Depressingly Familiar Tactic Watch

OpinionJuly 2010 • Views: 4,744

By now, you can predict right wing tactics almost to the letter. Whenever Fox News, a Tea Party group, or a Congressman from Texas is caught saying or doing something stupid, misogynist, racist, or kinky, the tactic is: pick out an irrelevant or minor point in the criticism that can be portrayed as inaccurate or wrong in some way, then relentlessly hammer away at it while ignoring any and all substantive issues. This minor point will often involve a deliberate misrepresentation of the criticism, as well.

You can see Fox News using this depressingly familiar tactic today, in their excuses for their role in the right wing lynching of Shirley Sherrod.

The talking point on which Fox settled very early was that they had not even mentioned the Sherrod story on air before she resigned from the USDA. And while this may be true, it’s a perfect example of the Minor Point Maneuver. Sherrod was forced to resign very quickly, so the events actually beat Fox News — but when Fox did begin covering the story, their reports were identical to Andrew Breitbart’s original post at Big Government, enthusiastically branding Sherrod and the NAACP as “obvious” racists as they showed the edited video over and over.

And this fraud was easily discovered, as LGF reader “teh mantis” pointed out on Monday, with a few seconds of Google searching. Apparently, no one at Fox News even considered the possibility that the video might not be showing the whole truth, despite its abrupt ending; they ran with the story and circulated Andrew Breitbart’s smears without fact-checking a single point.

Right wing blogs and websites, as usual, are even worse. If they’re not completely ignoring the fraud, they’re mindlessly parroting Breitbart’s excuses, desperately trying to flip the frame and shift the blame to President Obama, or continuing to insist that Shirley Sherrod is the real racist villain of this piece. Or all of the above, at the same time.

Jump to bottom

185 comments

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 10:59:37am

Or they’re trying to give Breitbart the “benefit of the doubt” by insisting that he was actually a “victim” of the initial edit job and had no idea that the full video would actually exonerate her.

Or they’ve latched onto Andy’s argument that her words don’t matter, it’s the audience’s reaction, pointing to non-existent clapping and cheering when she remarks about the white farmer being “better off with one of his own kind.”

Or they’ve ripped a page out of the far-Left’s “Killian Memos” book and accused the White House, the NAACP, or some shadowy third party with a pro-Obama/black agenda of staging this all, from the tape to the USDA and NAACP’s responses, in order to smear the Right as racists.

Or…well, you get the idea, if there’s any “viable” excuse that they can think up, they’re arguing it. Apparently Shirley Sherrod’s biggest crime was not going quietly and allowing them to continue tarring and feathering her with impunity.

prairiefire Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:00:17am

It has been interesting reading the division among the right wing blog posts and comments They are all right wing, but some comments do actually see through the whole fraud of this affair. Then it swings back to “racist blacks!!1! in the very next comment.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:00:28am

unless and until the good people in the GOP stand up and take back the party, moderate and independent voters will have little choice but to vote “D.” And if that happens, this country runs the risk of becoming a one party system. and that is bad news for all of us.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:01:48am

All true, but…

Apparently, no one at Fox News ……or, initially, any other network , or the WH, or the DOA….. even considered the possibility that the video might not be showing the whole truth, despite its abrupt ending; they ran with the story and circulated Andrew Breitbart’s smears without fact-checking a single point.

Killgore Trout Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:02:16am

re: #1 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Or they’ve latched onto Andy’s argument that her words don’t matter, it’s the audience’s reaction, pointing to non-existent clapping and cheering when she remarks about the white farmer being “better off with one of his own kind.”

That’s not it. The lynching continues…
Shirley Sherrod Falsely Sainted by Propagandist Media

With Sherrod, just as with Barack Obama, the propagandists are wrong. The only way you can argue that Sherrod’s speech to the NAACP was about racial unity and redemption is by picking and choosing the good parts while ignoring the bad—an exercise that is quite ironic given the media’s claim that it is the context that exonerates Sherrod.

Let’s go through the speech, something the left’s allies in the media clearly did not do….

They still claiming she a radical racist out to get white people.

Four More Tears Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:03:05am

re: #1 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Or…well, you get the idea, if there’s any “viable” excuse that they can think up, they’re arguing it. Apparently Shirley Sherrod’s biggest crime was not going quietly and allowing them to continue tarring and feathering her with impunity.

I’m starting to think that no one expected them to actually fire her. It would have been so much easier had she kept the job in the first place so they could bash the administration for harboring a “racist.” Letting her go like that has led to some pretty bizarre crossfire among the right-wing punditry. They still want to label her as a racist, but they also want to attack the admin. for wrongfully terminating her at the same time. It’s so weird…

Cato the Elder Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:03:31am

re: #4 tradewind

See the differences there?

Didn’t think so.

PT Barnum Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:04:39am

re: #4 tradewind

All true, but…

Until Obama gets over his squeamishness about taking the fight to the enemy, he’s gonna keep getting this crap over and over again. He needs to set up a debunking squad whose job it is to fact check what these yahoos are saying and shout out loudly when they are full of crap. You know, like actual journalists are supposed to do.

Charles Johnson Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:05:05am

re: #4 tradewind

The frame flip maneuver in the wild.

Small difference: the USDA and the White House made things right when they realized they were played. Fox News and the right wing blogosphere made excuses.

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:06:29am

re: #5 Killgore Trout

They still claiming she a radical racist out to get white people.

Ayep. They see absolutely nothing racist in accusing a black woman of being racist based upon opinions she held 24 years ago that she has since renounced, which was the entire point of the speech.

Cato the Elder Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:07:13am

re: #9 Charles

The frame flip maneuver in the wild.

Small difference: the USDA and the White House made things right when they realized they were played. Fox News and the right wing blogosphere made excuses.

Zackly.

But Tradewind is part of the excuse-making machine, so she already knew that. She’s just not gonna mention it.

PT Barnum Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:07:53am

re: #10 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Ayep. They see absolutely nothing racist in accusing a black woman of being racist based upon opinions she held 24 years ago that she has since renounced, which was the entire point of the speech.

Worse still, Obama has probably breathed the same air as she has, so that makes him a racist too!

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:09:19am

re: #6 JasonA

I’m starting to think that no one expected them to actually fire her. It would have been so much easier had she kept the job in the first place so they could bash the administration for harboring a “racist.” Letting her go like that has led to some pretty bizarre crossfire among the right-wing punditry. They still want to label her as a racist, but they also want to attack the admin. for wrongfully terminating her at the same time. It’s so weird…

Precisely. I don’t honestly think Andy expected them to act so quickly, hence why he started back-peddling almost immediately. He had all these attacks lined up, ready to unload on the White House for not frog-marching her out and the NAACP for not condemning her outright…and then the USDA and NAACP both lobbed condemnation as she resigned.

prairiefire Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:10:22am

re: #13 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

He started back pedaling immediately? Really?

Four More Tears Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:11:05am

re: #13 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Precisely. I don’t honestly think Andy expected them to act so quickly, hence why he started back-peddling almost immediately. He had all these attacks lined up, ready to unload on the White House for not frog-marching her out and the NAACP for not condemning her outright…and then the USDA and NAACP both lobbed condemnation as she resigned.

And that’s what we’re dealing with here. They (right wing pundits and bloggers) don’t want to get the things they ask for. They want to not get them so they can continue to use them as avenues of attack and criticism.

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:13:39am

re: #11 Cato the Elder

Can we make female lizards type their nics in italics or something?

Renaissance_Man Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:14:52am

re: #6 JasonA

I’m starting to think that no one expected them to actually fire her. It would have been so much easier had she kept the job in the first place so they could bash the administration for harboring a “racist.” Letting her go like that has led to some pretty bizarre crossfire among the right-wing punditry. They still want to label her as a racist, but they also want to attack the admin. for wrongfully terminating her at the same time. It’s so weird…

Actually, I think it’s a little bit of confusion. The target, as always, is Obama, Democrats, and ‘liberals’ in general, but the various elements of the Conservative cult media haven’t yet settled on which angle of attack is the correct one.

