President of the United States for gosh sakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 On the other hand, this kind of stuff gives Obama the opportunity to slap people around a'la the Heath Care Summit. I get letters too, you female dog!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 It's pretty amazing how people in this thread are trying to claim, apparently with straight faces, that Obama is dumb and can only speak when he has a teleprompter. It's perfectly fine to disagree with his policies, but don't pretend that he's dumb. I suppose it's backlash from people laughing at Bush and Palin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Actually you would think that would give them an incentive to conduct a professional interview. You think anyone at Fox is going to have a prayer at getting a 1on1 interview with Obama again for quite some time? That would be a dumb move by the WH. They complain about fox not covering the news the way they want then very rarely allow interviews with them. A lot of people get their news from fox, if they want to get their side heard they should be on their regularly. The O'reilly interview with Obama during the election run was good for both sides. This interview wasn't great for anyone. The interviewer came off as pushy and Obama came off as trying to allow as few questions as possible in 15 minutes. It would be nice to hear some 15 second responses rather than 5 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bay Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 It would be nice to hear some 15 second responses rather than 5 minutes. I think that's a valid point, but perhaps those answers can't be said with a simple yes or no. The only time I really felt Obama could've said yes or no was at the end when he was asked if he thought the bill would be passed. The rest of the time I thought he was trying to flesh out what the interviewer was asking him. I do think the interviewer was trying to get in as many questions as possible as well, and even though it was rude of him to interupt the president he was just trying to get 'his money's worth' so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 That would be a dumb move by the WH. They complain about fox not covering the news the way they want then very rarely allow interviews with them. A lot of people get their news from fox, if they want to get their side heard they should be on their regularly. The O'reilly interview with Obama during the election run was good for both sides. This interview wasn't great for anyone. The interviewer came off as pushy and Obama came off as trying to allow as few questions as possible in 15 minutes. It would be nice to hear some 15 second responses rather than 5 minutes. QFT Blackballing FOX will only allow them to present their view to a very large audience. No offense Bur,but the situations are not comparable when you already command a large audience. Both could have done better in the interview,but equivocating and evasion were on full display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 I don't see the benefit of giving FOX an interview. 95% of the people who watch that channel are entrenched Republicans. It's not like you are going to get them to vote Democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 If this interview had featured Sarah Palin instead of Obama people would be howling at the moon. Like I said to republicans FOLLOW UP questions are rude and asking too much. If a democrat is interviewed however you can basically treat him like the hired help, even if he happens to be the President, and well it's all good. FOX NEWS showed exactly why they had been denied an interview in the first place. They are more of a GOP media arm than they are a news organization. Not "leaning" right but outright in the tank for the party that supplies them with experts and promotes them on the campaign trail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 I don't see the benefit of giving FOX an interview. 95% of the people who watch that channel are entrenched Republicans. It's not like you are going to get them to vote Democrat. People who watch, maybe... but a lot of people just have it on. I've seen it just being on in a number of public places where there are TVs - rest areas, bars, fast food joints, etc. It takes one Fox News watcher to turn it on in a public place, and people get exposed. Also, many people don't visit ES to learn the true nature of Fox. They see "News" and they assume it's a new channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 It's pretty amazing how people in this thread are trying to claim, apparently with straight faces, that Obama is dumb and can only speak when he has a teleprompter. It's perfectly fine to disagree with his policies, but don't pretend that he's dumb. I suppose it's backlash from people laughing at Bush and Palin? I agree. People may not agree with his policies, but the man is FAR from stupid. I would go so far as to say he is probably one of the most intelligent Presidents that we've ever had, policies aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 If this interview had featured Sarah Palin instead of Obama people would be howling at the moon. Like I said to republicans FOLLOW UP questions are rude and asking too much. If a democrat is interviewed however you can basically treat him like the hired help, even if he happens to be the President, and well it's all good. FOX NEWS showed exactly why they had been denied an interview in the first place. They are more of a GOP media arm than they are a news organization. Not "leaning" right but outright in the tank for the party that supplies them with experts and promotes them on the campaign trail. People ARE howling at the moon. They just happen to be your people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 People ARE howling at the moon. They just happen to be your people. Howling that "what do you read" is a loaded question seems different from howling about interviewer treating the POTUS in a disrespectful manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 I've never been a big of the the "respect the office" nonsense. Baier should be free to ask him whatever questions, and press for an answer just like any other interview. That said, I think it's pretty transparent that FOX didn't want to talk about the merits of the bill. They wanted to restrict the conversation to congressional procedures because that is the best Republican talking point they have at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 This is why I could never be a respected journalist, and why I think all news organizations are biased to a degree. Everyone (reporters included) have their own personal biases when it comes to politics, and regardless of what news organization you work for, it seems like it would be really hard not to let some of that bias come through during interviews/reporting. So, even if the news channel/organization is trying to stay "middle of the road", if one of their biased reporters makes a comment or acts like Bret did during the interview, the news organization then becomes leaning "left" or "right" too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 The smart thing to do is NOT be afraid of your opposition. He should have interviewed with them straight up and he would not have looked like the chicken **** he is by avoiding them. Something tells me that the overwhelming majority of people who viewed him as chicken **** because he didn't give access to Fox were people who had no intention of voting for him anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.