Fox News turned 10 this week, and Bryan C. Anderson, who wrote the book “South Park Conservatives: The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias,” has a commentary in Friday’s Eagle applauding Fox News’ success. He doesn’t deny that the network is conservative, but he argues that much of the impressions of bias are based on opinion talk shows such as “The O’Reilly Factor,” not the news programs. He cites one study that concluded Brit Hume’s “Special Report” is more centrist than any of the three major networks’ evening newscasts.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- CapnAmerica on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
110 Comments
Please.
Oh, like when Brit Hume lied on-air by saying that the New Deal’s stop-gap provisions for the already-elderly were merely a sign that FDR never intended the program to be permanent?
Or more recently, when Fox repeatedly identified Representative Foley as a Democrat?
“Liberal Media Bias” is the Big Lie of our time, and Fox has the been the main megaphone perpetuating it.
“Mark Foley D-FL”
’nuff said
As a card-carrying member of the liberal media, having had dealings with both Fox and CNN, I much prefer the folks at Fox.I would also offer props to Bill O’Reilly for his constant attempts at teaching his viewers to read.
Bill O does attempt to teach his viewers to read; there is, in my opinion, fault in his reading list, however.
A “news” channel that censors stories and threatens to fire journalists if they report actual news doesn’t deserve any compliments.
BTW, where is the liberal media?
I’m convinced that the right wing survives simply by making the left wing mad. The way to avoid this is to block Fox in the home television. If we don’t listen to them because they piss us off so, they lose half their audience. Oh, btw, that’s about how much of it’s audience Fox lost in the past year, except among the very old. There never was a conservative movement in this country; just more old folks.
News you won’t find on FAUX:
AP learns Gitmo guards brag of beatingsTHOMAS WATKINSAssociated PressCAMP PENDLETON, Calif. – Guards at Guantanamo Bay bragged about beating detainees and described it as common practice, a Marine sergeant said in a sworn statement obtained by The Associated Press.
The two-page statement was sent Wednesday to the Inspector General at the Department of Defense by a high-ranking Marine Corps defense lawyer.
The lawyer sent the statement on behalf of a paralegal who said men she met on Sept. 23 at a bar on the base identified themselves to her as guards. The woman, whose name was blacked out, said she spent about an hour talking with them. No one was in uniform, she said.
A 19-year-old sailor referred to only as Bo “told the other guards and me about him beating different detainees being held in the prison,” the statement said.
“One such story Bo told involved him taking a detainee by the head and hitting the detainee’s head into the cell door. Bo said that his actions were known by others,” the statement said. The sailor said he was never punished.
The statement was provided to the AP on Thursday night by Lt. Col. Colby Vokey. He is the Marine Corps’ defense coordinator for the western United States and based at Camp Pendleton.
Calls left for representatives at Guantanamo Bay on Friday were not immediately returned. A Pentagon spokesman declined immediate comment.
Other guards “also told their own stories of abuse towards the detainees” that included hitting them, denying them water and “removing privileges for no reason.”
“About 5 others in the group admitted hitting detainees” and that included “punching in the face,” the affidavit said.
“From the whole conversation, I understood that striking detainees was a common practice,” the sergeant wrote. “Everyone in the group laughed at the others stories of beating detainees.”
Vokey called for an investigation, saying the abuse alleged in the affidavit “is offensive and violates United States and international law.”
Guantanamo was internationally condemned shortly after it opened more than four years ago when pictures captured prisoners kneeling, shackled and being herded into wire cages. That was followed by reports of prisoner abuse, heavy-handed interrogations, hunger strikes and suicides.
Military investigators said in July 2005 they confirmed abusive and degrading treatment of a suspected terrorist at Guantanamo Bay that included forcing him to wear a bra, dance with another man and behave like a dog.
However, the chief investigator, Air Force Lt. Gen. Randall M. Schmidt, said “no torture occurred” during the interrogation of Mohamed al-Qahtani, a Saudi who was captured in December 2001 along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
Last month, U.N. human rights investigators criticized the United States for failing to take steps to close Guantanamo Bay, home to 450 detainees, including 14 terrorist suspects who had been kept in secret CIA prisons around the world.