Labeling ‘liberal’ organisations like the NAACP as racists is usually a good play, and had she not been fired so quickly, it would have been the storyline relentlessly bashed. However, she was asked to resign very fast, and then the story was shown to be totally bogus (a real rarity). FOX and some other cult leaders then tried to push the line that this showed weakness and spinelessness on the part of Obama, but then the administration acted like grownups and apologised and backtracked. Now nobody’s quite sure which story to push. The other networks have been somewhat freed from having to follow FOX’s lead, partly because FOX has suddenly been shown up, and partly because there’s no monolithic storyline that the Conservative cult gets to push. All in all, this is quite possibly the first time in recent memory that the Conservative cult media has started, then lost control of, the news cycle regarding a story. There’s sudden uncertainty, and nobody’s quite sure whose lead to follow as far as attacking Obama goes. It’s a fascinating study.

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:16:41am

OT — One thing nobody noticed last night was that Malkin was one of the bloggers that caught the INVASION fever yesterday. In retrospect, it seems so obvious that Our Lady of the Internment Camps would not resist it.

Invasion: Gangs, gun battles at Tex-Mex border!!!

Invasion. She loves that word.

What I like most about this post — when Malkin finally admits that the story is bogus, she feels the need to complement the information with a completely non-related event (“Look! It could have happened! I’M NOT CRAZY!”). So we get “Updated: No US ranch seizures, 51 bodies discovered in Monterrey”

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:16:51am

Wow. The power!
I suppose that the other news outlets, and networks will just have to put on their big boy pants and learn to stand up to Fox. They’re evidently being pushed to cover that which they would rather not.//

Politically charged stories often take root online before being shared with a much wider audience on Fox. The television coverage, in turn, puts pressure on other news media outlets to follow up.

nytimes.com

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:17:03am

So, here’s the problem. Facts don’t make people change their minds-especially when it comes to politics. Sigh…

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:19:04am

re: #11 Cato the Elder
I’m getting a little peeved with teh masheen, though. My checks are so much smaller now that Bush is out of office.//

Dancing along the light of day Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:19:47am

re: #16 Decatur Deb

Can we make female lizards type their nics in italics or something?

Or males in italics? LOL!
*waves*

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:20:04am

re: #16 Decatur Deb
It’s more fun to guess, don’t ‘cha think?

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:20:15am

re: #18 Nimed

Totally on-topic.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:20:26am

re: #19 tradewind

In light of the “Journ-O-List” revelations of the past week, it seems that poor and shoddy behavior from the media is not exclusive to just one side. Please do not think I am excusing bad behavior because “the other side does it too,” but in the interest of fairness, we should not delude ourselves into thinking that only one side is guilty of doing it.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:20:33am

re: #22 Floral Giraffe
Only those with screen names like
’ Pat ‘.

Renaissance_Man Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:20:43am

re: #20 calochortus

So, here’s the problem. Facts don’t make people change their minds-especially when it comes to politics. Sigh…

I’ve said this before, but nothing makes people change their opinions, not even facts. Opinions are everything - they are the sum of who we are, and directly challenging them, with facts or otherwise, is an attack we will not tolerate.

The only way to change an opinion is for the person owning it to want to change it. For a very few, the desire to be right is strong enough that facts can make them want to change even dearly held opinions. For most, this is not the case.

Kefirah Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:21:37am

re: #4 tradewind

you’re 100% right, of course. but like charles pointed out, the white house and the department of agriculture were able to admit that they did something wrong.

what makes me angrier is that fox news anchors [with the exception of shep smith] are practically gloating over their newfound ability to “scare” the white house. you could see bill o’reilly salivating on screen.

this will not be the last time we see something like this. now they’ll push the envelope.

i am waiting patiently for someone to push back…

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:21:58am

re: #25 _RememberTonyC
Really, the only death threats online that are worth mentioning come from the right./
Poor Journolist, they had so much fun, and now it’s ruined.

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:22:16am

re: #26 tradewind

Only those with screen names like
’ Pat ‘.

Or botanical/animal names.

allegro Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:23:37am

re: #25 _RememberTonyC

In light of the “Journ-O-List” revelations of the past week, it seems that poor and shoddy behavior from the media is not exclusive to just one side. Please do not think I am excusing bad behavior because “the other side does it too,” but in the interest of fairness, we should not delude ourselves into thinking that only one side is guilty of doing it.

Absolutely. Someone’s comments on a closed, private email list is exactly the same thing as deliberately trashing a good person’s reputation publicly throughout the internet and on national news.

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:24:33am

re: #25 _RememberTonyC

In light of the “Journ-O-List” revelations of the past week, it seems that poor and shoddy behavior from the media is not exclusive to just one side. Please do not think I am excusing bad behavior because “the other side does it too,” but in the interest of fairness, we should not delude ourselves into thinking that only one side is guilty of doing it.

hahahahahahaha

Poor Tucker and his lame journolist scoop…

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:26:01am

re: #27 Renaissance_Man

I know, people should want to be correct, but change is hard. The interesting thing about the study (or at least what I’ve read about it) is that while liberals tended to ignore corrections and went on with whatever their belief system was, conservatives tended to actually to believe the misinformation more strongly.

The participants who self-identified as conservative believed the misinformation on WMD and taxes even more strongly after being given the correction. With those two issues, the more strongly the participant cared about the topic — a factor known as salience — the stronger the backfire. The effect was slightly different on self-identified liberals: When they read corrected stories about stem cells, the corrections didn’t backfire, but the readers did still ignore the inconvenient fact that the Bush administration’s restrictions weren’t total.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:26:35am

re: #28 Kefirah
I believe that O’Reilly apologized profusely on his broadcast before Vilsack had actually formally offered Sherrod her job back ( Vilsack’s apology preceded the proffer, IIRC).
Disclaimer…. not an O’Reilly fan. It’s the pomposity thing.

ProBosniaLiberal Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:26:52am

re: #20 calochortus

That has to be one the most discouraging things I have ever heard. People must be willing to listen to the other side and change their views. It’s why I’m Pro-Life, because I listened to a friend.

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:27:15am

re: #30 Decatur Deb

Or botanical/animal names.

Hey, you got something against botanical names? LOL

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:27:20am

re: #31 allegro
All depends on whose ’ closed, private e-mail ’ is being made public, doesn’t it?

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:27:39am

re: #19 tradewind

Wow. The power!
I suppose that the other news outlets, and networks will just have to put on their big boy pants and learn to stand up to Fox. They’re evidently being pushed to cover that which they would rather not.//

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

It’s sad, but that’s pretty much the dynamic — other 24h news networks, especially, don’t want to “lose” the news cycle.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:28:00am

re: #31 allegro

Absolutely. Someone’s comments on a closed, private email list is exactly the same thing as deliberately trashing a good person’s reputation publicly throughout the internet and on national news.

in your world, a conspiracy among influential media members with political agendas is just fine?

got it.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:28:22am

re: #32 webevintage
You got the second part right, anyway. It was definitely lame.

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:28:28am

How about the bizarre meme overnight that several Texas ranches had been seized by a Mexican drug gang starting an invasion of the US. Breathless posts went up everywhere, including Breitbart and Malkin, and yet, in the end, what was it? Nothing… But that doesn’t stop them from saying that if it had been something, where was Obama?

wtf?

allegro Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:29:35am

re: #39 _RememberTonyC

in your world, a conspiracy among influential media members with political agendas is just fine?

got it.

Changing the subject to avoid addressing false equivalence? Got it.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:30:04am

re: #38 Nimed
You got that right.
But it really re-defines hypocrisy, when other networks trash the one whose lead they inevitably follow.
If there is such disdain for the reportage, they should refuse to participate, right?
/right/.

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:30:12am

re: #34 tradewind

I believe that O’Reilly apologized profusely on his broadcast before Vilsack had actually formally offered Sherrod her job back ( Vilsack’s apology preceded the proffer, IIRC).
Disclaimer… not an O’Reilly fan. It’s the pomposity thing.

