Posts Tagged ‘Fox News’
Roger Ailes finds out that Pimpin Ain’t Always Easy:
More than 400 Fox advertisers told the company they did not want their commercials on Beck’s show. Beck’s advertisers were dominated by financial services firms, many touting gold as an investment.
Ailes dismissed the financial impact of the boycott but expressed some frustration with it.
“Advertisers who get weak-kneed because some idiot on a blog site writes to them and says we need to stifle speech, I get a little frustrated by that,” he said.
One of Beck’s most prominent critics – David Brock, founder of the liberal watchdog Media Matters for America – said that “the only surprise is that it took Fox News months to reach this decision.”
“Fox News Channel clearly understands that Beck’s increasingly erratic behavior is a liability to their ratings and their bottom line, and we are glad to see them take this action,” said James Rucker, executive director of ColorofChange.org, which organized the advertiser boycott.
Unmentioned is Angelo Carusone, the “idiot on a blog” who
moonlights here now works for Media Matters. But it’s worth pointing out that for a while he did this completely unpaid, basically pro bono. And if no one else can salute him for that today, the day Glenn Beck’s show’s death is announced, then at least I can.
Imagine if the one of the Wonkavator’s many buttons transported you to a deranged land filled with sociopaths, religious zealots, cult members, racists, and the abjectly ignorant along with willfully ignorant. In this land, a popular fascist propaganda website is Fox Nation.
Well, this AM, I made the mistake of pressing that button and two stories struck my attention.
Number 1: Apparently, Fox News thinks James O’Keefe’s alleged offenses are in the same category as the guy who tried to blow up an airplane on Christmas Day
If Fox News didn’t think the two acts were equatable, then why are they juxtaposing O’Keefe with the underwear bomber and comparing the way they’ve been treated? I realize FoxIsNotNews is the champion of false equivalences, but even this one is a stretch for them. Oh, and, since when does Fox give a damn about civil rights?
Number 2: Evolution may be ridiculous, but of course Chimps can be hippies
I’m pretty sure these Bonobos are not actually hippies. But, Fox doesn’t let any opportunity to equate progressivism with genocide or liberalism with cannibalism go to waste.
Foxnews.com lead story:
Putting aside how ridiculous that is on the merits, let’s instead focus on the number 53. 53 Congressman call for something. It has to be fairly serious, right?
Umm, not really. The House single-payer bill itself has NINETY THREE cosponsors. 93! You think we’ll see that on the front page of Foxnews.com any time soon?
Nothing of the sort even shows up on a search of the site – as if you expected otherwise.
We’ve been telling them how many we have for quite a while. Assuming that we’d get to count there’s too, isn’t the harm of letting them verify our numbers (and see our security protocol to compare) a very small price?
I mean, this would be uneasy 20 years ago just after the fall of the Soviet Union. But it’s gone now. I think we can move on.
From the front page of the Fox Nation website:
Okay, so you see a picture of Obama, a bunch of innocent looking babies and a headline that suggests there’s some kind of “dirty secret.” What exactly is Fox News suggesting here? Well, nothing untoward, of course – surely this is all innocent. They can’t possibly be suggesting that Obama is going to do something “dirty” with your babies, right? [I’m not even going to touch the subtle (or not so subtle) racial aspects of this picture.]
I’ll just click the link, see what the article is about. Ah, it links to an analysis of the health care reform bills by noted health care policy scholar, Chuck Norris.
Perhaps Fox News is just confused about the concept of a dirty secret. There’s nothing in the legislation that involves Obama doing something “dirty” with “young children.” Nor, is the legislation much of a secret, since it’s all public. Perhaps they should speak to childrens author and Fox News host Bill O’Reilly about the meaning of “dirty secrets.” An allegation that O’Reilly sexually harassed an employee is an example of a “dirty secret.” Health care reform, however, isn’t.
Note: I’ll try and post pictures. If you come across any, please email them to email@example.com.
Watching President Obama’s press conference today, I did notice one thing that will probably go unmentioned. If you compare the camera views on Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, you’ll notice that Fox News is providing a particularly close view of Obama. Granted this is not earth shatteringly bad, but it is one of those subtle ways that a media outlet can shape their viewers’ perception.
Such a view provides an “in-your-face” perspective and can contribute to the development of a negative reaction by the audience. A recent study by UPenn Prof. Diana Mutz concludes in part that “close-up camera perspectives will intensify viewers’ reactions to opposition political arguments and candidates.” Certainly, this kind of camera angle does not alone cause a negative reaction, but it can influence it. These angles are well recognized elements of political communication code.
Fox News is revealing their true bias in carrying the press conference in such a biased way (not that it wasn’t already clear that they are biased).