It is heartening that the Times called foul on a journalistic infraction
by Fox and that the writer at least recognizes that Fox has a political
agenda, but it is not encouraging that the Times editorialists continue
to view Fox as a club member in good standing, albeit one that plays by
its own rules more often than not.

Journalists should be the last cohort to be fooled by a political
operation that disguises itself as a news outlet, and the journalism
establishment ought to be leading the charge for rousting the impostors.

Who can stop Fox? Not “liberal bloggers,” though we will do our best.
And certainly not the government, which is rightly prevented from
censoring Fox — even a propaganda outlet has the right to free speech.

It’s up to the journalism establishment to put its own house in order.
But, as the Times editorial shows, journalists at the loftiest perches
of the profession have yet to recognize the peril Fox presents. Unless
and until mainstream journalists “muster the outrage” to unmask Fox for
what it is, once and for all, Fox will continue to pose an existential
threat, both to the Fourth Estate, as Fox’s financial success
accelerates the death knell for objective journalism — and to the body
politic, which is beginning to weaken under the barrage of Fox’s
right-wing propaganda, which is now entering its 15th year.

Think about it. If instead of Fox, these polls had found that the Times,
Time Magazine, ABC News or any other mainstream outlet was tricking out
its reporting to further a political agenda, not only would heads roll
inside the organization, the journalism establishment would be up in arms.

And yet, faced with evidence that Fox is undermining the entire
profession by promulgating propaganda, the establishment’s collective
reaction is a shrug. Whaddayagonnado.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/12...eives-viewers/

robertva wrote:
On 12/21/2010 9:12 AM, dave wrote:
(a long rant)

Did someone force their way into your home, steal all your cable boxes
and replace them with boxes that wouldn't tune other news outlets?

While the cable/satellite news outlet receive per subscriber fees
through the cable and satellite providers, there are still plenty of
commercials. Apparently the advertisers have some way of guessimating
how many pairs of eyes are watching each channel. If you disagree with a
channel's politics or think their reports are unreliable DON'T WATCH IT.
If enough of the viewers who are monitored by the rating's agencies
agree with you the channel you despise so much will be forced to change
their policies or shut down.

Also note that FCC authority over cable/satellite channel content is
significantly narrower than the agency's authority over direct
broadcaster to home antenna content.

I have no problem with their content. I have a big problem with them
being able to characterize it as "news". They lie, which is completely
legal with a few exceptions. I'd like a rule prohibiting them from
labeling their "lies" as "news". That's all.

This is a matter of urgent importance as the country is rapidly slipping
into complete domination. There's that famous "freedom and liberty" crap
hard at work.

"dave" wrote in message
...
robertva wrote:
On 12/21/2010 9:12 AM, dave wrote:
(a long rant)

Did someone force their way into your home, steal all your cable boxes
and replace them with boxes that wouldn't tune other news outlets?

While the cable/satellite news outlet receive per subscriber fees
through the cable and satellite providers, there are still plenty of
commercials. Apparently the advertisers have some way of guessimating
how many pairs of eyes are watching each channel. If you disagree with a
channel's politics or think their reports are unreliable DON'T WATCH IT.
If enough of the viewers who are monitored by the rating's agencies
agree with you the channel you despise so much will be forced to change
their policies or shut down.

Also note that FCC authority over cable/satellite channel content is
significantly narrower than the agency's authority over direct
broadcaster to home antenna content.

I have no problem with their content. I have a big problem with them being
able to characterize it as "news". They lie, which is completely legal
with a few exceptions. I'd like a rule prohibiting them from labeling
their "lies" as "news". That's all.

This is a matter of urgent importance as the country is rapidly slipping
into complete domination. There's that famous "freedom and liberty" crap
hard at work.

You have no problems with MSNBC of course. Fox lies, lol! I love how dopey
liberals like you think freedom of speech is a one way street.

John Smith wrote:
On 12/21/2010 6:12 AM, dave wrote:

...

Freedom of speech, as granted in the Constitution, means EVERYONE has
the right and no one is to be denied that right!

... end of story ...

Regards,
JS

As long as you don't take advantage of people by calling propaganda
news. No right is absolute.

On Dec 21, 10:06*am, dave wrote:
MNMikew wrote:
*wrote in message
m...
robertva wrote:
On 12/21/2010 9:12 AM, dave wrote:
(a long rant)

Did someone force their way into your home, steal all your cable boxes
and replace them with boxes that wouldn't tune other news outlets?

While the cable/satellite news outlet receive per subscriber fees
through the cable and satellite providers, there are still plenty of
commercials. Apparently the advertisers have some way of guessimating
how many pairs of eyes are watching each channel. If you disagree with a
channel's politics or think their reports are unreliable DON'T WATCH IT.
If enough of the viewers who are monitored by the rating's agencies
agree with you the channel you despise so much will be forced to change
their policies or shut down.

Also note that FCC authority over cable/satellite channel content is
significantly narrower than the agency's authority over direct
broadcaster to home antenna content.

I have no problem with their content. I have a big problem with them being
able to characterize it as "news". They lie, which is completely legal
with a few exceptions. I'd like a rule prohibiting them from labeling
their "lies" as "news". That's all.

This is a matter of urgent importance as the country is rapidly slipping
into complete domination. There's that famous "freedom and liberty" crap
hard at work.

