PDA

View Full Version : Ah, NBC: Thank You For Proving There Is A Liberal Bias In The Media



NJCardFan
04-04-2012, 02:04 AM
The Dan Rather scandal not withstanding, when you have to resort to distorting the facts in order to further your agenda, you stop being journalists and you become dog washers for your world view. I hope Zimmerman sues the crap out of NBC for this: NBC Issues Apology For Edited Zimmerman 9-1-1 Call (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/03/nbc-issues-apology-edited-zimmerman-11-call/)

Janice
04-04-2012, 02:41 AM
http://i.imgur.com/aU9WO.jpg

And the race pimps are off to the races ...

Odysseus
04-04-2012, 09:28 AM
Some "apology":


"During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers," the network said in a statement cited by The Washington Post.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/03/nbc-issues-apology-edited-zimmerman-11-call/#ixzz1r4sO3N38

Error? There was no error. The editing of that tape wasn't an "error:. Airing it wasn't an "error". The network that employs Al Sharpton aired a tape that had been deliberately edited to convey Zimmerman as a racist. The only necessary step to prevent this from happening again is to publicly fire the persons responsible for airing falsified news, and if NBC had an iota of integrity, they'd have done so. The only thing that NBC regrets in this is that it got caught.

Novaheart
04-04-2012, 09:30 AM
I want Lawrence O'Donnell to lose his job over this. Ed Shultz as well.

Odysseus
04-04-2012, 09:42 AM
I want Lawrence O'Donnell to lose his job over this. Ed Shultz as well.

Were they the ones who ran it?

Novaheart
04-04-2012, 09:49 AM
Were they the ones who ran it?

O'Donnell and Shultz have run with every bit of BS on this case and completely ignored, or mocked, all of the evidence and logic which supports Zimmerman. With O'Donnell I suspect that it's largely about gun control, and any wedge he has to push it. With Shultz, I think it's about shoring up his credentials as a "progressive" since Cenk The Moslem Turk is after his job.

Arroyo_Doble
04-04-2012, 09:51 AM
O'Donnell and Shultz have run with every bit of BS on this case and completely ignored, or mocked, all of the evidence and logic which supports Zimmerman. With O'Donnell I suspect that it's largely about gun control, and any wedge he has to push it. With Shultz, I think it's about shoring up his credentials as a "progressive" since Cenk The Moslem Turk is after his job.

Why do you watch that crap?

Novaheart
04-04-2012, 09:53 AM
Why do you watch that crap?

I go over to my mother's house to make sure she has done her meds and has her tea and snack. She watches MSNBC when there are no baseball games, British sitcoms, or Downton Abbey.

Arroyo_Doble
04-04-2012, 10:04 AM
I go over to my mother's house to make sure she has done her meds and has her tea and snack. She watches MSNBC when there are no baseball games, British sitcoms, or Downton Abbey.

Opening day for the Rangers is Good Friday. My wife doesn't like that. I find it somehow appropriate.

NJCardFan
04-04-2012, 12:31 PM
Opening day for the Rangers is Good Friday. My wife doesn't like that. I find it somehow appropriate.

Funny how you comment on this nonsense but the fact that a major news organization deliberately edited and fudged the facts of a racially charged case in order to stoke the racial flames means no never mind to you. Had this been Fox News people like you and wee wee would have been falling all over yourselves over this.

Arroyo_Doble
04-04-2012, 12:48 PM
Funny how you comment on this nonsense but the fact that a major news organization deliberately edited and fudged the facts of a racially charged case in order to stoke the racial flames means no never mind to you. Had this been Fox News people like you and wee wee would have been falling all over yourselves over this.

NBC bad. Bad network, bad.

Rockntractor
04-04-2012, 01:01 PM
NBC bad. Bad network, bad.

Don't you have some windows to lick? Either contribute or troll somewhere else.

Apache
04-04-2012, 01:12 PM
NBC bad. Bad network, bad.

hey oreo, ask yourself one question. would you be so flippant if you you were in zimmerman's place?

nbc hasn't learned its lesson. you'd think after the olympic bombing in georgia incident they'd be more cautious...