O’Reilly did a half-baked apology - he said that it still didn’t excuse the NAACP from applauding her racist statements when, obviously, they were going along with the whole thread of her story…

simoom Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:30:45am

The talking point on which Fox settled very early was that they had not even mentioned the Sherrod story on air before she resigned from the USDA. And while this may be true, it’s a perfect example of the Minor Point Maneuver. Sherrod was forced to resign very quickly, so the events actually beat Fox News — but when Fox did begin covering the story, their reports were identical to Andrew Breitbart’s original post at Big Government, enthusiastically branding Sherrod and the NAACP as “obvious” racists as they showed the edited video over and over.

Another way they’re disassembling is that they’re ignoring FoxNews.com and theFoxNation.com, both of which parroted Breitbart’s smear within hours of his posting it, and prior to Sherrod’s resignation.

MediaMatter’s timeline: mediamatters.org

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:31:32am

re: #42 allegro

Changing the subject to avoid addressing false equivalence? Got it.

BS on that. My point is that poor behavior is poor behavior. And when influential members of the media with a single political agenda act in concert, that is poor behavior. And Breitbart, et al are guilty TOO.

Got it? (Probably not)

Kefirah Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:32:29am

re: #34 tradewind

his “apology” was very slanted. it was one of those “i’m sorry, but…” moments. his particular apology was, “i’m sorry, but there are still racist memes in her speech and i wasn’t the only one who jumped to conclusions and i’m not the one who fired her.”

i was always told that if there’s a “but” clause, then it isn’t an apology. it’s an attempt to shirk responsibility.

i am definitely not an o’reilly fan. but i might be a tradewind fan!

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:32:47am

re: #46 _RememberTonyC

BS on that. My point is that poor behavior is poor behavior. And when influential members of the media with a single political agenda act in concert, that is poor behavior. And Breitbart, et al are guilty TOO.

Got it? (Probably not)

I’m not sure I’ve seen anything from the Jornolist thing that suggested they intentionally deceived anyone. I see people coalescing around arguments & talking points but that seems pretty different than Breitbart’s lies.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:32:51am

re: #41 cineaste
Sigh. Must we be reminded of the poor, lynched census worker in KY, killed (and monogrammed with FED !!) because of right-wing anger?//
Neither side has a corner on outrageous outrages that really aren’t.

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:33:41am

re: #39 _RememberTonyC

in your world, a conspiracy among influential media members with political agendas is just fine?

got it.

I’m not crazy about Journolist, but come on, dude? Conspiracy?

I post this Daily Caller article yesterday — Journolist members having a chat about Olbermann. Just take a look. It’s funny, but far from conspiratorial.

dailycaller.com

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:34:06am

re: #49 tradewind

Sigh. Must we be reminded of the poor, lynched census worker in KY, killed (and monogrammed with FED !!) because of right-wing anger?//
Neither side has a corner on outrageous outrages that really aren’t.

Tu Quoque much?

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:34:36am

re: #47 Kefirah
I’ve seen hedges in the apology, but I thought O’Reilly’s was pretty straightforward. I’d expect more of the ’ yeah-but ’ type of apology from the Hannity/Beck end.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:35:14am

re: #48 cineaste

I’m not sure I’ve seen anything from the Jornolist thing that suggested they intentionally deceived anyone. I see people coalescing around arguments & talking points but that seems pretty different than Breitbart’s lies.

of course there is a difference. but my point is that it is extremely poor behavior to do what they did. By virtue of the communication that has come out, there appears to be very strong evidence that these journolists (sic) acted in concert to push a presidential candidate and they used their position as supposedly honorable pundits and writers improperly.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:35:20am

re: #51 cineaste
Not nearly as often as I’m tempted. Why?
Ipse Dixit.//

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:35:21am

re: #52 tradewind

I’ve seen hedges in the apology, but I thought O’Reilly’s was pretty straightforward. I’d expect more of the ’ yeah-but ’ type of apology from the Hannity/Beck end.

Beck actually was probably the most correct of anyone on Fox (shocka!). Hannity never apologizes.

Randall Gross Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:35:31am

The major reason I am leaving the right after this primary election in Kansas is over is their parting of the way with objective reality and truth. All they have now is bile, no ideology, no principles.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:35:58am

re: #55 cineaste
Someone please do something with that shoe polish on the head. //

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:18am

So this is the conversation on the local blog about FOX and this story and rascism:
“The left has been pushing racism for the last 50 years. They have labeled white males as being racist. They have ignored racism by blacks and other minority groups. That is racism plain and simple. You can’t limit racism to one racial group and claim a moral high ground by others. You are further proof to my point that leftists are racist and don’t recognize it. Unless you are able then no dialogue will occur. So sad!”

and

“The documented racism of the new Black Panther Party being ignored by the mainstream media until recently is another example of racism by the left. You simply can not recognize that racism can be practiced by groups that the left favors but you pounce on it when you perceive it is practiced by conservative labeled groups.

Steve Cohen is a person that I can’t stand but when he tried to join the black caucus in Congress he was excluded for one reason and one reason only—-he was white. That wasn’t disputed but the mainstream media ignored it. Again, you simply aren’t able to see in yourselves what you accuse others of doing.”

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:46am

re: #56 Thanos
Why wait? The left needs all the help it can get in this midterm.//

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:48am

re: #53 _RememberTonyC

of course there is a difference. but my point is that it is extremely poor behavior to do what they did. By virtue of the communication that has come out, there appears to be very strong evidence that these journolists (sic) acted in concert to push a presidential candidate and they used their position as supposedly honorable pundits and writers improperly.

I don’t have a problem with pundits discussing philosophy, strategy and position. It’s when hard news journalists do it that I”m concerned (and yes, there were hard news journalists on the Journolist).

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:51am

re: #49 tradewind

Sigh. Must we be reminded of the poor, lynched census worker in KY, killed (and monogrammed with FED !!) because of right-wing anger?//
Neither side has a corner on outrageous outrages that really aren’t.

Hush, woman.

Kefirah Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:53am

re: #55 cineaste

and in other news, wormwood and screwtape have placed an order for parkas from sarah palin’s “moosehide line.”

apparently it’s quite cold in hell at the moment.

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:36:59am

re: #47 Kefirah

his “apology” was very slanted. it was one of those “i’m sorry, but…” moments. his particular apology was, “i’m sorry, but there are still racist memes in her speech and i wasn’t the only one who jumped to conclusions and i’m not the one who fired her.”

i was always told that if there’s a “but” clause, then it isn’t an apology. it’s an attempt to shirk responsibility.

i am definitely not an o’reilly fan. but i might be a tradewind fan!

And AFAIK, O’Reilly’s non-apology “apology” is the only one we’ve seen from Faux. There has been no official “apology,” nor have any of the reporters taken a few seconds to acknowledge that that repeated Breitbart’s bullshit “accusations” without blinking an eye. They instead immediately shifted gears and started going off on “The White House” for canning the “poor woman” without so much as an investigation.

MichaelJ Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:37:52am

re: #46 _RememberTonyC

BS on that. My point is that poor behavior is poor behavior. And when influential members of the media with a single political agenda act in concert, that is poor behavior. And Breitbart, et al are guilty TOO.

Got it? (Probably not)

But they really didn’t act in concert at all. If you read the emails in context, you discover that there was a LOT of argument and discussion among the group about all the topics being touted as outrages.

It was a discussion group, and some of the members were hotheads. The idea that there was some kind of journalistic conspiracy is absurd. Nobody buried any stories because of Journolist.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:37:56am

re: #50 Nimed

I’m not crazy about Journolist, but come on, dude? Conspiracy?

I post this Daily Caller article yesterday — Journolist members having a chat about Olbermann. Just take a look. It’s funny, but far from conspiratorial.

[Link: dailycaller.com…]

we all chat about things and it’s cool. and while the term conspiracy may be a bit harsh, there was a fair amount of coordination around a political agenda, not to mention a suggestion among the group that critics of then Senator Obama should be called the “r” word. Very bad behavior. And we saw the results in the campaign coverage.

