Fox News wins in court

[micknaboz]

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.

Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story.

In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.

http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/11.html

Fox news lies and distorts the news , well no surprise there. At least to some of us.

[anEinherjer]

:rofl:

It's funny to hear the same story from opposite sides.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/36646.html

Leftist outlets adopted Wilson’s spin as truth, peaking with the completely credulous treatment given him in The Corporation. Meanwhile, journalists on the left have never taken note of Wilson’s own questionable reporting on the Michigan Boys, or the fact that the story led to a second license challenge at the FCC, this time aimed at him and his employer.

So one very loud local TV reporter stands on both sides of an issue that could decide how much the federal government will butt into broadcast news. But because his better-known targets are two of the institutions most reviled on the left, few people even care to know whether their man on the front lines is a crusader or a fraud. Nor do they appear to recognize the implications of making the FCC the arbiter of whether a news outlet is shading the truth.


Now Mick, I know you hate the righties with a passion, but Reason isn't "rightie", and you gotta ask yourself deep down - do you REALLY want the FCC to decide who's telling the truth in the media? I know I don't.


And this Wilson guy is pretty pathetic, all in all.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Dude, this story is old news.

[JimKelly12203]

Going back to the "if you were king" thread... This much is certain. Dissolving Newscorp would be at the top of my list. Followed shortly thereafter by the other big media conglomerates.

I have always said the term "NEWS" should not be permitted next to FOX's name. FOX entertainment, or simply FOX would be acceptable. But FOX News, is a lie and a disservice to our country in that it dupes what is supposed to be an "informed citizenry".

That said, if you watch their programming and don't feel like you're being talked at by a tongue in cheek comic book version of Morey Povich, then you're beyond hope anyway.

[Crinoline]

I have always said the term "NEWS" should not be permitted next to FOX's name. FOX entertainment, or simply FOX would be acceptable. But FOX News, is lie and a disservice to our country in that it dupes what is supposed to be an "informed citizenry".



I would say the same of CNN, ABC, NBC etc etc. None of them tell the real truth, only their version of the 'truth'.

[JLB]

I would say the same of CNN, ABC, NBC etc etc. None of them tell the real truth, only their version of the 'truth'.

the truth doesn't sell anymore.:D

[ICRockets]

I would say the same of CNN, ABC, NBC etc etc. None of them tell the real truth, only their version of the 'truth'.

Well gee golly, how did I know you'd show up in this thread and pull the "b-b-but the other guys do it!" routine?

[anEinherjer]

They all do it, IC. Sure FOX is more blatant about it, but give me a break, news outlets have ALWAYS been biased in one direction or the other.

The old question: Where do you think the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle got the "Democrat" part of its name?

[ICRockets]

They all do it, IC. Sure FOX is more blatant about it, but give me a break, news outlets have ALWAYS been biased in one direction or the other.

The old question: Where do you think the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle got the "Democrat" part of its name?

My post was primarily a criticism of how all Crinoline ever does is bitch about the liberals. He'll bring them into the thread if he has to, because he's incapable of providing an original thought of his own.

[shiva2999]

My post was primarily a criticism of how all Crinoline ever does is bitch about the liberals. He'll bring them into the thread if he has to, because he's incapable of providing an original thought of his own.

It's the St Paul defense.

We are all sinners so none of us have any standing to criticize.

[anEinherjer]

Oh, I wouldn't say that his post automatically suggests that we don't "have any standing to criticize" - if you're going to put out a hypothesis you should be prepared to look at the alternatives as well. If you're going to suggest A is doing X, and B, C, and D are also doing X, that might elucidate some of the reasons behind A's behavior.

Describing alternatives is a useful tool. Used to do it all the time in environmental impact statements, for instance.

Now, to use the presence of alternatives as reason or evidence to shoot down or ignore the original hypothesis is a fallacy - call it St. Paul's or whatever you'd like. In this case, it's probably what Crino's doing...

[M76]

the media and their truthiness makes me sick, these huge corporations need to be broken up and more regulated, allowing 3 or 4 conglomerates to control the air waves is a disservice to the american people

[anEinherjer]

Well there's a unique point of view. Who fed that one to you, M76?

Seems to me there's nothing wrong with having 3 or 4 news conglomerates. The problem lies in that each one "owns" a piece of the spectrum. Free the spectrum and let the market sort it all out. We need LESS regulation. Because your government has regulated things SO WELL thus far... (go ahead Shiva, I set this one up for ya...)

