itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
Can't believe they haven't done so earlier. Good for the White House. They've got no obligation to play along with the lies and misdirection Fox News constantly employs in their pieces.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
White House: "Fox News is not a news organization"
- Thread starter permutated
- Start date
- Status
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
Thank goodness they're using their political capital to ram through a stimulus bill sprinkled with all sorts of inefficient concessions, lack of adequate regulatory framework and future safeguards, and a health care bill primed to mandate coverage for those who can't afford it without providing a strong public option to actually drive costs down to a reasonable level. There's clearly no room to challenge a cornered minority party when you're busy being so amazingly progressive, but shining the spotlight on a farcical "news" outlet that doesn't deserve the time of day anyhow? Oh yeah, there's all reason in the world to do that.laserbeam said:
Yeah, I'm getting a little bitter.
This really isn't a good idea. It won't achieve the desired effect. It simply entrenches the conflict even deeper along party lines. Perhaps the White House has given up on ever reaching the Republicans, and wants to marginalize them as much as possible, but I can't imagine they'd be successful in that mission. When you think of what "media" means in the first place, trying to discredit a "medium" (Fox) will just lead to an even more distorted message reaching that audience. There's also no guarantee that other news organizations will fall in line, even if Fox is a competitor.
For this to even resemble a successful move, the White House has to be pretty masterful at controlling the remaining media outlets, which isn't necessarily guaranteed. And even success just means further partisanship, which will only really win the White House points with their base.
I don't think stifling debate, even with an outlet that you disagree with, even with an outlet that frequently distorts the truth to spite you, is really wise.
For this to even resemble a successful move, the White House has to be pretty masterful at controlling the remaining media outlets, which isn't necessarily guaranteed. And even success just means further partisanship, which will only really win the White House points with their base.
I don't think stifling debate, even with an outlet that you disagree with, even with an outlet that frequently distorts the truth to spite you, is really wise.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
sonicmj1 said:
If anyone, it's Fox News that's stifling every debate. In this case the White House just ain't gonna play along with it anymore. Had the channel been a poster on GAF it'd been banned or ignored by 90% of the posters as a troll long ago.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Considering the rhetoric of Fox lately, I doubt any regular viewer is interested in anything the White House or Obama has to say anyway. The administration should just ignore them or though I do like the idea of calling them out on their BS but it would take more than the White House officials to do that.
ItsInMyVeins said:
If Fox News was a fringe network, this would be an easier decision to make. That just isn't the case, though. They have more viewers than any other news channel.
I'm not saying Fox is squeaky clean at all here, but I just don't see how this helps in any way. It sounds like the White House already hasn't been very cooperative with Fox News, and that has, if anything, increased the channel's level of partisanship.
I just don't see what the White House gains from this move.
Have no problem with the whitehouse calling Fox out like that.
Because it's true.
We often extend way too much reverence to news organisations and media, and I see that in some of the comments here. A journalist or a news org should not be just given that level of respect, they should earn it, and Fox absolutely does not earn that.
Because it's true.
We often extend way too much reverence to news organisations and media, and I see that in some of the comments here. A journalist or a news org should not be just given that level of respect, they should earn it, and Fox absolutely does not earn that.
Meus Renaissance
Member
sonicmj1 said:
I don't see how much they'd have to lose anyway. Even Bill O'Reilly admitted that Fox is bias.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
sonicmj1 said:
I seriously doubt the White House not being very cooperative is what's been pushing Fox to make all the outlandish claims they're known for. And if anything that shows what level they're working on, since what you're suggesting seems to be that they're increasing "critique" (I use that term as loosely as possible here) of the administration out of spite.
I see this as a statement from the White House about how Fox News is a troll, pretty much. I doubt this is gonna change much for either though, but I don't really care about that. Fox News needs to be called out more.
Ford Prefect
GAAAAAAAAY
Fuck Fox News. Their entire existence right now is dedicated to actions and dogma that are dangerously detrimental to the progress and well-being of this country. They are not a legitimate news organization and shouldn't be treated as such. If by some miracle this administration actually has the balls to stay the course and hold Fox accountable for their garbage until they shape up or spiral into impotent insanity, it could be the best thing they do for the country in the long run.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Ford Prefect said:
Idiotic.
Masta_Killah
Member
sonicmj1 said:
It wouldn't really hurt independent conservatives though. There's a reason why they are independent, the White House is just reinforcing that fact. As for the rest of the Independents, I don't think it'll sway them away or towards the Obama administration. They're more concerned with policies then these sideshow tactics(at least I hope they're more concerned).
