Fox News claims ‘magic negro’ text was ‘inadvertently cleared for air.’
Fox News claims ‘magic negro’ text was ‘inadvertently cleared for air.’
As ThinkProgress recently noted, Fox News allowed at least one racist message directed toward President-elect Obama to make it on the air during its New Years broadcast. In a statement to TVNewser yesterday, Fox News VP of programming Suzanne Scott defended the incident, claiming that the text message referring to Rush Limbaugh’s “Barack the Magic Negro” song was “inadvertently cleared for air.” Instead of offering an apology, Scott took the opportunity to attack Fox’s rivals:
Fox News VP of programming Suzanne Scott explains, “We received tens of thousands of text message submissions during our New Years Eve special, and this particular viewer submission was inadvertently cleared for air. At FOX we recognize our error as opposed to networks who allow their hosts to utter crude vulgarities to the public.”
Fox New has a history of allowing racially-charged language aimed at Obama and his family to make it on air and then claiming it was simply a mistake. In June, after a Fox chyron referred to Michelle Obama as “Obama’s Baby Mama,” Fox’s Senior Vice President of Programming Bill Shine explained it by saying that “A producer on the program exercised poor judgment in using this chyron during the segment.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I got nothing on this. Fox News is totally tabloid television and so in the tank for the republicans, it isn’t even funny.
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:36 amAt FOX we recognize our error as opposed to networks who allow their hosts to utter crude vulgarities to the public.
Text submissions that must be read to prevent “crude vulgarities” from making it on-air, aren’t the same as a host’s unpredictable outbursts. Scarborough’s since been put on time-delay, but Fox will continue to make such “mistakes.”
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 amIt is truly amazing that during this age this kind of sh*t is allowed. Unfortunately Obama cannot react to this because he would appear over sensitive to “white” people. What is happening in the middle east makes me realize that you cannot get elected as president unless you collectively kiss the asses of the christian movement and support Israel 100% of the time. Bill Marer where are you?
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 am“Not duly attentive” should be Fox’s new motto
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:46 amWhat he says:stateofthedivision Says:
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 amPssh, i say let them keep trying to explain away stuff like this. Less and less blacks and hispanics will find it amusing nor will they find their explanations fitting. mm the next few years will be really hard on conservatives lets let them die in peace
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 amfox racism.
proud would
be proud.
*
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 amIf it weren’t so obscure, I’d start forever calling Fox News the “Yeah, but” network. On the rare occasions they admit Bush or the Administration or anyone else in the GOP did something wrong, it’s always followed with a “yeah, but…”
“Yeah, but Clinton did it too”
“Yeah, but ‘they’ attacked us first!”
“yeah but there’s a Democrat (sic) majority in Congress now, so this is their fault!”
“”Yeah, but he’s a sitting Republican Senator and deserves the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Now, onto that thieving dirtbag William Jefferson”
So when caught either a: letting their Klan flag fly or b: proving how incompetent their hires are, instead of a simple “our bad,” I can’t really be surprised that their faux mea culpa is a “Yeah, but they curse over on those other networks.”:
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 amI choose not to have tv but still Fox News seems sort of amusing in a twisted sort of way. I can’t really tell but I think it would amuse me in the same way that occasionally listening to am radio does…
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:58 amHey, it’s Faux Noise. Did you really expect professional reporting?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:00 amThe same way they inadvertently called Obama “Osama” several times during the election. Blatant lies as usual.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:14 amThe three or four people left in this country who still believe in resurrecting the GOP in a conservative mold haven’t grasped the futility of trying to wrest their party from the 24/7 racist hate club that has taken it over. The GOP can no longer win with this sort of “help” from Fox and friends, they can only lose.