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:38:02am

re: #48 cineaste

I’m not sure I’ve seen anything from the Jornolist thing that suggested they intentionally deceived anyone. I see people coalescing around arguments & talking points but that seems pretty different than Breitbart’s lies.

They couldn’t even coalesce most of the times — they spent they’re time arguing and saying nasty stuff about each other. Remember Mickey Kaus Journolist leak?

The Daily Caller has all the messages in that listserv, and is cherry-picking those that are most convenient for the story of the day.

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:38:51am

Conservatives Try To Bash USDA Anti-Racism Suit, Shirley Sherrod

tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com

and now you know the rest of the story.

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:39:20am

re: #58 webevintage

Trying to create and equivalence between the New Black Panthers and the Tea Party is like saying the US’s economy should be compared to that of Bermuda. The Tea Party brags of millions of members, the NBP are what, like dozen people?

Randall Gross Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:39:25am

re: #59 tradewind

Why wait? The left needs all the help it can get in this midterm.//

I need to vote against Todd “Televangelist Hair” Tiahrt and several other Brownback wing Dominionist types before I leave the party

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:39:49am

re: #58 webevintage
Cohen is the Rep from my district, and I promise you, the only reason he wanted to join the Black Caucus is that he’s worried about being replaced in this upcoming election by former mayor Willie Herenton, whose campaign slogan is literally
’ Because I’m Black ‘. (Not my meme, but his, unapologetically. Herenton believes that a white person cannot represent this district).

Ojoe Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:40:18am

The country needs this guy.

It is too deadly serious anymore.

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:40:38am

re: #64 MichaelJ

But they really didn’t act in concert at all. If you read the emails in context, you discover that there was a LOT of argument and discussion among the group about all the topics being touted as outrages.

Except Tucker “the boy who got his feelings hurt” Carlson is not putting them out there in context at all.

Killgore Trout Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:40:52am

Does anybody have a good reliable and definitive debunking of Paul Sperry (The Muslim Mafia guy)?

PhillyPretzel Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:41:03am

re: #71 Ojoe
Yes we do.

Feline Fearless Leader Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:42:01am

I haven’t heard anything further from Fox about their investigation on who planted that edited video with Breitbart. Anyone else have any progress to report?

[snicker]

Ojoe Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:42:25am

re: #74 PhillyPretzel

The new president is a clang clang.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:43:07am

re: #66 Nimed
As if Kos or the equivalent wouldn’t cherry pick the same way.
If the left had a bunch of death threats/wishes against Keith Olbermann, say, don’t you think they’d be leading with those?
Sure they would.

PhillyPretzel Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:43:20am

re: #76 Ojoe

The new president is a clang clang.

What in heavens name is a “clang clang?”

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:43:53am

re: #64 MichaelJ

But they really didn’t act in concert at all. If you read the emails in context, you discover that there was a LOT of argument and discussion among the group about all the topics being touted as outrages.

It was a discussion group, and some of the members were hotheads. The idea that there was some kind of journalistic conspiracy is absurd. Nobody buried any stories because of Journolist.

All fair, but I’m coming at this as a producer/writer/journalist with over 30 years in the TV business. If I ever acted the way the journolisters acted, my news organization would have fired me. My job HAS to be to beat the other guy to the story with accurate information and hard work. The thought of discussing our coverage with a competitor in any way other than the most superficial is totally alien to me.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:43:53am

re: #72 webevintage
Stop hatin’ on Tucker. He’s adorable.

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:44:12am

re: #72 webevintage

Except Tucker “the boy who got his feelings hurt” Carlson is not putting them out there in context at all.

Between Tucker & Breitbart there are a lot of guys running around doing the equivalent of taking the kickball and sulking in the corner with our national politics.

What bothers me about Breitbart’s approach is that he obviously finds this all a fun game. He likes to agitate. He’s really a form of performance artist. The New Yorker piece on him was excellent. Unfortunately, he’s taken seriously as a news source & commentator by so many. He has no moral issue with making things up if it bothers the side he doesn’t like, it’s all fun for him.

Ojoe Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:44:48am

re: #78 PhillyPretzel

It is a sound effect from “Blazing Saddles,” a movie you could not make today.

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:45:18am

re: #80 tradewind

Stop hatin’ on Tucker. He’s adorable.

he was adorable back when he still wore the affected bow ties.

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:45:27am

re: #70 tradewind

Cohen is the Rep from my district, and I promise you, the only reason he wanted to join the Black Caucus is that he’s worried about being replaced in this upcoming election by former mayor Willie Herenton, whose campaign slogan is literally
’ Because I’m Black ‘. (Not my meme, but his, unapologetically. Herenton believes that a white person cannot represent this district).

’ Because I’m Black ‘.
wow….that’s an interesting slogan there.

“Hey I suck, but not as much as that other guy”

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:45:35am

re: #65 _RememberTonyC

we all chat about things and it’s cool. and while the term conspiracy may be a bit harsh, there was a fair amount of coordination around a political agenda, not to mention a suggestion among the group that critics of then Senator Obama should be called the “r” word. Very bad behavior. And we saw the results in the campaign coverage.

Notice that, while everybody thought that Rev. Wright’s story was being completely inflated, nobody agreed with Spencer Ackerman’s suggestion.

What were the results in the campaign coverage, by the way?

PhillyPretzel Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:45:39am

re: #82 Ojoe

TY. Mel would do something like that. He is a very funny guy.

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:46:01am

re: #75 oaktree

I haven’t heard anything further from Fox about their investigation on who planted that edited video with Breitbart. Anyone else have any progress to report?

[snicker]

I understand they’ve been sending reporters to various golf courses, looking for the “real editors.”

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:46:40am

re: #80 tradewind

Stop hatin’ on Tucker. He’s adorable.

is not.

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:48:19am

Here’s the pony in the manure pile: video clips of speeches / sound bytes that purport to incriminate one side or the other will hopefully from now be checked for context by someone’s watching /vetting of the entire thing before any major news outlet runs the story.
And if you believe that……..//

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:48:20am

re: #82 Ojoe

It is a sound effect from “Blazing Saddles,” a movie you could not make today.

Best story about Blazing Saddles:

Richard Pryor was an uncredited screenwriter on the film. In the famous scene where the Sheriff visits Bernadette Peters backstage and she says “So, is it twoo what they say about you people?…… [zip] ……. It’s twoo! It’s twoo!” it actually was written slightly differently. Comedy has the rule of three and that is an unfinished joke. The way Pryor wrote it (and what the studio forced Brooks to cut out went like this:

“So, is it twoo what they say about you people? ……. [zip] ……. It’s twoo! It’s twoo!” to which the Sheriff responds “You’re sucking on my elbow baby.”

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:49:29am

re: #84 webevintage
I’ll see if I can find you a poster. He even has one sign that just reads
’ Just One ‘. Figure it out.

Killgore Trout Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:49:31am

Hmm.. I was going to write an email to Pat Condell. I gave up on him a while ago but his latest video is a sales pitch for Paul Sperry’s conspiracy book, The Enemy Within. He’s even using Geert’s language about Islam as a “fascist ideology”. I was going to write him but now I see he’s uploaded Robert Spencer’s speeches to Swedish neo-nazis. He’s lost beyond hope of recovery.

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:50:05am

re: #85 Nimed

Notice that, while everybody thought that Rev. Wright’s story was being completely inflated, nobody agreed with Spencer Ackerman’s suggestion.

What were the results in the campaign coverage, by the way?

I think Mr Obama received exceptionally “gentle” treatment from the media. He had a far easier time than Hillary during the primary campaigns. And while Hillary had more stuff for the media to sift through, that track record was really a disadvantage against Obama. Since Obama had far less of a track record, we needed to learn as much as we could about him as quickly as possible, but many journalists were too infatuated with him or too lazy to vet him as fully as they vetted his opponents. Those are some of the results.

Randall Gross Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:50:17am

re: #73 Killgore Trout

Does anybody have a good reliable and definitive debunking of Paul Sperry (The Muslim Mafia guy)?

