White House Banned Cameras ?????

[Dragonfly]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017

The White House has been prohibiting cameras at some press briefings,

So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017



So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

There was actually a good point made about this.
Instead of reporters acting out and being "activists" they could be journalists.

Kinda like how congress behaves in front of cameras vs how they behave when there aren't any.

 

[trblmkr]

There was actually a good point made about this.
Instead of reporters acting out and being "activists" they could be journalists.

Kinda like how congress behaves in front of cameras vs how they behave when there aren't any.

So is the definition of an activist a journalist who asks uncomfortable questions? Besides, Spicer and Sanders don't/won't/can't answer half the questions. The briefing has become almost useless already as Trump will tweet out a contradiction to whatever they say so we still don't have a "real answer".

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

So is the definition of an activist a journalist who asks uncomfortable questions? Besides, Spicer and Sanders don't/won't/can't answer half the questions. The briefing has become almost useless already as Trump will tweet out a contradiction to whatever they say so we still don't have a "real answer".

That's not at all what I said.

 

[joG]

There was actually a good point made about this.
Instead of reporters acting out and being "activists" they could be journalists.

Kinda like how congress behaves in front of cameras vs how they behave when there aren't any.

You really want journalists to report solid information? As a group they haven't done that in years now.

 

[Manc Skipper]

We suffer similar attitudes to accountablity over here too. Andrea Leadsome (a senior Tory) complained that reporters asking awkward questions should be "more patriotic"!

 

[rocket88]

You really want journalists to report solid information? As a group they haven't done that in years now.

Nobody on the right wants them to report information, they want them to report with a right wing bias. Biased press has been with us since the days of Jefferson.

 

[rocket88]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017



So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

It's all about freedom!

 

[ocean515]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017



So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

More importantly, the ability to invent news via deft editing and use of out of context sound bites is removed.

It would seem the left's MSM partners will have to find other methods to create the dog whistles they incessantly blow.

 

[Carjosse]

So they can deny anything they want, there is no video of them saying it.

 

[PeteEU]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017



So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

"Puts on his GOP hat"

It cant be a first amendment issue as there was no cameras when the 1st amendment was written.

"Takes off his GOP hat"

Granted there was not much of a free media either and it was only white male land and slave owners over 30 that were able to vote and run for office...

 

[joG]

Nobody on the right wants them to report information, they want them to report with a right wing bias. Biased press has been with us since the days of Jefferson.

Well, then the right is certainly getting their prayers granted. Their problem is that it seems to be a deity that hates them.

 

[jimbo]

You really want journalists to report solid information? As a group they haven't done that in years now.

And that's mostly the point. Why bother allowing access if the so called journalists are not going to report and instead make stuff up?

 

[jimbo]

It's all about freedom!

Freedom of what?

 

[Praxas]

There was actually a good point made about this.
Instead of reporters acting out and being "activists" they could be journalists.

Kinda like how congress behaves in front of cameras vs how they behave when there aren't any.

Yeah I'm sure if obama or Clinton banned cameras we wouldnt have heard a peep out of the right about transparency or tyranny at all :roll:

 

[Praxas]

And that's mostly the point. Why bother allowing access if the so called journalists are not going to report and instead make stuff up?

Let's assume I buy into your bull****, even though I don't are you saying without cameras the press can't "make stuff up"? Sorry your reasoning doesn't pass the bull**** smell test.

 

[jimbo]

Let's assume I buy into your bull****, even though I don't are you saying without cameras the press can't "make stuff up"? Sorry your reasoning doesn't pass the bull**** smell test.

I'm saying the current press will make stuff up either way, so why bother?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Yeah I'm sure if obama or Clinton banned cameras we wouldnt have heard a peep out of the right about transparency or tyranny at all :roll:

Does or did that reality exist?
No.
It's irrelevant to what I wrote anyway

 

[Praxas]

I'm saying the current press will make stuff up either way, so why bother?

Because without cameras it solidly be worse which is why your reasoning doesn't pass the smell test.

 

[Praxas]

Does or did that reality exist?
No.
It's irrelevant to what I wrote anyway

No just pointing out your hypocrisy.

 

[Helix]

White House Banned Cameras ?????

if that's the case, then major media outlets should just stop participating. let the WH talk to an empty room and / or email out power point presentations.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

No just pointing out your hypocrisy.

I'm a hypocrite because of something that didn't happen and something I didn't say. :thinking

 

[Thoreau72]

With cameras banned, CNN sends sketch artist to White House briefing - Jun. 23, 2017



So seriously? WTF? Is this kindergarten or what? A childish chess match with the most immature one making the rules?

What's the point of banning cameras? Isn't that potentially a 1st Amendment issue?

It's far easier to manipulate/twist words on page/screen than it is to manipulate video with sound.

The tone and context of the person speaking can be completely lost in the written word form.
Much easier to show that with simple video.

Censorship, and that's essentially what this is, shows how insecure the censor is in any given issue or controversy. If he must use the bully pulpit to censor, he knows his arguments and policies cannot withstand scrutiny.

 

[humbolt]

Nobody on the right wants them to report information, they want them to report with a right wing bias. Biased press has been with us since the days of Jefferson.

Freaking Jefferson. This is all his fault, and no doubt why we don't have videos of his administration.

 

[Dragonfly]

There was actually a good point made about this.
Instead of reporters acting out and being "activists" they could be journalists.

Kinda like how congress behaves in front of cameras vs how they behave when there aren't any.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying here.

Are you suggesting the person speaking behaves differently when cameras are there, of the reporters report differently when the cameras are there?