FauxNews Does It Again! And AGAIN! by Niki2

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

What do those of you who defend Faux News as a "legitimate news station" think about this? While we're discussing free speech...what about "fake speech"? Why are they allowed to mislead the public like this? Yes, I know the answer, but it still pisses me off...

I'm wagering it'll either be totally okay, or they will remain silent.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 11, 2009 2:28 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Sigh...sadly...probably true. What a world...what a strange little species...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 11, 2009 4:17 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Hah - what's worse is, I heard one douchebag saying on Gordon Liddy's show that the crowd was more than a million strong!

And hell, the photos they showed of the "million plus" at the 9/12 tea-bag party weren't even of that event. Someone pointed out that some of their photos were actually of the "Million Man March", and pointed out the Native American museum (can't remember if that's its correct name or not) - or rather, the LACK of said museum, which stands there now, but didn't when the Million Man March went off.

Oh, FauxNews... Is there NOTHING you won't report wrong?

But hey, at least they'll soon be joined by Lou Dobbs, who just resigned - tonight - over at CNN. Said tonight would be his last show, and adios. Only he didn't actually SAY "adios", 'cuz, ya know, he's not down with the brown folks.

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 13, 2009 10:42 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I didn't know about that one...sigh...and their puppets bought both, no doubt...it's the librul media conspiracy to make them look bad, of course!

Tho' I saw Hannity APOLOGIZED for the Faux News faux pas:

Quote:
As Mediaite reported yesterday, the eagle eyes of The Daily Show noticed that Sean Hannity substituted news footage from the 9/12 rally for last week’s much-lower-attended Super Bowl of Freedom. The effect was that the latter event seemed like a much bigger deal than it was.

Last night, Hannity apologized, claiming that the footage had been used “inadvertently.” Here’s specifically what Hannity had to say:

Quote:
“And finally tonight, although it pains me to say this, Jon Stewart? Comedy Central? He was right. Now on his program last night, he mentioned that we had played some incorrect video on this program last week while talking about the Republican healthcare rally on Capitol Hill. He was correct, we screwed up, we aired some video of a rally in September, along with a video from the actual event. It was an inadvertant mistake, but a mistake nonetheless, so Mr. Stewart. you were right, we apologize. But by the way, I wanna thank you, and all your writers, for watching. (Laughter)”

Hannity’s claim that they “played some incorrect video,” is a bit of an oversimplification of the production process. Since the video they played was part of a pre-edited package, this most certainly wasn’t a case where the technical director simply hit a wrong button. The footage for this package was selected by someone, then edited by an Editor.

So — was this an honest mistake? Given the recent debate about the distinctions between Fox News’ opinion programming and its news programming, its at least worth another look.

You may recall the name Griff Jenkins from a previous flap involving Fox News: it was his crew that was “reprimanded” for whipping up a 9/12 crowd for the cameras.

While the White House took some lumps over their treatment of Fox News, incidents like this certainly seem to underscore their overall point. One of the linchpins of Fox News’ defense is the idea that there’s a wall between their news and opinion programming. Problems with their news programming notwithstanding, this defense isn’t exactly air tight.

The “opinion show” defense is only really operative when it comes to opinions. When it comes to news content on opinion shows, they retain some duty to present facts accurately and fairly. For example, MSNBC recently drew criticism for dishonestly editing footage of a gentleman who was carrying a gun at a Town Hall event. And similar criticism of blurry lines between news and opinion at MSNBC exist when day time news anchor David Shuster fills in to guest host Keith Olbermann’s Countdown. Even The Daily Show has been called out for blurring the line between facts and opinion (or comedy in this case.)

Fox’s news personnel are frequent guests on Fox opinion programs, which lends traditional journalistic credibility to opinion programming of Hannity or Bill O’Reilly. While it makes programming sense to promote shows and personalities across the network — which Fox News does better than any network — it also blurs the line between the two sides of Fox programming for a less informed or critical viewer.

