In my last post, gentle reader, I noted that President Obama, in an interview with the New Republic, criticized Fox News and Rush Limbaugh for contributing to the dysfunction and intransigence in Congress. This morning, Fox and Friends entertained both Fox's "legal analyst" Peter Johnson, who said Obama was singling out the conservative media, and Ben Shapiro of breitbart.com, who upped the absurdity level by claiming the President was out to silence them.
What made the guests really unhappy was Obama's remark, “I think what we really have to do is change some of the incentive structures so that people feel liberated to pursue some common ground.” He was referring to public debate in generally, not specifically to the media - his criticism of Fox and Rush came later - but the Fox pundits didn't care.
Johnson, after clumsily comparing Obama's remarks to reruns of the Carol Burnett show, snarkily interpreted them as meaning, “The people on the left, like MSNBC, they really want to encourage compromise and debate, but the people at Fox News, they are really out of control, they’re really crazy, they don’t want a debate and they want to punish Republican congressional leaders if there’s a debate.” It showed, he said, that the “civil libertarian” President had morphed into a Media Matters acolyte, bearing the message that "the most pernicious influence in the country [is] - not unemployment, debt, deficit or terror, but Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, conservative media, centrist media… they are coming at you in a big, BIIIIG way”.
The painfully earnest Ben Shapiro went Johnson one farther. Shapiro thought Obama’s words “change the incentive structure” should be “scary language for any American who believes in the First Amendment on a fundamental level….” Because it proved Shapiro's oft-repeated claim that Obama’s an imperial president, has dictatorial tendencies, and is generally a bully. To Shapiro, “incentives” was doublespeak for "silencing the media." (Really? Then why are you still on the air?)
Fox Nation upped the hysteria level one more notch with the shrieking headline, “Obama Threatens Fox News and Rush.” Interestingly, the URL for the post is the much more accurate, “Obama Singles Out Fox News.” Why go for accuracy if you can use sensationalism - right?
Do you like this post?
Agent 86 commented
2013-01-29 14:53:56 -0500
· Flag
U, I didn’t dismiss the Pew study.., that’s YOUR bias showing. I simply pointed out that an 8 week study during an election cycle is not indicative of an overall level of network bias as was the apparent contention of the OPINION piece in the Sun which cherry picked the parts of a Pew STUDY to fit the narrative. Re-read the highlighted part in my last post again where I further pointed out that even the Pew article itself put some context around the data which was ignored in the Sun piece by the…pardon me….“obviously Conservatively biased author”. Pew did call out MSNBC for the numbers during the 8 week study period that is true. I would like to see them do one now that the election is over and sample the same data. If that data bears out the contention of the Sun OPINION piece blanket statement that MSNBC is more biased than FOX I would concede the argument. As someone else pointed out, assuming Romney made a greater number of fallacious statement, those would be targeted by MSNBC (negative story) and ignored by Fox at best or spun in a positive light (zero or +1 positive). Anyway, get back to me when you get that new Pew STUDY so we can revisit the discussion.
I didn’t use code words for anything, a hack is a hack left or right, again that’s YOUR bias is showing being nit-picky as a diversion. When the Sun article author resorts to subtle name calling such as saying someone should change their title to Minister of Information and basically giving Fox a pass, yeah…that’s my clue he’s biased. Do you teach how to tell partisan opinion from unbiased fact, context, and the concept that correlation does not imply causation or to you simply tell the kids “Conservative good, Liberal bad” or whatever?
Also, I didn’t say a word about MSNBC not stumping for Democrats/Liberals. They do…so what? Fox stumps for the GOP yet claims fair and balanced which you and I both know is BS and you my friend are blind if you don’t see that. Any “Liberal” they have on any of their shows is outnumbered by orders of magnitude, talked over, shouted over and very seldom gets a word in edgewise. I know you’ll disagree.
Anyway, I look forward to your posting of the link to the new Pew study on media bias.
