THIS is an issue?!?

[Mursilis]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...use-defends-obama-tiger-woods-media-blackout/

There's outrage that the president played golf with Tiger Woods on Sunday, and he didn't answer questions or allow a photo-op regarding this activity? What am I missing here? Were there lobbyists in the foursome or something?

Media bias is a concern of mine, but media stupidity, even more so.

 

[waggy]

lol WTF.

who cares what he and Tiger talked about? i really don't give a shit.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

People want to know if Tiger gave him any good swinging tips.

Honestly, I don't know why this is posted in Debate Club. What are we supposed to debate here? The use of the media's time?

 

[skyking]

Insomuch as the media was denied any "Gerald Ford" moments, they are in the right here. That stuff sells!

 

[randomrogue]

Tabloid trash. Those reporters could have done a nice feel good story about a fireman saving a cat from a tree and it would have been more productive.

 

[Jaskalas]

Fox and Drudge ran headlines yesterday to this effect, it's one of those short lived issues that garner web traffic one day and are forgotten the next.

My summation, much ado about nothing.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I like to call these "nontroversies".

 

[Mursilis]

Tabloid trash. Those reporters could have done a nice feel good story about a fireman saving a cat from a tree and it would have been more productive.

Fox and Drudge ran headlines yesterday to this effect, it's one of those short lived issues that garner web traffic one day and are forgotten the next.

My summation, much ado about nothing.

I like to call these "nontroversies".

And I agree with all of that - it's a stupid non-story, and I'm hardly a big Obama fan trying to excuse the guy out of partisan zeal. And yet, multiple members of the media are making a big deal out of all this, at least until the next non-story comes along. Why can't the media see the same thing we're all seeing - this is NOT a big deal?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

And I agree with all of that - it's a stupid non-story, and I'm hardly a big Obama fan trying to excuse the guy out of partisan zeal. And yet, multiple members of the media are making a big deal out of all this, at least until the next non-story comes along. Why can't the media see the same thing we're all seeing - this is NOT a big deal?

It apparently got your attention, enough so that you took it elsewhere and pasted a link back to the story so other people could see for themselves how meaningless it was. All that says is that they got your attention and you're possibly giving them more eyeballs on the page, which means more ad revenue for them. This stuff sells, whether it's with educated people talking about how stupid it is or stupid people fascinated by celebrity gossip, and since that's how they generate income, I don't see it stopping any time soon. The only real defense we have against it is to ignore it and focus our attention on stories about issues that actually matter to drive up page hits. If we make it profitable for them to give us stories about the economy or the slate of controversial cases scheduled to go before the Supreme Court or whatever, they'll provide it.

 

[waggy]

actually now that i think about it im shocked that this is not a bigger story. you have 2 powerful black men hitting a WHITE ball with clubs! so fucking racist!


...

yeah i got nothing.

 

[manimal]

If this was OT I would say they stopped at a shoneys afterwards.


Opportunistic outrage film at 11


Its almost like frank lunz has a room full of people on call 24 hours a day to see what they get outraged about.

personally im outraged that there is so much outrage!

 

[Fern]

I don't think it's a big deal for the President to go off for some 'down time'. Playing golf with Tiger seems like an entirely appropriate thing to do.

Yet I don't believe this fuss by the WH Press corp is really about that golf match. Rather, this event has served to be the proverbial 'last straw'. The press, save for a few softball type events/interviews, has not had much access to Obama. No opportunity for interviews with questions and follow-ups, virtually no interviews with print journalists for papers like the NYT etc.

But most of the nation’s biggest papers, whose reporters cover the White House every day, have remained on the outside looking in. The Washington Post landed its last on-the-record meeting with the president nearly four years ago, as did the Wall Street Journal; the New York Times last got to him in the fall of 2010. The Boston Globe has never had an interview while Obama was in office, nor has the Los Angeles Times, according to the Nexis database and the newspapers. Even Obama’s hometown papers, the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times, have been stiffed.

I think the press corps frustrations have been building for some, and that they chose the wrong time, the wrong event to voice it.

Fern

 

[randomrogue]

Do Presidents normally spend a lot of time doing exclusive interviews with the largest papers? Although I think it would really be nice for them, what benefit is there to us? What issue are we seeking more transparency on and will these interviews ask hardball questions? Do they? Have they ever?

 

[Craig234]

It's simply informing about the prima donnas in the White House press corps, who I think generally do a HORRIBLE job, asking terrible, useless questions.