I’m aware of some generic criticism of the book, but nothing smoking gun like except the fact that it’s published by WND. The co author is Chris Gaubatz, both authors appear to be political operatives in guise of “investigative reporters”

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:50:20am

re: #77 tradewind

As if Kos or the equivalent wouldn’t cherry pick the same way.
If the left had a bunch of death threats/wishes against Keith Olbermann, say, don’t you think they’d be leading with those?
Sure they would.

I don’t think arguments like “they would have done it too” are valid. How can we know that for sure?

As for your Olbermann hypothetical, you really need to at least skim the Daily Caller story I linked upthread. Take a quick look.
dailycaller.com

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:50:21am

re: #85 Nimed

There’s a slogan that needs a slap-down, but I think the NAACP has spent its dudgeon for the week.

allegro Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:51:22am

re: #93 _RememberTonyC

Since Obama had far less of a track record, we needed to learn as much as we could about him as quickly as possible, but many journalists were too infatuated with him or too lazy to vet him as fully as they vetted his opponents.

What do you think they missed?

Randall Gross Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:51:56am

re: #92 Killgore Trout

Hmm.. I was going to write an email to Pat Condell. I gave up on him a while ago but his latest video is a sales pitch for Paul Sperry’s conspiracy book, The Enemy Within. He’s even using Geert’s language about Islam as a “fascist ideology”. I was going to write him but now I see he’s uploaded Robert Spencer’s speeches to Swedish neo-nazis. He’s lost beyond hope of recovery.

I gave up on him back when he decided that banning burkas was the right approach. He’s gone over the edge

windsagio Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:52:25am

re: #95 Nimed

Even if it were true, it would be a Tu Quoque argument anyways.

(We’ve gotten lazy about calling those over the last few months :P)

100

Killgore Trout Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:52:30am

re: #94 Thanos

I also seem to recall that he was posting on the internet as an islamist and then reporting big scoops about what he wrote as a sockpuppet. Either way, it’s not important. I was going to write Pat Condell about him but it’s not worth the effort. Pat has gone over to the darkside.

101

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:52:35am

re: #97 allegro

What do you think they missed?

Well that he’s a Muzlem born in Kenya to start with, duh… //

102

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:54:29am

re: #97 allegro

What do you think they missed?

we may never know what we missed because the people who needed to find the stuff were not interested in doing it. i think my post #93 reflects some of my feelings on this topic.

103

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:54:36am

re: #85 Nimed

Notice that, while everybody thought that Rev. Wright’s story was being completely inflated….

I hope that the comparisons between Wright and Sherrod don’t evolve into something tangible, the two situations are completely different. With Wright, there was some serious there there.

You could make the point that Fox beat it like a dead horse to which I would not argue against.

104

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:57:25am

re: #93 _RememberTonyC

I think Mr Obama received exceptionally “gentle” treatment from the media. He had a far easier time than Hillary during the primary campaigns. And while Hillary had more stuff for the media to sift through, that track record was really a disadvantage against Obama. Since Obama had far less of a track record, we needed to learn as much as we could about him as quickly as possible, but many journalists were too infatuated with him or too lazy to vet him as fully as they vetted his opponents. Those are some of the results.

But you think that Journolist contributed to that? Remember that lots of members were Hillary supporters, starting with the most prestigious and widely read columnist there, Paul Krugman (Krugman preferred Clinton’s health care plan). And plenty of them were undecided between Hillary and Obama. I think Journolist Ezra Klein (the creator of Journolist) was in this later category.

105

Randall Gross Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:58:38am

re: #100 Killgore Trout

I also seem to recall that he was posting on the internet as an islamist and then reporting big scoops about what he wrote as a sockpuppet. Either way, it’s not important. I was going to write Pat Condell about him but it’s not worth the effort. Pat has gone over to the darkside.

He’s featured and linked over at JW from his youtube chan

106

windsagio Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:59:18am

re: #104 Nimed

One of the rules is that you always think the other side got it easy from the media.

Hell, I remember being pissed at all the free passes I thought GWB had gotten!

107

Varek Raith Sun, Jul 25, 2010 11:59:55am

re: #4 tradewind

All true, but…

Or, cover FoxNews by pointing out other networks.
Ignoring, of course, the Fox heavily pimped this “story”.

108

Killgore Trout Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:00:12pm

re: #105 Thanos

He’s featured and linked over at JW from his youtube chan

ah, that explains it.

109

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:01:17pm

re: #103 BigPapa

I hope that the comparisons between Wright and Sherrod don’t evolve into something tangible, the two situations are completely different. With Wright, there was some serious there there.

You could make the point that Fox beat it like a dead horse to which I would not argue against.

I make no such parallel. Check the thread. The comparison we’re discussing is between Journolist and Breitbart. The “journolists” were discussing Wright’s media coverage in one of their threads.

110

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:03:34pm

re: #104 Nimed

But you think that Journolist contributed to that? Remember that lots of members were Hillary supporters, starting with the most prestigious and widely read columnist there, Paul Krugman (Krugman preferred Clinton’s health care plan). And plenty of them were undecided between Hillary and Obama. I think Journolist Ezra Klein (the creator of Journolist) was in this later category.

I really think the list of people was influential enough that it’s likely. Once the bloodletting in the Dem primaries was done, I believe much of the media threw it’s support to Mr Obama. But it’s really old news now. But moving forward, we should be on the lookout for the media’s treatment and reporting of Obama’s performance as President. Because if we can’t rely on accurate information from a variety of political and social perspectives, we will make poor decisions in the voting booth and harm our own future. That is why FOX deserves to have it’s place in the forum of ideas.

111

Stanley Sea Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:03:40pm

re: #66 Nimed

They couldn’t even coalesce most of the times — they spent they’re time arguing and saying nasty stuff about each other. Remember Mickey Kaus Journolist leak?

The Daily Caller has all the messages in that listserv, and is cherry-picking those that are most convenient for the story of the day.

Remember Climate-Gate? I’m not seeing much difference. Someone with an agenda gets a hold of private emails (unethically) then starts releasing their cherry-picked selections, and the populace buys the pushed conspiracy, because it fits what they have always thought.

112

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:03:56pm

re: #106 windsagio

One of the rules is that you always think the other side got it easy from the media.

Hell, I remember being pissed at all the free passes I thought GWB had gotten!

Right. Free election season passes!

And I don’t know how anyone can honestly think that Rev. Wright’s story was hushed up. I watched that “God damn America! Chickens are coming home to roost!” clip until my eyes bled.

113

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:04:33pm

re: #109 Nimed

I make no such parallel. Check the thread. The comparison we’re discussing is between Journolist and Breitbart. The “journolists” were discussing Wright’s media coverage in one of their threads.

OK, I was speaking generally and not specifically stating that you were. I made a general statement in reply to your specific one. Sorry to distract the real discussion.

114

windsagio Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:04:40pm

re: #112 Nimed

It was covered up because the networks didn’t broadcast the ‘real truth of Obama’s racism’ >>

115

webevintage Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:08:45pm

re: #110 _RememberTonyC

That is why FOX deserves to have it’s place in the forum of ideas.

I actually would have no problem with FOX if they all reported the news like Sheppard Smith.
But they don’t.
Faox and Friends is a zoo of crazy right-wing bull shit.
Megan “with a Y” Kelly…wide eye reporting of all the ways the Obama administration is out to get us white folks.
and then of course you have the nightly drumbeat of Beck and Hannity.
If they dealt in reality, FOX would be fine.

and NO MSNBC has no one like Beck.
No one.

116

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:09:37pm

re: #63 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
(You do realize, don’t you, that ’ Faux ’ in no way rhymes with ’ Fox ’ ) .
Just checking.//

117

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:10:31pm

re: #111 Stanley Sea

Remember Climate-Gate? I’m not seeing much difference. Someone with an agenda gets a hold of private emails (unethically) then starts releasing their cherry-picked selections, and the populace buys the pushed conspiracy, because it fits what they have always thought.

