1
   

Canadians want Fox News Now!

 
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 07:51 am
"Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah"
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 07:53 am
Your erudition is a great value to this site.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 07:56 am
Try to maintain control Smile

<I know it's difficult>
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 08:00 am
MG:-

Well-I was thinking more of the land the aboriginal Indian tribes of North America used to range over.Not own notice.

I don't know what wikipedia is and I don't fancy studying the word.Judging from the quote though it doesn't seem worth the bother.It seems to be rather stretching the word "undress" to mean a sexual act by it and even that assumes we know what a "sexual act" consists of scientifically.Which I do.

My reference to Noah,which is an abstract concept in itself,was a mere aside in relation to Foxy's signature tune which had struck me as the polar opposite of "journalism".One ought to find a signature,I feel,that concisely represents one's general position.That is why I have not yet decided to use one.A poor one can soon look silly with constant repetition like a botched piece of facial nip and tuck.
And Mr Dylan got into a fair bit of trouble with his line in Jokerman about Lev.and Deut and the jungle and the sea.
I don't have a virulent city/country dichotomy.I simply comment on the reality of both and their relevance to modes of thinking.Your first sentence
does contain an "if" a "say" a "pretty" and a "suspect" and these are "carpet moving under you" style constructions.The dichotomy does exist.
How virulent it is depends on subjective factors.It has certainly been virulent over fox-hunting and hare-coursing and now they have fallen fishing might be next.(My use of "certainly" which is actually un-necessary shows how I can adopt city speech patterns where appropriate.)

I have to confess ignorance on the sexual depravity issue.Both that and the city/country thing are quite complex matters.My assessment of city mentality from the media evidence is that it is inhuman from an evolutionary standpoint,intellectually exhausted and in terminal decline.No amount of goodwill,and I'm not short of that,can find real meaning in Foxy's posting or,for that matter,in most posting.My objection to it is the obvious assumption made that I will find meaning in them.It's insulting.It is hobby horse riding and,one asumes,nobody is supposed to notice.

I am prepared to leave Russel's definition where it is because it is another way of saying what I said.I can't say I rate the guy much.Had his campaign to scrap nuclear weapons been successful I fear a few more millions of conscripted soldiers,sailors,airmen and civilians would now be dead or maimed.It is understandable that you have no wish to debate "ethics".But then,why go on to do just that?

We can all agree on brain surgeons but only up to a certain point.They are mechanics really.The ethical question in that field is a money matter or,with some groups,a religious question.We can't assume that all brain surgery is going to be carried out on people who will then return to normal life.It would thus fall under a political or,if you like,economic decision process.Oooops!It already has done.It is quite easy to provide every patient with limitless care so long as bankrupting the system isn't a concern.If ethics has any meaning at all "patients" would include Bhopal victims and,as it so obviously doesn't,one can only assume racism is at work.I use "Bhopal victims" as a symbol.I tend to think that surgeons take great care to avoid career threatening incidents.I actually think that is the best way to manage them which then provides a justification for certain types of journalism of the watchdog variety.
I studied journalism intensely for five years in the same way Darwin studied fossils and pigeons with special emphasis on the female variety.I became quite notorious in fact.Plotting the natural exhibitionism of virtue and material success became as easy as falling off the sofa laughing.And the obsession with sex,or what H Miller called "the ovarian trolley" was astounding.Bernard Shaw once said that if women were given the vote we would all end up talking about aspects of ovaries and a glance at any media outlet is there to show that old Shaw was no fool.

You might have noticed that GB's media is today concerning itself,in view of Kyoto going onstream,minus the US of A of course because any US politician who embraced it would lose favour,with heat emissions from public buildings as shown in photographs taken at night.Buck Pal was feechewered,(a word from my scientific quest) looking like a volcano in eruption.The news voice assured us that The Queen had taken some measures to reduce the loss."Some" eh?Now Bernie what does "some" mean.Has it any useful meaning?Obviously not.That's journalese.Filling up the space between adverts.A straight parasitical activity.Giving an impression that something is happening that isn't.When Private Eye used a quote with "a great deal" in it they always followed it with a (sic).

What is the first rule of journalism?

I didn't get like this of my own accord you know.I had my nose rubbed into the facts of life goodstyle.

Regards.
spendius.

PS.Let's get back to the Goddess eh.She is far more
(no sic) interesting.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 08:08 am
sp
Must head out, but will respond in a bit. And yeah, I know you are fond of the godess. But I refuse utterly to capitalize the bitch. Unless I'm kneeling already.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 08:38 am
JustWonders wrote:
Amazing that anyone could criticize Fox News with a straight face and then admit being a devotee of Common Screams.

One word: YAHOO!!!