Arroyo_Doble
04-04-2012, 01:32 PM
hey oreo, ask yourself one question. would you be so flippant if you you were in zimmerman's place?

I am not sure. I am pretty flippant about things. Even when they are things where I am objectively wronged.

But of all the circus freaks and sideshow barkers pushing this particular manufactured shit storm, NBC's yellow journalism is way down the list.


nbc hasn't learned its lesson. you'd think after the olympic bombing in georgia incident they'd be more cautious...

Not to mention Shirley Sherrod ......

txradioguy
04-04-2012, 02:28 PM
O'Donnell and Shultz have run with every bit of BS on this case and completely ignored, or mocked, all of the evidence and logic which supports Zimmerman. With O'Donnell I suspect that it's largely about gun control, and any wedge he has to push it. With Shultz, I think it's about shoring up his credentials as a "progressive" since Cenk The Moslem Turk is after his job.

Before I asked for their two weeks notice...I'd tell Al Sharpton he has to find his own ride back from Sanford.

He's been down there reporting on the unrest that he himself is stirring up.

To me that's worse than what Schultz and O'Donnell have done.

txradioguy
04-04-2012, 02:29 PM
NBC bad. Bad network, bad.

Thank you for your input.

Gentleman Pirate
04-04-2012, 02:44 PM
Don't you have some windows to lick? Either contribute or troll somewhere else.

http://www.tinygif.com/data/media/13/window_licker.gif

The snozzberries taste like snozzbierries.

Odysseus
04-04-2012, 06:02 PM
O'Donnell and Shultz have run with every bit of BS on this case and completely ignored, or mocked, all of the evidence and logic which supports Zimmerman. With O'Donnell I suspect that it's largely about gun control, and any wedge he has to push it. With Shultz, I think it's about shoring up his credentials as a "progressive" since Cenk The Moslem Turk is after his job.

I remember O'Donnell tearing into a friend of mine when she was on somebody else's show and calling her a liar at the top of his lungs. He's obsessed with calling out everybody else, but can't be bothered to tell the truth when it bites him.


Why do you watch that crap?

Because he doesn't like NPR?


NBC bad. Bad network, bad.

Yes. Yes it is.


I am not sure. I am pretty flippant about things. Even when they are things where I am objectively wronged.

But of all the circus freaks and sideshow barkers pushing this particular manufactured shit storm, NBC's yellow journalism is way down the list.

Not to mention Shirley Sherrod ......

Really? You don't think that you and the rest of the country have been wronged by this? Think about this:

Shortly after the Tawana Brawley hoax began, there were a number of incidents of rapes in which the white victims were told that it was reprisal.
A car accident in Crown Heights in which a black child died led to three days of rioting and the murder of two men who had nothing to do with the incident, but who were either Jewish or looked it, because the driver of the car was Jewish.
At Freddie's Fashion Mart, Al Sharpton whipped up a mob with violent rhetoric and one of his supporters firebombed the store, killing seven, plus himself.
The Rodney King verdict led to riots in which 53 people died, thousands more were injured, and Los Angeles incurred property damages in excess of $1 billion.

A major network has presented falsified news whose sole purpose is to whip up black anger, which is already being exacerbated by demagoguery. What do you think will happen if Zimmerman ends up exonerated? Do you think that the people who are being fed a steady stream of violent, racist invective are just going to shrug and go back to their daily routine, or do you think that this is going to spiral into more violence?

NBC is inciting riots. If this blows up, as it most likely will, NBC will have blood on its hands. Hopefully, it won't be yours or mine, but it's not like NBC cares one way or another.

NJCardFan
04-04-2012, 07:48 PM
NBC is inciting riots. If this blows up, as it most likely will, NBC will have blood on its hands. Hopefully, it won't be yours or mine, but it's not like NBC cares one way or another.
This, BTW, is not protected by the 1st Amendment. Also, notice how you don't hear the wailing from the mountain tops for NBC to be silenced. Now picture the same happening on Fox News. You'd have sitting congresscritters on the floor of congress proclaiming that Fox should be censured. This will quickly be swept under the rug.

