Your Tax Dollars Hard at Work

[Gimpy]

you go again Blue.

You're starting to sound more and more like Kriminal Karl.

If you can't 'refute' the charges........attack, attack and undercut the speaker with inuendoe and ridiculous accusations.

Don't you EVER get tired of that?

[Gimpy]

Originally posted by SuperScout As I recall, Fox News Channel ran a rather extensive series on the White supremist group linked to the bombing in Oklahoma City.

And no, this isn't an attempt to smear anybody, Gimpy, but simply a retransmission of a series of remarks that are emphatically racist. Do not attempt to hijack my thread for your own political diatribe. And do not attempt to paint all or any the viewers Fox with the biased paint brush you carry around. You haven't earned and never will earn the right to make such unsubstantiated claims .

######

I am NOT attempting to 'hijack' your post for political purpose, or any other reason except to VERIFY that the SOURCE of your 'information' is NOT as truthful and 'objective' as you would have us believe.

Their reporting of this posts topic PROVES this.


So then, since you appear to think I am not 'qualified' or 'experienced' enough or "earned the right" to offer an opinion (or what I consider a statement of FACT) about your 'source' for this obvious inflamatory nonsense. I'll just supply you with some 'experts' in the business of TV journalism.

From the "Center for Media and Democracy ".

Publishers of PR Watch .

An email sent to Jim Romenesko's for posting on the message board of the prestigious journalism training center, The Poynter Institute by former Fox News producer, Charlie Reina , explained how bias permeates the Fox newsroom.

"The roots of Fox News Channel's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often, suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel responsible for the channel's daytime programming, The Memo is the bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo is behind it," he wrote.

The Memo was born with the Bush administration, early in 2001, and, intentionally or not, has ensured that the administration's point of view consistently comes across on FNC . This year, of course, the war in Iraq became a constant subject of The Memo. But along with the obvious - information on who is where and what they'll be covering - there have been subtle hints as to the tone of the anchors' copy," he wrote.

"These are not isolated incidents at Fox News Channel, where virtually no one of authority in the newsroom makes a move unmeasured against management's politics, actual or perceived. At the Fair and Balanced network, everyone knows management's point of view, and, in case they're not sure how to get it on air, The Memo is there to remind them." [4] (http://poynter.org/forum/?id=thememo)


Matt Gross, who left Fox News in March 2001 after working as a web journalist and editor, wrote to Romenesko after Reina's note. "Let me just say that the right-wing bias was there in the newsroom, up-front and obvious, from the day a certain executive editor was sent down from the channel to bring us in line with their coverage. His first directive to us: Seek out stories that cater to angry, middle-aged white men who listen to talk radio and yell at their televisions," he wrote.

"To me, FNC reporters' laziness was the worst part of the bias . It wasn't that they were always toeing some political line, although of course most of the time they were, it was that the facts of a story just didn't matter at all. The idea was to get those viewers out of their seats, screaming at the TV, the politicians, the liberals -- whoever -- simply by running a provocative story," he wrote in October 2003. [6] (http://www.poynter.org/forum/default.asp?id=letters).

A year-long study by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)[8] (http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Ir..._03_Report.pdf) reported that Americans who relied on the Fox News Channel for their coverage of the Iraq war were the most likely to believe misinformation about the war, whatever their political affiliation may be. Those mistaken facts, the study found, increased viewers' support for the war.


The study found that, in general, people who watched Fox News were, more than for other sources, convinced of several untrue propositions which were actively promoted by the Bush administration and the cheerleading media led by Fox, in rallying support for the War with Iraq.

As the Washington Post reported[9] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Oct14.html), "The fair and balanced folks at Fox, the survey concludes, were 'the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions.'

In the Project for Excellence in Journalism's "State of the News Media 2005" concluded that Fox was "the most one-sided of all major news outlets."

There are many more 'examples' of reputable and distinguished journalism organizations, centers and non-aligned publishers that will confirm 'MY' analysis of the 'source' of your information if you prefer me to post it?

Otherwise, I wish you good day and good 'viewing'!