You have no problems with MSNBC of course. Fox lies, lol! *I love how dopey
liberals like you think freedom of speech is a one way street.

- I have problems with MSNBC,
- but they do not lie
- and they do not call themselves "news".

'Special Dave',

All this from someone who 'claims' that :
"Facts have A Liberal BIAS"

'Special Dave' -you-are- "/S/p/e/c/i/a/l/"

On Dec 21, 12:44*pm, "MNMikew" wrote:
"dave" wrote in message

...



MNMikew wrote:
*wrote in message
om...
robertva wrote:
On 12/21/2010 9:12 AM, dave wrote:
(a long rant)

Did someone force their way into your home, steal all your cable boxes
and replace them with boxes that wouldn't tune other news outlets?

While the cable/satellite news outlet receive per subscriber fees
through the cable and satellite providers, there are still plenty of
commercials. Apparently the advertisers have some way of guessimating
how many pairs of eyes are watching each channel. If you disagree with
a
channel's politics or think their reports are unreliable DON'T WATCH
IT.
If enough of the viewers who are monitored by the rating's agencies
agree with you the channel you despise so much will be forced to change
their policies or shut down.

Also note that FCC authority over cable/satellite channel content is
significantly narrower than the agency's authority over direct
broadcaster to home antenna content.

I have no problem with their content. I have a big problem with them
being
able to characterize it as "news". They lie, which is completely legal
with a few exceptions. I'd like a rule prohibiting them from labeling
their "lies" as "news". That's all.

This is a matter of urgent importance as the country is rapidly slipping
into complete domination. There's that famous "freedom and liberty" crap
hard at work.

You have no problems with MSNBC of course. Fox lies, lol! *I love how
dopey
liberals like you think freedom of speech is a one way street.

I have problems with MSNBC, but they do not lie and they do not call
themselves "news".

BWHAHAHAHH!! *Don't try telling that to Chris Mattews!

They fastidiously maintain journalistic credibility and proved it recently
by suspending Olberman and Scarborough for financial support of candidates.

They broke a MSNBC rule. It only proves that Olberman and Scarborought are
stupid.

*How many Fox "News" people have been

punished for supporting one side over the other.

They don't have that rule, so none.



To compare the 2 is ludicrous. MSNBC are "truth to power" muckrakers in
the great tradition of American journalism; Fox News is first and foremost
the mouthpiece of corporate America (the power that needs to hear the
truth) and defenders of old money.

You are a clueless. Truth to power, LOL!

Fair and Balanced -is- FAIR and BALANCED !

Requires Fainess -not-from- MSNBC
-but-by- FOX News

-and-

Requires Balance -not-from- MSNBC
-but-by- FOX News

Why MSNBC Can Not Be Fair and Balanced . . .
To Them Facts Have A Liberal BIAS {Bigotry}

On 12/21/2010 6:19 PM, dave wrote:

...
As long as you don't take advantage of people by calling propaganda
news. No right is absolute.

No, it simply translates into, "I may disagree with what you say, but
NOT your right to say it."

A slogan which has been in existence since shortly after the
Constitutions enactment ... and depicts the true meaning and intent of
the first amendment ...

Our forefathers said what they meant and meant what they said. Not like
the limp wrist-ed politically imbeciles of today.

Regards,
JS

On 12/21/2010 6:46 PM, John Smith wrote:
politically imbeciles of today.

.... politically CORRECT imbeciles of today. ... even

Regards,
JS

On Dec 22, 1:49*am, RHF wrote:
On Dec 21, 6:59*pm, dave wrote:- - RHF wrote:

- - Why MSNBC Can Not Be Fair and Balanced . . .
- -To Them Facts Have A Liberal BIAS {Bigotry}

Reality-R-Us-Sucks :
Why MSNBC Can Not Be Fair and Balanced . . .http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...5c14216505124f
Progressive Bigotry : ABC & CBS & NBC & PBS & CNN . . .
The Facts Must Be Presented With A Liberal Bias !
- - .
- - .

-http://www.dailymotion.moc/swf/x39n1&v3=1&autoPlay=1&related=1&autoSt...

Ah . . . So . . . 'Special Dave',

Your Link {News Reference} is Stephen Colbert
of "The Colbert Report" on Comedy Centralhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert

Which just goes to prove your own words :
"The Facts Have A Liberal BIAS" and Your
Bigotry Against Anything That Is Fair and Balance :
That Might Refute Your Totally Preconceived Liberal Bias.

~t~w~i~s~t~e~d~ ~t~h~i~n~k~i~n~g~
you be 'special dave' ~ ~ RHFhttp://www.ihaveeadd.com/images/twisted%20man.jpg
*.
*.

-remember- 'Special Dave',
"Facts Are Meaningless.
You Could Use Facts To Prove Anything
That's Even Remotely True!"
-a-la- Homer J. Simpson
http://screwedus.com/wp-content/uplo...impson-doh.jpg

-butt-4-u- 'Special Dave',
"Facts With A Liberal-Bias Are Meaningful.
You Could Use Liberal-Facts To Prove Everything
That's Totally Un-True !"
-a-la- 'Special Dave'
http://forum.sensiseeds.com/fdata/ga...er_simpson.jpg

http://www.devilfinder.com
News media TV channels

The Internet is where a lot of people get news.Commie fed govt is trying
to rein in/clamp down/on the Internet.
cuhulin