3 news agencies refuse to distribute Obama photo

[Caje]

The news agencies are claiming Obama was breaking with long-standing tradition in not allowing photographers access to the oval office.

(The standard AP copyright notice does not appear at the end of this article.)

“...Three news agencies refused to distribute White House-provided photos of President Barack Obama in the Oval Office on Wednesday, arguing that access should have been provided to news photographers.

The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse said the White House was breaking with long-standing tradition in not allowing news photographers to capture the president at work in the Oval Office on his first day...”

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ieyVS1CAUqhtdJiW1LrJFaz2j4uAD95RVU5O1

[sage68]

:crying:

Wonder if they would like a little cheese with that whine?

[alterEgo©]

He began the day pushing for more transparency in government, only to end it by keeping TV cameras out when Chief Justice John Roberts re-administered the oath of the presidency.
...
So the whole point of the ceremony -- getting the word out there that the president was in fact inaugurated -- was undermined by the fact that now there's no videotape to prove he was sworn in.
Not to mention that it may run counter to the main message the president was trying to deliver Wednesday with his executive order pushing for more openness in government.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/obama.henry/

[sage68]

He began the day pushing for more transparency in government, only to end it by keeping TV cameras out when Chief Justice John Roberts re-administered the oath of the presidency.
...
So the whole point of the ceremony -- getting the word out there that the president was in fact inaugurated -- was undermined by the fact that now there's no videotape to prove he was sworn in.
Not to mention that it may run counter to the main message the president was trying to deliver Wednesday with his executive order pushing for more openness in government.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/obama.henry/

Oh Good Gravy! :rolleyes:

[alterEgo©]

Yeah, Sage, tell them MSM moguls just how eye-rolling pathetic they are being by questioning their non-access to the Oval Office from a President who ran on the platform of transparancy in gvt.

[TaintedHalo]

Yeah, Sage, tell them MSM moguls just how eye-rolling pathetic they are being by questioning their non-access to the Oval Office from a President who ran on the platform of transparancy in gvt.


:patriot: ..............

[MercedesV]

Well I saw pictures of Obama in the Oval Office on day 1, and I saw pictures of Obama being sworn in the 2nd time. So, obviously there was media present, pictures taken and distributed, transparancy. Apparently some media folks didn't like the way it was done. Each President will do things their own way. To claim there wasn't transparancy is false. The media didn't get their own way so they are annoyed. It will all work out, and isn't any big deal except for those who didn't get their own way.

[daniel green]

Well I saw pictures of Obama in the Oval Office on day 1, and I saw pictures of Obama being sworn in the 2nd time. snipped.

Well, yeah. There are pictures I posted yesterday from Newsweek with several, several pics of the President in the Oval Office and the First Lady coming in, with the Chief of Staff, the Chief Justice, with Reggie Love (go, Reggie!!!!!!!!!! We love you!), working in his shirtsleeves, taking the second Oath in the Map Room.

Oh, well, some folks musta missed the hundreds of pics from the first 2 days.

[alterEgo©]

Oh, come on... I don't think this has much to do with transparency. Work needs to be done and I would suppose granting press access where there is nothing really to be seen just takes more time.
Be sure to tell CNN that cuz it's their article.

[alterEgo©]

That's what I thought - Boo Hoo, Wah wah. Aren't there more important things the press could be doing (rhetorial, of course).
Yeah, they could be reporting on the pressing issue of what Obama ate for lunch.

[sage68]

Yeah, Sage, tell them MSM moguls just how eye-rolling pathetic they are being by questioning their non-access to the Oval Office from a President who ran on the platform of transparancy in gvt.

Check this out, all the transparency one could ask for, unless of course a photo is more important than the issues. :shrug:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

and coming soon

http://www.recovery.gov/

[sinagua]

If the news agencies would report things fairly and not give their personal opinion of topics, I wouldn't care if they had more access. But, why should we care that the press was not present for that 2nd swearing in? A staff photographer handled it just fine and it was released to the press. What more did they think they would have gotten?

[Teeka]

Sometimes you just have to consider the source of the post, and the poster's motives. it's very elementary.