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
sonicmj1 said:
Hey, who knows? Maybe someone will think "huh, why did they do this?" and check some stuff out and realize how much they do spin everything.
Either way, to any reasonable person this whole thing should be pretty clear and understandable. I doubt it's gonna affect many voters.
Omission of facts are as bad as fabrication in my opinion. I don't listen to the pundits or casters, I'll just watch any video they'll find and call it that.X-Ninji said:
All our networks are worthless but I believe the people are ever so slightly better off having Fox News as well as the rest of the media. It's not like if we get rid of Fox all that'd be left is truthful yet biased news, to the contrary, so it's not really worth it. Further, I do believe this, well all really, White House wants to control the media and it's a good thing that Fox will have none of it even if their reasons for having none of it are the wrong reasons. The Obama administration is no more my friend than the Bush administration is and it's good we have a network opposing them just like it was good that other networks went after Bush, some with fabricated evidence as well!
At the end of the day I don't think actual lies really matter or catch on, what does catch on are these half truths. What I'd consider a half truth is that Illegal Immigrants won't get care under Obama's health care plan, of course they will, but the reason for that is they already do get care anyways as our ER's won't turn anyone away. Neither network said this and it was idiotic, there could have been a debate on this and instead the left pretends no Illegal will get treated in a hospital ever(which is false) and the right pretends that they get covered explicitly. The real question is who wants our ER's to turn anyone away? I want illegal immigrants to get care at the ER, I don't want them to die outside a hospital and I think if this was said more often(because I think Obama did mention it briefly at one of his earlier pitches to the public) most people, even conservatives would agree. If we have to deport them after their care fine, but why ignore a real discussion and reduce it to a simple yes or no? But nothing is ever explained in our country, ever. They couldn't explain the illegal immigrant thing, instead both sides were accused of being liars when the truth was in the middle. Same thing with Medicare cuts, same thing with employers possibly dropping coverage for the government option, it's either the White House's rosiest prediction or Fox's most negative prediction but neither side will touch the "truth" with a 10 foot pole. We're either getting the whole world on a platter or being turned into an exoskeletal communist, fascist dictatorship. I question how any of these networks are beneficial to me, they're all pieces of shit.
The whole situation of course stinks and it's a shame that I have to make an argument for keeping shit around to balance other shit instead of getting rid of it but that's where we're at I'm afraid.
But what's truly most worrying to me is the extent the White House is trying to control their message, I think that's more of a danger than Fox News in and of itself. I think they're supposed to and expected to try and control their message but it get s a little muddy to me when they start trying to forcefully get rid of dissenting opinion. But like I said, no White House is my friend, they're all whores to corporate interest power consolidating dicks. Just because the Democrats want to give me a reach around while they ream my asshole doesn't mean I like their approach any better than the Republicans who don't even have the decency to give me a reach around.
innervision961
Member
As long as this admin calls them out on the falacies and refrains from attempting a coup or taking any real action against them then this is fine... I mean tabloids are perfectly legal. It's only harmful that in telling people what they want to hear they will beleive anything you tell them.
Tim the Wiz
Banned
What's that old saying? Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel. I can't see this as anything other than a bad strategy to delegitimize a news agency - even an incredibly biased one like Fox News. John S. Mill would be calling them pussies right at this moment.
I've never studied this so I want people to be clear this is only my opinion but regarding people who seek Fox out because they want to be told what they want to hear, I wonder if it really matters, like if Fox wasn't there they would all of a sudden not believe the things they do. I think they'd still believe them with or without Fox. It's my opinion that these types of opinions and thoughts existed before Fox and Fox only caters to them, it wasn't the reverse where Fox came around and all of a sudden people started buying into this stuff.innervision961 said:
So I don't think Fox has that big of an effect really.
But again, I've never really studied this type of human behavior so I don't know.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
mAcOdIn said:
I kinda doubt that, actually.
milkyjay20
Member
it's true, but that also applies to the rest of the bought-and-paid-for broadcasts.
innervision961
Member
I agree with you... I think these opinions did exist and fox caters to them, the danger comes from people like oreilly beck and the other crazy ones who take something and twist and twist to get what they want out of it to the point that it's a lie and build a fervor then sprinkle in their own made up parts then these people take these fake talking points and spread them like a virus.mAcOdIn said:
radioheadrule83
Banned
I don't see a problem with this.
