This is topic Which is worse? in forum General Comments at The Ornery American Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.ornery.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/6/9494.html

Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
Rupert Murdoch's News Corp's botched plan to air a two hour special where OJ explains how he murdered his ex-wife (just kidding!), or Kerry's botched joke about Bush getting us stuck in Iraq because he's dumb?

Since FOX News (farinballenst) likes to arbitrate such foolishness for us and was on top of the Kerry bomb 24/7, we should be able to pick which of these was worse by comparing the amounts of coverage each story receives.

Another u-pick option is to compare the NY Times writing about the not-so-secret wiretapping program or the NY Times blabbing that the Government had posted Iraqi plans to build a nuclear bomb on a web site to show people how dangerous the Iraq threat was.
 
Posted by ssci (Member # 1053) on :
 
In addition to not watching the OJ special I am boycotting an additional 10 hours of Fox. Idiots.

Edited for typo.

[ November 20, 2006, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: ssci ]
 
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 2212) on :
 
quote:
Since FOX News (farinballenst) likes to arbitrate such foolishness for us and was on top of the Kerry bomb 24/7, we should be able to pick which of these was worse by comparing the amounts of coverage each story receives.
Well, Bill O'Reilly said Kerry's joke was not an insult to the troops and that Fox's plans for the OJ interview were embarrassing and evil. So it's pretty clear how the poster boy for Fox News feels.
 
Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
Good for him.
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
If one wants to cherry pick stupidity, I suppose you could use Fox as a punching bag to feel validated in rejecting everything they say.

There was CNN's little faux pas of running that special where it stated Americans used chemical weapons in Vietnam, or Rathergate, or the poor coverage of Chinagate, Newsweeks' false Koran allegations, the fake exploding pickup truck with handy dandy "sparkplug in the gastank" option little purchased on the open market, the NYT coverage of Russias famines and political oppression.

Kerry brought that on himself. Fox brought OJ upon themselves and "lost points" as girls say.
 
Posted by scifibum (Member # 945) on :
 
Just a question for the smart people on this forum. A news story about the cancellation of the OJ special says this:

quote:
Although he was ordered to pay $33.5 million in damages to the Goldman family, Simpson has avoided making full restitution because California law prevents his NFL pension from being seized to satisfy the judgment. His lavish residence in Florida is similarly protected under state law.
Story at: http://www.fox21.com/Global/story.asp?S=5709073&nav=2KPp

My question is: how can this be possible? Why can't his assets be seized? Even if they can't be seized right away shouldn't he be in default for not paying the judgment, and be arrested for that?
 
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 2212) on :
 
You're generally not arrested for not paying a judgment - your assets are seized. Some assets are exempt. This basic framework exists in every state I'm aware of, although specifics vary wildly.
 
Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
Fly, some of the ones you mention were legitimate, some not and a couple I haven't heard of. You can't seriously claim that catching FOX doing something lowlife is hard to do (just ask O'Reilly's phone mate about the obscene calls he made to her -- he's still on the air in prime time and she's long gone, right?).

FOX is such an easy target, because they go to the well so often to slime people whose politics they don't agree with. You can find a stupid news trick on any network, but you don't really think you can find a "prime time" lineup of unabashedly biased stories on any other network that can compare with FOX's, do you?

I picked on them for those two stories now, because they are both very current and one of them directly reflects on the very values they claim to prize so dearly. Rathergate is a legitimate push back, but show me anything from CBS that comes anywhere close to using a celebrity murderer to pump their ratings by describing how he did it. That's not cherry picking, that's scraping the bottom of the barrel.

It isn't any better if they rationalize it as a reflection of their viewers' tastes. In fact, it's probably worse. I know this annoys you, but in fairness, don't you agree that the OJ debacle is over the line?
 
Posted by KnightEnder (Member # 992) on :
 
Props to O'Reilly, Sheppard, et al for bad mouthing OJ and thus their own network.

There is no comparison between what Kerry didn't say and what OJ did or is now trying to do, but Fox News comes out looking pretty good on both accounts this time. Especially O'Reilly.

KE
 
Posted by Ivan (Member # 1467) on :
 
Question: Did FOX pull the plug on this or did OJ?
 
Posted by KnightEnder (Member # 992) on :
 
Fox, from what I heard on Fox News on the radio. (I like to drive and cry while listening to Sean Hannity. It makes me cry that there are people out there that actually agree with that fat pompous ass.)

KE
 
Posted by LoverOfJoy (Member # 157) on :
 
quote:
(I like to drive and cry while listening to Sean Hannity. It makes me cry that there are people out there that actually agree with that fat pompous ass.)
Sean Hannity is in my opinion the worst talking head in the media. I can't even think of someone else who comes close (and there are quite a few other baddies). This is coming from a right-leaning guy.
 
Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
I agree that props go to the ones who badmouthed it at FOX. But,...

Murdoch made the announcement. Hard to see how FOX gets props for scheduling and promoting this until the tsunami of disgust forced Murdoch to personally push it off the agenda.

[Edited to recognize the FOX presenters who went against the grain.]

[ November 20, 2006, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: DaveS ]
 
Posted by scifibum (Member # 945) on :
 
Well, Fox has my tacit approval for changing their minds. Oops did I just make it un-tacit?
 
Posted by DonaldD (Member # 1052) on :
 
The US didn't use chemical weapons in Vietnam? Or was the CNN story about specific shemical weapons?
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
I believe it was specific chemical weapons which was found to be unsupported by facts. The piece was made by the same guy who later played apologist for Saddam during Gulf 2. I don't remember his name.

