Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism

[Mr. Monday Morning]

Originally Posted by Gertner Nice way of totally ignoring my argument. keep going, you're amusing me. and btw the CBS debockle does prove my point. that's not just a little incident. that's pretty friggen major. here's a better example. with your logic I can pass out racist propaganda and claim not to be rascist, since it was just one incident.

It's not his logic, it's your logic that he threw back at you to make the point of how retarded it was.

Which you seem to agree with.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Gertner Nice way of totally ignoring my argument. keep going, you're amusing me. and btw the CBS debockle does prove my point. that's not just a little incident. that's pretty friggen major. here's a better example. with your logic I can pass out racist propaganda and claim not to be rascist, since it was just one incident.

And with your logic I could claim that all North Americans are racist if you did pass it out.

Seriously, your weak-ass arguments are sad.

You want to talk about ignoring an argument, I've already made statements as to why this is a faulty argument that you've thus far ignored. You have to ignore that the "liberal media" that you claim would have checked its facts for a Democrat didn't with Clinton, didn't with Gore, and didn't with Kerry in order for your argument to work. You have to ignore lack of reporting of failures in Iraq, the reporting of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" claims, the reporting of Kerry's "mistress" (Picked up by the "liberal media" from Drudge without question), lack of favorable reporting for Kerry OR Gore (Not that I can blame them, but this liberal bias theory would require that they cover it). It would require that the "liberal" media jump all over "Gannongate" like Rush Limbaugh on a Twinky.

It would require that the media give a less favorable report of the economy (Pointing out that all those months of "gains" didn't meet minimal growth, and thus were still LOSSES), instead of whitewashing it to say Bush was doing a good job. It would require more negative coverage of the decision to go to war. We'd actually hear more about Gitmo, about the elections going "The other way," and have less PR shots.

And all you can come back with is "Well, this one reporter fucked up and didn't check his facts (like hundreds of reporters in the 90s with Clinton), and two others are DEMOCRATS! That proves my point!"

Uh uh. You have to ignore a huge body of evidence to the contrary before you can make this claim fly at all. So keep talking about "ignoring" your argument, your hipocrisy is a f'ing riot.

read any new york times and find me 1 Conservative reporter. The liberal media recently torn up a solider whom killed a supposedly wounded solider, even though he was playing dead, but on the other hand made a sob story out of how a catured saudi was being treated badly, after he was arrested for making a plot to kill the president.

[Kane Knight]

So you're taking the "ignorance is bliss" angle now?

Good on ya. Don't let a large body of statements get in the way of your ignorance. Ignore the body of my text and try and come back with "OMG! Find me a consevative reporter in the times!"

That's two times you've ignored specific statements. Please, keep complaining.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

Originally Posted by Gertner read any new york times and find me 1 Conservative reporter.

Sam Tanenhaus

[BCWWF]

Gertner, watch Outfoxed if you want to see all the Fox News people working for the Bush campaign. Jesus Christ, you are either incredibly naive or incredibly close minded.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by BCWWF Gertner, watch Outfoxed if you want to see all the Fox News people working for the Bush campaign. Jesus Christ, you are either incredibly naive or incredibly close minded.

Doesn't hurt that there's a family connection there, either.

But hey, Ignorance is bliss, why shouldn't Gertie be happy?

[Zelda]

It was interesting. I've never watched Fox news because it's all about "Radio-Canada" around here, I would have never imagined that it was that bad.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Zelda It was interesting. I've never watched Fox news because it's all about "Radio-Canada" around here, I would have never imagined that it was that bad.

Well if you damn canucks weren't so self-centered...

[YOUR Hero]

Pretty weak arguement Gertner. Damn.

[Kane Knight]

Probably why he abandoned it.

[Zelda]

Bill O'Reilly: I'm not a right-winger, I believe in global warming!

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Zelda Bill O'Reilly: I'm not a right-winger, I believe in global warming!

That's pretty liberal for Fox though.

moderate means condoning the deaths of gays, the beating of women, and killing social security so that Gates can afford another yacht, but feeling that you should sterilise the needle before killing the retarded death row inmate.

[BCWWF]

In my journalism class today we watched a film about how corporations dictate what is in the media..it wasn't its intent but it simply displaces the whole notion that the media is liberal.

It started out with a story about a lady in South Carolina. Her little town had sent Democrats to the house for about 100 years, but then she randomly ran as a Republican and won. When she got into office, she found out that there was a problem with the local pig farms expanding too rapidly and dumping their waste in places hazardous to the well being of the citizens. When she started to speak out, the farmers (not your Old McDonald, like big companies) formed a group called "Farmers for Fairness" which spent hundreds of thousands of dollars making character defamation ads against this lady, and she had the money to make no ads, so she was beat in the next election by, guess who, a farmer, and the nothing was done to control these giant pig farms.

Next was a big smoking bill that was in the senate in the 1990's at some point (the video was kind of old, so it was new at the time). The big tobacco companies were being douche bags, so John McCain clamped down and made the bill real hard on them. It passed 19-1 in committee, so it should have passed easilly in the senate, but....pretty soon ads started coming up about how the government was going to raise taxes (cigarette taxes), spend more (spend the money by giving it back to the states after they lost so much in medical insurance from cigarettes) and other things. On the bottom of their ads they would cite sources, such as "Morgan Stanley, 1996" which gave the impression that independent research came up with this, but the fact was really from a Morgan Stanley worker who was reporting what a Big Tobacco exec had said in a speech. Then they had a fact "70% of the people who will be taxes more make less then $30,000 a year", but what it really means is that 70% of the people who smoke make less then 30,000 a year. They just came up with a bunch of rediculous, misleading claims and spent millions of dollars promoting them on TV, and sure enough people got misled by them and the bill, which should have passed with flying colors, was defeated in the senate.

The third example was from the Telecommunications Act of 1996 I believe. Basically, this was before the digital era, so there was millions of dollars worth of digital space available for making television networks etc. People in the Senate wanted to auction this space off so that they could get the value of what it was worth, but because the big television networks were the one's who would benefit from getting all the free space, they didn't cover the story at all, so the American public was completely unaware that the big media networks were getting what was called "the biggest government giveaway in the century".

Finally it went into details about how all of the major networks have conglomorated, and how many of them now have stock in each other. Examples: Disney currently owns ABC, ESPN, some other cable channels (I think History Channel is in there), a bunch of local tv and radio stations, and just a bunch of other stuff. NBC is owned by General Electric, who also owns just about any random thing you can think of. Fox owns a billion channels and everything else, CNN is owned by Time Warner, etc etc. There are like 10 big corporations that own almost everything now (Microsoft, AT&T, Disney, Time Warner, Viacom, Clearchannel, GE, and others) and now most of them have stock in each other, so besides an exec at Disney saying "ABC shouldn't report on Disney", now for example Time Warner has money invested in Disney and they don't want to report bad about them because then Time Warner will lost money too. It is just a complete mess.

Corporations own the broadcast media, the Liberal bias is just something your conservative mothers told you about and you accepted without knowing the truth.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by BCWWF Corporations own the broadcast media, the Liberal bias is just something your conservative mothers told you about and you accepted without knowing the truth Thinking.

Fixed. but since Gertie's retreated, the point's moot.