As for Suzanne Scott, I can hardly think of a lower form of life than someone who takes money in return for lying publicly.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 amThe best part, is fox news wonders why Obama ovoids them at press conferences. HMMMM I wonder why?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:19 amSome might remember my mention of the recent Military Times “poll,” that claimed the military are uneasy with an Obama presidency. It appears I’m not the only one who noticed how unscientific it was:
http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2330
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 amI can see the “respect the president” crowd over at faux are whipping up for four years of exactly the opposite.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 amEarlier in the day, Fox repeatedly asked the question if the song parody was REALLY so bad. Given that context, who can be surprised if some lickspittle, in a desperate attempt to please his or her master, cleared that chyron’d comment for air? They were just told all day long it’s not a bad comment.
Unless Fox News didn’t really mean it…that it’s all a ruse for their viewers to think their own racist tendencies are OK, and everyone that works st Fox News is supposed to know they don’t really mean it…
Eh, what are the odds of that?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:33 amOn my recent vacation, I had a conversation with a woman from Amsterdam.
After realizing that I wasn’t a ‘typical American’, she confessed to me that she usually doesn’t like to have conversations with people from the US because most of us are very intolerant and uninformed (the rest of the educated world approves of gay rights, legal abortion, and evolution – and considers us backwards for the many who do not. We have, in part, FOX Noise to thank for this mindset).
I told her that I pretty much felt the same way…
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 amFoxpravda said:
I’m sorry, what network news organization allows their hosts to repeat these Racial remarks or allows such scrolling type to escape their judgment to be “inadvertently cleared for air”?
.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:44 amIsn’t Fux motto?
“We spew racist, hatred — you decide.”
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 amImichael Says: Bill Marer where are you?
I think he’s going what he can. Unfortunately, Religulous wasn’t shown in any theatre in my area (I live in metro-Atlanta), and you have to pay for HBO. His audience isn’t the same spread as Bill O’Reilly’s or Sean Hannity’s.
It’s We The non-religious People who have to make more noise. Sure, we get accused of being intolerant for simply doing what the Constitution gives us the right to do – demanding freedom from religion, and expressing our freedom of speech in questioning it, but if enough of us do, eventually organized religion will become marginalized. Most countries in Europe have already done this.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:47 amOn CNN, a comedienne makes an inapparopriate reference on the air at the new years eve celebration, and that is supposed to be worse than the racism, the bigotry, the propaganda and complete ignorance displayed continuously by regular hosts on the Fox network.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:49 amOn MSNBC, a host makes an inappropriate reference and is fired; another uses an inappropriate phrase, and he is suspended, another uses an inappropriate word and the program is now on a 7-second delay.
On Fox news, hosts make ignorant remarks, insinuations, false assertions, and outright lies, but that seems to be OK with the boss.
#16 barfly,
That was big headlines over at Drudge (wouldn’t you know?)
here’s an excerpt from the article you reference:
…(The)articles are full of self-selected, academically useless responses from the Military Times’ older, white, subscribing readership. The only question is whether they’re doing this deliberately, or whether no one who works at the paper is actually educated enough to know how important the difference is between a scientific survey and a haphazardly conducted poll of subscribers who choose to participate.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:52 amI’m calling bull.
A college freshman majoring in computer science could write a program preventing all texed in messages disagreeable words from being shown on tv.
Fox knew what it was doing.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:54 amI prefer racists be proudly-ignorant (i.e. “brightly feathered”) like this, and hope they continue their display.
Makes it easier to keep them in my sights.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:57 ami am wondering what are the chances of a message conflating bobby jindal with “convenience store” slipping by at faux news and how long would the reichwing piss and moan about it?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:59 amBeing Conservative and arrogant means never saying that you’re sorry!
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 pmunbelievable Says: Unfortunately, Religulous wasn’t shown in any theatre in my area (I live in metro-Atlanta), and you have to pay for HBO.
If you haven’t seen it but would like to, in these difficult times, I think I can help you out there.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pmFAUX=scum
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:08 pmfunny excuse. Anyone running the chyron is well versed in the legal aspect of what they print. as long as the gop continues to talk like this, they will be using the song and far worse.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:11 pmwe need to fight this type of crime before long folks. why don’t we hold people responsible for what they do?
Marie Says: #16 barfly,
That was big headlines over at Drudge (wouldn’t you know?)