[JLB]

the media and their truthiness makes me sick, these huge corporations need to be broken up and more regulated, allowing 3 or 4 conglomerates to control the air waves is a disservice to the american people


what do you wish to replace it with?

[JimKelly12203]

I would say the same of CNN, ABC, NBC etc etc. None of them tell the real truth, only their version of the 'truth'.

No doubt! FOX is just the most in your face. But there's no honor in being the nicest pimp or the least hateful biggot. All of the news outlets are full of dung.

The entire MSM is garbage.

[micknaboz]

Fox News Nutwork.

http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Whitehouse_v_Chafee_on_Fox.jpg
Republican incumbent losing to Democratic challenger? Switch the parties


http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Fox_Foley_Label.jpg
Republican pedophile gets busted? Call him a Democrat!


http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Libby_not_guilty.jpg
Republican operative gets busted? Say he didn't!


http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Specter_Democrat_hume.jpg
Republican Senator says your "administration" sucks eggs? Say he's a Democrat!

[ckg68]

How about calling Fixed News...ERRRR,Fox Noise.....ERRR,whatever the hell that network is what one of Air America's "Young Turks" did: Fox Opinion?

[35Pete]

Well there's a unique point of view. Who fed that one to you, M76?

Seems to me there's nothing wrong with having 3 or 4 news conglomerates. The problem lies in that each one "owns" a piece of the spectrum. Free the spectrum and let the market sort it all out. We need LESS regulation. Because your government has regulated things SO WELL thus far... (go ahead Shiva, I set this one up for ya...)

I've got a serious issue with centralization of any kind of power. Period.

Split them up. Allow competition of ideas to be fostered. Monopolies are bad for market economics. So are cartels.

[micknaboz]

FALAFEL MAN


http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/9123/billorallysmzh5.jpg

[anEinherjer]

Pete, what's the case for "centralization of power" in news reporting? There myriad news outlets, including the traditional ones plus gods only know how many web sites out there. And among the companies producing news there is obvious slant in different directions, and it's obvious they generally don't like each other. Sure, Shiva might say, but they're all eeevil corporations! What are you going to do, regulate the press in direct violation of all that is good in the world? :) The press has always been made of companies - what other option is there? Propaganda from the government? You can't legislate "objectivity"...

I'm sorry, I don't see the cause for concern.

[Crinoline]

My post was primarily a criticism of how all Crinoline ever does is bitch about the liberals. He'll bring them into the thread if he has to, because he's incapable of providing an original thought of his own.

I do it to annoy you.

[mikgaes]

Mephistopheles

http://www.americanprogress.org/kf/murdoch.jpg

[ICRockets]

I do it to annoy you.

I'm honored, but it would annoy me more to have to deal with intelligent conservatives making legitimate arguments. You know how us liberals hate having to think about anything. Just ask Uppy, he'll tell you.

[pmoon6]

I love a FoxNews thread. The same cast of characters come out to bash it. The funny thing to me is that it's just one cable news channel. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

Too bad for all the supposed proponents of the First Amendment, Fox enjoys good ratings. They have to resort to laughing at it or telling people only mindless sheep would believe anything they have to say.

It's just like I've always stated. Freedom of speech and the press apply only if you say the right things.

[mikgaes]

Not only do I not watch it. I do not allow the channel on in my house.

[г]

I love a FoxNews thread. The same cast of characters come out to bash it. The funny thing to me is that it's just one cable news channel. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

Too bad for all the supposed proponents of the First Amendment, Fox enjoys good ratings. They have to resort to laughing at it or telling people only mindless sheep would believe anything they have to say.

It's just like I've always stated. Freedom of speech and the press apply only if you say the right things.

Hey, you've got the right to be an idiot and watch Foxed Snooze...how is that a 'freedom of speech' issue ?

[pmoon6]

Not only do I not watch it. I do not allow the channel on in my house.How very tolerent of you.

Afraid your kids will hear a different opinion?

But then your choice, it would interfere with the leftist brainwashing.

[pmoon6]

Hey, you've got the right to be an idiot and watch Foxed Snooze...how is that a 'freedom of speech' issue ?Thanks for proving my point.

[г]

So you admit that Foxed Snooze is rightist brainwashing...

[г]

Thanks for proving my point.

What 'point' might that have been ? How is it a 'freedom of speech' issue ?

