Fox won't air Obama Press Conferenc

[Proteas]

=========

NEW YORK - Fox became the first broadcast network to turn down a request by President Barack Obama for time, opting to show its drama "Lie to Me" on Wednesday instead of the president's prime-time news conference.

Fox will direct viewers interested in the news conference to Fox News Channel and the Fox Business Network, which will both carry it. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC and CNBC are all carrying the 8 p.m. EDT event, on Obama's 100th day in office.

This will be Obama's third prime-time news conference as president, a schedule that has caused some private grumbling among network executives. Carrying a news conference costs the four broadcast networks an estimated $10 million-plus in lost advertising revenue.

Yet with an economy in distress, two wars and now a swine flu outbreak, the pressure on networks to agree to Obama's request as a public service is enormous.

Executives at Fox, owned by News Corp., would not comment on the decision Monday. It's not without precedent for the network; Fox didn't carry a prime-time speech by President George W. Bush in November 2001 despite a request from the White House.

"I can't imagine it was politically motivated," said Shelly Palmer, industry analyst and host of "MediaBytes," a daily show about technology and the media. "I'm assuming it was financially motivated."

The news conference comes at the start of a ratings "sweeps" months, where viewership is watched closely to set local advertising rates. Not only will Fox keep its advertising for the hour, it will offer the only broadcast entertainment program, potentially giving a boost to the new series "Lie to Me," about a crime-fighting expert who can spot liars. "American Idol" follows "Lie to Me" on the schedule.

The Fox broadcast network was the most likely to have made this decision. Unlike ABC, CBS and NBC, Fox does not have its own news division to analyze the event. Even though the broadcast network is in more homes, cable's Fox News Channel traditionally gets more viewers for its coverage of these events than the Fox network.

An executive at one of the three other broadcasters, who asked for anonymity because the conversations were private, said that network's executives had expressed concern to the White House about the frequency of prime-time news conferences and the financial sacrifice they were making in carrying the event. The executive said it was hoped the administration would show more flexibility in working with networks to find the best times to schedule the events.

Source: Huffington Post

=================

As someone who grew up only watching network television, I absolutely HATED it when the president was on. Because when I was a kid, all we had were the three major networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS), along with PBS, and if the reception was coming good that night, FOX, UPN, and later on the WB. So nights when the president came on for a press conference or an address, tv was shot for me. Now, I feel as though I have been avenged for all my years of getting pissed off at the Commander-in-Chief for screwing up my tv nights. TAKE THAT!!!

Personally? I think you really can't argue this as a partisan move on Fox's part, they've aired Obama's press conferences before. They're not airing this one because, hey, "Lie to me" is a damn good show, and it's not right that the President can just preempt network programming whenever he wants. And for what? A 100 day press conference? Big whoop, I can turn on CNN and see a summary of his past 100 days if I want too, I don't need to hear from him about it. Doesn't he have anything better to do, like... be president of the United States?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I find my entertainment programing more important than a Confrence that will be playing on the news stations for the next year and a half because of one little skewable statement by Obama.

Don't tell me anyone, ANYONE, will lose sleep over FOX's decline. And if so, they have bigger things to think about.

[Malachy]

I think that because of the limited choices years ago, it was important that the major networks showed president's addresses. But today, as you've mentioned Proteas, there is a lot of choice to be had. There's really no reason to put him on every single channel for something as unimportant as a 100th day address. The 24 hour news networks show almost all news conferences whether prime-time or otherwise all day long on their 24 hour channels anyway, so unless there is an actual threat or important announcement, I think a President should use this privilege sparingly and it is up to the broadcasters to decide if it really is pertinent for them to show. If Obama's face is going to be on 5 other channels at the time, why not let your prime time lineup offer an alternative to a president talking about his first 100 days.

I don't think this is a partisan thing. Some may say it is, but it looks to be about business. a prime time show can stand to make the network money if it is an alternative to the presidential address.

[Ravariel]

Wyy on earth would they choose to show Lie To Me instead? That show is terrible. I mean, sure, if they decide instead to show the new episode of 24 or something... but Lie to Me?

Seriously, it's like The Mentalist only stupid.

[catd77]

It's not as vital to show news conferences because, as previously said, there are way more channels now. So channels like C-Span can show the "important" stuff. Frankly, I only watch NBC/ABC/Fox for news and when comedy shows are on. I would watch CNN to see politics so I'm in favor of Fox's decision. Usually I only watch G4 and Discovery Channel though.

/ubernerdiness

[Al6200]

An interesting question: on what grounds can the president force networks to display his content? I think we can all agree that the networks should all be willing to cede the airwaves for major emergencies, but if it is just

But let's say Obama wanted to make all of the networks give up a primetime slot every day to air his weekly address. Could he use eminent domain laws if he agreed to compensate them for their lost time?

