0
   

Out Foxed

 
 
Foxfyre
 
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 02:58 pm
Is it possible that 90% of political ideology is perception more than reality? If a news source doesn't say something uncomplimentary about Clinton or Kerry, it is seen as okay by the left but conservatives see it as having left wing bias.

Conversely, if a cable news channel doesn't 'treat conservatism as an infectious disease'. does the left automatically brand it as a shill for the right?

Our European and Canadian friends seem to see virtually all U.S. media as 'conservative' while American conservatives see most of as tilted decidedly left.

Maybe that's why we all can't just get along?

Quote:
Is there anything funnier to watch than the Left suddenly discovering the virtues of journalistic objectivity? Liberals arrogantly have ruled the news media roost for decades, regularly demeaning conservative ideas and leaders in their ongoing quest for progress and enlightenment.

But now that Fox News Channel is on the scene, dominating the cable news scene and showing America that TV news can be something different than the suffocating consensus of the liberal establishment, the left is in a panic. Objectivity is needed! Democracy itself is in danger!

When Fox News debuted in 1996, liberals couldn't contain their laughter at what they considered a sophomoric challenge to the dominant media. Then, Fox became a pest, the proverbial gnat that wouldn't go away. Ultimately - almost overnight - Fox overtook its cable competitors and became king of the hill. Fox became a menace on the media landscape that should have been aborted before birth, a blatantly biased and bullying blight on America.

That's the sour theme behind "Outfoxed," a new Michael Mooresque documentary funded and circulated by the radical lefties at MoveOn.org and the so-called Center for American Progress. A summary of its thesis comes very near the film's end when John Nichols of The Nation proclaims that Fox must be stopped because it "limits" and "narrows political discourse."

Welcome to the Fox-hater's upside-down world: decades of liberal TV news unanimity represented diversity, and a conservative alternative is the arrival of a narrowed spectrum of opinion? The advent of a network that doesn't treat conservatism like an infectious disease is a danger to democracy?
by Brent Bozell

Remainder of piece:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2004/col20040721.asp
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 5,293 • Replies: 63
No top replies

 
Earl Grey
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 03:44 pm
Re: Out Foxed
Foxfyre wrote:

Our European and Canadian friends seem to see virtually all U.S. media as 'conservative' while American conservatives see most of as tilted decidedly left.


Speaking as a european I have no particular opinion of whether the US media is slanted to the republican or to the democratic side.

What I find "conservative american", and quite ridiculous, are things like not allowing curse words or four letter words, the idea that children are harmed by exposure to sex on TV etc. I think the attitude regarding that is different in the part of Europe where I am from.

The most striking thing about US media is the emphasis on patriotism. To me there is an aura of egoism and a lack of empathy about patriotism.

As far as I understand it, if you accuse an american of being unpatriotic, he is in a real bind and had better vehemently deny such an accusation or lose credibility. Where I live being called patriotic is not far from being called a right wing extremist, a racist or a fascist.
You could say that "patriotic" is something people here used to be during WW2, but now it is obsolete.

This is how I, a swedish european, see it. Ask a french european and the answer might well be different, I don't know. Europe is a very diverse continent. Smile
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:12 pm
I'm of the opinion that American televised news is crap, period. Flip on our most revered news network (since their bit of fortune during the Gulf War, anyway) in the morning, and you're liable to see some bit of pop music crap. It's all corporate trash.

That said, I certainly wouldn't call any of the major television outlets at all liberal, and I do think that Fox news was consciously constructed to cater to the phone-in talk radio crowd. Frankly, I miss the Canadian broadcasts I got when I lived in Washington.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:16 pm
patiodog is correct. It's one of the great myths that networks other than Fox are left-wing. They have the same overall agenda as Fox: To make money for their share holders.

It's Fox, of course, that makes the claim that it is "fair and balanced." Do they still also say, "We report; you decide"? I forget. It's Fox's good fortune that their rightist slant is in line with an audience who wants to see confirmation of their pre-conceived notions. And with Fox, they get it...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:25 pm
Earl writes:
Quote:
This is how I, a swedish european, see it. Ask a french european and the answer might well be different, I don't know. Europe is a very diverse continent.


As is the North American continent and as is the United States. The really wierd thing is that many on both the left and the write enjoy somebody as profane and outrageous as a Howard Stern and the left will applaud celebrities using the most vile vulgarities when bashing the president or the left, but will then comment at length on the impropriety of the vice president saying "f**k" once.