I didn’t use code words for anything, a hack is a hack left or right, again that’s YOUR bias is showing being nit-picky as a diversion. When the Sun article author resorts to subtle name calling such as saying someone should change their title to Minister of Information and basically giving Fox a pass, yeah…that’s my clue he’s biased. Do you teach how to tell partisan opinion from unbiased fact, context, and the concept that correlation does not imply causation or to you simply tell the kids “Conservative good, Liberal bad” or whatever?
Also, I didn’t say a word about MSNBC not stumping for Democrats/Liberals. They do…so what? Fox stumps for the GOP yet claims fair and balanced which you and I both know is BS and you my friend are blind if you don’t see that. Any “Liberal” they have on any of their shows is outnumbered by orders of magnitude, talked over, shouted over and very seldom gets a word in edgewise. I know you’ll disagree.
Anyway, I look forward to your posting of the link to the new Pew study on media bias.
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 14:46:31 -0500
· Flag
Yep. Your ignorance. You are ignorant, U troll. Sadly, pathetically, pitifully ignorant.
U Mad? commented
2013-01-29 13:42:05 -0500
· Flag
My ignorance? Your entire post is a lie wrapped around excuses peppered with deceit. Like I said, you dont know how to debate. You just know how to lie.
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 13:15:58 -0500
· Flag
@u troll, that still doesn’t support the opinion piece. 71% of the stories were negative because Etch-a-Sketch Rmoney lied and misinformed. Just because FoxGOPTV rewarded Etch-a-Sketch Rmoney for being a liar doesn’t mean legitimate news outlets are supposed to reward him too. Also, it was during the election cycle. That doesn’t support the statement of the OPINION piece that MSNBC is partisan. It just states that MSNBC didn’t cover up Etch-a-Sketch Rmoney’s campaign lies the way FoxGOPTV did. Get it? Your ignorance is what’s mindboggling.
And you’re lying again. MSNBC does not have fewer neocons on than FoxGOPTV has libruls. If you ventured out of your FoxGOPTV cesspool and actually watched MSNBC, you’d see that starting first thing in the morning is Joe Scarborough (neocon) with Willie G (neocon) and Mike whatshisname (neocon). He usually has more neocons as guests than liberals. Then there’s Andrea Mitchell (leans right) who frequently has Luke Russert (neocon). Then there’s Chuck Todd (neocon). Also on the MSNBC line up is Michael Steel (neocon), Steve Schmidt (neocon), SE Cupp (neocon), David Gregory (neocon). That sure seems like a lot more neocons than FoxGOPTV “libruls”.
And how many actual libruls does FoxGOPTV have? Not “liberals” like van cesspool or bob beckle, U troll, but actual liberals who are as high profile as Scarbrorugh, Michael Steel and Chuck Todd? I can only name 1. Can you name any?
And you’re lying again. MSNBC does not have fewer neocons on than FoxGOPTV has libruls. If you ventured out of your FoxGOPTV cesspool and actually watched MSNBC, you’d see that starting first thing in the morning is Joe Scarborough (neocon) with Willie G (neocon) and Mike whatshisname (neocon). He usually has more neocons as guests than liberals. Then there’s Andrea Mitchell (leans right) who frequently has Luke Russert (neocon). Then there’s Chuck Todd (neocon). Also on the MSNBC line up is Michael Steel (neocon), Steve Schmidt (neocon), SE Cupp (neocon), David Gregory (neocon). That sure seems like a lot more neocons than FoxGOPTV “libruls”.
And how many actual libruls does FoxGOPTV have? Not “liberals” like van cesspool or bob beckle, U troll, but actual liberals who are as high profile as Scarbrorugh, Michael Steel and Chuck Todd? I can only name 1. Can you name any?
U Mad? commented
2013-01-29 12:35:12 -0500
· Flag
The study does support it. Read the study. I posted the link to it but it was deleted. Ill post it again.
http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign_2012
See the part where it shows 71% of MSNBC Romney stories were negative while only 3% were positive? But thats not bias at all, is it?