Pardon me, dear. That was from the Portland Press Herald. It was written by a man whose son is going to Iraq. It was written by a man who asks, why in the land of freedom of speech, Confused , no one asks any questions?

Within his article, everything he said was dead on true, supported by United States government commissions.

One word: IDI, ... forget it.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2005 06:04 pm
sp

Re injuns...yeah, the contract between abraham and god was open-ended.

wikipedia is pretty cool, actually. It's a contributory encyclopedia...you could write something on the Godess for the site.

The ultimate analysis of the Noah story comes courtesy of lyricist Ira Gershwin in It Ain't Necessarily So. The pimp Sportin Life is talking to Bess, trying to convince her to come to Manhattan with him (some stories remain wonderfully workable) and he lists this series of increasingly improbably old testament miracles, to undermine her faith-based resistance, and to make clear that these tales are really about sex after all. The final stanza drives the knife home:
"little moses was found in a stream
little moses was found in a stream
he floated on water
'till old pharoah's daughter
she fished him (she says!)
from that stream
zim bam boodle oo
scatty wah"
And Gershwin got to write that wonderful Noah line en route:
"he made his home in
dat fish's abdomen"
Of course, the real story unfolds before our eyes...not arriving home to his wife's bed for five or six nights consecutive, Noah finally stumbles in smelling like booze and fish and he's read Adolf and knows the value of a big lie...

As to your signature, please feel free to quote anything I've written.

On the matter of hobby-horses, I simply do not speak of them. I think it bad luck before a race and my coffin ought to have at least one blue ribbon tucked away with the Elvis shrine and the little dashboard bobbly-head jesus.

re ethics...nice try, but dinner was a steak of the most magnificently immoral flavor, and I ain't nibblin. But I will bite on the racism point...yeah, I know it. It is a cold draught leaking in the windows and when I'm tucked in with the blue ribbon and elvis and jesus (white folk) is when I'll stop shivering.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Feb, 2005 07:39 am
MG:-

Don't really know what to make of that old boy.

Noah???It's a bit difficult in brief.Noah is a story out of the Magian world.They believed in magic and alchemy.Thus miracles were no problem to them.They seem to have thought that miracles were unusual actions undertaken by people who were endowed by God with special powers.Our rationality would have been incoherent to them.They existed between the Nile,the Black sea,the Tigris and South Arabia roughly.They had no conception of our prime symbol of pure and limitless space.Compare frescoes to Rembrandt.My own view,for what that's worth,is that electricity marks a new and completely opposed epoch.

As far as the steak is concerned I have no moral position.I don't eat it for health reasons and also because I don't care to have bits of dead animals rotting away within my residence.And I never eat out.

I'm glad you agree that we are all racists because it is unavoidable.Name me someone who's not a racist and I'll go out and say a prayer for him or her.

I don't think my take on the Goddess would get past the editor of wikipedia.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Feb, 2005 08:27 am
catching up on reading.......you guys sure are long winded. Back later.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Feb, 2005 09:46 am
sp

Things get rather fuzzy back then, don't they. Stories piggyback up through time taking new colorations and gaining new interpretations as they ascend. The persians would have gained their key stories from earlier times too. Not sure if you've run into Elaine Pagels, but her Adam, Eve and the Serpeant is a delicious study of how the Genesis story has changed over time. I'll mention Catal Huyuk again...it's 6000BC, central turkey, first big city (so far uncovered), and though there is no way at all to know what was going on in those noggins, we are surely the inheritors of that culture, at least in part, and very likely in some deep 'religious' ideas. Any book by Mellart you might find ought to be of interest. One historical period that I focus on is the neolithic, with the domestication of wheat and animals, thus permanent settlements and the consequent out-the-roof increase in human populations. But I'll buy the voltage view too.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Feb, 2005 10:15 am
MG:-

I'll check my shelves.I have stuff I don't even know about.
But it looks like a few months work there if I follow up.Imagine a historian in 1000 years going through A2K to get an idea what's in our nogs.Have you read Canticle For Leobwitz.Some monastic finds an electricians tool box long after a nuke fest.You must get to grips with Spengler though.
You could look at it this way.If Mr Jackson had been accused of what he is he would have been hung up by the big toes in the market place for anybody who fancied to vent their spleen on and competing with each other for originality.Terrible for lawyers wasn't it?Not even a trial.An Emmett Till job.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2005 05:46 am
Why Most Embeds Don't Tell All
"If anyone gets too close to us we ****ing waste them," said the Marine lieutenant. "It's kind of a shame, because it means we've killed a lot of innocent people." This came from a British reporter, traveling with American forces. Few of our embeds have passed along a quote like that, and I wonder why.- January 07, 2005

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_archive.jsp
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Mar, 2005 05:45 am
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000837511