[pmoon6]

So you admit that Foxed Snooze is rightist brainwashing...No, you can only be brainwashed if you buy into the right wingers on the shows.

O'Reilly isn't a lockstep neocon.

Sean Hannity is, but he is counterbalanced by Colmes, no matter if you think Colmes is a pussy. Their show also has both liberal and conservative guests.

That said, I watch those shows only occasionally, but I guess that still makes me a mindless sheep. Eh?

[pmoon6]

What 'point' might that have been ? How is it a 'freedom of speech' issue ?The point was Fox's ratings are so good that they won't be going away anytime soon. The left is left with the impotent tactic of calling people that watch it "Idiots".

Which you did right on que.

[г]

I guess that still makes me a mindless sheep. Eh?

Pretty much, yeah, with emphasis on 'mindless.'

[pmoon6]

Pretty much, yeah, with emphasis on 'mindless.'Ooooh, I guess I take my ball home after that scathing attack.

Not.

[ckg68]

The point was Fox's ratings are so good that they won't be going away anytime soon. The left is left with the impotent tactic of calling people that watch it "Idiots".

Which you did right on que.

"So good?" :guy: Psshh! Please.

Then why is USA the top ranked cable network,period?

Then why doesn't Fox News,most weeks,have one of their shows ranked in cable's top 10 shows?

Just as an example....current top rated shows include:

*TNT's The Closer and Saving Grace
*ESPN's coverage of the Brickyard 400
*Nickelodeon's "SpongeBob:The Movie"
*USA's Monk
*Four episodes of "SpongeBob"
*Disney's Hannah Montana

Gee,I don't see the "Factor" on there....guess he's too busy "destroying" Daily Kos. And where's "Hannity & colmes"? Or any of the other fine Fox News shows?

Fox News popular? Don't make me :censor:ing laugh. (The same goes for the other "news channels" out there.)

[shiva2999]

It's only partially about ratings.

Give Alan Colmes the boot and put ME on with Sean Hannity and watch the ratings soar.

They'd never do that though.

[pmoon6]

It's only partially about ratings.

Give Alan Colmes the boot and put ME on with Sean Hannity and watch the ratings soar.

They'd never do that though.If that were the case, I'd tune in everyday.

[ckg68]

And just to pile on,moon,here's the current top 15 as noted by USA Today in order:

TNT's The Closer and Saving Grace,USA's Monk,Disney's Hannah Montana,USA's WWE Raw(#5 and #7),sandwiched at #6 by Disney's Cory in the House,Discovery's Shark Week bow and USA's Psych tied at #8,Disney's showing of "The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lava Girl",Nickelodeon's "The SpongeBob Movie" tied with the debut of FX's Damages,Lifetime's Army Wives,USA's Burn Notice and Disney's The Suite Life of Zach and Cody.

I'll ask the question again: If Fox News is so popular,then why in the hell aren't they in the top 15 more often-if at all?

[ckg68]

It's only partially about ratings.

Give Alan Colmes the boot and put ME on with Sean Hannity and watch the ratings soar.

They'd never do that though.

Nor did they get Joe Conason to be Hannity's sparring partner when the show was being put together back in the day.

[anEinherjer]

I expect moonie was talking Fox in relation to the other news channels....

[stepsukie]

google news is my source...just the facts...**** networks...;)

[shiva2999]

If that were the case, I'd tune in everyday.

They'd have to change the name of the show from "Hannity and the Wussy Liberal Punching Bag".

[pmoon6]

I'm talking about news shows and total news programming, not cable shows in general. Only a percentage of people watch news or commentary shows regularly.

I still think Fox leads the cable news industry. I'm still pretty sure Idiot O'Reilly kicks Idiot Olbermann's ass, regardless of you having a Keith Olbermann altar in your house.

Maybe if you pray harder.

[pmoon6]

They'd have to change the name of the show from "Hannity and the Wussy Liberal Punching Bag".:rofl:

I suspect Sean might retire prematurely because of too many cinge marks on his ass.

[ckg68]

I expect moonie was talking Fox in relation to the other news channels....

I knew that as well. But the truth of the matter is,NO news channel will ever be popular with the viewers as a whole. Not CNN. Not MSNBC. And certainly not Fox News. And in Fox News' case,you can safely assume that a decent chunk of the viewers are there to get their yuks,etc. from it. So erase a decent percentage from the viewership. I can only remember a couple of times that specific Fox News shows landed in the cable top 15.

