more examples of similar fox news brilliance can be seen here

the media distorts the context by manipulating what they air to perpetuate a narrative?
ya dont say?/snark
while FOX may be adept,and lets be honest,prodigious with this form of manipulation,all giant media conglomerates are guilty of this tactic.
the only way to combat this blatant betrayal of public trust is to shed light on
their malfeasance.
which you have been doing admirably mr deputydog.
thanks my man,keep up the great work.

>> ^enoch:
the media distorts the context by manipulating what they air to perpetuate a narrative?
ya dont say?/snark
while FOX may be adept,and lets be honest,prodigious with this form of manipulation,all giant media conglomerates are guilty of this tactic.
the only way to combat this blatant betrayal of public trust is to shed light on
their malfeasance.
which you have been doing admirably mr deputydog.
thanks my man,keep up the great work.


choggie?

You had me at shenanigans.

Apparently I'm a retard. The first time I watched this, I was ignoring the video and looking at the bottom of the screen for what Fox covered up with text. Am I the only one?

>> ^brain:
Apparently I'm a retard. The first time I watched this, I was ignoring the video and looking at the bottom of the screen for what Fox covered up with text. Am I the only one?


No. Fox News has that effect on everyone. Watching anything Fox makes you retarded. Period.

enoch=not choggie

Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention, but I didn't see anything vital cropped. Editing to cut the length of a clip isn't evil by default.

Apparently people have never payed attention to news services like AP, AFP, and Reuters. Or watched, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, BBC or any of the other major news outlets in the world. This is normal operating procedure for everyone.

Whether or not it's right is moot. Don't get up in arms over Fox doing it, unless you're willing to do the same to the rest. Otherwise you're simply a hypocrite.

Did you guys watch the video? They played a clip of Obama talking about what he is looking for in his Supreme Court nomination, and cut off the part where he said his top priority is to nominate someone who will uphold the rule of law and respect the Constitution. Then the Faux talking heads went on to discuss the dangerous ramifications of Obama's apparently not caring whether the nominee will respect the Constitution since, according to the clip, he never mentioned it. No respectable station would do something so egregious to further its political agenda.

>> ^Mashiki:
Apparently people have never payed attention to news services like AP, AFP, and Reuters. Or watched, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, BBC or any of the other major news outlets in the world. This is normal operating procedure for everyone.


That is not true.

You're either lying like QM, or you're just dense.

None of those news services is anywhere near as biased and underhanded as Fox News.

While Faux News is clearly biased, it is true that other news sources edit clips ALL THE TIME. Now most of the time there doesn't seem to be any alteration of the content, except for the pause in between question and answer for example, but there is no telling what slips past the average viewer. In my opinion this is purely the fault of the average dolt who loves controversy and has the attention span of a gnat so they can't be bothered to look up the context of a clip and complain when a bad edit happens. In the case of Faux News, the average viewer doesn't come near the intelligence of a dolt, so the problem would certainly be worse.

>> ^enoch:
enoch=not choggie


i knew you weren't choggie as soon i was able to read a whole sentence just the once and understand the message.

>> ^rougy:
That is not true.
You're either lying like QM, or you're just dense.
None of those news services is anywhere near as biased and underhanded as Fox News.

Dissenting opinions, and real world experience are too hard to face when one gets cornered into it? By all means, when one is faced with stringers and the inevitability of the press with when they're snipping at a story to distort the F&I of it, you end up with what you're getting told not what it actually is.

Just remember, Ad-hom's are the first step in losing your own credibility, especially when faced with an opinion that doesn't fit with your own perfect world view that there's a "source" of darkest dark.

It's funny, I've been in court covering a case, and seen it in the paper the next day. When it was published in one of the national papers, I didn't even realize it was the same case until I saw the names. That's how far from reality things can be.

>> ^Mashiki:
>> ^rougy:
Just remember, Ad-hom's are the first step in losing your own credibility, especially when faced with an opinion that doesn't fit with your own perfect world view that there's a "source" of darkest dark.


Okay, smarty-pants, put up or shut up.

Show an example of another network news source exhibiting the same level of bias as Fox News.

Your claim that all networks edit their videos in order to suit a set agenda does not hold water.

Put up or kindly shut up.

>> ^rougy:
>> ^Mashiki:
>> ^rougy: Okay, smarty-pants, put up or shut up.
Show an example of another network news source exhibiting the same level of bias as Fox News.
Your claim that all networks edit their videos in order to suit a set agenda does not hold water.
Put up or kindly shut up.


Easy enough. How about Canada's happy liberal fun channel known as the CBC?


and that's only one video out of the thousands of them, I'll now take an up vote. You can spend the 1.5mins and do your own research, to find more.

Just to make it clear. The National(CBC), is the equivalent to oh, MSNBC, CBS or ABC on nightly news. In the same light in Canada as Global, CTV, and so forth . Except that it gets a large chunk of federal tax dollars. If you really want I can dig up the original video, that however should be sufficient.

Media Matters has documented numerous examples of Fox News hosts and correspondents cropping comments by progressives and Democratic political figures in a manner that misrepresents them. - yt


Yeah, that never fking happens on the leftmedia.

By the way, why do leftmedia even compete under different labels? They all spew the SAME Obamaganda!

Why not just form one huge ball of fake journalists?

And to Ape Boy.....I don't need to lie. Fraudbama's thievery and failures are well-documented: BY REALITY.

>> ^quantumushroom:
And to Ape Boy.....I don't need to lie. Fraudbama's thievery and failures are well-documented: BY REALITY.


You lie every time you open your mouth or write something down.

You are one of the reasons we're in this fucking mess.

You're a shitty human being with an equally shitty sense of decency, and America is much worse off now than it was eight years ago precisely because of people like you.

>> ^Mashiki:
>> ^rougy:
If you really want I can dig up the original video, that however should be sufficient.


Ha ha ha ha ha!

That's the best you've got? An apology from the CBC?

And you're comparing that to the way that Fox News constantly crops video clips in order to better frame thair partisan propaganda?

Weak. Very weak.

Save yourself some time, admit that you're wrong.

Or you can go ahead and make more excuses for Fox News, claiming that they're just like everybody else...which is to say, you can pull a QM and just tell some more lies.

>> ^rougy Save yourself some time, admit that you're wrong.
Or you can go ahead and make more excuses for Fox News, claiming that they're just like everybody else...which is to say, you can pull a QM and just tell some more lies.

Wrong? Hardly, you asked for and got exactly what you wanted. The irony is delicious.

Perhaps you should go look at the Beeb in your spare time, then again they don't publish their retractions quite like that either, like most other major networks. So you'd have a very hard time finding out exactly what, is what. I'm not sure what is sadder, that you believe that this isn't standard operating procedure for all networks. Or that you actually think I'm making an excuse for Fox.

Once you actually start looking at things critically instead of looking at things as you feel like, perhaps you'll understand my last three posts. And exactly where I'm coming from.

>> ^Mashiki:
Apparently people have never payed attention to news services like AP, AFP, and Reuters. Or watched, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, BBC or any of the other major news outlets in the world. This is normal operating procedure for everyone.


You're claiming that all media news outlets are the same as Fox News, and that is patently false.

None of the other media outlets that you used in your example twist the facts around as blatantly as Fox News.

To me, that looks like you're making the excuse that Fox News isn't so bad because they're just like everyone else.

Which is a lie, and that makes you a liar.

kids kids kids..
no need to argue,
their is plenty of crapola for everyone.
so play nice and share-fair.
you both are actually agreeing,
yet caught up in semantics...BLAAAAH.
thats boring.

i have stated this on a different thread,
second times the charm.
maybe i can help put some perspective and context here.
/rubs hands together..
/takes a big breath...
ok.......go!
the number one lobbyist in america is NOT..
big oil..
big pharma..
nor the health insurance industry.
its it.../drum roll
MEDIA MEDIA MEDIA
broadcast,print and televised.
they spend THREE times what the number two lobbyist spend (big oil)
in order to influence legislators to vote on favorable legislation
A.K.A MONEY,the green,cash,profits
now,
up until the mid 70's television news was NON-profit.
it was a badge of honor to be the most trusted news in television.
that changed in late 70's.
news become FOR-profit.
which meant they now had to start generating revenue.
ever wonder why we were subjected to an almost 24hr barrage of anna nicole?
because we live in a country of semi-retards who wanted to see anna nicole.
stupid?
yes..
ratings go up?
sometimes as much as 47%.
in 1993 michael powell(yes..he is colin's son) head of the FCC at the time,
allowed single ownership of multi-outlet media companies.
and so america gave birth to the mighty media conglomerate:
disney..viacom..and yes..mr murdoch's FOX.
leaving america with only 5 owners for its media.
/takes a breath...
ok,now that i have posted SOME relevant history.
lets take a look at what this means.
lets get some context here.
we have three branches of government:
executive,judicial and legislative.
but we also have an unofficial fourth.
its called the fourth estate.
freedom of the press anybody?
who would like some extra credit and tell me which federalist paper addressed this very issue?worth 100 pts.
the fourth estates job was to WATCH the elected and the powerful.
basically rat out any wrong-doing in public office.
and for almost 200 years,this system worked relatively well.
but when an institution relies on the very people it was designed to expose
for its very financial existence.
how willing would that institution be to expose...anything?
to risk losing access,beneficial legislation,maybe even their well-crafted monopoly.
answer=they wont and they dont.
they will not risk profit for journalistic truth.
they cant.it is in every corporate charter,profit comes before all else.
the losers are the public at large.
who have to "sift" through the massive amount of jargon,half stories and outright bullshit,to get to any modecum of context.
the american media no longer works for the public trust.
they work for those who pay their bills,and give sweetheart deals,so they can retain access and keep the cash flowing.


whew...
/wipes brow
so,
while some media companies are more egregious in their attempts to obfuscate
than others (FOX),
all have their hands in the cookie jar,
and all of them no longer work for us.
rougy=correct
mashiki=correct

Meh. It wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be.

A cookie for enoch who actually "gets" it.

chocolate chip i hope=)

You're a shitty human being with an equally shitty sense of decency, and America is much worse off now than it was eight years ago precisely because of people like you.

The last 8 years? Did anyone else notice that even with 9-11 and 2 wars, one of which is now won and done, things didn't really start taking a sht until the taxocrats took over Congress in 2006?

"America is for assholes." Know who wrote that, rougemeister? YOU did.

So I see no pressing need to justify sorting through the wreckage of bitterness and hatred that would spawn such a statement, but if you're going to accuse anyone else of "lying" when the left eats, drinks and shts lies and STILL can't compete in the marketplace of ideas, good luck.

I don't need Fox news. I just observe the mainstream media Obamaganda machine and conclude the opposite. Success or failure is all on the communist thugs running America now. I expect before Fraudbama is done, ALL 50 States will pass resolutions reaffirming their own statehood against the federal mafia.

Sorry you're going through tough times, but no one is owed a thing.

So you don't dispute that you're a shitty human being?

At least we all agree then.

>> ^enoch:
chocolate chip i hope=)

Chocolate chip it is!

>> ^Mashiki:
Apparently people have never payed attention to news services like AP, AFP, and Reuters. Or watched, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, BBC or any of the other major news outlets in the world. This is normal operating procedure for everyone.
Whether or not it's right is moot. Don't get up in arms over Fox doing it, unless you're willing to do the same to the rest. Otherwise you're simply a hypocrite.


No, you don't understand. Since FoxNews is a right wing propoganda machine, it's right and proper to criticize them for pretty much anything, even if the left wing propoganda machines (for more examples, see the coverage of the Tea Parties) such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, MSNBC, AP, Reuters, BBC, and pretty much everyone not Fox or CSPAN.

Remember, to a left wing point of view, small truth (factual truth) is subservient to the big truth (that only left wing viewpoints are justified and allowable). Pravda means truth.

>> ^ShakaUVM Pravda means truth.

Ahahaha. How long before we start smuggling media in?