For people to claim FOX stumps for the right but MSNBC doesnt stump for the left is mindboggling. You’re lying if you claim you dont see it. They have fewer conservatives on to debate than FOX has liberals.
http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign_2012
See the part where it shows 71% of MSNBC Romney stories were negative while only 3% were positive? But thats not bias at all, is it?
For people to claim FOX stumps for the right but MSNBC doesnt stump for the left is mindboggling. You’re lying if you claim you dont see it. They have fewer conservatives on to debate than FOX has liberals.
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 12:17:53 -0500
· Flag
U Troll, pay attention. The link you provided goes to a right-wing opinion column. That’s what I was referring to as opinion. Get it? Let me repeat, YOUR LINK GOES TO A RIGHT-WING OPINION COLUMN. That isn’t a study, troll. It’s an OPINION COLUMN. Are you with me so far? Did I lose you? Are you ok?
When one actually digs deeper and follows the link to the actual study, the actual study isn’t supporting what your RIGHT-WING OPINION COLUMN is claiming.
You still with me, U Troll? Or should I get my 6 year old nephew to explain it to you?
I love when you post here too, U Troll. You show the world how reasonable we can be with an ignorant troll like you.
When one actually digs deeper and follows the link to the actual study, the actual study isn’t supporting what your RIGHT-WING OPINION COLUMN is claiming.
You still with me, U Troll? Or should I get my 6 year old nephew to explain it to you?
I love when you post here too, U Troll. You show the world how reasonable we can be with an ignorant troll like you.
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 12:12:56 -0500
· Flag
@agent 86 – The actual study, which the Conservative Baltimore Sun hack and U don’t understand, is that during the campaign, Etch-a-Sketch Rmoney was caught spewing lies and misinformation, which would in fact cause media outlets to report negatively about him.
This is the problem with neocon/teabaggers, they only see the headline. They don’t bother to read the actual study to see what it says. U Troll would rather accuse us of “discrediting” his right-wing opinion hack.
This is the problem with neocon/teabaggers, they only see the headline. They don’t bother to read the actual study to see what it says. U Troll would rather accuse us of “discrediting” his right-wing opinion hack.
U Mad? commented
2013-01-29 12:11:59 -0500
· Flag
So one of you claim its not a study, that its an opinion but then the next one says it is a study but its only for 8 weeks so it doesnt really count. So which is it? Is it a study or an opinion? To me, something labeled “a Pew study” is a study, not an opinion. And of course the study is dismissed because of a “conservative hack”, code words for “we cant dispute this so we’ll attack the people involved as biased”.
And I do know how to debate; unfortunately none of you do. Your idea of debating is to call the other person names, degrade them, insult them and dismiss anything they say as a lie when you cant actually dispute them.
Pretty much every post ive had on here has been immediately met with hatred and name calling. Its what you guys do. You scream about the right being the party of hate but I honestly dont see anything but hate coming from you. Read the comments on this site. Some of them are so hateful that your own site admins have to remove them.
I like to post here because I enjoy seeing you people show the world just how mean and hateful you really are. i show this site to my students to show them how liberals act v/s how they “claim” the right acts.
And I do know how to debate; unfortunately none of you do. Your idea of debating is to call the other person names, degrade them, insult them and dismiss anything they say as a lie when you cant actually dispute them.
Pretty much every post ive had on here has been immediately met with hatred and name calling. Its what you guys do. You scream about the right being the party of hate but I honestly dont see anything but hate coming from you. Read the comments on this site. Some of them are so hateful that your own site admins have to remove them.
I like to post here because I enjoy seeing you people show the world just how mean and hateful you really are. i show this site to my students to show them how liberals act v/s how they “claim” the right acts.
Deb Tudor commented
2013-01-29 11:51:41 -0500
· Flag
I think we all should be gentler with U Mad — After all, if U Mad’s only exposure to “debtae” is what passes for debates with Faux Noise/gNOpers, then U Mad can’t possibly understand what a genuine reasoned exchange of ideas and facts that constitute a real debate. Obvioulsy, U Mad can’t tell the difference between an opinion piece and a study are. But, then again, if U Mad is following/swallowing Faux Noise/gNOpers, U Mad would know a fact based study if it stood up and it him/her.