I;m pretty sure this Army Times survey came out mid October, before the election. Unless this is a new one following the same format. Maybe I’ll go have a look-see on the intergoogle.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:12 pmThis is what Fox wants, and it is what Fox viewers want.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:17 pmLazy, irresponsible purveyors of half truths and lies feeding junk news to their lazy and ill informed audience.
They are racist, gutless cowards. When will people of charactor call these people out in the open for such remarks.
I would love to see a confrontation by one of them with Michelle…..without raising her voice she could shame them into obscurity……that’s why it won’t happen.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:34 pm5th Estate Says:
That was big headlines over at Drudge (wouldn’t you know?)
I;m pretty sure this Army Times survey came out mid October, before the election. Unless this is a new one following the same format. Maybe I’ll go have a look-see on the intergoogle.
Nope. Brand spankin’new:
2008 Military Times poll: Wary about Obama
Troops cite inexperience, Iraq timetable
By Brendan McGarry – Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Jan 1, 2009 11:06:56 EST
When asked how they feel about President-elect Barack Obama as commander in chief, six out of 10 active-duty service members say they are uncertain or pessimistic, according to a Military Times survey.
In follow-up interviews, respondents expressed concerns about Obama’s lack of military service and experience leading men and women in uniform.
“Being that the Marine Corps can be sent anywhere in the world with the snap of his fingers, nobody has confidence in this guy as commander in chief,” said one lance corporal who asked not to be identified.
For eight years, members of the U.S. military have served under a Republican commander in chief who reflected their generally conservative views and led them to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now, the troops face change not only at the very top of the chain of command, as Obama nears his Jan. 20 inauguration, but perhaps in mission, policy and values.
Underlying much of the uncertainty is Obama’s stated 16-month timetable for pulling combat troops out of Iraq, as well as his calls to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy to allow gays to serve openly in the military, according to survey responses and interviews.
“How are you going to safely pull combat troops out of Iraq?” said Air Force 1st Lt. Rachel Kleinpeter, an intelligence officer with the 100th Operations Support Squadron at RAF Mildenhall, England. “And if you’re pulling out combat troops, who are you leaving to help support what’s left? What happens if Iraq falls back into chaos? Are we going to be there in five years doing the same thing over again?”
When asked who has their best interests at heart — Obama or President George W. Bush — a higher percentage of respondents picked Bush, though Bush has lost ground over time. About half of the respondents said Bush has their best interests at heart this year, the same percentage as last year but a decline from 69 percent in 2004.
Nearly one-third of respondents — including eight out of 10 black service members — said they are optimistic about their incoming boss.
Even some service members who voted against Obama — only 1 in 4 supported him over Sen. John McCain in a pre-election survey of Military Times subscribers —now express goodwill toward him as their new commander in chief.
“Overall, the prospect of having someone who isn’t necessarily tied to old strategies is a good thing,” said Air Force Master Sgt. David Ortegon, who said he voted for McCain. “Sometimes you need a fresh perspective to be able to handle our military readiness and the needs of the nation.”
The findings are part of the sixth annual Military Times survey of subscribers to Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times newspapers. This year’s survey, conducted Dec. 1 through Dec. 8, included more than 1,900 active-duty respondents.
The responses are not representative of the opinions of the military as a whole. The survey group overall under-represents minorities, women and junior enlisted service members, and over-represents soldiers.
But as a snapshot of the professional corps, the responses highlight the challenges Obama faces as he prepares to take command of military careerists with different political and cultural attitudes.
In keeping with previous surveys, nearly half of the respondents described their political views as conservative or very conservative. Slightly more than half said they consider themselves Republicans, 22 percent independents and 13 percent Democrats.
Which part made the Drudge headlines? The admission that it only sampled certain segments of the military population?
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:37 pmFox motto: Better to post racist remarks now and ask for forgiveness later.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:46 pmThat military poll doesn’t surprise me, barfly. Wasn’t there a poll of military servicemen in Iraq that showed something like 90% of them believed that Iraq was involved in the attacks of 9/11? Their internet access is restricted, so they don’t necessarily get the same news that we do. Their opinions are informed by the orders they get from their commanders, and their current commander-in-chief lied about Iraq in order to send them there. That is an indisputable fact, so I hope no right-wingers try to defend Bush. He lied, and everyone, including Bush, knows it.