Or at least what they want to believe. It makes it all very comfortable to continue to do whatever they might have to change if they faced reality. I actually had someone try to reassure me that I really didn’t need to worry about climate change because Climate-gate “proved” there is no global warming. She meant it kindly…

118

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:14:23pm

re: #115 webevintage

I actually would have no problem with FOX if they all reported the news like Sheppard Smith.
But they don’t.
Faox and Friends is a zoo of crazy right-wing bull shit.
Megan “with a Y” Kelly…wide eye reporting of all the ways the Obama administration is out to get us white folks.
and then of course you have the nightly drumbeat of Beck and Hannity.
If they dealt in reality, FOX would be fine.

and NO MSNBC has no one like Beck.
No one.

FOX has others beside Shep who are good. Brett Baier’s news show at 6pm is really good. It provides news, commentary, and perspective from many points of view. Eric Shawn has done great reporting on the UN and it’s shenanigans. O’Reilly, for all his bombast used to be roasted by Republicans for going off the reservation. He’s a shit stirrer, but he is more or less equal opportunity in that area. Hannity was better with Colmes …. Alan should come back to the show. And MSNBC may not have a glenn beck, but keith olbermann is almost as unglued from reality as beck. I know the dude and worked with him. Trust me on that.

119

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:15:11pm

re: #116 tradewind

(You do realize, don’t you, that ’ Faux ’ in no way rhymes with ’ Fox ’ ) .
Just checking.//

And yet, it describes the network so well, a bunch of right-wing shills playing at “news reporter,” when they will run any story, no matter how thin the “evidence” behind it, so long as it either supports the Right or opposes Obama. “News reporting” aimed at the lowest common denominator, from the same network that brings you American Idol.

120

Romantic Heretic Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:15:25pm

re: #20 calochortus

So, here’s the problem. Facts don’t make people change their minds-especially when it comes to politics. Sigh…

I refer to this phenomena as Information Disease. Note: Link is not work or child safe.

121

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:16:29pm

re: #112 Nimed

And I don’t know how anyone can honestly think that Rev. Wright’s story was hushed up. I watched that “God damn America! Chickens are coming home to roost!” clip until my eyes bled.

I don’t think it was hushed up: some media streams didn’t pay much attention at all, but Fox championed it by running it front page. At that point in time I think the other streams weren’t paying attention to a viable story: Fox countered it by making it a huge story. It evened out, sloppy as the situation was. Ideal, no.

This supports what I perceive to be RTC’s point: Fox has it’s place. As ugly and sloppy as Fox is, it has it’s use. The good part is that Fox gets a lot of criticism, the bad part is that some will never listen to it.

122

Romantic Heretic Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:18:30pm

re: #78 PhillyPretzel

What in heavens name is a “clang clang?”

The new code for the n-word, I’m thinking.

123

Feline Fearless Leader Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:19:02pm

re: #120 Romantic Heretic

I refer to this phenomena as Information Disease. Note: Link is not work or child safe.

But not as dangerous as Industrial Disease since even Jesus can get that…

Youtube Video

124

Interesting Times Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:19:40pm

re: #121 BigPapa

The good part is that Fox gets a lot of criticism, the bad part is that ~~some~~ the people who need to hear it most will never listen to it.

Fixed.

125

PhillyPretzel Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:19:50pm

re: #82 Ojoe

It is a sound effect from “Blazing Saddles,” a movie you could not make today.

re: #122 Romantic Heretic

Please see above.

126

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:21:58pm

re: #119 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
And yet it’s almost a metaphor for the snarky left, because it so completely misses the mark it attempts to hit: it doesn’t rhyme, which was its raison d’etre, and so ends up meaningless.
/I suppose it could be considered an outreach to the disproportionately large number of registered Democrat high school drop-outs as compared to registered Republicans/.

127

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:22:12pm

re: #124 publicityStunted

Fixed.

the number one thing all TV people care about most is the ratings. if FOX turns enough people off, their ratings will tell “the powers that be” that something has to change. lots of independent voters like FOX too. That’s why they crush their competition in the ratings. It’s not just hard righties watching the network.

128

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:22:24pm

re: #121 BigPapa

I don’t think it was hushed up: some media streams didn’t pay much attention at all, but Fox championed it by running it front page. At that point in time I think the other streams weren’t paying attention to a viable story: Fox countered it by making it a huge story. It evened out, sloppy as the situation was. Ideal, no.

This supports what I perceive to be RTC’s point: Fox has it’s place. As ugly and sloppy as Fox is, it has it’s use. The good part is that Fox gets a lot of criticism, the bad part is that some will never listen to it.

No, the bad part is that Fox itself won’t listen to the criticism. When its sloppy, ad-hoc style is criticized, it doesn’t acknowledge such criticism, it goes on the attack, using O’Reilly and Hannity to attack the credibility of those offering criticism and find any excuse to claim the criticism is just an attack on Fox. Of course, that assumes any criticism gets leveled at Fox to begin with, as we’re seeing now, with nobody willing to bring up how they added fuel to the fire Breitbart started out of some unwritten code of journalistic neutrality.

129

Romantic Heretic Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:22:49pm

Ever since Fox started changing the party affiliations of Republicans caught in sex scandals to Democrats, and the time they made Iraq disappear from the map, I’ve taken to calling them ‘The Ministry of Truth’.

We have always been at war with EastAsia.

130

Varek Raith Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:24:13pm

re: #126 tradewind

STOP PICKING ON FOX!!!
Lol.

131

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:24:36pm

re: #122 Romantic Heretic
Think it has to do with ’ IF I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal ‘.
Although it really doesn’t seem like such a good example.

132

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:24:57pm

re: #126 tradewind

And yet it’s almost a metaphor for the snarky left, because it so completely misses the mark it attempts to hit: it doesn’t rhyme, which was its raison d’etre, and so ends up meaningless.
/I suppose it could be considered an outreach to the disproportionately large number of registered Democrat high school drop-outs as compared to registered Republicans/.

There’s a change, I thought usually those on the Left were brushed off by the Right as “intellectuals” who sit in their “ivory towers” and thus do not comprehend the realities of the real world, too busy living in fantasy worlds and perfect scenarios that they couldn’t realize that what the Right’s advocating is the only solution to real world problems.

133

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:24:57pm

re: #124 publicityStunted

Fixed.

LOL, I’d never make it as a writer, too fast to proof read. Especially when I’m working on writing a contract provision section, bad.

134

_RememberTonyC Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:25:02pm

good discussion today …. thanks and have a good one.

135

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:26:13pm

re: #127 _RememberTonyC
It’s just sooo Not Fair.
The FCC should require that the other networks have equal ratings.//

136

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:26:25pm

re: #120 Romantic Heretic

True enough. But I really have no idea how to deal with it. What do you do with someone who is proud of not having changed an opinion since she was in elementary school? (She probably has, but doesn’t recognize the fact.) How do you fight back against profitable propagandists like Fox? I don’t think there’s a lot of short term money to be made in questioning authority.

137

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:28:28pm

re: #132 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
The demographic stats also include the fact that there are more PhDs who teach at universities registered Democratic, so that’s the source.
Maybe that balances out the high-school drop-out stat.

138

HoosierHoops Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:30:04pm

Hello Lizards!
Greetings from Oklahoma…I’m staying 5 minutes from the OU Campus…I made in time to watch the Brickyard 400

139

Jaerik Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:31:22pm

The other new one around Ms. Herrod is that Glen Beck “took the high road” and refused to air the heavily edited tape. That he somehow had enough journalistic integrity to not run with the story when everyone else did, saying “Based on the facts that we have right now, this is something that I wouldn’t air and demand a resignation on.”

Unfortunately, he had run with the story earlier that day on his radio show, saying it was clearly discrimination against white farmers, and only backtracked when the story began to get fishy shortly before he went on air. Didn’t stop Hannity or O’Reilly, but Beck is hardly innocent here.

