The 'JournoList' Controversy, Fox News and the 'Helen Thomas Seat'

I don't care who gets her seat , Fox will continue to do there job as they do . The others who do not ask the hard questions who just sit there and ask softball questions are of no use to us . As far as the list well they will continue to be in the tank for Obama and will slime fox when they can so who cares . The public know what's up and are pulling away from this admin. and president in droves , Why ? Because we see thru there game .

Are you kidding me? Do you really think we care where all of you sit in press meetings? Jeez, the egos on you journalists. Let me open your sheltered mind...the citizens in this Country care about the TRUTH in the news. After reading about the Journo List, I have lost faith in all of you. All we can do is read a story now and see the slant become ever increasing and by most comments from readers, you are failing miserably in attempts to "making us believe" what you say. God help this Country if we only get hand picked journalists that will write only hand picked opinions and stories. Why don't you all start acting like real journalists with actual truth for a change. Stop trying to censor those you don't like.

In "olden" days the President answered many reporter's questions. Sometimes as long as 45 minutes or so. Now reporters are "selected" like the President is afraid to answer or might not have the answer or is afraid to look "bad". With the teleprompter speeches, perhaps written by a group of White House writers, I wonder just what does the president actually think about certain subjects and what is "fed" to him, he certainly can't be any worse than Gibbs.

FOX NEWS has not shown recently that they deserve a front seat at the White House daily briefing. Their behavior during the Sherrod affair was particularly egregious. They also claim to be fair and balanced while constantly shilling for the republican party.

I can't afford cable, so I've never seen Fox News (except for Fox News Sunday, which I watch avidly) and I have no idea what a listserv is, but I was editor of a college weekly @44 years ago, and it seems to me that advocate journalism is something to be avoided. Writers whose job it is to cover the White House ought to be objective, and if we can't have objective, we could at least get some balance.

When considering breaking news, candidates for public office - or anything else for that matter, I now trust any of the media 0-percent after reading about how they had a backroom agenda to falsely paint Republicans as racists to boost Obama. It still seems to be the case. And their successful plot to undermine Palin as a VP candidate makes me extremely happy to see her laughing all the way to the bank these days.

I have been surprised by the lack of comments on this article which does a very good job of describing what I see as a significant problem. It doesn't matter to the general public where a reporter sits in a Presidential briefing. What does matter is how that reporter uses and reports that information. We seem to have reached a point in time where journalists have rejected any form of ethics just so they can try to shape the feelings of the public. People are not so stupid as to accept this and now we find both newspapers and magazines failing. Try to blame it on the economy, but watch the failure continue after the economy rebounds.