So, if the majority of them are under the mistaken belief that they are fighting the people who attacked us on 9/11, then doesn’t it make sense that they would view a new commander-in-chief who wants to take them out of that (illegal) fight unfavorably?
If the soldiers serving in Iraq knew the truth, they would not be so supportive of Bush, and they would welcome Obama with open arms. (They would greet him as a “liberator”.)
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:52 pmWho is Rupert Murdoch?
“Murdoch is a close friend of Ariel Sharon,” Sam Kiley, The Times (UK) veteran journalist on the Middle East wrote about the man who took over the once famous British paper. Kiley said Murdoch’s friendship with the Israeli prime minister had caused senior staff at the paper to rewrite important copy.
“Murdoch’s executives were so afraid of irritating him that, when I pulled off a little scoop of tracking down and photographing the unit in the Israeli army which killed Mohammed al-Durrah, the 12-year-old boy whose death was captured on film and became the iconic image of the conflict, I was asked to file the piece ‘without mentioning the dead kid.’” Kiley wrote. “After that conversation, I was left wordless, so I quit.”
Sharon and Murdoch are old friends. On Oct. 15, 1982, a month after the massacres of thousands of Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila camps of Beirut, war crimes which occurred under Sharon’s direct command, the Israeli defense minister held meetings with Rupert Murdoch and others, reportedly in order to advance his “West Bank real estate grab.”
The visit with Sharon included a trip for Murdoch and his editors from New York and London that “took them on a bird’s-eye tour of Israel aboard a helicopter gunship, flying over the Golan Heights, West Bank and settlements.”
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 pmThe career military people are mostly conservatives and they also know that any democrat is going to cut the bloated defense budget.
We know what the troops think, we have vets and vet organizations that tell a completely different story.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pmWho cares what you think. You thought Iraq had wmd’s. Get a life and go away.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:02 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
That military poll doesn’t surprise me, barfly. Wasn’t there a poll of military servicemen in Iraq that showed something like 90% of them believed that Iraq was involved in the attacks of 9/11?
Same poll. It means they’ve probably been serving up a cooked result these past eight years as well. I’ve often argued with wingers about Military Times’ specious polling, but now, we know the truth. Other Military Times polls have showed the military to be overwhelmingly conservative – another canard that was never real, or proven by stats. I’ve checked with the Pentagon, and they don’t compile stats of servicemen’s voting registrations; this poll was previously the only thing wingers could point to.
No more.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:04 pmPerhaps Proud can tell us why the poll I just referenced over-samples soldiers, when supposedly it was of all the services?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:06 pmFred Says:
The career military people are mostly conservatives and they also know that any democrat is going to cut the bloated defense budget.
According to?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:08 pmproud is good at asking questions (mostly based on a variety of logical fallacies), but like all trolls they are short on answering questions from others.
They are not holding a discourse, and they not supporting their arguments. In particular they do not continue dicussions that others try to have with them — they simply avoid that and ask more ridiculous questions.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:08 pm“Panties” in a wad. Or planties.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pmProud,
The very fact that Fox News Channel is so popular is precisely what concerns us. FNC lies, says racist, bigoted things, and blindly supports a president and political party who do not act in the best interests of Americans.
A lot of regular FNC viewers (who actually like the channel) thought that Iraq was involved in 9/11. (You do know they had nothing to do with it, don’t you?) And because FNC is heavily invested in the dumbing-down of America, we appreciate those who are willing to stomach their crap and report back to us what FNC says.
It helps us understand why our conservative family members, friends, and neighbors are so uninformed.