[Proteas]

At 4/29/09 05:01 PM, Al6200 wrote: An interesting question: on what grounds can the president force networks to display his content?

I don't think Obama was "forcing" anyone to do it, I think the article (or one of the other online articles about it) mentioned that he had a "request" to have his press conference aired on fox.

Could he use eminent domain laws if he agreed to compensate them for their lost time?

Eminent domain is used with regards to physical property, stuff like land. If the government goes from having voluntarily donated airtime for press conferences/adresses and the like, to physically taking it and cutting the network a check for lost ad revenue, then there's really not much stopping them from just TAKING the time and telling the network to screw themselves.

[stafffighter]

I can see where as a private entity they have a right to do this but there's a lot of fault in the argument here.

1. Obama did not create the 100 day mark. Someone decided that was important a long time ago. So let's not saddle anyone with that.

2. Lie to me is not a very good show. You can tell when someone's lieing? They're actors on a tv show. Everyone's lieing.

[BrianEtrius]

Oh my. They're not airing a new conference? Wow, I would have thought the opposite; they would air it all day and jump over everything he would say.

But hey, it's a private company; they can do want ever they want.

[Korriken]

Prime time Tv show where actors act out a script or a presidential speech where the president acts out a script.. only on teleprompter. Neither are particularly great, neither are particularly entertaining, and both are full of themselves and full of shit.

I don't see much difference myself. Politics is like professional wrestling, It wouldn't be interesting if it was friendly.

[Malachy]

Proteas,

You lying sack of shit.

Obama's big black face was all over my recording of Lie to Me.

[Malachy]

Proteas informs me he watched Lie to Me live on Fox.

this brings about a new conspiracy. They want New England to see Obama...but not th midwest?!

[BrianEtrius]

At 4/29/09 09:24 PM, Malachy wrote: this brings about a new conspiracy. They want New England to see Obama...but not th midwest?!

Maybe they figure people watch more politics in New England then the midwest.

Also: Obama was on fox on the west coast.

[Proteas]

At 4/29/09 09:24 PM, Malachy wrote: Proteas informs me he watched Lie to Me live on Fox.

this brings about a new conspiracy. They want New England to see Obama...but not th midwest?!

It could just be the difference in the affiliates; I live in a red state, you live in a blue state.

[BrianEtrius]

How about we're missing the obvious reason here: Fox didn't want to interfere with their prime time slot?

[Malachy]

At 4/30/09 01:09 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: How about we're missing the obvious reason here: Fox didn't want to interfere with their prime time slot?

that was mentioned plenty of times already.

[Wonderful]

For the record, the episode of Lie to Me was pretty good.

And Fox News aired the conference, so what's the problem?

[Proteas]

At 4/30/09 04:20 PM, Wonderful wrote: And Fox News aired the conference, so what's the problem?

Are we talking about the Fox network, or are we talking the Fox News Network? Because that was mentioned in the article I presented (or one of them I read, anyway), that they would air it on the news channel and leave "Lie to Me" alone to air.

Of course, I think the rock dj that spoke of this on the radio yesterday said it best; "There's something ironic about FOX playing a show called 'Lie to me' over airing a political address."

[Alphabit]

Americans care WAAAYY too much about their leaders... Here in Australia if our prime minister asked for some air time; the networks would tell him to F-off! We don't give a crap if some VIP guy is blabbering-on about political technicalities - It's like watching an electrical engineer blabber on about the technicalities of how a mobile phone works; we don't give a crap about HOW it works; so long as it does work! Presidents should shut their big deceptive mouths, keep their heads down and do the work that they're being paid to do like everyone else... They shouldn't have to talk to justify their decisions; if their work was any good it would speak for itself.

[UpTheIrons]

Typical of Fox.
I only watch that network for
House
DollHouse
Terminator: SCC
Simpsons

I sometimes watch Fox news for a laugh or too. It is fun to watch mentally insane people on the news.

[Elfer]

At 4/29/09 04:36 PM, Ravariel wrote: Wyy on earth would they choose to show Lie To Me instead? That show is terrible. I mean, sure, if they decide instead to show the new episode of 24 or something... but Lie to Me?

Seriously, it's like The Mentalist only stupid.

Yeah, but people watch it, and that means they makes more money.

To be honest, it's a smart business move. If people want to see the address, there's no way that the Fox broadcast network would be their only opportunity to see it. However, there's plenty of people who don't want to watch the address, and having it on every single network would be a pain in the ass. It's like how Bush used to always interrupt the Price is Right. WHAT THE HELL, BRO.