NeoCons = toolboxes
Why FoxNews Isn't Actually a News Organization
- Thread starter Facial_King
- Start date
To answer your first question, no, not necessarily. However, I've noticed over the years that many of those who purport to believe in "limited Federal power" are incredibly selective in how they apply that principle, which they market as something far more overarching. They are all for limited federal power to address or ameliorate various social ills, but when it comes to spreading "democracy" (also known as neoliberal, globalized monopoly capitalism) throughout the world or spying on your private info (mail, phone calls, credit card purchases, library loans, medical records, internet habits, etc.), they're fully on board with the biggest Brother imaginable.
As for the spending of "money we don't have on programs they can't run correctly" let's talk about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and how successful either of them have been in stopping terrorism or establishing serious democracies.
No. How have they committed treason? Let's not employ the thinking and tactics of the Bush/Cheney crew. Also, I think it's important for such things to exist, because it helps to reveal the true mind of so many conservatives, AND they are often quite good at painting themselves into corners of unsustainable extremism (people get worn down after so many years of being encouraged to fear and hate at such intense levels).
Our tax dollars at work....:hatsoff: Add PBS to the growing list of "gov't providing a valuable service to citizens"
I watched the link. It's 7min+ in length. I suspect that is about 6 minutes too long for the attention span of the Wackoes in this thread.
Fox creates "ant-gov't" events and uses it's resources to support efforts against Obama's administration and policies (HEALTHCARE REFORM) specifically. That is the key difference. When CNN/MNSNBC criticized Dumbya, they didn't actually create events to work against his policies.
I would support shuttering Fox News or atleast the FCC demanding that they remove "Fair and Balanced" or the word "News" from any of their on-air and off-air corporate branding.
They should be ordered to change their identity to "Fox Cable Channel." They don't have a single Democrat on their on-air staff payroll. They got rid of Colmes and brought in the Beckster. Is that "fair and balanced?"
It actually made me laugh when I read shut down for treason. :1orglaugh
What do you mean? Can you elaborate on that?
Or.... are you substituting name-calling for an argument?
:dunno:
Neither. Just a statement :hatsoff:
During Bush II's first shot at the presidency, Fox News gave declared him a winner although that was untrue.
Most of the big mainstream media were lying to us during 9/11 by telling us that 9/11 was done by Saddam Hussein.
If lying, misinforming and misleading Americans in this manner is not treason then what is...
jasonk282
Banned
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason#United_States
Basicly Americansthat turn their back on their country. Spying for the Enemy during the cold war. Or the most recent act of treason aganist Adam Yahiye Gadahn,is an American-born English-speaking senior operative, cultural interpreter, spokesman and media advisor for the terrorist group Al-Qaeda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Yahiye_Gadahn
But then againt this was reported of Fox ne........ oh wait MSNBC and the other MSM carried this story too.
The 9/11---Saddam link was started by Dumbya in his State of the Union speech in 2002. He said it on national television. In that instance, the lies started from the Oval Office and the "press" just went along. After 9/11, Dumbya had a 90% approval rating, so that meant that the press (and the Democrats in minority) were too cowardly to question him and put his "evidence" under careful examination. Dumbya successfully created the sheep mentality.
Since we've long been wasting our soldier's lives, our money and our time over there all these years, apparently the American Public really couldn't care less what or why we're over there anymore....:dunno: As long as we keep green-lighting billions to these war efforts, maybe someday "we'll get Saddam...errrr I mean Osama"...:dunno:
Since we've long been wasting our soldier's lives, our money and our time over there all these years, apparently the American Public really couldn't care less what or why we're over there anymore....:dunno: As long as we keep green-lighting billions to these war efforts, maybe someday "we'll get Saddam...errrr I mean Osama"...:dunno:
Actually, what was most worrying for me was when Tony Snow left Fox to be the whitehouse spokesperson. Mr Snow seemed like a sterling chap and most certainly comported himself in a manner fitting of both positions. However there should always be a chasm between journalists and administrations they cover and that chasm should be filled with distrust at the very least. Politicians of all stripes should hate the same journalists for the same reasons and journalists should not be able to jump the gap so seamlessly.
Some years ealier I was watching one of the NFL pregame shows, in it they were cutting between interviews with Al Gore and Tim Russert. Again I have no problem with the late Mr Russert and his abilities as a journalist. They were talking about some game between the Tennessee Titans and the Buffalo Bills. The game in question contained some incident (possibly a freak turnover, I'm not sure) both people were watching the game at home and when the incident happened they talked of speed dialling the other to rub salt in the wound. I had a very uneasy feeling about this. Politicians and the journalists who are charged with keeping them in line are not supposed to be hanging out. They shouldn't have each other on speed dial watching sporting events. George Orwell was very wary of meeting those he knew he would be reviewing and criticising. He knew that forming these kind of bonds would be corrosive to speaking the truth. As a general rule you can't go far wrong by emulating Orwell. To this day he is claimed by both left and right as a critic of the other.
When a news organization goes a step further and gives up all realistic attempts at clarity they strengthen these parasitic relationships. If anybody here thinks that is a good thing under any circumstances then again I have to say I disagree. Don't listen to me though, why not run this thought experiment? Try to work out what George Orwell would think about Glenn Beck and company and judge them accordingly?