DaveS. There are two different arguments you are making. One is a critique of the entertainment division. Fox...goes to the lowest common denominator at times (Temptation Island or Celebrity Boxing for example). Someone really stupid thought up the OJ thing and I offer no apology on their behalf.

The second goes to implied character assassination. Kerry lasted a short time, from when he made the comments until he apologized. If you'd like a MSM example, Mark Foley was artificially dragged out The story broke in September. It wasn't THAT big a story...and yet stayed front and center until November. Strange. Tell me again about how dozens of media outlets can't find more important news then a guy talking dirty inappropriately? And I keep getting told that Republicans are uptight...

Lest I sound dismissive, Mark Foley was wrong. Pronging an intern wrong? No. The story should have gone away when he resigned. And yet a quick perusal of the NYT archives shows that every article which discusses Republicans HAS to mention Mark Foley all the way up to November.

[ November 23, 2006, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
quote:
Report on CNN Broadcast
The following is the complete text of attorney Floyd Abrams' report on his independent investigation of CNN's broadcast "Valley of Death."

"VALLEY OF DEATH"
We have completed our review of the broadcast "VALLEY OF DEATH" and submit this report to summarize our conclusions. In the course of our review, we have had access to the information relied upon by the CNN journalists in their preparation of the broadcast, including certain information about confidential sources that will not (in order to continue to protect their confidentiality) be set forth in detail in this document. Where we considered it appropriate to do so, we have ourselves interviewed sources of information used in preparing the broadcast and have consulted with present and former military and other government officials. We have reviewed published criticisms of the broadcast and have had the benefit of post-broadcast interviews conducted by Time Magazine personnel. We have also utilized the services of independent investigators retained by us.

Our central conclusion is that although the broadcast was prepared after exhaustive research, was rooted in considerable supportive data, and reflected the deeply held beliefs of the CNN journalists who prepared it, the central thesis of the broadcast could not be sustained at the time of the broadcast itself and cannot be sustained now. CNN's conclusion that United States troops used nerve gas during the Vietnamese conflict on a mission in Laos designed to kill American defectors is insupportable.
CNN should retract the story and apologize.


The narrarator was Peter Arnett. He did not make the piece as previously stated. He is still a tool, however.
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
quote:
Sean Hannity is in my opinion the worst talking head in the media. I can't even think of someone else who comes close (and there are quite a few other baddies). This is coming from a right-leaning guy.
Ditto [Wink]

I absolutely loathe Sean Hannity. I would rather chew tinfoil then listen to him stupidly attack people in the name of Conservatism.
 
Posted by KnightEnder (Member # 992) on :
 
Fly,

The left leaning media trying to win us the election. Although Kerry did his dumbass best to screw it up.

Now that we got what we wished for we have to be careful.

Happy Thanksgiving!

KE
 
Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
The Foley "incident" has far more implications than the Kerry bomb, because it was pernicious, ongoing, well-known within the Republican leadership, hushed up rather than addressed (for example, at a minimum by removing him from his child abuse oversight committee role), and apparently lied about (given all the contradictory accusations and denials that the Republicans have been flinging around about it).

Even so, it was overblown in order to be used as a tool by all sides of the MSM to generate attention (to the MSM, not the election).

FOX coverage of the OJ aftermath matched that of all other networks combined, which I would have thought commendable. But, since I did watch several hours of the aftermath (I'm a masochist, so what?), I was even more impressed by how they turned it into a shamefest of moral shortcomings of nameless liberals and their agendas. Little was said about FOX's role, except by our man O'Reilly, who takes credit for getting the show cancelled. I wonder how he'll make it up to Rupert.
 
Posted by Jesse (Member # 1860) on :
 
Thanks for posting that, Fly. I was about to point out that we most certainly did use chemical weapons in Vietnam (CS Gas, and debatably Agent Orange)...but anyone who wants to throw around Nerve Gas charges better have a bunch of old canisters with "Made in the USA labels" at a bare minimum.

DaveS, expect to see O'Reilly veer toward the center in his coverage. You're going to hear a lot more about his long standanding opposition to the death penalty in most situations and his support for gay's adopting and such.

He's going to start trying again to prove his "independant" credentials, just MHO.

[ November 23, 2006, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]
 
Posted by DaveS (Member # 2734) on :
 
The CNN story is an example of corporate mistakes, but also of corporate responsibility. They not only retracted the story publicly after an independent review, but at least four of the CNN staffers who participated in it either resigned (forcibly) or were fired. The CBS story falls into a similar category, where an independent review was followed by a retraction and the firing of four staffers. Rather's career was cut short by the fiasco, as well.

So far with FOX, the events follow a different path. FOX's parent company, News Corp, commissioned and paid a $MM+ advance for the book and the two part interview through its subsidiaries, ReganBooks and FOX TV. Presumably, Murdoch was well aware of and approved of all that. The release of the book was to coincide with the airing of the interview at the end of November's TV ratings sweeps period. After widespread outrage, Murdoch cancelled both. It has since been alleged by Denise Brown, Nicole's sister, that FOX offered her family $MM+ more to stay quiet during and after the broadcast and book release. Let's just say that the taint of principled journalism does not cling to FOX or Murdoch the way it does to CNN and CBS for their handling of their respective mistakes.
 


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1