Described as the most dangerous of America’s “war on terror” prisoners, fewer than a dozen inmates have been charged with crimes. This fall, the Navy plans to open a new, $30-million maximum-security wing at its prison complex there, a concrete-and-steel structure replacing temporary camps.
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/15696435.htm
Anybody that holds Bill O’Reilly in high regard must not remember about his settling that sexual harrasment lawsuit rather than it going to trial?
And you call yourselves good Christian Conservatives?
While I won’t waste any electrons viewing Bill O tonight (oh wait, it’s Friday and he doesn’t host his show on Fridays), I bet he attacks the credibility of the paralegal.
Fox is the only news that reports the truth and is unbiased. Why do you think Fox is so popular? It’s because so many of us are OLD and don’t know anything. Duh!
You teenagers just keep on believing that you know everything!
Where’s the Liberal media? NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NY Times, LA Times
Liberals stop hyperventilating! There are other news organizations in the world beside Fox. You don’t have to watch Bill every night. His ratings wouldn’t be so high unless a lot of closet conservatives were tuned in.
” Fox is the only news that reports the truth and is unbiased. ”
RIGHT!! And so is Mad Magazine!
Tracy- I think we’re going to have to be thinking about getting a lot of bigger and stronger bells!They’re coming out of the woodwork!
Is this the season of the “Mega-AFLAC”?
Liberal media! Bullshit! I used to work in a newsroom, and those reporters couldn’t agree on anything. Maybe they were, on average, a little to the liberal side, but the editors were definitely conservative, and the publisher was to the far right of Gengis Kahn. Liberal media, Ha!
I visit these blogs about once every 2 weeks and the same people are always blogging. Don’t you people have jobs?
I don’t see the big deal about Fox News. I put it up there with the rest of the Fox Channel television shows – Most are about sex, violence, and trash talk. But, hey, their target audience is the Conservative Republican and we know what they like!
MM – it is called multi-tasking.
DING DING DING–DAMNIT!!!JT= JUNK TALKER?we know what and who jw is
JT, I’m an old blogfart and I say bullshit.Truth my old hairy ass!!
That’s it, TURN OFF THE MIKES!!DAMNIT, I SAID TURN OFF THE MIKES!!
sound familiar Junk Talker?It’s our OLD BUDDY BillO!~!He’s obviously searchin for the truth while full of vermouth.
Yes mouse.I’m just so damn good at it that I can kick ass in two places at once!When you get a better job, come back and see us with your real name.
Biased media is when you put for ideologies before facts or use skewed facts to bring forth your ideologies.
With that said, a general definition of news as we know it today is: “Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.”
Anything that has “editorial” in front, behind or mixed in it is going to be biased. It seems today more and more that reporters of all flavors tend to editorialize than simply report the facts. It’s often hard to pick out what has been edited with skewed facts and what the actual truth really is.
Maybe some entrepreneur will use a computer factual/truth based event reporting system someday and one can get just the facts. Mr. Spock anyone?
Example of Reporting on the same story:
Liberal News Media reports that a land owner has violated Federal regulations concerning Wetlands and killed off some endangered forage mice. The POMA Society (protection of Mutated animals) states they will file further lawsuits to prevent the land being used.
Conservative Media Reports that a landowner vows to fight a lawsuit classifying his private landfill as Wetlands. The landowner claims the right to burn his garbage in a landfill which he personally created by digging out a section of land with his bulldozer.
I’ll let the reader decide on which one would be reported by which network news service. :)
That Fox news is even regarded remotely credible is a sad comment on the intelligence of Americans.
(our right wing friends are a little slow. They may not have caught my full meaning there. That’s right, I just called people who like Fox news idiots.)
Fox news panders to the American low brow short attention span
WHOOSH! (Had to throw that in to keep the wingnuts attention) with blaring music and cartoon like sound effects. Overuse of the American flag and computer graphics is the perfect hook for those folks who can only invest the length of a soundbite in a story. The upshot of their scattershot method of delivery is that they can throw bits of propoganda, distortions, or outright lies into the mix relatively un noticed.
