Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Any news organization that took its responsibilities seriously would take pains to cover presidential criticism fairly. It would regard doing so as itself a test of integrity. At Fox, by contrast, complaints of unfairness prompt only hoots of derision and demands for "evidence" that, when presented, is brushed off and ignored.
***
Rather than in any way maturing, Fox has in recent months become more boisterous and demagogic.
***
What's most distinctive about the American press is not its freedom but its century-old tradition of independence—that it serves the public interest rather than those of parties, persuasions, or pressure groups.....For Murdoch, Ailes, and company, "fair and balanced" is a necessary lie. To admit that their coverage is slanted by design would violate the American understanding of the media's role in democracy and our idea of what constitutes fair play. But it's a demonstrable deceit that no longer deserves equal time.
Wow, as if you do not have a battery in your remote contril? Change the channel! Last I knew, THERE ARE OVER 500 CABLE CHANNELS!
Maybe what you really detest is the First Amendment? Do you want a One Party System like in Red China which Controls the Media and KILLS the OPPOSITION? Geez, you may be able to get a good job in Red China working for their Censorship Bureau!!!
Why did you leave out MSLSD, guys like Chris Mathews, Obermand and Rachel Madcow? Hope you do not mind the hyperbole but that is what free speech as well!
Never has a President attacked the a News Organization as this one has. Obama is just pissed off because Fox News revealed the Dirt of Acorn, which was the thug group who helped Obama fix the election. He is also pissed off about Van Jones and how a Mormon like Glenn Beck uncovered all his dirt as well!
Sorry, but I just do not buy your Anti First Amendment Rant!
I do watch Fox and CNN both. I would be upset if Obama treated CNN the same way he does Fox. Although, his opinion on anything that really matters I totally disregard, the very fact he is trying to censor the media, in any way what so ever is so disturbing, I do tend to believe he is going to try and turn us into Cuba. He will fail, of course, but he won't care about destroying the country as a means to his ends. There are too many good people in America, and I know that bothers Liberals, we like freedom of the press, even if we don't agree with what they say.
C-U-B-A? Did you say "Cuba"? Things have worked out so well in Cuba, you know.......certainly Obama want's to turn the U.S. into Cuba! Geeee........
Newsweek subscribes to the Journalistic Code of Ethics qualifying them as Journalists. Fox does not
More From the 3rd Party
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
My favorite passage from the Newsweek article:
And weepy Glenn Beck has begun to exhibit a Strangelovean concern about government invading our bloodstream by vaccinating people for swine flu. With this misinformation campaign, Fox stands to become the first network to actively try to kill its viewers.
Too true! I didn't realize Beck was opposed to swine flu immunization. If even one person doesn't take the vaccine because of him, and then dies of swine flu, Beck will have a lot on his hands.
If the liberals want to use Newsweek as their source of news, I have no problem with that, as long as you acknowledge that they also joined in the lawsuit with the Fox affiliate, where the Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Their comments arent anywhere near the same. They explain what Anita Dunn meant. The Qs centered on Anita Dunn (though Steph. included Murdoch video) because her comment had made news, at least at you-know-where , that week.
If you're not allowed to look at the transcripts I put up about sixteen times, cover your eyes:
EMANUEL: Well, no, it's not so much a conflict with FOX News. But unlike -- I suppose, the way to look at it and the way we -- the president looks at it and we look at it, is, it is not a news organization so much as it has a perspective. And that's a different take.
AXELROD: Well, I don't -- you know, I'm not concerned. Mr. Murdoch has a -- has a talent for making money, and I understand that their programming is geared toward making money. All -- the only argument Anita was making is that they're not really a news station, if you watch -- even -- it's not just their commentators, but a lot of their news programming, it's really not news. It's pushing a point of view.
And the bigger thing is that other news organizations, like yours, ought not to treat them that way, and we're not going to treat them that way. We're going to appear on their shows. We're going to participate, but understanding that they represent a point of view.
But most importantly the transcripts prove that Faux was lying again: that a so-what mention at the end of long interviews the themes of which were NOT Fox or the press, stuck in when there's nothing left to say, isnt exactly "taking to the airwaves to get Fox".
