Or demand that other media organizations be allowed to attend as a precondition for their participation.

Fox News is the one that's important; the others are just to support them. And no, they won't be embarrassed. Having the capability to create a favorable multimedia cocoon was the reason the Wurlitzer was created.

Well, ideally adults would be ashamed being under the employ of FOX News, and yet people do it.

I've said it before: you can't organize a mob for more than a few minutes. Tea Baggers will fade away because they have no purpose.

signaling to Fox News and the WSJ that the right considers them partisan and unprofessional, on par with WorldNetDaily

Not just the "right". Everyone considers them partisan, unprofessional and on par with a nutty rag - mostly because they are partisan, unprofessional and nutty as squirrel shit.

in truth, this is a rather humiliating moment for both.

Or at least it would be if we'd had even the slightest bit of success in discrediting the tea party movement.

Which, of course, we haven't.

Fox and WSJ aren't a surprise, but the choice of WorldNetDaily is quite revealing. Anyone who imagines that the Tea Partyers are moderating their message, or that they will have to take account of reality at some point should go to that site and have a look around.

Does anyone here watch Fox as their first choice for news?

No, I didn't think so. Remember, all media is a for-profit business, and the first order of the day-every day- is to "feed the beast".

Well the WSJ might balk. They would then be quickly replaced by the New York Post.

Does anyone here watch Fox as their first choice for news?

Good point. My first news is the web. My second news is ABC/CBS/NBC... and I usually find myself yelling at the TV because they don't report the whole story, only enough to represent a balanced debate. Facts be damned.

WorldNetDaily is "right-leaning?" That's like saying Ed Gein had "relationship issues." Jeebus.

Hmmmm.... I seem to remember a little dust up in October over FOX being "shut out" in a White House reporting pool to interview Ken Feinberg. At the time, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC all balked when it happened.

So...... I'm sure FOX News will likewise balk at being the only ones invited to cover this event.

Sounds like a fascist movement in the making.

'Otherizing' opponents, not allowing dissent by exclusion, secretive meetings with message control via specific media outlets sympathetic to their cause.

DAY writes:...media is a for-profit business...

That is true, and accurately reflects the management view at all media outlets. It does not reflect the view of many -- perhaps most -- journalists. They should be ashamed that they were singled out in this way, especially WSJ, which has many excellent, professional journalists. (It doesn't get crazy until you get to the op-ed page and also the reviews).

oh my said:
. . . I'm sure FOX News will likewise balk at being the only ones invited to cover this event.

No, Faux News will use it in their promos, bragging that they're the only teeveee news outlet invited because they're the only one without a "liberal bias".

No, Faux News will use it in their promos, bragging that they're the only teeveee news outlet invited because they're the only one without a "liberal bias".

Actually, FOX won't mention it at all. It will be left up to the FOX "audience" to assume that FOX is the only network to care enough about this important conservative "grassroots" event to have coverage. Said audience will assume the liberal MSM is just avoiding the event on purpose.

"Actually, FOX won't mention it at all. It will be left up to the FOX "audience" to assume that FOX is the only network to care enough about this important conservative "grassroots" event to have coverage. Said audience will assume the liberal MSM is just avoiding the event on purpose."

And now we see the purpose of them beating that drum during the other marches and events. They build their own reality and now the 'truth' that they are the only ones covering this 'movement' can remain unspoken. They framed the movement in the minds of their followers.

Steve Benen wrote: "Ideally, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal would feel insulted and reject the invitations."

Nonsense. That's like saying that a cable TV channel devoted to professional wrestling should feel insulted and reject an invitation to cover a professional wrestling tournament.

This is all about selling pseudo-ideological, pseudo-political entertainment to the Ditto-Head market. "Conservatism" is no longer an actual political ideology -- it is an entertainment demographic.

The interesting thing is that the so called MSM has really not called the tea-baggers to task for their crazyness. The coverage has been just that, coverage. So this defensive posture I think reveals the callowness of the movement. ABC covering the event from outside the event is going to give them a much less flattering look than if they were invited in. It's really not a smart move.

Only the far right wingnuts will fail to find a problem with this. When it comes to their favorite news sources' lack of journalistic integrity and credibility, these viewers and readers are either too dumb or just plain don't want to acknowledge it. I can't tell you how many conservative friends brag about getting all their news from Fox, the WSJ, and sports radio! These are the folks who strongly believe the "fair and balanced" "we report; you decide" slogans. Given enough time, the Teabagger movement will burn itself out. It's already causing a split the Republican party. Most Republicans I know want nothing to do with these gun-toting, angry, hate-filled extremists.

Would this make Fox the official teabagger network? Can I help design the logo for that?

It's just more singin' to the choir.

And considering that both Fox News and the Journal regularly balk at claims that their news product -- as opposed to commentary -- is partisan, will they join three right-leaning outlets while other non-partisan outlets aren't granted access?

That is a pretty odd equivalence. Nobody takes seriously Fox News's claim that their news product isn't partisan. The Wall Street Journal's news coverage is well-respected, or at least was before Murdoch bought them, and certainly hasn't gotten anywhere near the Fox News level.

I know...I just know Jon or Steven's intrepid reporters will find a way to crash this event

"Would this make Fox the official teabagger network? Can I help design the logo for that?

Posted by: PhillyCooke on January 15, 2010 at 11:05 AM"

Only if you gave us a preview on here first.

yeeps...no hot air? these guys are so far right that even our lady of perpetual outrage's staff doesn't get invited..