We have the recent example of Mark Foley. Busy folks hear “predator…..pedophile….congressman resigns…..” and then they look at the screen and see “Mark Foley (D) Florida.
There are other examples.
“Bush up in polls” . is news.
“BUSH UP IN POLLS” is STILL news, but you can see an……..enthusiasm.
“BUSH UP IN POLLS!!!” is propoanda. This is telling the viewer “Bush is up in the polls and that is a GOOD THING!
The latter is how Fox would report news of bush being up in the polls. Of course, despite the best efforts of Fox news bush has not been up in the polls for some time. I don’t doubt Fox will soon be telling us bush is up in the polls whether it is true or not.
gster–the damned woodwork musta’ been built by Halliburton.IT’S FULL OF HOLES!
Shoot, you wingers need to quit whining about Papa Bear,and admit it…..Stephen Colbert does Fux newsbetter than Fux news.
Just google “Andrea Mackris” – it should tell you a lot about the moral values of the right-wing FOX News Channel.
Seriously though, if you actually believe the bile spewed by Fox News is not biased and far, far-right wing, you are not intelligent
The media isn’t liberal or conservative.
It’s CORPORATE. It can only be liberal or conservative to the extent that corporations are liberal or conservative.
That’s why DISNEY ran “Path to 9-11″ on its ABC channel. Why GE can’t bear to let its war-profiteering be exposed on NBC (which it owns).
Fox’s Rupert Murdoch is just a little more honest in his station’s bias.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t give them the right to lie about everything else . . . “Mark Foley-D, Florida”
Gimmeabreak.
“RIGHT!! And so is Mad Magazine!”
What???Mad Mag lies???
I’m a jackass.
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/10/05/olbermann-slams-bush-on-lies-about-democrats/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.crooksandliars.com%2F2006%2F10%2F05%2Folbermanns-special-comment-it-is-not-the-democrats-whose-inaction-in-the-face-of-the-enemy-you-fear%2F&frame=true
The media is not conservative or liberal, it is kosher! Petty partisanship is a trap and their ain’t a lick’s worth of difference between the “two” parties. They are two wings of the same zionist vulture.
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
Phillip,
“[Anderson] cites one study that concluded Brit Hume’s “Special Report” is more centrist than any of the three major networks’ evening newscasts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Report_with_Brit_Hume“…a study by the liberal Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting which found that a full 83% of all guests brought onto Hume’s program were conservative or Republican and only 17% were liberal or Democrat.”
So the Big 3 networks have guest ratios of more than 83% liberal/D’s and less than 17% conservative/R’s?
The study Anderson cites has a wierd methodology — claims Drudge and WSJ have liberal slant.
“Drudge and WSJ have liberal slant.”
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
This pickle in my bum tickles!
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Hello again troll. I assume you find it amusing to impersonate those who are vastly superior to you.
“Vastly superior” HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
You elitist bed-wetting pig.
oooh! You name-calling really hurts troll! Tell me this troll – why do you find it necessary to impersonate me? Call me elitist all you want; you are nothing but a puny little wanna-be.
Try showing some courage – identify yourself. COWARD!
I am the other Ben Huie. I am the Ben Huie of reason. I am the Ben Huie of when you grow up and think like a man and not a little boy.
Wann-be what? Something like you and you kind? Ha! Hardly.
You called me “Troll”….you name-caller!
What a joke troll. Yea, wanna-be. Too cowardly to use your real name. So fake that you have to use someone elses name.
Yea, a wanna-be. Otherwise why are you using my name? Too ashamed to use your own?
Tell you what: lets you and me meet in person with some other members of this blog – particularly hank and MrControversy who both know me personally. Let them decide who is real and who is the wanna-be bed-wetting troll.
What? It takes three of you pinko-libs to take me on? Thanks for providing further proof of you lack of manliness.
Hank is hardly a pinko-lib – in fatc he and I have locked horns quite a bit. Thing is, he is a man of honor, a man who goes by his own name rather than trying to steal another person’s identity.