Sean Hannity certainly deserves credit for the quick and earnest apology for the footage miscue, and while he’s clearly on the opinion side of FNC, it is legitimate to ask whether this mistake also harms the credibility of Fox News “news desk.” This mistake not only gives rise to Fox News fiercest and most vocal critics, which until recently, included the White House, but raises a larger question: shouldn’t there be any concern about this expressed by FNC News Desk?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 13, 2009 2:11 PM

It says a lot about your "news" organization when COMEDY CENTRAL is the one doing your fact-checking. None of what it says is good, though.

And they STILL can't figure out why people are pointing and laughing at them when they call themselves "reporters". ;)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 14, 2009 3:18 PM

http://piratenews.org/fox-news-owned-by-communist-china.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendi_Deng

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Are they a "news" organization?

(By the way, where are all those people who were arguing that ClusterFox didn't deserve to be dissed by Obama because it's a responsible news organization? They're awfully quiet...)

(Also, how do you make an "inadvertent mistake" like that? I'd like to learn, I don't know much about editing video, I'm sure I could learn a thing or two from them...)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 14, 2009 5:41 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Yeah, I cant stand that left-wing liberal commie Fox.

Cant get more un-American.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 14, 2009 7:11 PM

Quote:
(Also, how do you make an "inadvertent mistake" like that? I'd like to learn, I don't know much about editing video, I'm sure I could learn a thing or two from them...)

Well, you start by doing whatever you want to do, and then if anyone calls you on your lies, you claim it was "inadvertent". :)

And PN thinks they're "commie liberals"... Really, what more needs to be said about his level of batshit?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 16, 2009 9:37 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Yeah, I cant stand that left-wing liberal commie Fox.

Now, is that a case of the "denial" you mentioned elsewhere, or just complete nut-wing batshit? Or does it matter which one it is? Yup.

Ah, the mind...such a terrible thing to waste/screw up completely...

As to

Quote:
Well, you start by doing whatever you want to do, and then if anyone calls you on your lies, you claim it was "inadvertent".

Yeah, I knew that, I should have put [sarcasm] before and after it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 16, 2009 10:07 AM

RIVERLOVE

Why y'all so obsessed with Fox News? If you watch, great. If you don't watch, then you don't know how bad or how good they are. All the cable news shows are suspect in my opinion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 16, 2009 5:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Why y'all so obsessed with Fox News? If you watch, great. If you don't watch, then you don't know how bad or how good they are. All the cable news shows are suspect in my opinion.

So you were okay with Dan Rather's story about Dubya's ducking out on his National Guard duties and playing hookie and going AWOL and never finishing his duty? Seems a lot of people were upset about that one, because they had this silly notion that a "news" reporter ought to show at least a casual interest in the actual "facts" of a story.

Are you saying you have no problem with "news" that doesn't check its facts, or that purposely reports information it KNOWS to be false?

Do all conservatives have standards as high as yours? It would explain a lot about Faux News, its viewers, and its "journalists".

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:48 AM

RIVERLOVE

Sometimes mistakes get made in both news reporting and news opinion. And sometimes details get omitted in the grander story. For example, last nite on MSNBC Rachel Madow did a story about the NY 23rd Congresssional election that is now being challenged. Rachel said " The Conservative conceded the loss, and the winner was already sworn in." Well that's all true, EXCEPT she omitted this key point:
THE ELECTION HAS NOT YET BEEN CERTIFIED in NY state!

There was slow reporting in some areas where support for the Conservative Hoffman came in later as stronger than anticipated, and now he's only a few thousand votes behind, with 10 thousand absentee ballots still uncounted. So he's taken back his concession, much like Gore did in 2000.

Now he's likely not going win when all the votes are counted, but when Madow said he was sworn in, that was completely true, yet very misleading. Again, NOT certified by NY State. Pelosi had him flown in to DC on a Saturday night to cast his vote for her Healthcare Bill. That seems pretty desperate and smarmy to me, but not unexpected as politics go. AND if I'm supposedly a Fox hound as some imply, what am I doing watching Madow anyhow?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:11 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

So you were okay with Dan Rather's story about Dubya's ducking out on his National Guard duties and playing hookie and going AWOL and never finishing his duty? Seems a lot of people were upset about that one, because they had this silly notion that a "news" reporter ought to show at least a casual interest in the actual "facts" of a story.