BTW, you’re not helping the discussion at all. Rather than attack us for pointing out FNC’s racism, why don’t you defend them? Then we can better help you to understand what they are doing wrong.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pmThey all pimped for the Iraq invasion, which a liberal media would never do. ;)
Have you noticed that the only people who honest-to-God think the media is biased toward liberals are people who have their planties in a wad about liberals? Well, notice that some time.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:10 pmHow can you “inadvertently” miss the words “magic negro” strung together.
I am beginning to sense a bit of panic coming out of Fixed News. Perhaps they see that they are going to be going the say of the doo doo bird.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:15 pm“…At FOX we recognize our error as opposed to networks who allow their hosts to utter crude vulgarities to the public.”
Oh heavens, someone said a naughty word on the teevee machine, that’s MUCH worse than condoning racist statements about the President-Elect.
Shut up, you stupid cow.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:15 pmStupid troll. Accurately reporting what FAUX broadcasts is not an “attack”. Neither is accurately reporting what your Reichwing heroes say.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:16 pmThanks, barfly #35! (I didn’t get around to intergoogling this subject yet.)
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:16 pmPerry Logan,
Liberals have a natural bias for the exposing the truth, while conservatives have a natural bias for secrecy. Therefore, whenever the media reports “the truth”, it is seen as being “liberally-biased”.
One thing they’ve never explained to me is why it is good to be a conservative? I should re-phrase that. They’ve never explained to me why being selfish, distrustful of those who are different, supportive of excessive government secrecy, and heavily in favor of using violence to resolve disputes is a good thing.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pmdasm Says:
The same way they inadvertently called Obama “Osama” several times during the election. Blatant lies as usual.
The “Osama” reference is a hell of a lot more believable as a mistake than not noticing “magic negro” in an e-mail.
On the other hand, I doubt that either of them was a mistake. It’s much too easy for Fixed News to brush these things off as an “inadvertent mistake”.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pmYou can dream..
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 pmplease tell me why we should care? You solidly predicted that Iraq had WMD’s…..
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 pmProud Says:
What another obsession now with an unscientific poll. I would not defend this poll or its results because it does not matter.
And when the media finally begin admitting that America isn’t a certer-right country, the Proud will again employ the Cheney-esque “So what?”
I think you’re going to be surprised at Obama. He plays his cards too tightly to bet whether he’ll be this, or that, before he even takes office.
Spare us the prognostications, OK? You guys have’t been right in eight years.
About anything.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pmbarfly Says:
Some might remember my mention of the recent Military Times “poll,” that claimed the military are uneasy with an Obama presidency.
One has to wonder what the military would have said if this poll was taken when Bush was elected. They seem to be making this decision on Obama’s lack of military service. I wonder if Bush’s lack of military service (a frat-boy fly boy doesn’t count) would have ended up with the same result.
On the other hand, you have to consider what these people listen to on a daily basis. They are fed Fixed News 24/7 and forbidden to access liberal blogs. It’s kind of like brainwashing, wouldn’t you say.
I think the fact that more military families contributed money to Obama than McCain says more than this poorly constructed poll.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pmOops. Make that “center-right nation.”
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:26 pmProud Says:
You have your soon to be president, you will have the majority in both houses. The libs can fix everything now.
Not until they do something about the filibuster. One of your heroes has already announced that the Republicans will, once again, filibuster whatever the Democrats try to do. They will do so at their own peril and I’m hoping that the Democrats will not roll over at the mention of a filibuster, and will make them actually conduct a filibuster. Then the Democrats should highly publicize the obstructionist Republicans agenda.
As Paul Krugman so eloquently said: The Republican party has become the party of whiners and Proud is right up there with them.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pmProud Says:
Blah Blah Blah Obama has done more to reach out to the right than to the crazy radical left and if he wants to win reelection in four years he will continue to move to the center right.
So government bailouts are now center-right economic policy?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:31 pmI remember when the trolls were screaming “you must respect the office of the President!!”
Funny how that’s gone by the wayside.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:33 pmYeah, I’m sure we will see more tax cuts for the wealthy and more deregulation…..where’s that robust economy that bush said these kinds of fiscal policy would usher in? We’re still waiting…….
the right had better change their ways if they want a seat at the table in 4 years…..the winds of change have blown through and you didn’t even see that!