[ckg68]

I'm talking about news shows and total news programming, not cable shows in general. Only a percentage of people watch news or commentary shows regularly.

I still think Fox leads the cable news industry. I'm still pretty sure Idiot O'Reilly kicks Idiot Olbermann's ass, regardless of you having a Keith Olbermann altar in your house.

Maybe if you pray harder.

Yes.

However,as I noted to aE,a decent percentage watches Fox News to get their laugh on. So,discard them as loyal friends and true.

Re O'Reilly/Olbermann: In terms of overall viewers,yes. In the money demo,BillO does beat Keith by nearly 2-1,BUT KO has been been gaining ground whereas O'Reilly has not.

[г]

The point was Fox's ratings are so good that they won't be going away anytime soon.

That wasn't your point. You just pulled that out of your ass...

[pmoon6]

Yes.

However,as I noted to aE,a decent percentage watches Fox News to get their laugh on. So,discard them as loyal friends and true.

Re O'Reilly/Olbermann: In terms of overall viewers,yes. In the money demo,BillO does beat Keith by nearly 2-1,BUT KO has been been gaining ground whereas O'Reilly has not.O'Reilly's act is old. I can't remember the last time I watched his show or Fox News period.

I prefer to get news off the internet from different sources as I assume most of the people here do as well.

I just don't have a problem with them airing their viewpoint and don't feel the need to bash them or their regular viewers because I may not agree.

[shiva2999]

I just don't have a problem with them airing their viewpoint and don't feel the need to bash them or their regular viewers because I may not agree.

A viewpoint is one thing.

Arguing in court for the right to DELIBERATELY LIE is quite another.

[pmoon6]

That wasn't your point. You just pulled that out of your ass...Blow me. I guess you're a mindless reader now.

Let me expand the answer for you, genius.

Because the left wing stations can't beat Fox in the ratings, they resort to attacking them.

Opponents to Fox's point of view resort to the same thing and calling their viewers idiots, morons, etc. Either to pump their own egos or demean others with a different perspective.

Don't let me stop you though, you know it all.

[ckg68]

Then I guess that survey they did some time ago showing Fox News viewers actually knew less about what was going on in Iraq,compared to other news outlets,was all just a bunch of bull:censor:,eh moon?

[mikgaes]

How very tolerent of you.

Afraid your kids will hear a different opinion?

But then your choice, it would interfere with the leftist brainwashing.


Sparing my family the blatant lying that goes on.

[mikgaes]

O'Reilly's act is old. I can't remember the last time I watched his show or Fox News period.

I prefer to get news off the internet from different sources as I assume most of the people here do as well.

I just don't have a problem with them airing their viewpoint and don't feel the need to bash them or their regular viewers because I may not agree.

There is a huge difference between different viewpoints and the bold-faced lying that is pervasive at Faux.

[JimKelly12203]

I love a FoxNews thread. The same cast of characters come out to bash it. The funny thing to me is that it's just one cable news channel. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

Too bad for all the supposed proponents of the First Amendment, Fox enjoys good ratings. They have to resort to laughing at it or telling people only mindless sheep would believe anything they have to say.

It's just like I've always stated. Freedom of speech and the press apply only if you say the right things.

Pmoon, lets not for a second assume that there is any type of parity regarding the types of lies told by FOX and the types of lies told by the other big media conglomerates. Yes, they're all crap. But FOX is clearly in it's own stratosphere.

The beef with FOX is that they get roughly 50% of all cable news viewers. So, 50% of the citizenry is being manipulated and misinformed. That DOES effect my life when those same morons go to the polls on election day.

Simply ignoring it does not solve the problem IMO. You should not be able to pass half-truths, opinion and propaganda as news. The news should be straight up factual and devoid of opinion and inuendo.

Back in the day, people read the news and drew their own conclusions based on the Facts. Murdoch, on the other hand pre-emptively gives you a carefully crafted conclusion and calls it news.

News Corp is nothing more or less than a modern day version of the Völkischer Beobachter. The only difference i can see is that Murdoch's empire is far larger and more far reaching.

[ckg68]

But here's the fun part:

Fox News averaged a 1.2 rating in prime time,a DROP of 14% from July 2006. CNN,too,did worse year to year....a .6,down 25%. MSNBC was the only news channel to make gains: .5,up 67% from last year.

The audience who watches in prime time is microscopic...no more than 2% of those watching TV in prime time have one of the 3 news channels on. Methinks Moon is giving these channels WAAAAAAAAAAAY too much credit(and,to be fair,so is everyone else).