Agent 86 commented
2013-01-29 11:45:00 -0500
· Flag
U, the study was over an 8 week period during the election so I don’t see that as representative of an overall comparative degree of bias. I would venture a guess that over the longer term it would be proven out that Fox News is the clear winner in terms of outright bias and definitely wins in the race of misinformation.
You must have missed this in the actual Pew research page and any mention of it’s point is lacking in the Baltimore Sun writeup:
“Throughout the eight-week period studied, a good deal of the difference in treatment of the two contenders is related to who was perceived to be ahead in the race. When horse-race stories-those focused on strategy, tactics and the polls-are taken out of the analysis, and one looks at those framed around the candidates’ policy ideas, biographies and records, the distinctions in the tone of media coverage between the two nominees vanish.”
Looks like it says in reality it was more equal than it appears on the surface. I surmise the Baltimore writer is a Conservative hack.
By the way…I’m not a Liberal, I just detest the masters of manufactured rage, purveyors of half truths and misinformation, and the general cesspool that is Fox News.
You must have missed this in the actual Pew research page and any mention of it’s point is lacking in the Baltimore Sun writeup:
“Throughout the eight-week period studied, a good deal of the difference in treatment of the two contenders is related to who was perceived to be ahead in the race. When horse-race stories-those focused on strategy, tactics and the polls-are taken out of the analysis, and one looks at those framed around the candidates’ policy ideas, biographies and records, the distinctions in the tone of media coverage between the two nominees vanish.”
Looks like it says in reality it was more equal than it appears on the surface. I surmise the Baltimore writer is a Conservative hack.
By the way…I’m not a Liberal, I just detest the masters of manufactured rage, purveyors of half truths and misinformation, and the general cesspool that is Fox News.
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 11:23:28 -0500
· Flag
Your “study”, @u Troll IS NOT A STUDY. It’s an opinion piece. No study there troll. My god. Do you even know the difference between a study and an opinion piece? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
And what point did we prove, U Troll? That you’re ignorant? You proved that a long time ago.
And what point did we prove, U Troll? That you’re ignorant? You proved that a long time ago.
U Mad? commented
2013-01-29 11:12:59 -0500
· Flag
And the “average american patriot” makes my point for me.
Also, here’s your link. Of course you’ll do everything possible to discredit the study, as all liberals do when facts are presented that dispute their views.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bal-pew-study-suggests-msnbc-really-is-more-partisan-than-fox-20121102,0,7266571.story
Also, here’s your link. Of course you’ll do everything possible to discredit the study, as all liberals do when facts are presented that dispute their views.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bal-pew-study-suggests-msnbc-really-is-more-partisan-than-fox-20121102,0,7266571.story
Average American Patriot commented
2013-01-29 09:15:14 -0500
· Flag
Aigoo…
“You guys dont want debate or compromise.”
Debate? Dear lard… we have just finished with the mother of debates. It is called an election and President Barack Hussein Obama WON with a landslide in spite of all the crap Fox and the gNOpigs threw in the way.
Compromise? On what?
It is not like you gNOpig imbeciles are proposing anything sensible. On gun control, you morons want children to pack heat to schools. On gubbimint spending you want Grandma and Grandpa out selling oranges on freeway off ramps.
On abortion, you fruitcakes want to grant citizenship upon conception. That is unless the parents are illeeeguls, so citizenship does not apply to them.
We on the LEFT, We the Progressives, We the Secular Humanists don’t owe a damned thing to the bass ackward buyble thumpin’ wrapped in the flag trigger happy gNOpigs.
END OF DEBATE.
Kindly go about burying the gNOpig by yourselves.
We won’t stop you.
How do you like that compromise?
“You guys dont want debate or compromise.”
Debate? Dear lard… we have just finished with the mother of debates. It is called an election and President Barack Hussein Obama WON with a landslide in spite of all the crap Fox and the gNOpigs threw in the way.
Compromise? On what?