Fox has a lot to answer for. If the other news organisations got their shit together, stopped aping them, and went back to aspiring to be proper news organisations themselves, that would be a great thing. Fox can continue doing their shitty right wing opinion editorials / "journalism" if they want, no one is stopping them. The White House is just appealing for others to not be as shitty.
A lot of you in North America, those of you actually defending Fox as "not that bad", have NO IDEA how bad fox is compared to international outlets. Its so bad it borders on the shameful. Its a pox on the American media and the American populace. Post 9/11 and Iraq - during the last two elections - to watch Fox coverage on youtube is just mind altering stuff. Its NOT news. Its wall-to-wall propagandising bullshit dressed up as something reasonable and entertaining.
Fox has a lot to answer for. If the other news organisations got their shit together, stopped aping them, and went back to aspiring to be proper news organisations themselves, that would be a great thing. Fox can continue doing their shitty right wing opinion editorials / "journalism" if they want, no one is stopping them. The White House is just appealing for others to not be as shitty.
A lot of you in North America, those of you actually defending Fox as "not that bad", have NO IDEA how bad fox is compared to international outlets. Its so bad it borders on the shameful. Its a pox on the American media and the American populace. Post 9/11 and Iraq - during the last two elections - to watch Fox coverage on youtube is just mind altering stuff. Its NOT news. Its wall-to-wall propagandising bullshit dressed up as something reasonable and entertaining.
Do they really spread though? Again, this is an area I've not really looked at but would one say there's more or less people who identify as Republicans now than say 10 years ago? I wonder if the only difference is that people now hear them more. I don't know if Fox is really expanding the loony base or if they just get the whole loony base where as the more liberal networks all have to fight among themselves for their audience hence the huge disparity between ratings. But this is really an area of politics that I don't follow, I don't follow registered voters of parties or tv ratings over the years so I'm kinda talking out of my ass here.innervision961 said:
But Beck may make me have to put Fox on the dangerous list. The others are "passable" as partisans Beck could actually be dangerous. He's almost blatantly called for revolution which is pretty fucking crazy rhetoric from a "news" network. I kinda give Fox a pass over him because I don't see him as a newscaster but regarding Fox's overall power I guess my interpretation of what are and are not "news" programs on Fox is irrelevant, there may very well be people who watch every damn block of air time on that station and believe them all to be legitimate "news." I can't recall a time even during Bush's most hated points where a national news network made such inflammatory comments towards the government.
I'm not even against the idea of revolutions, I'm a gun owner, I think maybe some day we might have to, possibly, who fucking knows you know, but there's a real danger, not to mention it's stupid, to call for such measures when in reality the two parties are so damn similar(I guess this is only true if looking at it from a global perspective). I just find the concept of violently throwing out either the Republicans or the Democrats just to put the other one in power laughable, especially when our democracy hasn't failed yet and there are still completely peaceful means to do so if that's really what the people want. I know Beck never openly called for Revolution or explicitly said to replace Democrats with Republicans but when he's got Republican representatives on his show speaking from a Tea Party, well I formed my own damn opinion Fox, I decided. I'd give him a real pass if he had 3rd party or unknowns on his show or interviewed them but nope.
teruterubozu
Member
Bush & Cheney gave the media the finger. Same shit, different day.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
probably the closest thing we've got, but it's nowhere near to FOX.GrotesqueBeauty said:
as for the whole white house/fox thing. it's just rhetoric to keep the public entertained, if they were actually serious they would introduce some kind of regulation to stop crazy propaganda.
Commodore_Perry
Banned
I'm sorry I'm late to the party, so to make up for it I'm going to address the last 8 pages in one post...
First of all, I think Fox holds the most blame for shooting down the public option and for that they should eat a bag of Dick's. Should that bag of Dick's consist of the WH calling them out? I think it's a fair option. They're not censoring Fox, they're just calling them out on their bs. Hopefully this will resonate with the other networks and they'll stop trying to imitate Fox, because that's the real slippery slope.
The more the other networks become like Fox, the less information we get. I remember a time when I was first entering college and 24-hour news channels actually played news snippets 24/7... Oh what a glorious time. I miss it dearly. Sometimes they'd even talk about International things or do investigative stories. It was amazing. Fox News is responsible for taking that away from me and for that they should eat another bag of Dick's.
(For any mod reading this, please note that I live in Seattle and that all of my references to Dick's include the possessive apostrophe, meaning it's a reference to a very popular late-night burger chain that serves giant bags of delicious hamburgers for very affordable prices)
Bush's wars against Iraq and Afghanistan are nearing the same proportions as Vietnam... That's TWO wars as long, drawn out and politically ugly as a war that defined an era 30 years ago... And you think these two wars will effect America less than a couple liberals saying that more people should have access to health care and that we shouldn't shit on the environment as much as we do?
