Thursday, 8 November 2018

Other views are available



Some views on the Acosta affair (including about the banning of the CNN reporter from the White House) from BBC journalists on Twitter:

Trump’s attack on CNN’s Jim Acosta is an attack on the right of all journalists everywhere to ask tough questions of people in power. That’s our job. Only fair to note - as others have - that Trump is more available for questioning than many politicians here, that CNN relishes the fight & that journalists should talk about others not ourselves. However, attacks on news organisations as ‘enemies of the people’ crosses a line.

The press secretary of a man who has boasted about sexually molesting women...
This is dumb. And disproportionate.. Jim Acosta may be royal pain in ass - but that’s our job. We’re not sent to ask easy questions.  But can’t help feeling this is a shiny object thrown for the media to chase when far more important things are happening.

Don't underestimate how much more watchable rolling news shows make themselves when they're getting attacked by DJT. They both looked for that row.

Pres Trump’s press sec Sarah Sanders accuses CNN’s Jim Acosta of ‘placing his hands’ on intern who tries to snatch the mic from him. The video doesn’t support this. Let’s hope she is more accurate about things that don’t happen in front of her.

Gary O'Donoghue:
This is a total fiasco - and utterly demeans the presidency.

3 observations: A female White House intern exploited for a bigger political fight. Again. Sarah Huckabee Sanders was labelled as victim of a vicious attack when a female comedian made a joke about her eye makeup. Brett Kavanaugh.

11 comments:

  1. They are very revealing. Some such as Sopel’s comment are fair enough.

    Once again, Nick Bryant is signalling his bias. He is now the worst and has obvious contempt for Trump, that’s fine - he is entitled to his personal opinion ...but not in the capacity of a senior BBC reporter who is supposed to be impartial in that role.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the one from Nick Bryant is the stand-out one.

      Delete
    2. Agreed.

      Samira Ahmed ran him close though. Her gnomic tweet seems to be saying: 1. Bill Clinton is not the one to be criticised in the Lewinsky affair. It was those nasty Republicans who victimised Monica. 2. The Republicans got upset about a harmless make-up joke. It wasn't just a joke about make-up it was a nasty personalised attack on an accomplished woman - saying in effect she was a pathological liar - while she was sitting a few feet awayat a gala dinner. 3. Despite two women already having admitted that they lied about him assaulting them, and despite Blasey Ford's unconvincing performance, Bert Kavanagh is obviously guilty.

      Delete
  2. Let's take a look at the "Robinson Doctrine" which holds that attacks on news organisations as ‘enemies of the people’ are impermissible.

    Does this mean that no news organisation can be an enemy of the people? Is he saying that Press Today, Russia Today, Pravda, the Morning Star, Goebbels' organisation have to be protected from such robust criticism?

    Or will he, as one suspects, redefine "news organisation" to mean "legitimate news organisations in a democracy". But that is precisely the point. Are news organisations legitimate if they seek to overturn a democratic vote. CNN has lobbied non-stop for Trump to be removed...only stopping short of actually calling for his assassination. At the same time they have covered up for the Clinton family's manifold crimes.

    In the circumstances, calling them an enemy of the people seems to me to be legitimate political rhetoric.

    Jim Acosta doesn't ask questions. He delivers political, accusatory sermons and then tacks on a question at the end.



    ReplyDelete
  3. Sopel is turning into an American. He should stick to English, BBC.

    Perhaps Mr Robinson can tell us how we the humble people can ask tough questions of the people in power over our airwaves, namely the BBC. They do put obstacles in our way, brush us off with evasive or non-answers and refuse to enter into correspondence if it pleases them. Why can't we, or the US President, do the same thing? Fair's fair, Mr Robinson.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How very very true. Virtually 100% rejection rate of all significant complaints about bias. They are beyond criticism, even over such matters as how much they spend on "the talent".

      Delete
  4. Jeremy Vine tweet on the subject;

    Possible that this press conference was so awkward for Mr Trump that he fired #JeffSessions to knock it off the top of the news

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Possible Jeremy Vine is a teeny-weeny bit embarrassed.

      Delete
  5. Weirdly - Maitlis's comment is fair. Simpson is clearly, and blatantly, lying. Either he ignored the push down on the intern's arm or he never looked at it at all. Either way it's a lie.

    To be fair the push down by Acosta wasn't that hard, but can you imagine if Trump had used the same amount of force on a female reporter's arm what their mock horrified reaction would be.

    And the attack on Sarah Huckerby Sanders, while she sat there, was to do with her weight. Amazing where the sisterhood fails to kick into gear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maitlis is in the running for the QT Dimbo job isn't she? I think her sudden outbreak of extreme leftism followed by seemingly sensible statements might have something to do with that!

      Delete
    2. Well, according to Robinson, yes. Suspiciously timely indeed. I'd hate if she got the job. It'd probably mean I'd stop watching it altogether - yet another BBC programme to add to my list. Kirsty Wark would be a better host, Labour lefty though she is.

      Delete