Those were the "facts"-- or at least a valid interpretation of the story. What Rather got busted for was a forged document that "confirmed" the facts in black and white. It would be interesting to know who actually created the fake document and who fed the bait to CBS.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:31 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

So you were okay with Dan Rather's story about Dubya's ducking out on his National Guard duties and playing hookie and going AWOL and never finishing his duty? Seems a lot of people were upset about that one, because they had this silly notion that a "news" reporter ought to show at least a casual interest in the actual "facts" of a story.

Those were the "facts"-- or at least a valid interpretation of the story. What Rather got busted for was a forged document that "confirmed" the facts in black and white.

Hello,

I imagine that police officers and detectives sometimes use a similar tactic.

They might plant evidence, knowing the suspect is guilty of something, and justify it to themselves. They tell themselves, "surely it's a fact that this man is guilty of something. The evidence that confirms the facts may be false, but the facts themselves are valid."

Of course, there's a good reason for outrage when someone tries to use falsified evidence. Even when such evidence is used against very bad people.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:07 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Obama is going to be interviewed on FOX NEWS this Wednesday at 6:00 pm Eastern time according to their promo. Ought to be interesting in light of their recent skirmishes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:06 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Maddow reporting the winner in NY was exactly what every other station reported. And as you said, it was true, not an outright lie. I haven't heard ANY news that the election hasn't been certified, so she's no more to blame than anyone else...I believe Faux News as well?

River, I don't feel I'm "obsessed" with ClusterFox, but I abhor such blatant lies as they provide and I abhor the TRUE ugliness they present against the current administration and anything Democrat-related.

Quote:
Sometimes mistakes get made in both news reporting and news opinion

These weren't mistakes. You can't "mistakenly" insert video from one event into another, and doing so was an obvious attempt to make the event look larger than it was. That's fraud and propaganda. I don't trust cable shows either and check my facts, but Faux News is blatant and what they do is unconscionable, so I'll call 'em on it when I'm aware of it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:52 PM

Quote:

Obama is going to be interviewed on FOX NEWS this Wednesday at 6:00 pm Eastern time according to their promo.

Sorry, but I'm not convinced it will happen. :) After all, if FauxNews is reporting it, how reliable can it be?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 11:57 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

If he does (which I also doubt...good way to rake in viewers then claim he was too chicken to show!) I hope he nails 'em good and proper. Would be nice.

But I don't think it will happen...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:07 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I would love to see someone nail down Obama on his beliefs.

Something he can't back out of.

If hes got the balls for it, I would actually give him more credit. Especially after his camp tried to discredit a news source, and to un-Constitutionally silence them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:14 PM

Quote:
Especially after his camp tried to discredit a news source, and to un-Constitutionally silence them.

Can you elaborate on that?

How did he try to "silence" them? Did he have them jailed? Killed?

By the way, I noticed that Rachel Maddow had asked Sarah Palin for an interview, and was refused. Why is Palin trying to "un-Constitutionally" silence Rachel?

Quote:
I would love to see someone nail down Obama on his beliefs.

Heck, I'd be satisfied if someone could nail YOU down on YOUR beliefs. I mean, other than just mumbling things like "freedom" and running away or posting up a stupid movie clip. How 'bout it, Wulfie - what do YOU believe in?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 6:44 AM

Aaaaannnnndd they've done it yet again.

http://www.examiner.com/x-30067-Knoxville-Headlines-Examiner~y2009m11d
20-FOX-News-caught-using-misleading-footage-video

Their story about Palin's book drawing crowds and long lines was punctuated with pictures of crowds and long lines - at a Palin rally from last year! What made it worse was the "news" reader saying over the footage, "These pictures are just coming in..." and showing the crowd at one of her campaign rallies before the election last year.

I think it's pretty obvious at this point that FauxNews uses the word "news" and the phrase "fair and balanced" in exactly the same way that The Onion calls itself "America's Finest News Source". And they should be taken every bit as seriously, and their "facts" given exactly the same credence.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 6:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Especially after his camp tried to discredit a news source, and to un-Constitutionally silence them.

Can you elaborate on that?