I wonder if Fox is so decidedly slanted right as it is perceived that way because it doesn't go out of its way to point out the sins of conservatism and conservative politicians?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:27 pm
Oh I just thought about the sex thing too. I don't think Americans are so inhibited about sex as one might think when magazine ads, teleivions programs, and movies all go out of their way to include some gratuitous sex, violence, and/or profanity to avoid the dreaded "G" rating.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:32 pm
Quote:
I wonder if Fox is so decidedly slanted right as it is perceived that way because it doesn't go out of its way to point out the sins of conservatism and conservative politicians?


As loaded as that quasi-question is -- yes. That is precisely it. The network's talking heads consistently bash dems and admire repubs, and love war. I'm not stupid enough to think it stems from an ideological commitment on the part of the network: they just know their audience, and they know that they are the only television outlet that caters to that audience. CNN and MSNBC, on the other hand, seem devoted to catching trends and trying to one-up each other on entertainment and glitzy graphics, so neither can confidently claim a core audience.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:48 pm
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2004/db040719.gif
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:49 pm
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2004/db040721.gif
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:50 pm
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2004/db040722.gif
0 Replies
 
Earl Grey
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:51 pm
@Foxfyre
Very true comment you make about the diversity.
I think the general impression of US media, well TV mostly then, over here is still one of prudish censorship. The examples you mention of the opposite makes the censoring all the more bewildering. Why?

What is different when comparing Europe with USA is that since the European Union consists of different nations such a thing as patriotism can't be applied to the Union as it can in America.
Also perhaps there is a stigma left in some countries - I'm thinking particularly in Germany - after the world wars which makes patriotism less desirable.

You mention Howard Stern, who I thought was funny based mostly on the film, but that was years ago.
I believe I've heard about other american radio talkshow hosts who express the most extreme views and abuse their political opponents.
I can't think of anything similar here in Sweden, unless it'd be a satire or something like that.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 04:53 pm
American radio is a thing to behold, teacup...
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:05 pm
As myself and many other posters from Canada, Europe and Australia have observed, political discourse in the US as represented by even the major media and both major parties is generally so far right that 'liberal media' claims are entirely derisable. Bill Clinton, if he were a European politician, would not even be centrist, but considered to the right, as folks here have remarked.

Elsewhere here, I have quoted various right wing pundits and politicians confessing that there has been a purposeful promotion of the notion of 'liberal media' (Bill Kristol, Pat Buchanan, James Baker, etc) for the very obvious reasons why such a notion might be advantageous to right side ideologues.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:25 pm
Where are the cartoons from Blatham? They fit right in. Smile

I know you perceive the American press as tilted right or even maybe far right and to me that is just mind boggling as I read European press and don't see it as all that much different from our own mainstream media. Its all in perception I think.

Earl, I don't think we have censorship of our media as that would violate our constitutionally protected free speech. But there is a sense of propriety about what is suitable for children and to what polite company should be subjected. Therefore, on the free public airways, it is required that content not be offensive to the general public. On cable where we specifically pay for the programming, there is little or no restriction on content.
0 Replies
 
Earl Grey
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:40 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Earl, I don't think we have censorship of our media as that would violate our constitutionally protected free speech. But there is a sense of propriety about what is suitable for children and to what polite company should be subjected. Therefore, on the free public airways, it is required that content not be offensive to the general public. On cable where we specifically pay for the programming, there is little or no restriction on content.


In this regard what I meant with censorship was bleeping of words, blurring of nude parts, someone giving the finger etc.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:47 pm
Quote:
Therefore, on the free public airways, it is required that content not be offensive to the general public.


Quote:
In this regard what I meant with censorship was bleeping of words, blurring of nude parts, someone giving the finger etc.


Many of us Yankees are greatly offended by these things. However, grainy footage of bombs exploding is fantastic television.
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:53 pm
Quote:
However, grainy footage of bombs exploding is fantastic television.


Next to Reality TV, what could be more riveting?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 05:54 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
But there is a sense of propriety about what is suitable for children and to what polite company should be subjected. Therefore, on the free public airways, it is required that content not be offensive to the general public.


Yup, boobs are horribly offensive to Americans. Seeing people get blown up isn't. <nods>
0 Replies
 
the reincarnation of suzy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 07:05 pm
Funny what we've deemed acceptable.
I think the hate radio talk shows are obscene, but instead we ban breasts.
I dunno.
Hi earl grey!
0 Replies
 
the reincarnation of suzy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jul, 2004 07:08 pm
Funny what we've deemed acceptable.
I think the hate radio talk shows are obscene, but instead we ban breasts.
I dunno.
Hi earl grey!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Out Foxed
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/19/2019 at 06:09:33