Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Fox: Pat Robertson's PR Firm

Reported by Janie - August 25, 2005

Yesterday (8/24), Dayside was cut short by the Presidential address which Fox, once again, played in its entirety. After a brief analysis of what the President stated in the speech, guest-host Alisyn Camerota moved on to discuss Pat Robertson.

Camerota began: "Pat Robertson came out with some controversial comments, this time about the biblical root of Islamic terrorism. Take a listen to this:"

PR: "The bible talks about Ishmael being a wild ass, he's just uncontrollable and it's almost like that seed of rebellion and uncontrollable anger has filtered into these people. There's an element of hatred and revenge that is just extraordinary, and you say they're deluded, there's poverty, this and that, 100 different reasons, but at the heart of it all it seems like to me, it's just the spirit of violence, the spirit of hatred, and a spirit of murder."

Comment: Wait. Robertson was talking about Islamic terrorism, not himself, right?

Camerota continued: "Muslims view themselves of descendants of Abraham's son Ishmael, Robertson is already under fire this week for saying Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, should be quote, taken outÂ…. Robertson has since clarified his statements saying the words were taken out of context, he did not mean assassination."

Comment: This is, plain and simply, NOT journalism. Camerota begins discussing Robertson's controversial assasination comments by saying that Robertson said Chavez should be taken out, which matches up directly with what Robertson claims to have said. She then continues by telling the audience Robertson's defense of his statements and leaving it at that with no further dissection of what his actual comments were. Every other main stream outlet seems to have picked up on the fact that Robertson was lying in his defense, but Fox chooses to ignore what his comments actually were.

Yes, Robertson did say that Chavez should be "taken out", but that was only a portion of his comments, his actual comments on assassination were: "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it..."

Fox blatantly ignores what his actual comments were, in favor of voicing only his (false) argument. This segment was neither fair, nor balanced, and left the audience once again, misinformed.

Comments
Post a comment




Remember Me?


We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.