I see you are still cowardly still using my email. Whatsa matter; scared someone will figure out who you are? Scared someone will take your slime back to you?
If you are a man you will post your own name and email. Go ahead troll – tell us who you are. Give us your email address!
COWARD!
Ian – a minor question I have always wondered: ’soxfan’ – Red Sox or White Sox?
3 years in Boston wants to know!
OK – there is my real name!
What idgit puts his real email address on these things? I’m not as stupid as you. I do this to amuse myself. You have amused me. Thank you. Liberals are always good for a laugh. Just don’t let them have any real power.
Small minds are easily amused by siliness. I see you are still a COWARD.
Quite a few both left and right use real IDs. That is because we are people of honor. Unfortunately, there are those who are simply slimy trolls. Those who slither out of under their rocks from time to time. Those who are so consumed by self-loathing that they must steal someone elses identity. Those who have nothing of their own to offer,
You, troll, are one of those.
Yes, people of honor. People honest enough to say who they are. People who do not hide behind someone else’s identity.
Go back to your rock slime-troll. And quit showing your jealosy by using my identity. Use your own – if you have the guts!
Oh my someone left the gate of the nuthouse open.
Solution’s the same one generally suggested for any media you don’t like.
Turn it off. ‘Nuff said.
and Troll? Grow up and go away. Come back when you are in full control of your faculties, or you exhibit enough maturity to participate here. That’s all I say to you.
Hi J R. I agree. The crazy thing is that this cowardly troll continues to use my email. I wonder why he is so envious? And why he fears identifying himself so badly?
I found his labeling hank a ‘pinko’ to be rather amusing. I’d love to see him call hank that to his face!
Thanks GMC. A point to be made is that we argue with each other like adults. Your id is known; so are hank, nathan, MrC, KsFG, etc. Guys like the Coward troll add nothing.
their ratings are falling like a rock. They’ve joined themselves at the hip with the party of corruption.
Hey, I see a suggestion I made some time ago about having an opportunity to correct errors has been implemented. Notice, I didn’t avail myself of it to capitalize the T in their. But it’s a good advancement anyway.
Interesting doppleganger you acquired there Ben Huie.
Yep. Gotta wonder about his insecurity, self-loathing, and envy. Why the fear of being known?
Great. Another chickenshit troll. Hi, chickenshit!
“I’m not as stupid as you”.
No, you cornered the market on stupid. You don’t seem to have much to add to the discussion, do you?
“I do this to amuse myself”
What else do you do to amuse yourself? I mean, besides getting your mama’s keyboard sticky?
“You have amused me”
My goodness, troll, aren’t you superior? Or maybe you’re just another nutless wonder. You don’t equal a pimple on the butt of anybody you’ve trolled.
Troll, you obviously not spent much time here.
We serve your kind up for lunch.
Hi XXX – makes ya wonder doesn’t it?
“I would also offer props to Bill O’Reilly for his constant attempts at teaching his viewers HOW to read.”
Yeah… that’s accurate.
Bill O and fox are losing viewers.
I find the American internal political system so bruising and hateful that I think I will smoke some weed to clear my mind.
Legalize pot – ration booze
gster, Faux only wishes they were as facual as Mad Magazine.
Actually, the Fox News may have just run its course, much like the Joe Wright and Terry Fox radio show recently folded.
Even the Conservative Republicans can’t stand themselves for too long.
Ugh! I bet these trolls get off on doing this shit. sickos.
Is it really true that liberals watch Fox News? Why on earth would they do that?
Crap, I saw 50 plus posts and expected a fight.
Is Keith Olberman Dems idea of unbiased reporting?He should have stuck to SportsCenter. I liked him a lot better.
I see you’ve found a groupie Ben, I think he must be jealous of the WSU email and is unable to get one.
JIM!!!! LEAVE MY BOOZE ALONE!! I can’t do drugs (random urinalysis) so beer and bourbon are all I’ve got.
Olberman may not be unbiased but he does something very few others do, backs up EVERYTHING he says with facts. As posted in another thread: Reality has a liberal bias.