Your predictions are about as viable as 10 day old milk sitting in the hot sun.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pmLet’s see:
Bush supports government bailouts.
Obama supports government bailouts.
They claim Bush isn’t conservative, but Obama is governing like one?
Pass the kool-aid.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:35 pmFred Says:
Your predictions are about as viable as 10 day old milk sitting in the hot sun.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pm
That good!? :-D
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:37 pmthanks Zooey, these trolls are just too easy.
proudflesh, I have a prediction for you and I was right about wmd’s and the economy. If the conservitives don’t acknowledge reality and swing with the country to the left, they will once again be left out of the process of governing.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pmyou see proud, threads like this exemplify the utter failure of the right to understand the world around them. Thanks for adding bold type to the statement….you’re a champ.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pmThere are still trolls?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pmProud,
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pmAccording to FoxNews, Obama was the “crazy radical left”, until he won by 7 million votes—–and then he became “center right”. All spin all the time.
Funny… some of us thought the same in regard to the right and Bush… yet a lot of ya still got a raging woody for the guy.
Thankfully some of ya stopped drinking the koolaid.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:49 pmIm waiting for FOX to start airing ‘Woman gives birth to alien baby’ stories
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:50 pmAnd Fox inadvertently put “(D-FL)” after Republican internet predator Mark Foley.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:57 pmI also love the tactic used by Mr. Hannity… “I’ll support Obama as the President… but you can count on me to speak up when he does something wrong…”
Wow, who would have predicted that El Seanbo would find SO much “wrongdoing” before Obama even takes office?
Get him a gold mic, stat!
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:57 pmI think FAUX News should defend it instead of saying it was an error. After all, didn’t Bill O’Reilly do a whole segment on their channel saying that use of that phrase out of its original context wasn’t offensive? If their leading opinion shows are saying it’s not offensive, then that presumably has some overlap with their editorial policy. Therefore, their chyron editors are being a bunch of liberal wussies by apologizing.
FAUX News should make a huge deal out of demanding to use racial epithets and bigoted statements whenever they want. After all, don’t we have free speech in this country?
Stay classy, wingnuts.
January 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 pmProud Says:
You have your soon to be president, you will have the majority in both houses. The libs can fix everything now. This FOX News obsession continues to just amazes me, what do you fear that makes you attack FOX News. If it is so racist and against everything you hold dear just change the channel. Are you so afraid because FOX continues to be #1 in cable news ratings it didn’t win McCain the White House and you have ABC NBC CBS PBS MSNBC CNN NPR all clearly left wing propaganda channels. Get a life and change the channel.
*
“get a life”?
*
you’re always here.
:)
January 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pmThe Military Times really needs to stop doing these stupid surveys, if they can’t get a hold of a representative sample.
On the other hand, I’d like to see the IAVA do one.
January 3rd, 2009 at 2:58 pmFauxNews “inadvertently” cleared a racial slur for air?
Riiiight…
Because they have never, ever spewed bigotry and stereotypes about minorities. That’s never happened, oh no…
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmProud prattles:
This FOX News obsession continues to just amazes me, what do you fear that makes you attack FOX News. [...]Get a life and change the channel.
Another babbling post by our new irony-challenged resident troll. Here, let me point out your idiocy:
Your obsession with ThinkProgres continues to just amaze me; what do you fear that makes you attack this forum and people here time and again? Get a life and change blogs.
(I am betting the irony will continue to escape you even now)
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmProud Says:
…you have ABC NBC CBS PBS MSNBC CNN NPR all clearly left wing propaganda channels.
That’s the lie that allowed FAUX News to destroy the concept of “news” to begin with. Those channels never were left wing or right wing, and they never have been propaganda channels in any sense of the term. If you’d ever taken a Journalism 101 class you’d realize that there’s a huge body of work that goes into reducing bias as much as possible in classical journalistic media. To claim that all other media sources refuse to practice journalism is like claiming that firefighters refuse to practice firefighting. It’s the entirety of their job. It’s upside-down to claim otherwise.
