Media Matters Declaring "War On Fox"

[dhett]

On the other hand - you don't have to dig very deep to find hypocrisy in the fundamentalist right-wing, which the conservative movement in this country has been cozying up to for the last 4 decades. In my view, these religious leaders want to limit freedom of religion to their religion, control our lives and have us live by a credo that they don't personally adhere to.

At the risk of getting this taken outside, and as a member of the "fundamentalist right-wing", as you put it, I'm going to call you on this statement. It's flat-out inaccurate. So-called fundamentalist organizations loudly advocate their standards of living, and attempt to persuade others to join them in it, but never attack other points of view in the manner that Fox News has been attacked, from Media Matters to the White House. So-called right-wing religious organizations have not dedicated personnel to researching the opposition with the intent of tearing it down in the manner that Media Matters has. No religious leader has attempted to limit freedom of religion to his religion - ever. No religious leader has attempted to control anyone's life in the manner in which you speak. The closest anyone has come to doing that is to attempt to organize like-minded people to boycott something they didn't agree with, a tactic practiced by all stripes of creed and politics, and we all know how successful that strategy has been.

 

[Kelly Watts]

Question....Has everyone forgotten the 5 basics of news reporting?

WHO (who is involved)
WHAT (what happened)
WHEN (when did it happen)
WHERE (where did it happen)
WHY (why did it happen)

I post this for the aspiring reporters, the first G.M. I worked for told me, "son if you follow that format, you will have a good and accurate story."

 

[dhett]

I post this for the aspiring reporters, the first G.M. I worked for told me, "son if you follow that format, you will have a good and accurate story."

In a perfect world with limitless airtime and an endless supply of operating funds, you're absolutely correct. Problem is, this is not a perfect world, a newscast is only 30 minutes to an hour long, and investors are looking for a good and robust bottom line. Whether one wants to admit it or not, a station's profitability drives which stories make the air, and cheating a little for ratings is a temptation that some just cannot resist. Sad but true.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

At the risk of getting this taken outside, and as a member of the "fundamentalist right-wing", as you put it, I'm going to call you on this statement. It's flat-out inaccurate. So-called fundamentalist organizations loudly advocate their standards of living, and attempt to persuade others to join them in it, but never attack other points of view in the manner that Fox News has been attacked, from Media Matters to the White House.

I also want this conversation to continue in such a way that it does not get tossed into T-I-O. I am not sure how we accomplish that. A few years back I was the general manager of a teach and preach style broadcast station with wall-to-wall religious programming. I routinely had to call in some of my local pastors who purchased broadcast time and reprimand them for their "attack messages".

I had representatives of the church of my "largest spending local customer" knock on the door of my home and they proceeded to invite my wife to their place of worship. When she informed them that we had a church and which one it was, she was told in no uncertain terms that she was on her way to hell if she did not repent and come to their church. Is that not an attack? Both on my wife and my religion? The pastor of this church by the way was a class mate of Jerry Falwells in college. My church at the time was the Southern Baptist Convention.

So-called right-wing religious organizations have not dedicated personnel to researching the opposition with the intent of tearing it down in the manner that Media Matters has. No religious leader has attempted to limit freedom of religion to his religion - ever.

What about the research group at Focus on the Family?

What about Donald Wildmon and his American Family Association?

Come to my county in North Georgia and try to get zoning approved and a building permit to build a mosque for Muslim worship.

It is really hard to see the faults of people with whom we agree.

 

[LKellerIII]

On the other hand - you don't have to dig very deep to find hypocrisy in the fundamentalist right-wing, which the conservative movement in this country has been cozying up to for the last 4 decades. In my view, these religious leaders want to limit freedom of religion to their religion, control our lives and have us live by a credo that they don't personally adhere to.