Some years ealier I was watching one of the NFL pregame shows, in it they were cutting between interviews with Al Gore and Tim Russert. Again I have no problem with the late Mr Russert and his abilities as a journalist. They were talking about some game between the Tennessee Titans and the Buffalo Bills. The game in question contained some incident (possibly a freak turnover, I'm not sure) both people were watching the game at home and when the incident happened they talked of speed dialling the other to rub salt in the wound. I had a very uneasy feeling about this. Politicians and the journalists who are charged with keeping them in line are not supposed to be hanging out. They shouldn't have each other on speed dial watching sporting events. George Orwell was very wary of meeting those he knew he would be reviewing and criticising. He knew that forming these kind of bonds would be corrosive to speaking the truth. As a general rule you can't go far wrong by emulating Orwell. To this day he is claimed by both left and right as a critic of the other.
When a news organization goes a step further and gives up all realistic attempts at clarity they strengthen these parasitic relationships. If anybody here thinks that is a good thing under any circumstances then again I have to say I disagree. Don't listen to me though, why not run this thought experiment? Try to work out what George Orwell would think about Glenn Beck and company and judge them accordingly?
jasonk282
Banned
Not to get off topic but that was the Music City Miracle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_City_Miracle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2I4_UP8_2M
Cheers - but if - that is a miracle what is this? Nine passes after the clock had reached zero.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhGEldMGoSM&NR=1
jasonk282
Banned
People who need to play for the titans this season. LOL
"Not to get off topic"... but you still did.
You're getting a bit of a reputation for that.
"FoxNews Isn't Actually a News Organization"
I expect random drivel statements like moveon or the huffington post.
Sad really
I expect random drivel statements like moveon or the huffington post.
Sad really
Freedom of speech is only amazing when stating an opinion not when forcing your views on someone else. I think the media not just fox news is guilty of this, but it's all about the bottom line. Why do they put crazy people for democrats and republicans on the media? Not saying their all bad though.
Here's a really good summation of the arguments against Fox (but still, it's far from thorough!):
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091109/alterman
I found these points from it to be the highlight:
"What all these critics fail to address is that the administration's argument is right on the merits. Fox's pretense of being an actual news network is hardly more convincing than, say, Milton Berle in a bra and garters posing as a woman. By refusing to acknowledge Fox's open and avowed partisanship, its MSM defenders are not only flacking for Ailes & Co.; they're diminishing the work of honest journalists who try to play fair. Ask yourself:
§ Would a genuine news network reproduce a Republican press release, replete with typos?
§ Would a genuine news network run, over a five-day period, twenty-two excerpts from healthcare forums in which every single speaker was opposed?
§ Would a genuine news network allow a producer to cheerlead, off camera, anti-Obama protesters?
§ Would a genuine news network take out full-page ads to complain of insufficient coverage of antigovernment protest marches it had promoted?
§ Would a genuine news network run the following headlines, trumpeting each story as a "Fox Nation Victory"?
Senate Removes 'End of Life' Provision
Congress Delays Health Care Rationing Bill
Anti-Tea Party Reporter Dumped by CNN
Obama's Drive for Climate Change Bill Delayed
Obama's 'Green Czar' Resigns
(Note: I have not had to quote the lunatic ravings of Messrs. Beck, Hannity or O'Reilly to make my case.)
Fox is not a news organization; it is a propaganda outlet, and an extremist one at that. Is it any wonder that according to survey after survey, Fox News viewers are among the worst informed Americans when it comes to politics, despite their obsessive interest? A recent study by Democracy Corps finds that this audience believes "Obama is deliberately and ruthlessly advancing a 'secret agenda' to bankrupt our country and dramatically expand government control over all aspects of our daily lives," with the ultimate goal of "the destruction of the United States as it was conceived by our founders and developed over the past 200 years." "
====
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091109/alterman
I found these points from it to be the highlight:
"What all these critics fail to address is that the administration's argument is right on the merits. Fox's pretense of being an actual news network is hardly more convincing than, say, Milton Berle in a bra and garters posing as a woman. By refusing to acknowledge Fox's open and avowed partisanship, its MSM defenders are not only flacking for Ailes & Co.; they're diminishing the work of honest journalists who try to play fair. Ask yourself:
§ Would a genuine news network reproduce a Republican press release, replete with typos?
§ Would a genuine news network run, over a five-day period, twenty-two excerpts from healthcare forums in which every single speaker was opposed?
§ Would a genuine news network allow a producer to cheerlead, off camera, anti-Obama protesters?
§ Would a genuine news network take out full-page ads to complain of insufficient coverage of antigovernment protest marches it had promoted?
§ Would a genuine news network run the following headlines, trumpeting each story as a "Fox Nation Victory"?
Senate Removes 'End of Life' Provision
Congress Delays Health Care Rationing Bill
Anti-Tea Party Reporter Dumped by CNN
Obama's Drive for Climate Change Bill Delayed
Obama's 'Green Czar' Resigns
(Note: I have not had to quote the lunatic ravings of Messrs. Beck, Hannity or O'Reilly to make my case.)
Fox is not a news organization; it is a propaganda outlet, and an extremist one at that. Is it any wonder that according to survey after survey, Fox News viewers are among the worst informed Americans when it comes to politics, despite their obsessive interest? A recent study by Democracy Corps finds that this audience believes "Obama is deliberately and ruthlessly advancing a 'secret agenda' to bankrupt our country and dramatically expand government control over all aspects of our daily lives," with the ultimate goal of "the destruction of the United States as it was conceived by our founders and developed over the past 200 years." "
====
Similar threads