Study Finds No Media Bias on War, Hits Fox As Most One-Sided

By E&P Staff

Published: March 13, 2005 9:00 PM ET

NEW YORK The Project for Excellence in Journalism's "State of the American News Media 2005," released late Sunday, disputes charges of antiwar media bias,

And it determined that Fox News was the most one-sided of all major outlets. In fact, the idea that Americans are engaged in "partisan" news consumption isn't supported by the research. With the exception of Republicans who prefer Fox, most media use mirrors the general population, the study found.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Mar, 2005 06:29 am
Fox's attitude to Italian citizens killed by US troops by mistake:

"Krauthammer Goes Beyond the Bounds (Again)
Last night (3/7) on Special Report, Brit Hume went to great lengths to continue the spin on the shooting incident that killed Italian intel agent Nicola Calipari & wounded Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena, with a lot of help from one of the most rabid ideologues on his "All-Star" panel, Charles Krauthammer, who said: "She's lucky she wasn't shot as a collaborator."

At 6:18pm (all times ET) Bret Baier reported on the Sgrena shooting incident. It should be noted that Baier was reporting, as usual, from the Pentagon, not from Rome. And, as with other reports on this incident aired elsewhere on Fox, Baier's report minimized & downplayed the events. He said that "hundreds of Italians" lined the streets for Calipari's funeral. Baier also said that the Italians "did not inform the US about the move", thus creating the problem. He showed clips of a State Dept statement, read from the official Pentagon response, & showed a clip of Scott McClellan talking about this. He also mentioned that there is a separate investigation into the shooting death of a Bulgarian soldier in Iraq by US forces.

Comment: "Hundreds" of people? The Italian press reported that "thousands" crowded into Santa Maria degli Angeli church in Rome for Calipari's full state funeral, with 20,000 more in the square outside the church; & an estimated 100,000 people filed by his coffin as it lay in state. Baier also didn't mention that the priest who officiated at Calipari's funeral was his brother, Maurizio -- an unusual lapse for Fox, which normally loves the tug-at-your-heartstrings angle.

At 6:21pm Hume interviewed Robt Scales (US Army Gen, ret) about the incident. Scales is a frequent Fox guest, & was relatively subdued (for him). He offered a lot of factual information about the US military's rules of engagement (the Army usually leaves a battalion, or 1000 troops, to guard this particular stretch of road, with each checkpoint manend by one platoon, often with one Iraqi Natl Guard unit; the checkpoints are frequently moved so they don't become targets; the procedure is voice warning, then flashing lights, then shooting in the air, then shooting at tires or engine block, & only then, if all else fails, "deadly force"). When Hume asked if US intel did or didn't know Sgrena was being taken to the airport, Scales had to admit it's not entirely clear." When Hume wondered why the driver wouldn't stop, Scales speculated that he "decides to accelerate through" the checkpoint, repeating that the US "soldiers followed the rules of engagement." He added that there is "some question" of whether they were killed by shots fired at the engine. Hume mentioned the possibility that the shooting was intentional, & Scales dismissed that as "ridiculous", trotting out the usual excuses (these are "young soldiers" in a "dangerous spot" who have only "10-15 seconds to make a decision"). Hume went back to blaming the driver -- "One wonders what impelled the driver to keep on going" & Scales agreed, saying that "at night, you see floodlights" & army vehicles so you can't mistake that it's a checkpoint.

Following a clip of Sgrena talking about the US policy of not ransoming hostages, at 6:41pm the All-Stars (Barnes, Krauthammer & Mara Liasson) took up where Scales left off. Hume opened the segment by noting that Sgrena "later backed off a little bit" on her charges that she might have been targeted by US forces. Barnes jumped right in, sneering "She's a communist" & she "hates America" & "opposes the war" in Iraq. He said US troops "didn't know who was in that car" & added that he's "been on that road, it's scary, the one thing your driver does is floor it." Liasson tried to point out that "We don't know exactly what happened" but said she couldn't "imagine they targeted her on purpose -- what's the point?" Liasson did note that the US does not "follow" Euro policy of ransoming hostages. Krauthammer was chomping at the bit & barely let Liasson finish her sentence before starting to slam Sgrena -- "She writes for a communist newspaper, she's against the war" & "She's lucky she wasn't shot as a collaborator." He dismissed her allegations about being targeted as the "paranoia of a communist" & called the charges "disgraceful." Barnes said this is an "attempt by these communists to pull out" of the coalition, adding that "they want to embarass" Berlusconi. Krauthammer agreed, saying it shows the "desperation of the left" & it's a "reaction to the success" of the Iraqi elections, which even the "left-wing press in Britain" has had to admit. He wrapped it up by calling the charges of deliberate targeting an attempt to "explot anti-Americanism" & a "ridiculous falsehood."