At the risk of getting this taken outside, and as a member of the "fundamentalist right-wing", as you put it, I'm going to call you on this statement. It's flat-out inaccurate. So-called fundamentalist organizations loudly advocate their standards of living, and attempt to persuade others to join them in it, but never attack other points of view in the manner that Fox News has been attacked, from Media Matters to the White House. So-called right-wing religious organizations have not dedicated personnel to researching the opposition with the intent of tearing it down in the manner that Media Matters has. No religious leader has attempted to limit freedom of religion to his religion - ever. No religious leader has attempted to control anyone's life in the manner in which you speak. The closest anyone has come to doing that is to attempt to organize like-minded people to boycott something they didn't agree with, a tactic practiced by all stripes of creed and politics, and we all know how successful that strategy has been.

I don't mind being "called out" and if we get taken outside, I'll still respond. Goat Rodeo Cowboy gave a better response that I could (see the examples he gave, above). To get deeper into how (in my opinion) fundamentalist Christian groups are working to limit what I believe are legitimate freedoms, we would have to get into other issues like abortion rights, and there's no point going there.

But my point was that there is hyprcrisy on both sides of the political spectrum - not that both sides necessarily engage in the same hypcrasies - I never said that.

As to what you said in regard to like-minded people being able to boycott something they don't agree with - I totally agree, and said exactly that - a few posts above.

 

[ricksegers]

It seems to me all this boils down to a very simple matter. If you don't like Fox News, don't watch it..If you do watch it. Likewise with MSNBC, CNN, CNBC or whoever. That's the reason you have a channel selector. I'm not a sports fan and don't watch ESPN but I don't gripe and complain about it. Everybody (including Media Matters) should just grow up and remember your TV has a controller..Use it!

 

[LKellerIII]

It seems to me all this boils down to a very simple matter. If you don't like Fox News, don't watch it..If you do watch it. Likewise with MSNBC, CNN, CNBC or whoever. That's the reason you have a channel selector. I'm not a sports fan and don't watch ESPN but I don't gripe and complain about it. Everybody (including Media Matters) should just grow up and remember your TV has a controller..Use it!

OK - I've used that line myself: "if you don't like it, don't watch it." But as dhett and I seem to agree, despite our differences - like-minded people are free to band together and urge others to boycott institutions (broadcast or otherwise) with which they don't agree...or to point it out if they believe an institution is spreading falsehoods or operating under false pretenses. Applied to Fox News, that would be taking exception to their supposed "Fair and Balanced" credo.

In that Politico article, Media Matters uses a lot of inflammatory language - "war on Fox," "all out attack", etc. That's too bad, but there's nothing in the article that states or implies that they are trying to censor Fox News.

And to quote the article: "In some views, the war between Media Matters and Fox is not, necessarily, bad for either side. Media Matters has transformed itself into a pillar of the progressive movement with its aggressive new brand of media campaigning. And the attacks cement Fox’s status on the right."

That says it all. In a nutshell, its the problem with all boycotts. The publicity will only make Fox News stronger - but Media Matters will be growing stronger too, and I guess that's what matters to them.

 

[ricksegers]

[/quote]


In that Politico article, Media Matters uses a lot of inflammatory language - "war on Fox," "all out attack", etc. That's too bad, but there's nothing in the article that states or implies that they are trying to censor Fox News.


[/quote]

If I recall correctly, it was that kind of language the left was going apoplectic over after the Arizona shooting.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

It seems to me all this boils down to a very simple matter. If you don't like Fox News, don't watch it..If you do watch it.

As long as the issue is: I don't LIKE it, the channel selector is an adequate remedy.

I use it often.

But when the issues becomes: They are telling lies and people who hear and believe the lies are going to elect officials who pass laws that adversely affect me, the channel selector is NOT an adequate remedy.

I can't make the gullible listener use HIS channel selector and make him want to tune out lies.

To protect the integrity of this 230 something year experiment in self government, I feel sometimes the need to do something more than use MY channel selector and sit there in the dark sucking my thumb. I can't turn off the channel for the dumbass gullible listener.

Maybe you would like a recent example. Young Barack Obama spent his youthful years in INDONESIA. A few days ago Mike Huckabee was on FOX NEWS explaining to the world that the problem is that Barak Obama spent his early years in Kenya where he was influenced by the Mau-Mau movement thus he hates Western governments as imperialists.

