Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
  1.  (396.1)


    http://www.foxnews.com/
    •  
      CommentAuthorARES
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.2)
    Rupert Murdoch: Terrific Dancer
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.3)
    Actually it's refreshingly honest - the murder of a politician and the ongoing political chaos in a country of over 100 million people really only registers in the west because that country has nukes.
    • CommentAuthorRedwynd
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007 edited
     (396.4)
    Which is sad, really. And rather frightening that the American public has to be reminded who has nukes.
    •  
      CommentAuthorScribe
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.5)
    Fox news; subtle?
    •  
      CommentAuthorJoe Paoli
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.6)
    Instability in Pakistan is a pretty legitimate concern for precisely this reason, though.

    If Mousharraf can't hold it together, who's going to come to power over there? And what will our trigger-happy jingoist best-defense-is-a-strong-offense US government feel they need to do about it?
    •  
      CommentAuthorScribe
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.7)
    They will throw another ten billion dollars at the problem and see what kind of government our money can buy. Why would Bush give up on a proven failed policy; it's never stopped him in the past.
    • CommentAuthorsamishah
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.8)
    Honestly, how is it that Fox News still has viewership in the U.S. It is the most bizarre channel. In a world with CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and whatnot, the fact that Americans still watch this is ludicrous.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJoe Paoli
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.9)
    Honestly, how is it that Fox News still has viewership in the U.S. It is the most bizarre channel. In a world with CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and whatnot, the fact that Americans still watch this is ludicrous.
    The US is in another age of Yellow Journalism, and FOX is the official expression for the people who believe editorializing is the same as reporting, and agreeing with editorializing is the same as critical thinking. It's a disturbingly large portion of the political spectrum that believes this, and I'm not sure the pendulum is going to swing back to objective reporting any time soon.
  2.  (396.10)
    Samishah,

    Keep in mind many Americans have no idea that Al Jazeera is credible and consider them to be some sort of terrorist news service. There was actual anger when they expanded to some US cable services with their English language broadcast.

    As a whole the US does not want news, it wants gossip and a subtle reassurance what ever it beleived before it tunned in is exactly what is true. That is the real brilliance of Fox news. It tells the audience all their petty fears are correct and reassures them them via an illusion of personal "you decide" choice that reason and thought are not needed to understand the world. They knew the answer coming in and Fox is here to confirm it.
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.11)
    "If Mousharraf can't hold it together, who's going to come to power over there? And what will our trigger-happy jingoist best-defense-is-a-strong-offense US government feel they need to do about it?"

    -Joe
    To be fair, I don't think any American administration since maybe Nixon has had a clear idea of what to do about Pakistan. (Nixon took the simple view that since Russia was allied with India, America needed to be allied with Pakistan - not necessarily correct but straight forward and consistent with his larger policy of deterrence and containment.)

    Pakistan is too big and too strategically important to simply ignore. They've got enormous internal divisions and even when they've been nominally democratic their politics have been vicious and their governments corrupt.

    American military aid has made them powerful enough militarily to be a threat if the country ever comes under the control of extremists. Corruption and political violence have made them so weak economically and politically that cutting off aid could lead to the country's collapse.

    Honestly, how is it that Fox News still has viewership in the U.S. It is the most bizarre channel. In a world with CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and whatnot, the fact that Americans still watch this is ludicrous.

    - Samishah

    Americans are no more or less ignorant or stupid than other people - but they're the most populous developed country and that means that in absolute terms there are more ignorant and/or stupid people there. Enough of them in fact to support a TV network. (This is not to say that all Fox News viewers are either ignorant or stupid, just an awful lot of them. I watch Fox News because I'm a total news junkie and it does me good to scream at the TV regularly.)

    Supposedly, the more hours a day someone watches Fox News, the less well informed they actually are based on objective questions like "Who is the President of Russia?" . This is based on research by that totally eminent and respected internet source Some Guy Who Did a Study. I don't think watching Fox nakes you ignorant. I do think being the right kind of ignorant makes it more likely you'll watch a lot of fox News.

    Take a look at the Murdoch tabloid press in England, they're pretty much as bad as Fox. But with the smaller population (and Fox on cable) there isn't enough of an audience to support a local broadcast version of Fox.

    Keep in mind many Americans have no idea that Al Jazeera is credible and consider them to be some sort of terrorist news service. There was actual anger when they expanded to some US cable services with their English language broadcast.


    Try explaining to some people that Al Jazeera was founded by the BBC; regularly criticises the governments of the Arab world; is the main Arab language venue in which the western world can put its case (other than VoA and BBC World Service) and carries interviews with liberal Muslim scholars who are considered heretics in the more conservative states of the region.

    Then watch their heads explode.
    •  
      CommentAuthorARES
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.12)
    A good litmus test I use before engaging in political discourse with someone new is telling them my regular news sources include Al Jazeera. If they flinch, I know what I'm in for.
    •  
      CommentAuthorcurb
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.13)
    Take a look at the Murdoch tabloid press in England, they're pretty much as bad as Fox.