[anEinherjer]

Pmoon, lets not for a second assume that there is any type of parity regarding the types of lies told by FOX and the types of lies told by the other big media conglomerates. Yes, they're all crap. But FOX is clearly in it's own stratosphere.

The beef with FOX is that they get roughly 50% of all cable news viewers. So, 50% of the citizenry is being manipulated and misinformed. That DOES effect my life when those same morons go to the polls on election day.

Come on Jim, nowhere near 50% of "the citizenry" gets its news from cable news outlets.

Voters are irrational and uninformed in general.

Simply ignoring it does not solve the problem IMO. You should not be able to pass half-truths, opinion and propaganda as news. The news should be straight up factual and devoid of opinion and inuendo.

And when it is, that will be the first time in history.

Back in the day, people read the news and drew their own conclusions based on the Facts.

Come on man, you're completely ignoring history here.

Murdoch, on the other hand pre-emptively gives you a carefully crafted conclusion and calls it news.

News Corp is nothing more or less than a modern day version of the Völkischer Beobachter. The only difference i can see is that Murdoch's empire is far larger and more far reaching.

And this is just silly. He's in the entertainment business and always will sell the product that makes him MONEY. It has nothing to do with a political viewpoint for him (or other CEOs).

[shiva2999]

And this is just silly. He's in the entertainment business and always will sell the product that makes him MONEY. It has nothing to do with a political viewpoint for him (or other CEOs).

No, this is silly.

Have you ever heard of "loss leaders"?

[г]

Just ask Mrs. Carlson

[anEinherjer]

Of course I've heard of loss leaders Shivster, don't be absurd - a CEO might take a loss for a while, but in the end, there's a profit motive. They don't take losses forever.......

[shiva2999]

Of course I've heard of loss leaders Shivster, don't be absurd - a CEO might take a loss for a while, but in the end, there's a profit motive. They don't take losses forever.......

Well, if you've heard of it you don't understand the concept.

Murdoch could really care less how much money Fox News makes.

That's not it's purpose.

[anEinherjer]

:rofl:

Ahhh the old "I guess you don't understand" canard.... beautiful!

[shiva2999]

:rofl:

Ahhh the old "I guess you don't understand" canard.... beautiful!

:rofl:

I'm not the one pretending to be a dumbass.

[ckg68]

Hell,the New York Post and the Washington Times loses millions of $$$ every year.

They're still in business because it gives their owners(Murdoch and Rev.Moon)megaphones for their editorial views.

[Gibby]

google news is my source...just the facts...**** networks...;)

you may be redeemable after all.

[shiva2999]

Hell,the New York Post and the Washington Times loses millions of $$$ every year.

They're still in business because it gives their owners(Murdoch and Rev.Moon)megaphones for their editorial views.

I tell ya Carl, I'll never get over how people are willing to take ridiculously idiotic positions just to argue against something that's perfectly obvious to anyone with a brain.

[ckg68]

I tell ya Carl, I'll never get over how people are willing to take ridiculously idiotic positions just to argue against something that's perfectly obvious to anyone with a brain.

Two reasons:

1. It gives the owners a chance to set the news agenda. Murdoch did this when he used his British papers to denigrate anyone who dared oppose former PM Tony Blair in the early days of the Iraq invasion.

2. Like everything else,it sells papers.

[JimKelly12203]

[QUOTE=anEinherjer;1724188]Come on Jim, nowhere near 50% of "the citizenry" gets its news from cable news outlets.
QUOTE]

Fair enough. But he does get ~50% of cable news viewership.

[voicekiller]

Fox Opinion Channel...new slogan

"when you want biased opinions turn us on"

[shiva2999]

Media outlets don't necessarily need huge numbers to be opinion leaders.

The Fox News attitude has permeated the whole country.

[voicekiller]

Media outlets don't necessarily need huge numbers to be opinion leaders.

The Fox News attitude has permeated the whole country.
Not the whole country just the south and the midwest...most of the people on the East and west coast (The Blue States) are smart enough to realize that Fox news is just another outlet of Republican propaganda.

[pmoon6]

Not the whole country just the south and the midwest...most of the people on the East and west coast (The Blue States) are smart enough to realize that Fox news is just another outlet of Republican propaganda.:rofl: Yes, the East and Left Coasts are smarter than everyone else.

If you don't think so, just ask them.