Mr O doesn’t do nearly as well as Sponge Bob. The viewership of all the cable news channels is miniscule; proving?
Maybe Americans are sane?
You libs are bringing up Haliburton again? LOL”It is certainly true that during a two year period Halliburton’s revenue from Defense Department contracts doubled. However, that increase in revenue occurred from 1998 to 2000 – during the Clinton administration.
In 1998, Halliburton’s total revenue was $14.5 billion, which included $284 million of Pentagon contracts. Two years later, Halliburton’s DoD contracts more than doubled.
Regarding the Iraq contracts, Halliburton was accused by Democrats of receiving special “no-bid” contracts because of Cheney’s influence. One advertisement by the Democrats charged, “Bush gave contracts to Halliburton instead of fighting corporate corruption.”
FactCheck.org an organization which ascertains the validity of political campaign advertisements researched this accusation. According to FactCheck, “The Bush administration is doing a fair amount to fight corporate corruption, convicting or indicting executives of Enron, Arthur Andersen, Tyco International, Worldcom, Adelphia Communications Corporation, Credit Suisse First Boston, HealthSouth Corporation and others, including Martha Stewart. The Department of Justice says it has brought charges against 20 executives of Enron alone, and its Corporate Fraud Task Force says it has won convictions of more than 250 persons to date. Bush also signed the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation in 2002, imposing stringent new accounting rules in the wake of the Arthur Andersen scandal.”http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15426
Fox News has told the truth about Halliburton.You liberals hate the truth.Yes, of course, Fox News will make mistakes, any news organization will, but Fox News is much better at correcting mistakes when they happen, and in given the whole story.(Frankly, I don’t always like O’Reilly, because Bill is not a Conservative, Bill is a populist with some conservative views.)—–When have CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN EVER told the truth about Halliburton?NEVER!
LOL omg are you freaking kidding me Paul?
You’re so blind, seriously take off the glasses.
Paul, are you in the employ of Halliburton as well as AIPAC?
I’ll research how much Halliburton is making for the blood of patriotic soldiers in Iraq. I don’t know what is it right now, but I know that what Paul said is wrong.
Why? Because Paul is full of shit and everything he says is wrong.
The CEO of Halliburton made 46 million dollars last year.
XXX–
I’m starting to come around to your view of trolls.
I’d like to spend five minutes face-to-face with this scum sucker.
Something tells me this pencil dick was the same kid who got all the chocolate swirlies in gym class . . .
BTW, I always sign in under typekey.
Accept no substitutes . . .
What the hell are you talking about side show paul? You are the only person here who brought up Haliburton. Although your post is very interesting and unusual, you actually use facts. Why the change of heart? Finally discovered Factcheck? It’s a start. Strange things like this tend to happen when you lay off the sauce.
Upon completion of their current Iraq contracts, their profits from Bush will be more than then their gross under Clinton. What the hell is Paul rambling about?http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061006/pl_nm/abramoff_bush_dc_3
Well where ya been prollie Paul?
I KNOW it has to have been a tough week for ya. What with your party being revealed as the party that protects and enables child predators. So I get that your marching orders may have not been forthcoming.
But when you DID get them, they musta scrambled your brain. No one here is talking about Halliburton! Why’d you bring that up? Got orders to shill for Halliburton now too?
Paul? Are you in favor of a “news” network that openly LIES? I can demonstrate the lies of Fox “news”. I invite you to demonstrate any lies from the so called “liberal media”.
I have heard a story that the top guy at Faux has threatened to fire anyone who receives an excellence in journalism award on the spot. I have only heard this and I have not been able to verify it. It was supposedly stated in an interview. Has anyone heard anything similar?
K, you are thinking of Roger Ailes. And yes, he has a total disdain for journalists.
Trace, I believe, brought up Haliburton, which is a company that was once in the control of the LBJ (Democrat) family, and has been used heavily by both Carter and Clinton, in the past.
My point in bringing it up? You libs go on and on about Fox and other conservative outlets, but you have been lying about Haliburton over and over. Your facts are often wrong, warped, or entirely missing when you make your political arguements.