    Damn straight. The consistently jingoistic, xenephobic, sexist, homophobic, antidemocratic bullshit that spews from The Sun is just as scary as anything I've managed to catch from Fox News. Worse than that, the Sun consistently outsells any other daily paper, including the broadsheets (pulls in about 3 million people a day, I believe). And to make matters worse, they're pretty public about their ability to swing elections. I'll be very surprised if Mr Murdoch isn't seen meeting with the leaders of both mainstream parties here before the next election. So if it's any comfort for those of you in America, you're not alone.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.14)
    I sometimes watch it, just so I can see what stupid shit they're doing on that particular day. It's like having my own private freak show whenever I change the channel. I also watch CNN for basically the same reason.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJoe Paoli
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007 edited
     (396.15)
    To be fair, I don't think any American administration since maybe Nixon has had a clear idea of what to do about Pakistan. (Nixon took the simple view that since Russia was allied with India, America needed to be allied with Pakistan - not necessarily correct but straight forward and consistent with his larger policy of deterrence and containment.)

    Pakistan is too big and too strategically important to simply ignore. They've got enormous internal divisions and even when they've been nominally democratic their politics have been vicious and their governments corrupt.

    American military aid has made them powerful enough militarily to be a threat if the country ever comes under the control of extremists. Corruption and political violence have made them so weak economically and politically that cutting off aid could lead to the country's collapse.

    I agree - all I was implying was that I fear we'd seriously consider invading or bombing if things went to hell there - which seems like an all too real possibility given public sentiment towards Mousharraf and his obvious reluctance to step down. In this case there actually is an arsenal of WMDs over there, and the boys in charge over here are a little koo koo nuts on that little bugbear, if their propaganda machine is to be believed. They've rattled that sabre at two (unsheathing it at one) middle eastern countries so far.

    Though for once we actually know it's true, so the prospect of a power struggle in a country with extremists competent enough to take out political leaders doesn't fill me with warm, fuzzy feelings, nor does my country's war-as-a-means-of-stabilization foreign policy, especially given their consistent lack of success at its execution.
    •  
      CommentAuthorUnsub
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.16)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    It took me almost 9 months to realize that Rush Limbaugh was not the devastating satire that I thought it was. It honestly never occurred to
    me that anyone could actually want to think like that.

    What people don't know about FOX is it has no real politics. They got their views from focus groups and decided (correctly) that the
    hick redneck wallmart point of view was not being marketed to because most reproters were educated and a pit liberal or they would not have become reporters.
    FOX and Murdoch serve the lowest common denominator segment. If there was money to be made doing good honest reporting they would.

    I am used to being the resident lefty on the gun and knife sites I visit(kindoff like I am the right wing nut here)and I was shocked to find out that a LOT of people in the US
    HATE the idea of medicare. They would rather pay way more for their health care just to ensure no one gets any for free. I can understand doctors and HMO's not wanting it but this is people who it would directly benefit. Often the working poor. The idea of enlightened self interest was also totally new. The idea that social programs benefit the rich by making it a safer society to live in and was actually more fiscally responsible than imprisoning the poor was also something that they had never heard of. To be fair though for every nut case who would rather spend 100 grand keeping the poor in jail than 10 grand rehabilitating them there were many who were quite receptive to new ideas. It helped that they knew me in another context.

    I find it much easier to get a gun toting red neck to get on board with climate change or social programs than it is to have a liberal consider that someone should have the right to defend themselves. Neal Stephenson in the cryptonomicon postulated that it was because liberals don't have a method of dealing with sin. When a Christian does something they think is wrong they ask forgiveness and are forgiven but the liberals don't have any method so every transgression is considered a totally evil act much like the way the Puritans thought. Look at something as innocuous as driving the wrong kind of car(SUV) or wearing fur? It is all blasphemy. The Puritans were just as positive that what they were doing was right and that the old(catholic) way of doing things was hopelessly outdated and wrong. Calling someone a jingoistic ,xenophobic,sexist ,homophobic and the very worst insult of all racist is the modern versions of the words heretic and infidel or blasphemer.
  3.  (396.17)
    I was shocked to find out that a LOT of people in the US HATE the idea of medicare.

    That's because they've been indoctrinated with propaganda that Universal Healthcare is Socialism in disguise, and Socialism leads directly to Communism and the end of American as we know it.

    HMOs, insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies all do their best to reinforce this propaganda - they don't want Universal Heathcare as it would kill the massive profits they make. HMOs and health insurance companies are not in the business of keeping people healthy. They are in the business of making money, and will use and justify any tactic to stop Universal Health care, in spite of how well it works in Canada, Great Britain, and France, among others.
  4.  (396.18)
    Fox news; subtle?


    *whispering* It was sarcasm. ;)
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (396.19)
    "I agree - all I was implying was that I fear we'd seriously consider invading or bombing if things went to hell there - which seems like an all too real possibility given public sentiment towards Mousharraf and his obvious reluctance to step down."

    Apparently there's a plan in place for American troops to "help" Pakistan "protect" its nukes in a crisis.

    Meanwhile Musharef who had always resisted any suggestion of nepotism now has his brother-in-law,. who's also career military - in charge of the nuclear arsenal.
  5.  (396.20)
    My favourite Fox News moment was their coverage of an explosion in North Korea.

    They basically just talked over constant edited footage of marching Korean soldiers, as if to suggest they are coming to get us with their bombs they just tested. In dress-uniform no less.

    It was hilarious.

    They also tried to claim London was hit by panic and chaos over the 7th July 2005 tube/bus bombings and accompanied this by footage of people just walking about a bit and chatting with police at the cordons around sealed off areas.... They are always good for a laugh.

    I also love the way they call their opinion pieces 'no spin zone' as if 'spin' was not the exact definition of opinion based editorial pieces.

    It must take a single figure IQ to not find Fox News completely preposterous.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.