140

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:31:52pm

re: #110 _RememberTonyC

I really think the list of people was influential enough that it’s likely. Once the bloodletting in the Dem primaries was done, I believe much of the media threw it’s support to Mr Obama. But it’s really old news now. But moving forward, we should be on the lookout for the media’s treatment and reporting of Obama’s performance as President. Because if we can’t rely on accurate information from a variety of political and social perspectives, we will make poor decisions in the voting booth and harm our own future. That is why FOX deserves to have it’s place in the forum of ideas.

Meh. In my opinion, all news networks right now are crap. I’m pretty left of center, and the only programs worth watching for me in MSNBC and CNN are Maddow’s show and Zakaria’s GPS. Right-wing economic policy ideas definitely have a place in our political discourse, but Fox and pretty much every conservative blog do a lousy job of explaining them. The places to watch here are libertarian blogs IMO — Megan McArdle’s blog and Marginal Revolution are good examples.

For instance, many right-wing wonks favored reforms in our health care system that would implement something similar to the Singaporean model. It’s mostly private (much more than ours is currently), it’s cheap, it produces very good results. What’s not to like? Yet, most people barely ever heard of these ideas, because the mainstream right-wing media and the GOP leadership are currently dysfunctional.

141

Jaerik Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:32:00pm

Sherrod, sorry. I could at least get her name right.

142

Varek Raith Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:32:36pm

WHOA!
Holy high winds Batman!

143

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:33:01pm

re: #121 BigPapa
The thing is, it’s undeniable that there are stories that the WH would just as soon never see hit the light of day, that hit it first on Fox, and then force the others.
I don’t see this as a bad thing. When Bob Schieffer says that he has ’ never heard of ’ the election controversy re the NBP in PA, that is a problem. Whether or not you feel it’s a big story, for him to say he has no knowledge of it is troubling.

144

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:33:05pm

re: #137 tradewind

The demographic stats also include the fact that there are more PhDs who teach at universities registered Democratic, so that’s the source.
Maybe that balances out the high-school drop-out stat.

So the argument is that Democrats are both college intellectuals and high school drop-outs? What does that make Republicans? College drop-outs?

145

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:33:28pm

re: #128 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

No, the bad part is that Fox itself won’t listen to the criticism. When its sloppy, ad-hoc style is criticized, it doesn’t acknowledge such criticism, it goes on the attack, using O’Reilly and Hannity to attack the credibility of those offering criticism and find any excuse to claim the criticism is just an attack on Fox.

You seem to be making an assumption that Fox is a public relations firm coordinating communications and talking points as opposed to a media company selling a product to a target market. OReilly and Hannity have their own shows and for the most part I think say and do what they really want: same for Alex Jones’ buddy Napolitano and Beck. If you care to look for it in between the partisan hacks’ shows there is some more moderate fare there.

It’s all a product, which is why they don’t accept blame or change much: it’s not what their biggest consumer group wants. They want Coulter to call people fags and roll their eyes at Franken, and cut Breitbart a HUGE amount of slack. That’s the problem, not so much as Fox is simply peddling BS.

146

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:33:47pm

re: #144 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

So the argument is that Democrats are both college intellectuals and high school drop-outs? What does that make Republicans? College drop-outs?

College stay-ins?

147

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:34:37pm

re: #144 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

So the argument is that Democrats are both college intellectuals and high school drop-outs? What does that make Republicans? College drop-outs?

Old.

148

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:34:43pm

re: #139 Jaerik

The other new one around Ms. Herrod is that Glen Beck “took the high road” and refused to air the heavily edited tape. That he somehow had enough journalistic integrity to not run with the story when everyone else did, saying “Based on the facts that we have right now, this is something that I wouldn’t air and demand a resignation on.”

Unfortunately, he had run with the story earlier that day on his radio show, saying it was clearly discrimination against white farmers, and only backtracked when the story began to get fishy shortly before he went on air. Didn’t stop Hannity or O’Reilly, but Beck is hardly innocent here.

In other words, he was just as willing to wallow in the bullshit until he noticed it didn’t smell quite right, then tried to play himself off as “compassionate” by claiming to be on Sherrod’s side? Yeah, color me surprised. *rolls eyes*

149

Interesting Times Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:34:44pm

re: #127 _RememberTonyC

the number one thing all TV people care about most is the ratings. if FOX turns enough people off, their ratings will tell “the powers that be” that something has to change. lots of independent voters like FOX too. That’s why they crush their competition in the ratings. It’s not just hard righties watching the network.

High ratings != quality. Justifying fox by citing its ratings is like saying McDonalds, due to its ubiquitous “1 billion served” signage, must be the most nutritious food ever.

As to the “Faux News” joke - it’s a VISUAL PUN meant for print rather than pronunciation. Surely even a “high school drop-out” can understand that!

150

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:35:50pm

re: #145 BigPapa

You seem to be making an assumption that Fox is a public relations firm coordinating communications and talking points as opposed to a media company selling a product to a target market. OReilly and Hannity have their own shows and for the most part I think say and do what they really want: same for Alex Jones’ buddy Napolitano and Beck. If you care to look for it in between the partisan hacks’ shows there is some more moderate fare there.

It’s all a product, which is why they don’t accept blame or change much: it’s not what their biggest consumer group wants. They want Coulter to call people fags and roll their eyes at Franken, and cut Breitbart a HUGE amount of slack. That’s the problem, not so much as Fox is simply peddling BS.

I think the problem is the circular nature of the cycle. What happens at Fox is that Hannity and/or Beck and/or O’Reilly will make some outrageous claim with no basis in fact. Then the news side will report that “Some people are saying that President Obama is really a little green martian” but not note that the people saying that are employees of the same network. They are making the news they’re reporting on and that’s wildly inappropriate.

151

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:37:06pm

re: #134 _RememberTonyC

good discussion today … thanks and have a good one.

Good job RTonyC and Nimed. I appreciate it.

152

tradewind Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:37:21pm

Bottom line… anyone who uses one network or news source as their sole source for current affairs and news reporting is not hearing What’s Going On . In this area, as in most others, a little diversity is not only a good thing, but a necessity.
Laytuh.

153

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:39:00pm

re: #149 publicityStunted

High ratings != quality. Justifying fox by citing its ratings is like saying McDonalds, due to its ubiquitous “1 billion served” signage, must be the most nutritious food ever.

You’d think Stephen Colbert’s repeated satirization of the “market has spoken” meme would have hastened its demise.

154

Nimed Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:40:26pm

re: #144 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

So the argument is that Democrats are both college intellectuals and high school drop-outs? What does that make Republicans? College drop-outs?

It makes them just right. You don’t want to have too much education.
/

155

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:41:55pm

re: #150 cineaste

I think the problem is the circular nature of the cycle. What happens at Fox is that Hannity and/or Beck and/or O’Reilly will make some outrageous claim with no basis in fact. Then the news side will report that “Some people are saying that President Obama is really a little green martian” but not note that the people saying that are employees of the same network. They are making the news they’re reporting on and that’s wildly inappropriate.

Exactly. Fox’s “editorial” shows throw wild, bullshit stories out, then Fox’s “news” division begins reporting as though the conspiracy theories and rumors are fact or that there “might be something to them.” Why? Because the “editorials” draw in the highest ratings, so the execs want to keep people tuning in by acting as though there’s something to the nutty rantings of Beck or the blowhard grandstanding of O’Reilly.

156

calochortus Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:43:06pm

Must go do something constructive…

157

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:45:50pm

re: #149 publicityStunted

High ratings != quality. Justifying fox by citing its ratings is like saying McDonalds, due to its ubiquitous “1 billion served” signage, must be the most nutritious food ever.

As to the “Faux News” joke - it’s a VISUAL PUN meant for print rather than pronunciation. Surely even a “high school drop-out” can understand that!

If you trust the TP meme that all TV except Fox is Leftist/MSM, the Fox ratings are not impressive. Then, more people get their news from Progressive Non-Fox than from Fox.

158

Achilles Tang Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:49:31pm

Slightly on topic, I find in interesting how the MSM can never agree on simple facts that should be verifiable, or at least only available from very few reliable sources.

Specifically, “CIA drones kill X militants in Pakistan”. Never ever does the BBC, AFP, AP, and others have the same number in their reports, and those are usually single digits.