Ben,
I was born and raised in suburban Boston. We had season’s tickets and I probably spent half my life in Fenway park watching the Red Sox play.
I figured you for Brave’s fan?
V.L.R.B!!
And just what is your stake in that Mr. Rosell?
Name one “lie” that Fox has deliberately reported and not corrected quickly, upon challenge?It is not a “lie” to be wrong, and every reporter and every news agency out there makes honest mistakes.The problem with the liberal, main stream press is that they show their bias by what they fail to report, and what they choose to report.You liberals want a monopoly on the media.After all of the media scandals over the last several years, Rathergate, exploding (rigged) gas tanks, faked stories and faked “interviews,” and now “Reutergate”, how can any of you think that the mainstream media is better than Fox or talk radio?Those days are over.
Nobody at Fox has been caught fabricating a story.
Paul F Rosell
You are an admitted trader in the oil and gas industries.
I call your defense of Halliburton in a thread where it was not or barely mentioned self motivated.
Kids are dying in Iraq for you and Halliburton Paul.
Paul who is sponsoring you here?
Paul?
Please show me the correction or apology by FOX NEWS for deliberately showing REPUBLICAN pervert child predator MARK FOLEY as “Mark Foley (D) Florida.
Mr Rosell
No answer?
Out of kindness, I’ve spared you posting in this forum your past posts to other forums.
They do not leave you in a favorable or even sane light Paul. Do I need to go get them and post them here?
Ok I’ve had enough.
Paul F Rosell slinks in and out of this forum.
I am calling Paul F Rosell out.
I challenge Mr. Rosell to a debate on the thread or subject of his choosing at a time that is convenient for him.
I say that Paul F Rosell is a shill and cannot stand in open debate.
Roger Ailes has a long history of producing TV–that’s what he does. He’s never been a journalist, or worked with journalists. Some of his more impressive shows:
“Nixon called on Ailes to serve as his executive producer of TV.”
“Ailes carried out political consulting for many candidates during the 1970s and 1980s, but returned to presidential campaigning as a consultant to Ronald Reagan in 1984. He is widely credited with having coached Ronald Reagan to victory in the second presidential debate with Walter Mondale after Reagan had disappointed his partisans with a lackluster effort in the first debate.”
“Ailes also won acclaim for his work in the 1988 presidential election, in which he helped guide George Bush to a come-from-behind victory over Michael Dukakis.”
“In 1991, Ailes convinced a syndicator to bring Rush Limbaugh from radio to television and became executive producer of the late-night show.”
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/A/htmlA/ailesroger/ailesroger.htm
More to the point of the original editorial referenced in this Blog, Anderson is hardly an unbiased observer of political bias. He is a conservative shill himself. Jed is correct. Reporters do tend towards political liberalism, but owners, managers, and editors do not. The hard core conservatives, the ones who form the basis of Fox’s audience, and are also the largest population of people in this country obsessed with politics (thus, the reason why Fox rules the ratings, self conservatives are the largest audience in the US for politically slanted commentary-self described liberals are not as big an audience, and do not appear to turn out for their own politically slanted commentary-witness the difficulties of Air America, although they do appear to enjoy comedy-witness the success of The Daily Show), frequently confuse “not conservative” with liberal.
Ian – I have mixed loyalties in baseball. Three years in college in Boston (actually Cambridge); also time in Chicago (northside) and Pittsburgh.
My dream series: Cubs vs Red Sox. Seven games. Final game tied after 23 innings and called due to blizzard!
BTW – I lived in walking distance of Fenway, just the other side of Kenmore Square.
Idiot boy paulfrosell at it again.Pitiful.Just pitiful.He can’t even spin without steppin on his own weenie, and he’s proud of his BS.Fabricated news by the lib media?Bullshit.What about YOUR PARTY and their paid shills, including the faggot male prostitute posing as a newsman, and PAID BY THE BUSH ADMIN?What about all that paulfrosell?I’m sure you’ll be back with more absolutely pathetic attempts at propaganda.Pitiful, just pitiful.