How did he try to "silence" them? Did he have them jailed? Killed?

By the way, I noticed that Rachel Maddow had asked Sarah Palin for an interview, and was refused. Why is Palin trying to "un-Constitutionally" silence Rachel?

Quote:
I would love to see someone nail down Obama on his beliefs.

Heck, I'd be satisfied if someone could nail YOU down on YOUR beliefs. I mean, other than just mumbling things like "freedom" and running away or posting up a stupid movie clip. How 'bout it, Wulfie - what do YOU believe in?

Bump because Wulfie apparently refuses to answer.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 6:50 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Um,ok.

Whats the question?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 6:58 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"FOX News caught using misleading footage (video)

For the second time in two weeks, FOX News has once again had apologize to viewers for using misleading footage. During a story about Sarah Palin drawing large crowds while promoting her new book, footage of a well-attended campaign rally played on the screen. Host Gregg Jarrett said "Some of the pictures [are] just coming to us...The lines had formed earlier this morning."

FOX's senior vice president, Michael Clemente, has said that the footage shown was unintentional. "This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn't alert the control room to update the video," he said in a statement.

Last week, on Sean Hannity's program, the network showed footage of a protest on the Mall in Washington, saying that the crowd had been at an anti-health care reform rally organized by Rep. Michele Bachmann. Comedy Central's Jon Stewart noticed the footage mix up and used it on his show."

Hello,

I am surprised that they would make the same mistake again so soon. I hope someone gets fired at FOX for this, as this is really harming their credibility. They need to work hard to restore their reputation.

One begins to understand why many young people prefer to get their news from the Daily Show. It's biased and fake, but it is much more entertaining and there's lots of good humor. Also, strangely and inexplicably, after watching 30 minutes on FOX news and watching 30 minutes of the Daily Show, I feel that I have learned more by watching the Daily Show. I am at a loss to explain this, since the Daily Show is patently not trying to inform me, but rather to entertain me.

Lately I have been increasingly disappointed with CNN, as it feels like it's becoming more difficult to extract the information from the chaff. I was so upset when I got home yesterday and watched the 'Cop Tasers 10 year old' video, as the video provided no useful information on the event, and I found no apparent link for a standard text format article with details.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Um,ok.

Whats the question?

Two questions, as stated above.

1) Can you elaborate on how you think the government "un-Constitutionally" tried to silence Lou Dobbs?

2) As asked above (twice): "I'd be satisfied if someone could nail YOU down on YOUR beliefs. I mean, other than just mumbling things like "freedom" and running away or posting up a stupid movie clip. How 'bout it, Wulfie - what do YOU believe in?" Use your WORDS; don't rely on someone else's video to tell you how you feel. USE YOUR OWN WORDS TO EXPLAIN IT TO US. We know you claim to not be a conservative, but we also know that you hate all liberals and Democrats. We know what you hate; what is it you BELIEVE IN?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:24 AM

Quote:
Lately I have been increasingly disappointed with CNN, as it feels like it's becoming more difficult to extract the information from the chaff. I was so upset when I got home yesterday and watched the 'Cop Tasers 10 year old' video, as the video provided no useful information on the event, and I found no apparent link for a standard text format article with details.

See, Anthony - we're more alike than you'd like to believe, I'm afraid. :)

Getting "the story" out of "the news" these days is harder and harder. I rely on the news to give me the broadest possible strokes on what it is that people are interested in. Then I have to go online and start digging, to actually try to churn up enough info the discern what they're NOT telling us, not just what they ARE telling us. And even at that, you have to read between the lines an awful lot.

Lately, I've been trying to figure out just WHY the Republican party doesn't want terror suspects tried as criminals, but rather wants them tried by the military for what were criminal acts. What is the core belief behind it, when you think your military is the only arm of government strong enough to inflict - er, I mean ENFORCE - your laws? And what does it say about the government if one side so actively believes that, and is so urgently pushing back against the idea that we treat criminals as criminals, and not treat criminals as war heroes or martyrs in a religious war?

Oh, and since I can't let a post go by without snarking it at least somewhat (or so I'm told)...

My first reaction when I read your words about Fox needing "to work hard to restore their reputation" was to laugh and say, "Good one!"

