| QUOTE |
| And the claim that 'every day they unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts to harass and hector any journalist who is critical of the president' is also unsubstantiated–the administration certainly pushes back against press coverage it doesn't like, but what evidence exists that they 'unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts' against journalists each day?" |
| QUOTE |
| CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR CNN CORRESPONDENT AMANPOUR: Certainly television, and perhaps to an extent, my station, was intimidated by the administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News. And it did in fact, put a climate of fear and self-censorship, in my view, in terms of, of, of the kind of broadcast work we did. |
| QUOTE |
| Hmm, You know, you actually give no sense of the speech at all. If you are going to label a speech "thoughtful" - and for my money, this speech is far beyond thoughtful - it's an amazing speech. Out of a speech of 50 paragraphs, you pick two sentences, and simply take issue with two sentences, pieces of data. And even with these two pieces of data, the standards you hold are unrealistically high. "No evidence"? Remember, repeated instances of giving passes to an unqualified person (Gannon). Remember also, some evidence of Gannon being signed out far beyond the period of any press period... Also, you are forgetting the LOCAL "fake news" set-reporter-pieces, that look like news, but were more infomercials shipped to tv stations. "Digital brownshirts" - clearly a "term of art" - yes, an exaggeration, to make a point. I would think "digital brownshirts" would apply to most political bloggers, on both sides.... At any rate - what about the CONTENT? You know, the other 99.9% of this speech that you deem "thoughtful?", while devoting your 99% of review to what wasn't "thoughtful"? The analysis of TV as a one-way communication? Of the dominance of TV by large corporations? Of the mention of how, biologically, people respond to moving pictures? Of the historical tracing of TV, and the elimination of the equal time clause? Anything? For what it's worth, this post of yours looks simply like a dismissal of a speech that, in analytic power and clarity, captures much of what is wrong with the media landscape, which, I'm sure, you care about a great deal. |