Link or it didn't happen.
I read this in Danny's voice...
I recently read an incredible paper that I'm about to butcher, so bare with me as I attempt to convey to you an abridged version...
The cost of an ambulance ride is approximately $1500 including the ER visit. If the symptoms that resulted in the ambulance ride were due to a preventable infection or disease, the costs begin to soar.
A normal check-up usually ranges around $50-$100. If more people had medical care that was affordable and guaranteed, a lot of medical emergencies could be prevented.
When people don't have medical insurance and end up in the ER, who do you think foots that bill? That's right, we do.
So would you rather your tax dollars go toward regular check-ups for your fat, out of work neighbor who is sprinting towards a coronary, where the doctor will tell him to straighten out his lifestyle or die? Or would you rather your tax dollars went toward covering all the costs when he actually has a coronary, is transported to the local ER and sits in hospital bed for several days?
I'm sorry that your post was tl;dr and most people probably didn't see this, but I appreciated this part of your rant.
First of all, I think Fox holds the most blame for shooting down the public option and for that they should eat a bag of Dick's. Should that bag of Dick's consist of the WH calling them out? I think it's a fair option. They're not censoring Fox, they're just calling them out on their bs. Hopefully this will resonate with the other networks and they'll stop trying to imitate Fox, because that's the real slippery slope.
The more the other networks become like Fox, the less information we get. I remember a time when I was first entering college and 24-hour news channels actually played news snippets 24/7... Oh what a glorious time. I miss it dearly. Sometimes they'd even talk about International things or do investigative stories. It was amazing. Fox News is responsible for taking that away from me and for that they should eat another bag of Dick's.
(For any mod reading this, please note that I live in Seattle and that all of my references to Dick's include the possessive apostrophe, meaning it's a reference to a very popular late-night burger chain that serves giant bags of delicious hamburgers for very affordable prices)
eznark said:
Bush's wars against Iraq and Afghanistan are nearing the same proportions as Vietnam... That's TWO wars as long, drawn out and politically ugly as a war that defined an era 30 years ago... And you think these two wars will effect America less than a couple liberals saying that more people should have access to health care and that we shouldn't shit on the environment as much as we do?
Ether_Snake said:
Link or it didn't happen.
SpeedingUptoStop said:
I read this in Danny's voice...
drakesfortune said:
I recently read an incredible paper that I'm about to butcher, so bare with me as I attempt to convey to you an abridged version...
The cost of an ambulance ride is approximately $1500 including the ER visit. If the symptoms that resulted in the ambulance ride were due to a preventable infection or disease, the costs begin to soar.
A normal check-up usually ranges around $50-$100. If more people had medical care that was affordable and guaranteed, a lot of medical emergencies could be prevented.
When people don't have medical insurance and end up in the ER, who do you think foots that bill? That's right, we do.
So would you rather your tax dollars go toward regular check-ups for your fat, out of work neighbor who is sprinting towards a coronary, where the doctor will tell him to straighten out his lifestyle or die? Or would you rather your tax dollars went toward covering all the costs when he actually has a coronary, is transported to the local ER and sits in hospital bed for several days?
mAcOdIn said:
I'm sorry that your post was tl;dr and most people probably didn't see this, but I appreciated this part of your rant.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
Cable news television in general is god awful. I've long since turned it off. Hell, I barely watch TV. Almost all of it is sensational bullshit. If you think it isn't, turn it off for a month and then turn it on again and see if you have the same opinion. Every pundit has a doom and gloom outlook in which only their (and their party) views are correct. Then they justify it in various means. Maddow is probably the most intelligent out there right now but she is not above the bullshit either. All cable news is obnoxious.
Fox has a clear right wing bias but it has always presented itself that way. Carping Fox about using the motto "Fair and Balanced" is dumb. It isn't any different than using generic buzzword terms like a company using "innovative" to describe themselves when they pump out the same crap their dozen other competitors do. The network has always made it clear that it is for conservatives, by conservatives. If you somehow found yourself fooled by the motto, you need help or are just being facetious.
Fox News is also op-ed commentary. All of these anchors have published books and promoted them on the show. So it is also in-show advertising. If you think what Bill O'Reilly or John Gibson think counts as news, you're doing it wrong.