It's not that I dislike FOX NEWS for being the stage for such a message and I can solve all the problems of the world by turning it off with my channel selector. It is a LIE that is now implanted in the minds of the gullible listeners.

 

[dhett]

I don't mind being "called out" and if we get taken outside, I'll still respond. Goat Rodeo Cowboy gave a better response that I could (see the examples he gave, above). To get deeper into how (in my opinion) fundamentalist Christian groups are working to limit what I believe are legitimate freedoms, we would have to get into other issues like abortion rights, and there's no point going there.

I got the sense that you were painting with a broad brush and wanted to be sure that such accounts were not taken as axiomatic. To claim that you've met people with intolerant attitudes is credible. To generalize it among all churches, church leaders or advocacy groups is not.

I've encountered self-proclaimed Christians from all sects from liturgical to mainline to evangelical. Most actually attempt to live the values they preach and are doing all they can to keep their own lives under control, let alone trying to control anyone else.

I don't claim that there's no intolerance of other religions or even other sects of Christianity, or that there are no people seeking to impose their values on everyone else - that would be naive. Growing up Pentecostal in the Northeast US, I've been the target of intolerance from people in liturgical and mainline churches. But none of these were national church leaders or associated with the TV-related advocacy groups that we all enjoy discussing. Those were the ones to which I was referring in my previous post.

But my point was that there is hyprcrisy on both sides of the political spectrum - not that both sides necessarily engage in the same hypcrasies - I never said that.

I accept that. I still don't equate Media Matters' actions with those of the "fundamentalist right-wing", but that's a conversation better left for private messaging. If you care to continue the conversation in private, I'd be happy to engage.

 

[dhett]

Maybe you would like a recent example. Young Barack Obama spent his youthful years in INDONESIA. A few days ago Mike Huckabee was on FOX NEWS explaining to the world that the problem is that Barak Obama spent his early years in Kenya where he was influenced by the Mau-Mau movement thus he hates Western governments as imperialists.

It's not that I dislike FOX NEWS for being the stage for such a message and I can solve all the problems of the world by turning it off with my channel selector. It is a LIE that is now implanted in the minds of the gullible listeners.

A LIE? Are you so sure? Or just a gaffe? I know that Huckabee wrongly claimed that the President grew up in Kenya, but it would be an easy, if not careless, mistake to make, as Barack Obama SENIOR - the President's father - did grow up in Kenya. And his grandfather was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau uprising. The President claims that his family, which came from western Kenya while the Mau Mau movement was mainly in the east, was not involved in the rebellion, but his grandmother claims that her husband supplied information to the guerillas, according to a piece at blackpower.com (http://www.blackpower.com/politics/obamas-grandfather-allegedly-tortured/). Did the President lie then? How about when he said he'd been in 57 states and doubled down by saying he had a couple more to go? Was that a lie? I don't think so. Nor do I accuse Huckabee or Fox News of lying. Just committing stupid mistakes - not uncommon in the radio and TV world.

Lying is using this interview to claim, as liberal blogs have, that Huckabee is a) a closet birther (conveniently ignoring the fact that he states that the birther movement is detrimental), or b) a racist, because "Mau Mau" is just codespeak for "n----r".

 

[Kelly Watts]

wonderful devices those remote controls, allws you to change channel and never leave your recliner. I agree with the posters, if you don't like it don't watch. Judging by the veiwing reports a lot of people have long abandoned the "legacy" networks, and CNN and MSNBC to name a couple.

 

[Nate Wesley]

It seems to me all this boils down to a very simple matter. If you don't like Fox News, don't watch it..If you do watch it. Likewise with MSNBC, CNN, CNBC or whoever. That's the reason you have a channel selector. I'm not a sports fan and don't watch ESPN but I don't gripe and complain about it. Everybody (including Media Matters) should just grow up and remember your TV has a controller..Use it!

'I'm not a sports fan and don't watch ESPN but I don't gripe and complain about it' is a really crappy analogy to what's being talked about. Never mind the cheesy easy 'change the channel' solution that anyone could come up with--but its also the fact that nobody's justifying their favorable/unfavorable opinions of Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. to about not being 'news fans'. They're tying it to what they see in quality of coverage and programming.