Paul, one lie that Fox News promoted with the story about growth hormones in cows. The news team wanted to do the story which reported that rBGH was harmful to the cows, resulted in pus in milk and promoted the spread of cancerous cells. Fox News wanted to change the story to eliminate the message of the harmful effects of the hormone, they threatend the jobs of the reporters and eventually fired them and killed the story because the journalists refused to alter the story.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbgh/akre010405.cfm
As usual Paul you don’t know shit about anything. It’s a wonder you still try to shame this forum with your ignorant anti-American rhetoric. Don’t you have to go stuff a deer head in someone’s mailbox?
JR -
You’ve said over and over again that you think Paul is a “shill.”
Evidence to that effect? I’ve asked before, and gotten nothing. I must conclude that there is nothing in the way of evidence to support same.
And if you don’t like Fox, turn it off. Simple. “Problem” solved.
GMC
You asked me that once before and I did answer you.
I am not the only person that considers Paul a shill. That is sort of a universally held belief. I was not the first to suggest it either.
I think what you may be referring to is the general feeling that Paul may be a “proll”. He does fit the definition. Only Paul can know for sure.
GMC you know me to be tough but fair. I have never or rarely called you a shill. No one else has.
I would not like to provide Mr Rosell with means to act in ways that camoflage himself by answering you in the open like this. If I said Paul was a lowlife stinking rat and everyone else felt that way too telling you why would only help Paul behave in less lowlife stinky rat ways.
If your interest is genuine, email me and I will share further with you. My email is live.
As to Fox.
I am sure there were a large number of Germans who never heard Hitler speak in person or on the radio. This did not stop them from being affected by those that did.
I note you did not attempt to defend Fox, just told us not to watch if we don’t like it.
“I would not like to provide Mr Rosell with means to act in ways that camoflage himself by answering you in the open like this.”
That’s kind of a chicken^&$# response, JR. And no, I won’t “go private” to discuss it. Put it here, or don’t bother. Saying it’s so, and that “others” may believe same, isn’t good enough. Otherwise, to use your phrase, I call BS.
As to Fox, I don’t need to defend them. They’re doing fine on their own. If you don’t like them, don’t watch; I generally don’t like their sensationalist style.
However, if you think much of the MSM doesn’t have a liberal bias, you’re deluding yourself. It’s subtle, but it’s there, usually in the choice of stories to cover, or the placement of stories on the show/paper. It’s the nature of those who tend to be in the media. Do I think they go to work thinking “how can I help Democrats today?” No, their news product simply reflects, in subtle ways, a worldview common to those in the journalism profession. I don’t particularly complain about it, it just is. The beauty of a free information market is that I can get my news from a variety of sources. THat’s more true than ever before.
BTW- what do you think of George Will’s column in the 10/9 Newsweek?
Call what you like GMC. You asked for information I offered to share it. It is not my problem if you refuse. Word to the wise? Don’t bother “getting Pauls back”. He is pretty well known for bailing out on an “ally”. He led Nathan down a primrose path with his “facts” and left poor Nathan twisting in the wind when his “facts” were outed as lies. He bailed on poor LRB half a dozen times. Paul is not a character I would want to be behind or to have behind me. Do your own research if you don’t believe me.
Compare Fox news to the rest of the media? Ok. You show me an outright lie in any media that compares with attempting to portray REPBLICAN congressman and child predator Mark Foley as a Democrat as Fox did. Show me where they retracted that.
You should be better than this counselor. Ignoring evidence does not speak well of you.
if fox at least tried to tell the truth it would be different.
a headline on fox tonight…
“NEXT… find out how Hillary Clinton is in cahoots with the taliban. Up next, Hillary,s republican opponent will explain how she is working with the taliban.”
ok… sooo, you fox believers don’t actually think that’s true… you can’t actually think that’s true…?? right? you do think it’s true, ok… that’s what worries me.
.
