there is a huge difference between your referenced material and what the WH is doing. Your reference is about those that wish and do express their opinions and ideas freely in the public eye via programs that they work and gain money from as part of their job are in a free market driven by those that wish to partake in it. as a result of his statement he lost market share and also advertising.

“TERENCE SMITH: Maher’s comments ignited a firestorm. And some local stations dropped or suspended his show. At the White House, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer issued a cautionary note.”

So the comment: “ARI FLEISCHER: There are reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that. There never is.” is nothing more than a reminder to those that the public will choose what they think and who they will support for their entertainment/news.

This is completely different than what the WH is actually doing today. They are intentionally targeting an entire news organization and saying they are the enemies. They are targeting any conservative or even mildly conservative outlet (radio, paper, blogg, organization, activist group, etc..) as the enemy. They have sent out trolls to intentionally place supportive comments for O’s plans on websites, they have been blogging (from the WH blogg) in absolute support for the plans, they openly deny that people and organizations are actually reporting with facts and news, yet they respond with accusations of racism, and outright lies.

As a result there is a resurgence of patronage to the more conservative media in all its forms due to these actions. Your example is nothing more than advice to those during a time when tensions were high and people reacted faster due to one’s comments. What is happening now is a direct attack against free speech. This is the same Pattern that many other leftist governments have taken. Research the ley de medios/Radiofusion/Grupo Clarín if you don’t believe me. *careful, I’m fairly well versed in it*

Can a president/administration choose how and when to do interviews and press conferences? Then he can choose who to do them with. He explained his rationale and I find his concerns valid. Fox can try harder for balance or continue to parade their ideologues across the screen to spout their contrarianism.

Rememeber it was during the Bush misadministration that Helen Thomas got moved to the back of the bus when she dared to ask probing questions, and shill questioners like former gay escort Jeff Gannon/James Guckert were treated like legitimate news reporters as they lobbed slobber-covered soft balls. Bush Townhall meetings were screened to allow supporters only though touted as open to the public. Those looking to gain access were harassed by security, threatened with arrest or actually detained, and/or escorted off the premises (and these were public venues and the people were not even carrying firearms). People were also ejected or otherwise mistreated for t-shirts or buttons or signs with political messages on them. BushCo gave Fox eclusives with their people knowing they would receive a “friendly” reception. BushCo granted access to those who played ball and froze out those who wouldn’t. And on and on… Bush team members were on record saying that they could count on Fox to promote their agenda.

The Obama adminsistration is just choosing not to validate an adversarial propaganda outlet.

An excellent analysis of the WH/Fox situation. I think Emanuel is the architect, Axelrod his project manager. It has their stamp, postmark Chicago. But we cannot blame entirely those cunning culprits. The remainder of the American media has a load to carry. Shame on them. The media’s responsibility should be, as it once was in this country, to challenge — with facts. The WH has a right to challenge the media — with facts. Today we witness a one-sided argument: Fox has the facts, the WH has the power. I have seen this fungus spread in other countries, experienced its resultant chaos and devastation. The “slow” ride to Socialism is picking up steam, and soon we’ll be heading downhill without brakes.

Your very good point regarding what this white house is trying to do to FOX, that is to say literally waging war against a media entity, as compared to the comment Ari Fleischer made regarding Maher’s idiocy is, to use another vernacular, light-years away from each other. A presidential administration has a duty to stand up for it’s policies against ridicule and misrepresentation (something by the way that the Bush administration was extemely remiss in doing, much to the dismay and frustration of republicans/conservatives), but has no business using the substantial power of government to attempt to destroy those entities, especially the press. The latter falls under the category of Stalinism.