Though would I disagree with folks who think other non-Fox outlets are decidedly left of center (I'd argue more passionately for corporate biases very much like this one), I can recognize they're mostly speaking about the execution of news reporting, not about that reporting's existence. (To a point, anyway.)

 

[LKellerIII]

Maybe you would like a recent example. Young Barack Obama spent his youthful years in INDONESIA. A few days ago Mike Huckabee was on FOX NEWS explaining to the world that the problem is that Barak Obama spent his early years in Kenya where he was influenced by the Mau-Mau movement thus he hates Western governments as imperialists.

It's not that I dislike FOX NEWS for being the stage for such a message and I can solve all the problems of the world by turning it off with my channel selector. It is a LIE that is now implanted in the minds of the gullible listeners.

A LIE? Are you so sure? Or just a gaffe? I know that Huckabee wrongly claimed that the President grew up in Kenya, but it would be an easy, if not careless, mistake to make, as Barack Obama SENIOR - the President's father - did grow up in Kenya. And his grandfather was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau uprising. The President claims that his family, which came from western Kenya while the Mau Mau movement was mainly in the east, was not involved in the rebellion, but his grandmother claims that her husband supplied information to the guerillas, according to a piece at blackpower.com (http://www.blackpower.com/politics/obamas-grandfather-allegedly-tortured/). Did the President lie then? How about when he said he'd been in 57 states and doubled down by saying he had a couple more to go? Was that a lie? I don't think so. Nor do I accuse Huckabee or Fox News of lying. Just committing stupid mistakes - not uncommon in the radio and TV world.

Lying is using this interview to claim, as liberal blogs have, that Huckabee is a) a closet birther (conveniently ignoring the fact that he states that the birther movement is detrimental), or b) a racist, because "Mau Mau" is just codespeak for "n----r".

If you heard the recording of Huckabee's remarks, it was fairly long and involved multiple sentences, and some interaction with the talk host. If it was a "gaffe," it was a serious one. How do you confuse the fact that Obama's father (who he barely knew) was Kenyan, with some weird idea that Barack grew up in Kenya? The details of his childhood have been widely publized and involve Hawaii and Indonesia, never Kenya.

Huckabee is very smart guy and impresses me as being well informed. I always liked him (never woulda voted for him, but liked him nevertheless), but I lost a good bit of respect for him because of that "gaffe."

And its typical of the never-mind-the-facts mis-information campaigns dissemintated by some right-wing groups. No matter how many times Obama shows his birth certificate, these loons will still yell "why won't he just produce the birth certificate?"

 

[dhett]

If you heard the recording of Huckabee's remarks, it was fairly long and involved multiple sentences, and some interaction with the talk host. If it was a "gaffe," it was a serious one. How do you confuse the fact that Obama's father (who he barely knew) was Kenyan, with some weird idea that Barack grew up in Kenya? The details of his childhood have been widely publized and involve Hawaii and Indonesia, never Kenya.

Huckabee is very smart guy and impresses me as being well informed. I always liked him (never woulda voted for him, but liked him nevertheless), but I lost a good bit of respect for him because of that "gaffe."

And its typical of the never-mind-the-facts mis-information campaigns dissemintated by some right-wing groups. No matter how many times Obama shows his birth certificate, these loons will still yell "why won't he just produce the birth certificate?"

Before I posted, I made sure I actually heard the recording, and not just commentary about it. I might say that it took a lot of digging through cr@p to find it. And yes, I do mean a gaffe, and a serious one - along the lines of "There has never been Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration."

Like you, I like Huckabee, and also like you, but for a different reason, I would never have voted for him, and don't plan to now. The reason is shared by many other conservatives like myself, including "birthers" (of which I am not - I also share your sentiments about them). Huckabee's perceived weakness on immigration issues hurts his candidacy more than any other issue. And going "birther" opens him up to charges of flip-flopping. So he has nothing to gain by trying to start a "Obama grew up in Kenya" rumor, or by cozying up to the "birther" crowd. For me to even entertain the idea that he deliberately lied about Obama's birthplace, I would have to see how it would give him any advantage. I cannot.