[SuperScout]

Run, if you can, and seek someone to help you with the panty de-wadding machine. For your information, the source of the original posting was NOT the Fox News Channel, much to your disappointment. Now, doesn't that feel better?

So if you want to get your "news" from the likes of CBS, NBC and the other left-leaning sources, be my guest. It is rather curious though why the CBS et.al. are continually losing viewership, just like the New York Times et.al. are losing readership. Oh, I forgot, according to you, we're the worst of people. Me and millions more!

Now, after your panties are unknotted and unwadded, go read Bernie Goldberg's "Bias". Or "Arrogance." Or "100 People Who Are Screwing up America."

[BLUEHAWK]

Originally posted by Gimpy you go again Blue.

You're starting to sound more and more like Kriminal Karl.

If you can't 'refute' the charges........attack, attack and undercut the speaker with inuendoe and ridiculous accusations.

Don't you EVER get tired of that?

What if, jus' supposin'... a person sounded like themself rather than someone famous.

What would happen then?

[Seascamp]

There?s that word again, the most malleable, contorted and turned inside out word on the planet, ?Liberated?. In this instance we have ?African Liberation?. Oh my, in the score or so civil wars, large or small, going on in Africa, everyone is trying to ?Liberate? someone or something ?for the people?. Most often they don?t even bother with an ideological statement, just start shooting and shooting until some wealth positioning is gained or lost, but for ?the people?, of course.

Being ?Liberated? in the last century simply meant becoming State Property and not unlike livestock, fenced in and culled out as perceived necessary, or being used as cannon fodder to go ?Liberate? other ?proletariat?. i.e., Soviet Union in Vietnam, Cuba in Africa, Cuba in Central America, Vietnam in Cambodia, etc. One can only wonder what ?Prof? Kambon?s version of ?African Liberation? amounts to and what he perceives his role as.

Then the matter of ?African Studies?, especially sub-Sahara Africa, one would think the ?Prof? would know exactly which racial group in Africa is actually killing; in droves of droves, Black Africans. That isn?t hard to figure out at all, from Angola, to the Sudan to the Horn of Africa through the Congo to Zimbabwe, it?s all the same-same answer. Then the digits and stats in the Caribbean and North America might be worth a look as well, but that concept and information could well be considered ?racist?, etc., and I?d get some more new names around here, again, so I?ll keep shut, eh. Maybe the erstwhile ?Prof? will figure all that out and say something productive and useful, who knows.

Scamp

[MarineAO]

Just my .02 cents. As I think a couple of folks here have met my wife and myself I am as white as any Scots-Irish can be (cause that is what I am) now my Wife is Black (Not African-American(her words not mine she has never been to or was she born in Africa)) and an AMERICAN as Much as I am. Now I wonder what the Dear Doctor would think of that. I'm sure I (or her) would go to jail (me for murdering her JUST because she is Black)(her for the same Just because I'm White). Now if the only priority of whites would be the elimination of blacks in America (or the world for that matter) why is there so many inter-racial couples (white/black, black/asian or white/asian) around the U.S.. She and I agree on many things and one of them is that crap like this must stop it gets us nowhere fast and is very COUNTER-Productive. Both my Father and Her Father are WWII Veterans my dad was a emigrant to this country volunteered for the service in the war as her Father did (which for a Black man in the 40's say's allot to me). They taught us both that this country is a free country and opportunities abound and the one missing out are the ones not trying. Both our Fathers were hard working men who EARNED the respect they got nothing was given to them by anybody. Both men were caring, giving and when they first met we could not separate them (should've seen the Moms trying to get them to come on and go home it was funny). Any way this sh*t stinks and I see no good coming out of it, if we ignore asshats like and they have no audience they will stop or just go shouting to no one there to no avail like the FOOL on a hill that they are.

[SuperScout]

Thank you for putting this subject matter in the proper light it should be seen in. It is about the message of the racist, vile as it is, not the source of the message, that needs to be condemned. As far as I'm concerned, this topic is closed.

[Gimpy]

No surprise there!