The first thing liars do is try to make you doubt the truth. To do that, they have to make you doubt your only sources of accurate information. Finally, they try to make you doubt whether there can be such a thing as accurate information. Then it’s just a question of who can shout louder, and then they have a chance to win.
Before the establishment of FAUX News, there was no such thing as a major media outlet that viewed its editorial policy as saying whatever they had to say to support a political party or end of the spectrum. Now however, the existence of FAUX News casts all journalism into doubt. It’s kind of like how the invasion of Iraq created terrorism in Iraq.
Here’s a simple test: let’s hypothetically grant that all other media is left wing, so long as you grant that FAUX News is right wing. But FAUX News constantly uses the phrases “fair and balanced,” and “we report; you decide.” Which means that they’re lying. If they’re lying about the very fact that they’re biased, then they must be lying about the things that they’re biased about. Either way, you lose. You’re getting your information about extremely important world events from a source that is lying to you.
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmAt FOX we recognize our error as opposed to networks who allow their hosts to utter crude vulgarities to the public.
Supporting failed economic policies that have led to thousands losing their homes and livelihoods is a crude vulgarity.
Cheerleading for an invasion of a country that was no threat is a crude vulgarity.
Sending people to kill and die in a war of choice is a crude vulgarity, as is supporting the man and the policies that make such carnage possible.
At this point in time, blind support for Pres Bush’s many failed initiatives looks suspiciously like a crude vulgarity, and definitely like a threat to democracy.
Fox itself is a crude vulgarity.
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmShares of News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) are 57% lower since the beginning of the year.
January 3rd, 2009 at 3:47 pmLIARS!!
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:21 pm(Forgive me for not reading the previous comments thoroughly if anyone has said this same thing, but…)
It was “inadvertently cleared for air”?
That seems to happen a lot at Faux.
-
-
-
And I like their justification: “so what if we inadvertently clear racist comments for air — some other networks we could name let their hosts utter crude vulgarities in public.”
That’s a real mature, businesslike operation they got going on there.
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 pmAnd Steve Doocy purposely gives us his fowl opinions without any filters, delays or muzzles attached. I guess even lunatics who can’t pass the smell test have hope for a future after all, in varying degrees.
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:36 pmThe people at Fox are so childish.
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:47 pmProud Says: 38
You are a liar and a fool. The networks do NOT have a clear liberal bias as the runup to the war cheerleading clearly shows. Fox is at the top of the cable heap, still dwarfed by the networks an accomplishment about like leading the minor league in walks, because there are plenty of venues to find reasoned and balanced coverage so the divvy up the reasonable viewers. Fox is the only place knuckledragging moronic neandrathals like YOU can get your daily dose of propagana.
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 pmThe really surprising thing is that they’re conscious enough of how offensive it is that they’d try to excuse it. One would think they’d just go about their business, thinking that everything was cool.
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 pmProud Says:
You are nothing but an ignorant troll and a liar. You base your accusations about Obama on your prejudice and stupidity nothing else.
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:05 pmoff topic. from c & l:
Morning Edition, January 2, 2009 · The Army is investigating a cluster of suicides in the Houston Recruiting Battalion, where five soldiers have taken their own lives since 2001. Nationally, 17 recruiters have committed suicide during the same period.
Back in March of 2007, Aron Andersson locked himself in the cab of his Ford 150 pickup, called home to say he was going to kill himself, shot up the dashboard radio, and then put a bullet in his head. He had threatened suicide five months earlier, and back then his father, Bob Andersson, reported him to the military.
“I don’t know if that was the right thing to do, but I called a major and told him his girlfriend had said he threatened to commit suicide, and she told me he was going through night terrors and a bunch of other things. And he’d get up to go to work in the morning and tell his girlfriend he was exhausted, and she’d say, ‘Yeah you’ve been jumpin’ over the couch, hidin’ behind the chairs and stuff, like you’re in battle,’ and he wouldn’t even realize it in the morning,” Andersson says.