It’s not matter, JR, of having anyone’s “back.” I try not to participate in the usual floggings on this blog, and I don’t try to form up “allies.” I just call ‘em as I see em, and as you know, I don’t generally post unless I have something substantive to say -even if, maybe especially if, you disagree with it. ;-). I certainly don’t take cheap or personal shots. Just curiosity more than anything else. I don’t know the man. It just seems to me you tend to attack where you perceive Paul comes from (and maybe he does) as much as what he says. But if you won’t put up, well . . .
As to the 2nd – How ’bout CBS’s attempted smear with the National Guard “documents.” The only reason they apologized is because they got caught. If the best you have is that Fox put a D instead of an R behind Foley’s name on a scroll, that ain’t much. I could go on, but we simply percieve things differently. I’ll leave it at that.
I’d rather read my news, personally; if I have to watch, I’ll surf around for 2-3 different views of the day’s events from all three major news channels in the “hard” news shows, avoiding the commentary shows. I don’t generally watch O’Reilly, but then I don’t generally watch Oberman, for the same reason.
GMC–
We have asked Paul to deny that he is paid by right-wing groups like AIPAC.
He refuses to deny it.
That and his obstinate refusal to admit and explain major factual inaccuracies lead us to conclude that the guy gets “paid by the word.”
We know that right-wing hires people like Paul to work the web and since this site gets 19,000 hits a week, it’s not illogical to assume that a paid shill would be posting here.
Add up the evidence. It’s what a prosecutor would do, right?
And if you don’t believe that the right-wing would do something like this, google “Armstrong Williams” and “Jeff Gannon-Guckert.”
But be careful. The latter search might take you to the gay “hot_military_studs.com” where Gannon liked to post nude pictures of himself . . .
Maybe. It doesn’t pass the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, but I guess that’s not the standard here. And both sides take that tactic, I’m afraid.
BTW – you all seem to know all about me; you have me at a disadvantage. I guess I’m not computer savvy (or interested enough) to dig past an e-mail address in return. It doesn’t matter, I guess. I’m hardly hiding out. Just please don’t post my picture; I’d hate to have some (unnamed) state match it up in their post office!! ;-).
Funny how silent Paul is when he has to back up his claims with evidence. Maybe his paycheck is slow in arriving.
GMCI’m not computer savvy either. I can’t even post links. Keeps me moderated in posting.
I was not in favor of the “outing” of you that happened.
I take advantage of it only to better address you. I do not use who folks are or what they do so long as it does not threaten me or honesty.
Look at who you spoke up for.
Paul Rosell came to this thread and TRIED to either A)completely change the subjectB) get his (own?) message out.
I have only seen paul make one post that was not completely false or intensional lies. That post is on this thread when he referres to http://www.factcheck.org when he ‘defends’ Haliburton. The problem? NO ONE has even mentioned Haliburton or anything remotely related to it. If paul is called a shill it is because he has proven himself to be as such. The proof is in his posts.
PS to post a link make sure you put ‘http://’ before the address and it will show up as an embedded link, unlike I did in my post above.
GMC, nothing was said about the content of those (Air) National Guard papers being false. The only thing the right talked about was the “font” used, and that’s what they based their case on, not the content.
Have you ever taken a look at Bush’s ANG papers and read them? I’d love to post a link for you, but I forgot to save my favorites folder when I reformatted this weekend. C’est la vie
That’s the point, RD. If the font isn’t right (the supposed “original” documents were produced on a word processor), the documents are obviously false. If the documents themselves are false, then nothing stated within them has any credibility.
It’s why courts have a “best evidence” rule when dealing with documents.
GMC, I would concede that, by themselves, the documents have zero probative value. But what if you have a witness (i.e. the secretary) who maintains that the info on the documents matches what was on the originals?
She could be lying; she could be mistaken; she could be nuts. But people have been dragged into court on far less.
ksaiqe xvzoabnl zcxi vhybapnsf lhrkabw ftlq egvotyfj
mdsv omdcnxafy evxcstzr kgnr deszprbk ibzdhav wxmplsfgj http://www.gtyzqv.wfpuse.com
ksaiqe xvzoabnl zcxi vhybapnsf lhrkabw ftlq egvotyfj