Quote:
Originally Posted by USNRET04
If you actually take the team to ready your own posts.... Emanuel says that Fox has a different perspective, a different (take on the news).
Axlerod says it's really not news. It's pushing a point of view, but understanding that they represent a "point of view".
per·spec·tive: Subjective evaluation of relative significance; a point of view
Sounds basically the same to me like I said earlier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Well, what words would you expect them to use? Do you think Emmanuel and Axelrod had never thought about his before? I don't get what you think is so, well, sinister about them both saying similar things.
I don't know what delu thinks about it, but I posted what I think about it.
The reason I pointed it out Katiana is because delusianne kept repeating in multiple posts that these questions "came at the end of a long interview" (I'm paraphrasing her comment). She want's you to believe it was an off the cuff question by the interviewer on two different networks.
I never said it was sinister, but it's obvious they were prepared for the question if it came.
Censor the Other news channel first, then censor the internet and control what the people read, then start with the popular shows and do the little voluenteer scenes then get into praising the government.
Just wait and see if our Federal Government doesn't start trying to go this route and indoctorinate the public.
Well, fortunately, I like to think that we're all smarter than that. Contrary to what seems to be poplular belief lately, I think we as a nation actually are, although I can't seem to find anything that would report that publicly because there's entirely too much "infotainment" out there - heavy on the "tainment" with negligible "info."
Well, fortunately, I like to think that we're all smarter than that. Contrary to what seems to be poplular belief lately, I think we as a nation actually are, although I can't seem to find anything that would report that publicly because there's entirely too much "infotainment" out there - heavy on the "tainment" with negligible "info."
When the TV shows are geared for the mentaltality of a 12 year old, and the attention span of minutes, just how do you get your message across. People will switch the remote in 2 minutes if you don't get there attention. Yes Beck uses the drama to get people to focus but listen they do that's why Obama and crew are worried otherwise they would just ignore.
Even the liberal Helen Thomas is against what the administration is doing.
At least one liberal is speaking out and thankfully she does carry some weight.
The reason I pointed it out Katiana is because delusianne kept repeating in multiple posts that these questions "came at the end of a long interview" (I'm paraphrasing her comment). She want's you to believe it was an off the cuff question by the interviewer on two different networks.
I never said it was sinister, but it's obvious they were prepared for the question if it came.
That's called being smart. Sarah Palin refused to be prepped for her interveiw with Katie Couric and she looked like a fool.
Any news organization that took its responsibilities seriously would take pains to cover presidential criticism fairly. It would regard doing so as itself a test of integrity. At Fox, by contrast, complaints of unfairness prompt only hoots of derision and demands for "evidence" that, when presented, is brushed off and ignored.
***
Rather than in any way maturing, Fox has in recent months become more boisterous and demagogic.
***
What's most distinctive about the American press is not its freedom but its century-old tradition of independence—that it serves the public interest rather than those of parties, persuasions, or pressure groups.....For Murdoch, Ailes, and company, "fair and balanced" is a necessary lie. To admit that their coverage is slanted by design would violate the American understanding of the media's role in democracy and our idea of what constitutes fair play. But it's a demonstrable deceit that no longer deserves equal time.
Any news organization that took its responsibilities seriously would take pains to cover presidential criticism fairly. It would regard doing so as itself a test of integrity. At Fox, by contrast, complaints of unfairness prompt only hoots of derision and demands for "evidence" that, when presented, is brushed off and ignored.
***
Rather than in any way maturing, Fox has in recent months become more boisterous and demagogic.
***
What's most distinctive about the American press is not its freedom but its century-old tradition of independence—that it serves the public interest rather than those of parties, persuasions, or pressure groups.....For Murdoch, Ailes, and company, "fair and balanced" is a necessary lie. To admit that their coverage is slanted by design would violate the American understanding of the media's role in democracy and our idea of what constitutes fair play. But it's a demonstrable deceit that no longer deserves equal time.
I hoped you typed that with a tongue in your cheek. If you didn't you must have missed the media's coverage of President GWB.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Things have worked out so well in Cuba, you know.......certainly Obama want's to turn the U.S. into Cuba!