Fox News isn't worth it. Shutting them out isn't going to change much. Nazi tactics would be to shut it down and imprison the people that work there. Fox doesn't really care about the entire truth, just whatever they can pick apart, blow it up to a huge proportion, and then shriek about the audacity of Obama using Grey Poupon mustard on his burger. That isn't news; that is tabloid news. The far right wing will never give Obama any credit and feels that every action he takes is some kind of socialist/fascist takeover. If he walks his dog, that is a sign that we're going to be in a Nazi regime. When that side tends to be that irrational, they're not worth bringing into the group.
Ordinary people won't care. I'm convinced at least a third of the high Fox ratings comes from the left, who enjoys watching the show and yells about how Hannity said something wrong again (shokku!) These are also the same guys that buy conservative pundit books en masse and then shriek when they see the sales numbers at how well they are selling.
Fox has a clear right wing bias but it has always presented itself that way. Carping Fox about using the motto "Fair and Balanced" is dumb. It isn't any different than using generic buzzword terms like a company using "innovative" to describe themselves when they pump out the same crap their dozen other competitors do. The network has always made it clear that it is for conservatives, by conservatives. If you somehow found yourself fooled by the motto, you need help or are just being facetious.
Fox News is also op-ed commentary. All of these anchors have published books and promoted them on the show. So it is also in-show advertising. If you think what Bill O'Reilly or John Gibson think counts as news, you're doing it wrong.
Fox News isn't worth it. Shutting them out isn't going to change much. Nazi tactics would be to shut it down and imprison the people that work there. Fox doesn't really care about the entire truth, just whatever they can pick apart, blow it up to a huge proportion, and then shriek about the audacity of Obama using Grey Poupon mustard on his burger. That isn't news; that is tabloid news. The far right wing will never give Obama any credit and feels that every action he takes is some kind of socialist/fascist takeover. If he walks his dog, that is a sign that we're going to be in a Nazi regime. When that side tends to be that irrational, they're not worth bringing into the group.
Ordinary people won't care. I'm convinced at least a third of the high Fox ratings comes from the left, who enjoys watching the show and yells about how Hannity said something wrong again (shokku!) These are also the same guys that buy conservative pundit books en masse and then shriek when they see the sales numbers at how well they are selling.
innervision961
Member
maybe the point IS to infuriate the "revolutionists" with this move... Just as soon as one of the beck'erheads (hehe I made myself laugh with that one) does something extreme, the irrationality will be blatantly obvious, and this group will grow a little more quiet and step back a little bit.
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
GrotesqueBeauty said:
Sky news leans a bit to the right and do in the past (Might still) had some class assholes on there but it's far better then fox.
Commodore_Perry said:
That is truly high praise, and more than a little bit of hyperbole.
Right, I forgot that Presidents don't pass over ownership of military authority when the new guy comes in, so Bush is still commander in chief and responsible for the continuation of military action and the maintenance of global military empire.
Well you've certainly identified a problem.
PistolGrip said:Boy oh boy
eznark seriously you have to stop. Your comments would make sense if Fox was a news organization. I dont mind if they pander to conservatives, actually I used to be a conservative until I realize in what bad company I was inand also I was naive. The problem with Fox news is not who they pander to, it is that they outright lie and deceive people. They are a complete propaganda machine. They are a disgrace and an insult to America.
I would defend them to no end if they were not getting rich of ignorant religious middle americans by deceiving them and playing to their fears. FOX is pure and simple trash and I am glad the president is following suit on calling people out on their lies.
I'm not defending Fox News, I'm saying the administration trying to rally outlets around the country to denigrate them is a bullshit move. Like I said, my 30 daily minutes of cable news is derived from Bloomberg. I do like that you admit you would defend them if they were on "your side" though. That honesty is uncommon in poligaf threads.
Yes, because they are still controllable costs. Comparing them to Vietnam in anything but dollars is laughable. Politically ugly? Since the election how often have you heard Iraq? Seems to me the credible, laudable news outlets (obviously not the evil, bigoted corrupt propaganda machine FN) have forgotten it exists.
drakesfortune said:
You are the worst poster I have came across in some time. Your post is so fucking stupid, so fucking devoid of critical thought, so absent of rationality, facts and logic that it pains me to dwell on the fact that the rest of this board has to endure such ignorance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYRpv1QkGz8
And remember: Chris Wallace is supposed to be one of the only semi-rational people at Fox besides Shepard Smith.
And remember: Chris Wallace is supposed to be one of the only semi-rational people at Fox besides Shepard Smith.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked