Lol.
I do get to say what constitutes American values in my opinion, an opinion informed by civics class, something it seems most people were deprived of. Those values are honesty, fairness, and equality under the law.....honoring one's word/agreements, helping the needy, standing up for right not just maximum profit internationally. These are historically the values America held dear....but no longer, at least not officially.

Fox does not honor those values, it rarely gives them lip service and never more.

Well, the boy cried wolf 1000 times this year, and twice there were wolves, you go ahead and drop everything and keep running, pitchfork in hand every time he cries out, I quit listening to him the second time there was no wolf, only a boy laughing at us. Call me emotional and dismissive, I disagree but that's fine. You don't want to know what I think about you and that boy.

Good reporters would not associate with those zealous, hyper biased, hypocritical blatant propagandists, so no, there aren't good reporters there. Maybe some who occasionally tell some truths, that's not enough by far to be "good", and as a network they've squandered any chance they had for redemption as a legitimate news organization with zeal and glee repeatedly.

Yeah.....you know me so well. I don't watch any Trump bashing sessions, they were boring before he was elected. I haven't had my tv on CNN in years, not that they're solely Trump bashing sessions, but they do host some.
You seem to think any news not stroking his ego is a bashing session, quoting him, out of bounds bashing, discussing his new policies, out of bounds emotionality, discussing his recent court losses, out of bounds schadenfreude, pointing out constant stream of blatant self serving lies, out of bounds emotional garbage. Only positive spin is real news...Fox is real news with real reporters, not >80% hyper biased hosts spouting opinion as fact. No thanks....Homie don't play dat.

Just out of curiosity, what do you consider real news?

You replied to the wrong quote, buddy. I didn't say that stuff....but a quote of what someone might say is proper English. Get over it.

Also, Fox is not news, they're political entertainment, they admit it. Lumping real news networks in with the admittedly fake one is a disingenuous ploy to be divisive, not an adult argument.

What on earth do you mean by "can" lead?
We're already there.
Sadly sites like the one in question and even Hannity's show are useful in showing us the other side of the coin that big brother doesn't want us to see.
Society is a sick puppy.
Where losers rejoice at taking down anyone they "perceive" as being better than them.
(Kinda like that gangsta old lady parking violator video mentality on a larger scale)
The bit about the airlines was only a small part of the entire video and still holds up at any rate.
This is why men do have EVERY right to listen in and gosh darnit even COMMENT on the latest rules of conduct being introduced on how they should act and be treated in society.
I'm not even going to lower myself by entering the arguments here on what constitutes rape etc or how a broad slanderous brush will or will not solve the problems.
It's like dealing with people who sniffed glue or suffered brain trauma.
Like talking to anyone who actually thinks CNN is real news or isn't totally biased.
How it's totally ok for the FBI to do what it did and shame on anyone who tries to reveal it.
I always find it cute how CNN pushes news clips at you often not having anything at all to do with what you went there to read.
I am or was a liberal but this trend has gone far beyond troubling.

You forget that Bob's one of the Foxnews wingnuts. He wouldn't know real news if it fucking bit him. When all you watch is fictional propaganda, then of course comedy and satire seem like just another flavor. All that matters in his view is the end slant...if it's "for" the GOP, then it's good, otherwise it's a lie.

Why does this seem so familiar? (And no, it's not because it's *just like the real news*)

Um...who is this tool?
"All the Russia stuff is fake news, I mean, is it really news that Russia's been trying to hack into our election?" .... That means you are admitting it's REAL news, just not new or surprising news. Verifying or debunking expectations is what the news is for, in part.

No direct link proven in the publicly released report (we don't know what's in the classified report) is not the same as no evidence. Multiple intelligence agencies, not democrats, issued an unprecedented joint report saying exactly what the title says they did. Note, he won't tell you what the middle of the story is...only points out two seemingly contradictory (if you don't read them closely) sentences (omitting the rest of the report).

Do you know that Trump didn't even let the FBI look at his servers, international contracts, business contacts, international contractual obligations and holdings, or even let the USA look at his taxes, and now says he won't ever release them even though he promised he would. Why do you think that is?

@bcglorf
i have no issue with disagreement.
i have read many of hedges books,and to see his evolution over the years really should not surprise anyone.

we all have an evolution of sorts when we continue to investigate,and challenge our own preconceptions.the intelligent man or woman,will accept this new information,and change their conclusions accordingly.the hyper-partisan and/or rigid fundamentalist,will dismiss this new information because it conflicts with their dearly held preconceptions.

some people struggle with a changing landscape,and prefer to reside in their own comfort zones.

i like hedges because he challenges and criticizes power,but he also tends to speak in apocalyptic verbiage.

i also respect hedges because he does back up his opinions with actual sources.now we can disagree with his conclusions,but how he came to those conclusions,he is quite clear.

on a side note:i cannot watch or read hedges for extended periods due to the fact that what he is pointing out is so damn depressing.

but he is incredibly consistent in regards to criticizing power.

which,in my opinion,is so very vital in these times,because we see the majority of corporate media revealing a reverence and fealty to corporate power.

chris hedges has earned my respect.
but i do not demand that everyone read or listen to him.

and speaking only for myself,i refuse to dismiss a viewpoint simply because it may be on a venue of questionable intent.
i read the american conservative,though this is a website funded by pat buchanon.i do so because the american conservative produces some damn fine content,with journalists who source their material.

i may disagree with their conclusions,but i cannot ignore the quality of their work.

this is the same reason why i no longer do work for crooks and liars and the young turks and good god..SLATE.does this mean that everything they produce is utter shit?

no..of course not,but they all have taken a book out of the FOX model, and became hyper-partisan,faux outrage machines.

now let us take this video,which so happens to be on RT.
what is it that hedges is saying that is WRONG? or false? or a lie?

i have no issue with disagreement,nor skepticism,but is anything he is saying really that controversial?
what is he saying that should be dismissed?
should his words simply be dismissed due to him being on RT?

if we refuse to accept the words,or conclusions from any public personality,simply because of the media that they happen to be on,then..in my opinion..we relegate ourselves to a handful of outlets,and it diminishes the conversation.

is it any wonder or surprise that those academics that are critical of power are NEVER seen on corporate media?
that those brave and courageous journalists and academics are forced to the fringes in order to get their messages out.

we can disagree with their messages and conclusions,but for us to even have the OPTION to disagree.they need a media outlet in order to even put the word out.

do you see what i am saying?

i am probably wording this wrong,and producing more confusion than clarity,but when the corporate media controls who and what gets to be discussed,debated and argued.then THEY are the ones who set the agenda.they are the ones who set the lines of discussion and the parameters of that discussion.

and people like hedges have not been invited to the table for decades.

it appears that any journalist,or academic that is critical of power are relegated to the fringes.

you will never see noam chomsky on FOX,or MSNBC,or CNN.

but you will see them on independent media.
such as democracy now,or the real news and yes...venues like RT and aljazeera english.

i probably totally messed my point up,but it is in there somewhere.
i am just gonna stop right here,because now i am just rambling.

Spread awareness *quality

Amy Goodman and Democracy Now doing real news.

in response to the TYT comments: i really appreciate what TYT are trying to do but they need to get their shit on lock. they're too experienced to be operating like a high school news channel/early morning radio comedy show.

same with the real news but their stories are way, way better. and why can't they title their videos in any kind of coherent way?

and i feel similarly about bill maher. about 10-20% of the time he has something worth saying. he does, however, put together some awesomely bizarre groups of people, which i appreciate so long as they're allowed to speak in complete sentences.

anything from the amazing atheist or thunderf00t is just pure cringe these days. they lost the plot years ago and now just their voices sound like crying toddlers to me.

any MRA/ideologically anti-feminist stuff is also pure cringe. i'm all about critiquing ideas and i have my own critiques for parts of feminism but pretty much everything i've seen devolves to "look at this stupid fat girl" pretty quickly.

i also second what newtboy said.

anything political that bobknight posts is just a clusterfuck of wrong/partially wrong/intentionally misleading and adds nothing of substance to any discussion.



what i miss rachael maddow articles. she always seems to research and cover the facts of her stories really well.

Is there anything more to this story yet? Has any real news outlet said anything? All I can find is a bunch of links to obviously partisan blogs and Enquirer-esque pseudo sites.

I stopped watching the news years ago because I realised that we were being fed pap to keep us amused, while the real news was ignored. Nothing appears to have changed since then, except the lies seem to have got bigger and multiplied.

"Pinhead" in an official Real News title. Look it up, people!

I know that Jon himself doesn't really think of himself or his show as competing with the "real news".

...I agree, he hasn't competed with the real news. He and his show were way better than the "real" news. To such an extent that to say they were in "competition" is laughable.

The "real" news blathers on about drivel that corporate interests and juggernauts like Murdoch and Trump want us to hear about. And when it isn't doing that, it trying to shovel and spin enough horseshit to fill a 24-hour "news cycle". Garbage in, garbage out.

In trying to be a satire or parody of the "real" news, Jon Stewart has actually helmed a show that really informs, yet does it with wit, logic, and some amazingly real insight.

So, thanks for being my primary source of "news", be it fake or real, for the past 10+ years Jon. Enjoy your retirement or whatever comes next -- nobody deserves it more than you.