Guys, this is not hard: we worry more about threats to press freedom from the president than antifa because it's a lot harder to protect yourself from a president running roughshod over civil liberties than from antifa. So we should have more sensitive early warning alarms.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @asymmetricinfo
Megan, like your commentary a lot but I'm just saying if you think tossing Acosta from the briefing room (when CNN can send anyone else btw) is akin to running roughshod over civil liberties (while 200 other reporters still there) people are not gonna give that the time of day.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @Buckeye9131
Remember when Obama wanted to ban Fox News from briefings? And other news orgs banded together to say "Let them in, or we won't come either?" Because we need sensitive early warning signals, not because we were one step from the Red Terror.
5 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @asymmetricinfo @Buckeye9131
Any president from any party could banish any news outlet he liked from any and all press briefings and it would not be the slightest "threat to press freedom"; the freedom of the American press - the freest in the world - would not be diminished one iota.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @random_eddie @Buckeye9131
I think this is very reductive, and ignores the soft power that government has to suppress unfavorable press coverage if we let them get away with it.
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @asymmetricinfo @Buckeye9131
I think *that* ignores the godlike-levels of soft power that the press has.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Yeah, when I look at the CURRENT YEAR, I don't see that the "power to suppress unfavorable press coverage" lies with the GOVERNMENT, of all entities !
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.