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:24 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I suggest starting a new thread, "A reaffirmation of my beliefs" by Wulf.

And then I suggest everyone pinkie swear not to snark at the guy, not to criticize the guy. The only questions should be to more fully understand his position. Even if he was to post, "I love Nazis and hate America" (just an off-the-wall example) you shouldn't interrupt him by making fun of him or yelling at him or anything like that. Just let him talk, explain in his own words, and maybe ask him questions to clarify his position without criticizing his position.

Then, with his position fully stated and not made fun of or interrupted with shovelfulls of snark, you'll have a base reference thread to check back on when Wulf posts on other threads.

I suspect you'll find that in 6 months, some of his ideas will have evolved and changed. And this will be a good thing. I am very glad that I don't hold all the same opinions I held 5 years ago.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:35 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

1) Never said the "gubmint" tried to silence Lou Dobbs. But did this current administration go after Fox? Absolutely.

2. Um, I would still need questions. As in, "What is your belief on XYZ"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:43 AM

By the way, anyone who's done much editing with modern software would tell you that "accidentally" inserting old footage from other events into a new story is ridiculously unlikely.

It's not like those clips are just drifting around willy-nilly.

They either have utterly incompetent editors, or they are flat out lying.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:49 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I would like to rule out 'utterly incompetent editors' and favor lying... But the ease of detection of this deception indicates *someone* at Fox is utterly incompetent and foolish.

It's not like they didn't know they were being scrutinized... And then they did it again. And they did it *after* releasing a statement that said, "We have taken steps to make sure this never happens again." I mean, it's mind-bogglingly terrible. I wasn't kidding when I suggested someone should be fired. And I wasn't thinking of the video editors.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:52 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

You guys actually think Fox news (maybe) is the only one that does this?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:55 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Wulf,

That's a good question. No, I suspect most news agencies do this from time to time.

Fox is doing it frequently lately, and is doing it very badly. Like a kid signing his parent's name to a homework notice with a crayon.

Surely you agree that they're just horrible about this lately?

But no, I have concerns about many news agencies. Not always the same concerns. Note my rant about the increasingly uninformative CNN.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:59 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Whenever a news agency claims to either A) bring you unbiased information, or B) not have an agenda.... you should KNOW right off the bat they are lying.

Then, when you have news agencies claiming to FOLLOW an agenda, they are REALLY lying.

But whats the alternative? Straight facts? That would be too boring for the public.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 8:07 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Its the age old question... are you lying if you purposely leave out facts, which then causes your audience to reach a pre-approved conclusion?

Fox News may manipulate stories, but so does CNN, NPR, MSNBC, ect ect.

the only thing you can do when watching the news, is acknowledge that SOMETHING happened.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 8:16 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Mike,

You would be disappointed to learn how little it troubles me that we may have a lot in common. :-)

In reference to terror suspects being tried in military courts...

I wonder what they are saying, then? Are they suggesting that terrorism is part of a legitimate military action against the United States? An interesting position. And if they are accusing these combatants of war crimes, shouldn't we try them in an international court? Isn't that what we did with the Nazis?

What a mess that would be for us, when our own mistreatment of these people comes to light.

But a criminal case would reveal our inequities just as surely.

So, secret military courts with closed doors and unknown evidence - and yet no acknowledgement of our enemy as valid combatants, and no trying them in international court for war crimes. Amazing.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 8:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
1) Never said the "gubmint" tried to silence Lou Dobbs. But did this current administration go after Fox? Absolutely.

2. Um, I would still need questions. As in, "What is your belief on XYZ"

You're weaseling. I thought you hated that.

Here's your quote from above:

Quote:

I would love to see someone nail down Obama on his beliefs.

Something he can't back out of.

If hes got the balls for it, I would actually give him more credit. Especially after his camp tried to discredit a news source, and to un-Constitutionally silence them.

Now, you distinctly accused "Obama" and "his camp" of trying to silence a news source. If "his camp" is NOT the government nor his administration, then who is?