 

[RadioMan203]

Like you, I like Huckabee, and also like you, but for a different reason, I would never have voted for him, and don't plan to now. The reason is shared by many other conservatives like myself, including "birthers" (of which I am not - I also share your sentiments about them). Huckabee's perceived weakness on immigration issues hurts his candidacy more than any other issue. And going "birther" opens him up to charges of flip-flopping. So he has nothing to gain by trying to start a "Obama grew up in Kenya" rumor, or by cozying up to the "birther" crowd. For me to even entertain the idea that he deliberately lied about Obama's birthplace, I would have to see how it would give him any advantage. I cannot.

I similarly like Huck and would be personally on the fence in regards to voting. While it may have been viewed as a back-pedal, the statement he made regarding that nobody remembers BHO from before is 20's would make anybody question why. I do, as most anybody I know today I can easily find people who knew them in childhood. Allegedly born Hawaii, a Connecticut SS number and nobody remembers him as a young Barry Soetoro - I'm sorry but there's a fly in the soup somewhere that doesn't belong as far as I can tell.

Anyways, back on to the thread at hand: How does Media Matter think they're going to give FNC any sort of come-uppance? I always thought they were just another left learning group with nothing better to do than flap their gums!

 

[dhett]

Anyways, back on to the thread at hand: How does Media Matter think they're going to give FNC any sort of come-uppance? I always thought they were just another left learning group with nothing better to do than flap their gums!

No kidding - it's one left-leaning group going after another! How does that angle not get covered in the media? I mean, every time conservative groups disagree, you'd think the Republican party was going to split off into a million pieces, to hear it in the press!

We really need a conservative counterpart to Faux News' so-called "fair and balanced" coverage. They're as left-leaning as the others!

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

We really need a conservative counterpart to Faux News' so-called "fair and balanced" coverage. They're as left-leaning as the others!

Now there is a concept that boggles the mind!

I am trying to imagine what an organization would be like if it were so conservative as to make Fox News look like a left-leaning organization.

What is keeping us from having such a channel?

 

[dhett]

We really need a conservative counterpart to Faux News' so-called "fair and balanced" coverage. They're as left-leaning as the others!

Now there is a concept that boggles the mind!

I am trying to imagine what an organization would be like if it were so conservative as to make Fox News look like a left-leaning organization.

What is keeping us from having such a channel?

On any other day, such a concept might have even been controversial. ;D

 

[LKellerIII]

Re-awakening this debate, perhaps. Conservatives have often stated that Fox News is the antidote to the regular liberally-biased media...Palin calls it the "lame-stream media." So the idea is - the regular media is so biased toward liberals and the Democrats that it's only fair that Fox News gets to be biased toward the right. Of course, this also includes the note that Fox is "Fair and Balanced" outside of the night-time opinion hours.


NPR and PBS are the favorite targets of conservatives - who claim they are biased toward the left. But I am struck again at how UNTRUE this is. This morning on NPR, Scott Simon had a long and thoughtful interview with conservative Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn, who was provided with many minutes of air-time to present the Tea Party view of the world. Both NPR and PBS have a number of conservative commentators on their payroll - who provide the conservative viewpoint on a regular basis.

I hear this kind of thing all the time on NPR. My views on immigration have become more conservative because of thoughtful conservative viewpoints on the subject - and I heard those conservative viewpoints on NPR - not on Fox News from right-wing bomb-throwers like Hannity or Dobbs.

So I'll ask the question - does Fox News give time to liberal pundits on their airwaves? I'm not arguing a point-of-view here, I'm honestly asking that question. I don't watch Fox News on a consistent basis, so maybe they do. But when I tune in, all I've seen is the constant barrage of right-wing commentary from their platoon of far-right pundits like Krauthammer, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, etc. And that's not only during the night-time commentary hours - it's also during their supposed fair-and-balanced news hours.

But I'm willing to hear that I'm wrong, and Fox News gives some "fair and balanced" air time to liberal commentators.

Awaiting your reply, dhett, BRNout, and others.