Republican National Committee mad at ABC for coverage

Hypocracy. The RNC can moan and whine all they want, but they have FOX and a few other news channels. Let the Democrats have ABC and NBC. Also, Obama is AMERICA'S PRESIDENT! Meaning, Americans chose him and elected him as their leader. If Obama wants to speak to the media or hold press conferences on national television, then he has every right to do so. The Republicans are just mad because nothing is going their way right now and they need to get over it.

While I heavily look down on ABC for the way they are conducting themselves it is perfectly legal for them as a private organization to do however they wish. They are no more in Obama's pocket than MSNBC or CNN. They just lucked out by getting to be his pets for now. I don't see why anyone would have to pay for air time if they are only doing interviews and such. If Obama were campaigning than that would be different as it would be covered by campaign finance laws, but obviously that's not the case right now.

It's a little from column A and a little from column B. The level to which ABC has committed to this participation in the President's agenda is more than FOX ever dared do with Bush. There is currently no law enforcing equal time during non-election coverage, however I'll bet we see one proposed after this. Obama and ABC are really pushing this to the edge. The blame has to fall entirely with ABC, though. No legitimate political negotiator would turn down the opportunity to present their agenda so well.

ABC is a private network and can give air time to whom ever for what ever it's little heart desires. the only way to force otherwise is with legislation such as the fairness doctrine....and I think you all know how I feel about that one. Anyone oposed to abc's bias in this is welcome to use the free market system to demonstrate their disaproval, stop watching it, write companies that buy adds on the network and ask them to stop giving them their money, boycot products that advertize with them, etc.

If a member of the administration gives an exclusive interview to one journalist over another, he is simply stating a preference for one journalist over another, or a preference for the network. Media outlets like newspapers run editorials all the time supporting one opinion over another and even endorsing candidates and particular legislation. The difference is, however, they clearly state that this is editorial opinion and support and not news and not impartial. In order to be effective and useful, the press must seek truth and facts in news reporting and be honest when what they give is opinion rather than news or fact. ABC didn't do this. They clearly support the President's proposal and so, if they intended to make this an extended editorial/endorsement, it should have been so stated. To pretend that this is an examination of the facts or that it is a news presentation is unprofessional. The president has every right to put forth his proposals, but even when all networks give him airtime for a State of the Union address, the other party is given time for a rebuttal. That's fair reporting, and ABC neglected its duty to provide that. Legally, they can do as they please. But I think that asking questions of a sitting president and then going to a five minute commercial to let him think about it shows a definite bias towards a particular viewpoint. Our free press is important. Remember that it was two journalists that broke the Watergate story. Being in bed with politicians makes for a dangerous situation, let's hope ABC and all other press organizations keep some degree of impartiality and honesty in their reporting. We don't want to end up in a country where anyone gets a free ride to be dishonest or to unduly influence without proper scrutiny and examination.

I think it will take time to verify the hypocrisy!As long as it is for the people is good!On this issue i am looking forward to the follow-up reports..thanks for sharing