Aron Andersson served two tours in Iraq, and he was furious with his father for reporting him, saying his Army career would be ended.
“And I just simply told him, ‘Well, Aron, if you don’t talk to me ever again, I can live with that. But if I didn’t turn you in and something happened, I don’t think I could live with that,’ ” Bob Andersson says.
Andersson says his son had trouble delivering the required two recruits a month, especially after his experience in Iraq.
“How could you be over there and see some of the things he saw and dealt with, and try to hire people to go over there and do that?” he says.
*
more for our troll buddies
rap and proud then anyone else here.
^
thank you.
*
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:13 pmAn interesting bit about the lyth of the “liberal media”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlyb1Bx9Ic
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:45 pm*) as opposed to networks who allow their hosts to utter crude vulgarities
Could Faux, perchance, provide examples on the levels of racism and vulgariteis uttered by Faux folk versus those on other networks ???????
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:59 pmI admit, I got it wrong. Faux went for the argument of “the censor let it through” versus alternate explanations of “it was an open box that just repeated what was sent in”
OTOH, they included strains of this second explanation in their explanation when they “explained” how many messages they got so that the censor couldn’t do their work.
So are they admitting they didn’t apply enough resources for due diligence ? Are they gonna do anything to the censor who let it through ? (let’s face it, if you’re censoring something and you see “Negro”, doesn’t that get your attention for more research ?)
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 pm.
FOXPRAVDA MOTTO:
.
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:29 pm.
Dear Proud,
We’ve hear that ‘just change the channel’ mantra before and in some cases it does apply. Just not when being (R)acist, or derogatory or inflammatory under the guise or maintaining a reputable stance as being a leader of anything, let alone “THE NEWS” 24/7/365.
How is one to be considered a reputable source for all things “NEWS” when one continues to make claims of ignorance and ineptitude? So goes the reputation, NO?
Know that that, is what you’re defending.
Hate speech, defined as being speech that is disrespectful of a persons race, is also known as RACISM.
Why you defend the use of Racism is beyond comprehension to us regular folk, aka for you, we’re the “LIBS” that you loath.
So please convince us “LIBS” as to why (R)ACISM is in line with your “CHRISTIANITY”? Wasn’t Christ born a black man, Himself?
-or-
What makes (R)acism preferable?
.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:01 pmWe’ve heard that ‘just change the channel’ mantra before and in some cases it does apply.
The thing is when it’s racism, bigotry, xenophobia or homophobia on the TV and we complain, they tell us to change the channel. But when it comes to consenting adults being naked or having sex, they don’t even want to give us the option to watch.
We have to stop listening to them. They are not consistent. It’s okay for children to watch examples of hate, but it’s not okay for them to watch examples of love. I don’t get it.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:13 pmWe have to stop listening to them. They are not consistent. It’s okay for children to watch examples of hate, but it’s not okay for them to watch examples of love. I don’t get it.
Love, implies communal outlook. It’s really hard to love when you’re trying to amass as much status (and as many status symbols) as you can. Lust is another matter. It also stems from greed, and a desire to take from others.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:50 pmYea, Right. When are they goin’down!??
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 pmThe only time I ever anything concerning Fox News is via the Progressive Bloggs.
I have not watched that joke of a News station since the year 2000. Not one second since!
I refuse to contribute to thier ratings and salaries!
January 4th, 2009 at 1:32 amWhatevs. I don’t even have a television. If I did, in this instance I think changing the channel is actually a reasonable suggestion.
No attention is probably better than negative attention when it comes to these childish individuals. They’re throwing a tantrum because their president is about to be black.
January 4th, 2009 at 4:08 amYou wont see this in the war propaganda filled US MEDIA:
January 4th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
FOX News, ” Biased and imbalanced “.
You listen’ We decide for you.!
January 4th, 2009 at 2:35 pmOnce again…Fox “allows” something rascist and offensive, then insists it was a harmless error…The publics attention span is just too short to worry about such
January 4th, 2009 at 5:53 pmshit….what are they (sic) going to do…quit watching? Hate sells…sorry folk’s