Also, that addresses your Question 2 as well. YOU want to be asked specifics. You didn't ask for specifics from the President, though, did you? You said, and I quote, "I would love to see someone nail down Obama on his beliefs." No "his beliefs on XYZ", just an open-ended query about "his beliefs". So I asked about yours.

Are you saying you would hold a black man to a different standard than you hold yourself? Or that we should? :P

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 8:27 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

*sigh

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 8:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Its the age old question... are you lying if you purposely leave out facts, which then causes your audience to reach a pre-approved conclusion?

Fox News may manipulate stories, but so does CNN, NPR, MSNBC, ect ect.

the only thing you can do when watching the news, is acknowledge that SOMETHING happened.

It's more than that, though, isn't it?

The question SHOULD be, "Are you lying when you replace facts, make up facts, or substitute different facts in your stories to push your agenda and lead your audience to a pre-conceived conclusion?"

Fox isn't saying that smoking doesn't cause cancer. In essence, they're swapping data to say that smoking DOESN'T cause cancer, but eating salads DOES. It's not a lie of omission (leaving something out to lead to a specific conclusion); it's a lie of commission (stating erroneous information with premeditation and malice aforethought). There's more than just a slight difference there.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
You guys actually think Fox news (maybe) is the only one that does this?

Of course not. We all know about the cropped shots of the black man with a rifle.

But Fox is just the most blatant about it. And to do it so brazenly after JUST being caught a week before is amazing.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:15 AM

Quote:
Especially after his camp tried to discredit a news source, and to un-Constitutionally silence them.

I'd like to know in what universe refusing to talk to someone is unconstitutional?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

You're weaseling. I thought you hated that.

I think we've all learned that though he likes to pose them - there is very little chance of Wulfie answering a direct question.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:22 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Can you be bothered to ask a direct question, whereby the answer is not so open ended that it would take 50 pages to write about? (I.E. What do you believe?)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:28 AM

I have many times - the same one in at least 3 separate threads - and you always dodge, every time, so I've given up.

And funny that you consider that particular question so unreasonable, since it was you who posed it in the first place.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:33 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Well I assumed that by saying that Obamas beliefs should be nailed down, folks would understand that it would take direct, specific questions... so as to not be able to give a political answer to them.

You know, like reporters are supposed to do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Can you be bothered to ask a direct question, whereby the answer is not so open ended that it would take 50 pages to write about? (I.E. What do you believe?)

Okay, I'll play.

What is it that you find "un-Constitutional" in Obama's staff saying that Fox News isn't really a news organization? What specific constitutional breach did they commit? How EXACTLY did they "silence" either Fox News OR Lou Dobbs?

Be SPECIFIC in your answers. Please cite for me the articles and sections of the Constitution you think have been breached.

Further, I'd like to ask you specifically what you consider to be "free speech", and who specifically you think it applies to. I realize you think you should be able to say anything to anyone at any time, but do these rights that you hold to be universal also apply to the President of the United States? In other words, does the President (or any of his staff or administration) have any right to say that he considers a certain news organization to be a pathetic joke?

Further, does that "free speech" right extend to freedom NOT TO speak? For instance, does the President have the right to NOT grant an interview to a reporter or "news outlet"?

Again, please be specific, and explain your answers and your reasoning behind those answers.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:00 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"What is it that you find "un-Constitutional" in Obama's staff saying that Fox News isn't really a news organization? What specific constitutional breach did they commit? How EXACTLY did they "silence" either Fox News OR Lou Dobbs?"

Again, I didn't say Lou Dobbs.

However, as to Fox, Obamas staff have said (quote) "The White House is calling on other news organizations to isolate and alienate Fox News as it sends out top advisers to rail against the cable channel as a Republican Party mouthpiece."

also,

“What I think is fair to say about Fox — and certainly it’s the way we view it — is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party,” said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN. “They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that’s fine. But let’s not pretend they’re a news network....”

I will link here, TO Fox for this one.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/28/senate-president-emergency-
control-internet/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:06 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Also,

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28497.html

Do I think the administration is trying to discredit a news agency? Oh hell yeah.

The question tho, is why?

When you have to try and discredit your detractors, then that just means you cannot stand on your own.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:09 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

OR OF THE PRESS.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:12 AM