I can’t help but wonder if they just call nearby phones at random and ask someone what the rumor mill says, then they call it news.

159

cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:52:46pm

For the record people, we just made our own fresh mint-chip ice cream with real mint from our garden… I’m feeling very self-satisfied at our first attempt!

160

Targetpractice Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:52:55pm

re: #158 Naso Tang

Slightly on topic, I find in interesting how the MSM can never agree on simple facts that should be verifiable, or at least only available from very few reliable sources.

Specifically, “CIA drones kill X militants in Pakistan”. Never ever does the BBC, AFP, AP, and others have the same number in their reports, and those are usually single digits.

I can’t help but wonder if they just call nearby phones at random and ask someone what the rumor mill says, then they call it news.

Seems the only time they all agree on the small things is when they’re essentially copying the others news release, except with a different headline and byline.

161

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:55:38pm

re: #158 Naso Tang

Slightly on topic, I find in interesting how the MSM can never agree on simple facts that should be verifiable, or at least only available from very few reliable sources.

Specifically, “CIA drones kill X militants in Pakistan”. Never ever does the BBC, AFP, AP, and others have the same number in their reports, and those are usually single digits.

I can’t help but wonder if they just call nearby phones at random and ask someone what the rumor mill says, then they call it news.

It’s not too strange. The Army chain of command needs couple days even to get our casualties right after a big engagement or accident. The rule of thumb is: “The first number is always wrong.”

162

Political Atheist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 12:56:35pm

re: #159 cineaste

Nice. Recipe?

163

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:02:07pm

re: #41 cineaste

How about the bizarre meme overnight that several Texas ranches had been seized by a Mexican drug gang starting an invasion of the US. Breathless posts went up everywhere, including Breitbart and Malkin, and yet, in the end, what was it? Nothing… But that doesn’t stop them from saying that if it had been something, where was Obama?

wtf?

Well, we who were up and on the blog at one in the morning had a good time watching the wingnut blogs go bananas.

164

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:02:56pm

re: #49 tradewind

Sigh. Must we be reminded of the poor, lynched census worker in KY, killed (and monogrammed with FED !!) because of right-wing anger?//
Neither side has a corner on outrageous outrages that really aren’t.

He was, IIRC, actually dead, and really did have FED on him.

165

Stanley Sea Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:03:59pm

re: #163 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, we who were up and on the blog at one in the morning had a good time watching the wingnut blogs go bananas.

I’m safe SFZ, woke up and no Zetas were in my yard.

166

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:06:27pm

re: #115 webevintage

I actually would have no problem with FOX if they all reported the news like Sheppard Smith.
But they don’t.
Faox and Friends is a zoo of crazy right-wing bull shit.
Megan “with a Y” Kelly…wide eye reporting of all the ways the Obama administration is out to get us white folks.
and then of course you have the nightly drumbeat of Beck and Hannity.
If they dealt in reality, FOX would be fine.

and NO MSNBC has no one like Beck.
No one.

That’s because there IS no one like Beck. There’s only one. Thank God.

167

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:07:38pm

re: #126 tradewind

And yet it’s almost a metaphor for the snarky left, because it so completely misses the mark it attempts to hit: it doesn’t rhyme, which was its raison d’etre, and so ends up meaningless.
/I suppose it could be considered an outreach to the disproportionately large number of registered Democrat high school drop-outs as compared to registered Republicans/.

It’s a visual gag. What can I say?

168

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:09:47pm

re: #165 Stanley Sea

I’m safe SFZ, woke up and no Zetas were in my yard.

Cool. Did they get the plums?

169

Stanley Sea Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:11:33pm

re: #168 SanFranciscoZionist

Cool. Did they get the plums?

Nope!! Still waiting for me to go pick.

That was one of the funniest threads I’ve experienced. I went and read what I missed this am.

170

Decatur Deb Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:11:40pm

re: #165 Stanley Sea

I’m safe SFZ, woke up and no Zetas were in my yard.

No Zetas here, but a couple neighbors might be Deltas.

171

Renaissance_Man Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:13:59pm

re: #110 _RememberTonyC

I really think the list of people was influential enough that it’s likely. Once the bloodletting in the Dem primaries was done, I believe much of the media threw it’s support to Mr Obama. But it’s really old news now. But moving forward, we should be on the lookout for the media’s treatment and reporting of Obama’s performance as President. Because if we can’t rely on accurate information from a variety of political and social perspectives, we will make poor decisions in the voting booth and harm our own future. That is why FOX deserves to have it’s place in the forum of ideas.

You said that we have to be able to rely on accurate information from a number of sources. This is true. But then you said that FOX deserves a place in the forum of ideas. That I don’t get.

FOX does not provide accurate information. It provides hyperbole, entertainment that borrows heavily from reality, and now, slander. I fail to see how this belongs in the forum of ideas.

I suppose some believe that misinformation from FOX has value because it counters and balances out, somehow, theoretical misinformation from ‘the left’, whoever they are. What a bizarre notion.

If you think that ‘the left’ has put out a false, biased, untrue story, by all means point it out. Whatever it’s about. It’s not enough to simply ‘know’ that all those lefty media types are in the tank for the Dems, cause the liberal media is full of liberals and has a liberal bias for liberals. Even if that strange idea were somehow true, that still would not earn FOX’s own form of misinformation a valued spot in the forum of ideas.

172

b_sharp Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:21:35pm

re: #126 tradewind

And yet it’s almost a metaphor for the snarky left, because it so completely misses the mark it attempts to hit: it doesn’t rhyme, which was its raison d’etre, and so ends up meaningless.
/I suppose it could be considered an outreach to the disproportionately large number of registered Democrat high school drop-outs as compared to registered Republicans/.

It is a visual joke, it doesn’t have to rhyme, it just has to look similar.

Miss the point much?

173

b_sharp Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:24:30pm

re: #132 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

There’s a change, I thought usually those on the Left were brushed off by the Right as “intellectuals” who sit in their “ivory towers” and thus do not comprehend the realities of the real world, too busy living in fantasy worlds and perfect scenarios that they couldn’t realize that what the Right’s advocating is the only solution to real world problems.

The right apparently have the exclusive rights to magical ‘common sense’.

174

Kronocide Sun, Jul 25, 2010 1:25:42pm

re: #171 Renaissance_Man

You said that we have to be able to rely on accurate information from a number of sources. This is true. But then you said that FOX deserves a place in the forum of ideas. That I don’t get.

FOX does not provide accurate information.

RememberTonyC has left, but may I interject. The point is that we have rely on information from a number of sources to gain accurate information. That’s an important distinction. Fox puts out tons of information, much of it inaccurate and mis-contextualized, there is no doubt. But depending on the particular program on Fox, that relative amount of spin fluctuates. To this I would agree with.

Some of the programs/persons on Fox I think are more even keeled/newsworthy. But they don’t get the ratings Beck/Hannity/OReilly does… which is a shame.

175

Kung Fu Grip Sun, Jul 25, 2010 2:27:45pm

And if Sherrod were white, and made the same sort of speech? Fired, with no apology, no retraction, and with no reputation left to repair. But, let’s fall all over ourselves in praise of Ms. Sherrod’s “redemption.”

And, keep burying the Journolist story Charles. It’s a nice juxtaposition — Sherrod and the Journolist smears — isn’t it? Put the spotlight on one, and ignore the other.

Let’s apply Charles Johnson logic to both. There are racist elements in the Tea Party — therefore, the Tea Party is racist!! There are ostensibly objective journalists willing to conspire to slant the news for Obama. Therefore, all journalists slant the news for Obama!! Uh, er, um — no. LGF logic in action.

176

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sun, Jul 25, 2010 2:33:05pm

re: #175 Kung Fu Grip

Trying to bat cleanup on the thread?

177

Charles Johnson Sun, Jul 25, 2010 2:48:50pm

Another sleeper awakes.

178

Cineaste Sun, Jul 25, 2010 3:33:48pm

re: #162 Rightwingconspirator