General comment: I strongly recommend that you read some of the European press to get more info on this story. The Guardian, for example, has covered this extensively. Corriere della Sella has an English-language website. Among other interesting things, you will learn that Sgrena has said there were no bright light & no signal to stop; that her driver said they were driving slowly, about 40-50 km/h (25-30mph); that Sgrena's editor, Gabriele Polo, said he was told by Italian officials that 300-400 rounds were fired at the car.


http://www.newshounds.us/2005/03/08/krauthammer_goes_beyond_the_bounds_again.php

Interesting to compare this obnoxious ranting to what one might expect to be an equally obnoxious rant op-ed piece from Al Jazeera.

Only it isn't.

Fox lovers won't like it - but most would consider it well-informed - and balanced:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9F3D082E-919F-4C0E-AD2E-7541EC22B048.htm
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 07:04 am
Lord Ellpus watched the BBC coverage of George Galloway appearing before the US Senate - and then switched to see what Fox News made of it.

Lord Ellpus wrote:
During the edited highlights of this on the BBC news last night, viewers were informed that the full "interview" could be seen on their interactive channel, simply by pressing the red button on the remote control.

I pressed, and sure enough, there was the complete, unedited version being played on a continuous loop.

Like Set, I was very impressed, so impressed that I waited to see it come round again and videotaped it for future rainy day entertainment.

On a more serious point, I was curious as to how this was being portrayed on American News networks.

I tuned in, at midnight here (7pm USA esb) to CNN. Now, this was peak time viewing, and one would think that, on the hour, some form of News update would take place. Wrong.

There was a programme about China, and their manufacture of such interesting things as Knitting needles.

I quickly switched over to Fox News.....(I had never watched Fox News before)....and, although they were running a headline story about two missing children, I was immediately struck by their amateurish and subjective style of presentation.

The broadcasters seemed falsely emotive and it was obvious that they were doing their best to sensationalise the story, as opposed to just presenting the facts in a straightforward manner.

The news then moved on to Galloway.....and it left me wondering if the so-called Journalist actually saw the interview. A travesty of news broadcasting.

The item ran for no more than two minutes, Galloway clips were limited to two, each lasting about ten seconds, and then a long diatribe ensued, finding every possible way to cast doubt upon the credibility of Galloway, whilst old footage of one of Saddams "Generals meetings" was being shown. The anti Galloway rhetoric rose to a climax as the cleverly synchronised footage showed all of the "Generals" standing up and applauding a gloating Saddam. If it wasnt so tragic, I would have laughed.

Goebbells, the WW2 Nazi minister for Propaganda, couldnt have made a better job of it. SERIOUSLY.

If that style of crap is served up to the American public as news every day, no wonder a fair number of its Citizens fully supports their leader regarding Iraq.

There would be immediate outrage if the BBC ever tried to put out such rubbish. Talk about dumbing down, in a devious way.

I will never tune in to Fox again....the Journalists working for that station should be ashamed.


Lord Ellpus wrote:
[..] What seems to have caused so much sensation, is the way that he has dared to speak with such a lack of reverence to the US Senate Commision.

What the ?? Why SHOULD they expect to be treated with kid gloves?
They probably lead a much more devious kind of life than they like to let on, with manipulation of fact and behind the scenes business deals an everyday part of their careers.

This type of heated comment and debate is often seen on British TV. The American politicians would probably shrivel up and die, if faced with such a programme as BBC's Questiontime, aired once a week.

Another BBC "Bulldog", Jeremy Paxman, would probably give them a live TV heart attack.

Good, healthy, questioning, probing political discussion on live TV. It's what America seems to be lacking at the moment.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 07:59 am
nimh

As of yesterday, even c-span didn't run this! PBS News did an item on it (see here ) that was far and away the best coverage I could find (I went looking) but even that PBS coverage was paltry. As you may know, the PBS is now under a Bush appointee who is forcing coverage and programming to follow the propaganda model seen elsewhere.

The main press outlets this morning are giving the Galloway piece minimal coverage.

You'll want to look at this ... http://baltimorechronicle.com/051805Moyers.shtml
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 10:46 pm
blatham wrote:

You'll want to look at this ... http://baltimorechronicle.com/051805Moyers.shtml



Here's a site where you can watch the video or listen to an audio of the
speech noted by Blatham, above, called "Muting The Conversation Of Democracy".

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050517/muting_the_conversation_of_democracy.php

Be patient for the video portion as it takes a while to load.

===============

Oh, by the by, when is President Bush, VP Cheney, or D Rumsfeld scheduled to head over to merry ole England to be questioned in Parliament?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 10:48 pm
Re: Fox "News"

There is a Russian adage:

There is no new in the truth, and there is no truth in the news.
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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/21/2021 at 08:56:29