It is not like you gNOpig imbeciles are proposing anything sensible. On gun control, you morons want children to pack heat to schools. On gubbimint spending you want Grandma and Grandpa out selling oranges on freeway off ramps.
On abortion, you fruitcakes want to grant citizenship upon conception. That is unless the parents are illeeeguls, so citizenship does not apply to them.
We on the LEFT, We the Progressives, We the Secular Humanists don’t owe a damned thing to the bass ackward buyble thumpin’ wrapped in the flag trigger happy gNOpigs.
END OF DEBATE.
Kindly go about burying the gNOpig by yourselves.
We won’t stop you.
How do you like that compromise?
Visitor 55 commented
2013-01-29 08:14:16 -0500
· Flag
So, once again, the FoxGOPTV pukes are soiling themselves because President Obama spoke the truth. Instead of taking a look at themselves, they go on attack. Why? So they can keep their stupid mindless sheep convinced that they’re right and everyone else is wrong.
And it works! (see u dumbass! below). The stupid mindless sheep will defend FoxGOPTV despite the fact that they’re being lied to. No outrage that they’re being lied to, used and disrespected. Nope. None. The stupid mindless sheep will continue to defend their masters even by making up lies about the competition. (see u dumbass! below).
And it works! (see u dumbass! below). The stupid mindless sheep will defend FoxGOPTV despite the fact that they’re being lied to. No outrage that they’re being lied to, used and disrespected. Nope. None. The stupid mindless sheep will continue to defend their masters even by making up lies about the competition. (see u dumbass! below).
Richard Santalone commented
2013-01-29 07:43:21 -0500
· Flag
@u Mad? “Studies during this last election showed MSNBC was more biased towards the left than FOX was biased towards the right.”
Question: do you have a CREDIBLE LINK to back that up?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I’m waiting………………………………………….BUUUUUUUUZZZZZZZZZ!! TIME’S UP!
Boy oh boy, it’s painfully obvious to us that you are REALLY YEARNING LIKE HELL for your dear former Fuehrer George Dumbya Bush. Remember the run up to that 100% TOTAL DISASTER in Iraq which started almost ten years ago? Mark my words: anyone opposing that invasion was INSTANTLY SQUASHED LIKE A BUG or smeared, insulted, and called a traitor by Bully O’Lielly, Sean KKKlannity and the rest of Herr Goebbles II’s (i.e. Murdoch’s) minions at Faux Spews Channel. Case in point: Phil Donahue — his show got CANCELLED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY by MSNBC when he expressed his opposition to the invasion of Iraq and had antiwar guests on his show. But, then again, remember who OWNED MSNBC at the time: GENERAL ELECTRIC, a charter member of the MIC (Military Industrial Complex).
Question: do you have a CREDIBLE LINK to back that up?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I’m waiting………………………………………….BUUUUUUUUZZZZZZZZZ!! TIME’S UP!
Boy oh boy, it’s painfully obvious to us that you are REALLY YEARNING LIKE HELL for your dear former Fuehrer George Dumbya Bush. Remember the run up to that 100% TOTAL DISASTER in Iraq which started almost ten years ago? Mark my words: anyone opposing that invasion was INSTANTLY SQUASHED LIKE A BUG or smeared, insulted, and called a traitor by Bully O’Lielly, Sean KKKlannity and the rest of Herr Goebbles II’s (i.e. Murdoch’s) minions at Faux Spews Channel. Case in point: Phil Donahue — his show got CANCELLED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY by MSNBC when he expressed his opposition to the invasion of Iraq and had antiwar guests on his show. But, then again, remember who OWNED MSNBC at the time: GENERAL ELECTRIC, a charter member of the MIC (Military Industrial Complex).
Thx4 Fish commented
2013-01-28 23:09:12 -0500
· Flag
If Obama wanted to destroy Fox he wouldn’t have to silence them. He could simply reinstitute the fairness doctrine forcing fox to allow equal air time for opposing opinions, and no butting in or talking over the lone opposition voice. Fox, having to play fair, would cease to exist as the complete propaganda machine it is today.