Janice
04-04-2012, 08:19 PM
http://i.imgur.com/gASdG.jpg

I have friends that I have visited and still visit over the years, who live in Sanford Florida. And I have done a lot of business there. I know Sanford inside and out. It has a large poor to middle class black community. This is not going away. Not after all this racial bs. I guarantee this will not just "fade into the sunset" after the knee pad media and the race pimps have had their fun.

And can you believe a President (commie organizer) weighing in on this so as to provoke more outrage (when the facts are not even all in yet)? So how many innocents will be killed (murdered) over this?

You know I wonder sometimes. Today we all know about the "Religion of Peace" (Radical Islam). How many are aware of the political "Party of Tolerance" (the Democrat Party)? Any connection?

Wei Wu Wei
04-05-2012, 06:14 PM
Funny how you comment on this nonsense but the fact that a major news organization deliberately edited and fudged the facts of a racially charged case in order to stoke the racial flames means no never mind to you. Had this been Fox News people like you and wee wee would have been falling all over yourselves over this.

Fox News does stuff like this every day, their bias is obvious and known to everyone and the quality of their "journalism" is laughable. It's simply a lowest-common-denominator infotainment network for right-wing propaganda.

I don't have to "fall over myself" over this, everyone knows it, including yourself. It's so obvious that even the most hardened conservatives know it, which is why their only defense for Fox News is "but other networks are LIBERAL!" as if that said anything about the merit of Fox.

It doesn't even need to be said about Fox.

As for these other networks, who are you trying to prove this to? I know msnbc, nbc, abc and the rest are garbage. I know CNN is unwatchable empty filler. So you are saying a lot of people who work at these networks are Democratic-style liberals. Okay, I'm not arguing with you.

Rockntractor
04-05-2012, 06:23 PM
Fox News does stuff like this every day, their bias is obvious and known to everyone and the quality of their "journalism" is laughable. It's simply a lowest-common-denominator infotainment network for right-wing propaganda.

I don't have to "fall over myself" over this, everyone knows it, including yourself. It's so obvious that even the most hardened conservatives know it, which is why their only defense for Fox News is "but other networks are LIBERAL!" as if that said anything about the merit of Fox.

It doesn't even need to be said about Fox.



Give us examples, instead of unsubstantiated allegations.

Apache
04-05-2012, 06:54 PM
Fox News does stuff like this every day, their bias is obvious and known to everyone and the quality of their "journalism" is laughable. ...

proof?

JB
04-05-2012, 07:12 PM
Fox News does stuff like this every day...Allow me to pile on...Links?

Rockntractor
04-05-2012, 07:17 PM
Wei seems to have left after making his accusations, maybe when he comes back he can finish what he started here before he posts anything else.

Hawkgirl
04-05-2012, 07:27 PM
Wei seems to have left after making his accusations, maybe when he comes back he can finish what he started here before he posts anything else.

Isn't that trend with WeeWee?

JB
04-05-2012, 07:29 PM
Isn't that trend with WeeWee?Yes, yes it is. Another lib on here does the same thing. We could kick this thread for a year, wee won't be back.

Zeus
04-05-2012, 07:39 PM
Yes, yes it is. Another lib on here does the same thing. We could kick this thread for a year, wee won't be back.

Well Fox news does it all the time everyday day in & day out so it should take about 5 minutes for Wee We to come up with multiple examples.

Wei Wu Wei
04-05-2012, 08:44 PM
Allow me to pile on...Links?

Just watch the damn channel, are you that unable to do any critical thinking on your own that you need someone to spoonfeed it to you?

Watch the channel with a critical perspective and it's obvious.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that MSNBC is a weak, hypocritical, liberal circle jerk devoid of any honest criticism aimed at college kids and yuppies who want to feel good about their stupid pet causes. I can see that because I'm not a moron. It's so bad it's embarrassing. I feel sorry for every free trade liberal douche I see on that channel.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that CNN is a totally inane, pointless, empty filler channel who spend more time focusing on "hot twitter updates" than they do real journalism. It's a stupid network that does no in depth reporting, no interesting stories. Their entire shtick is simply putting a Tea Party Conservative on the air next to a Planned Parenthood Liberal and having them shit out of their mouths at each other, and pretending like this is some kind of profound platform for "moderate debate" where we can "find common ground". They think pretending (and I can't emphasize this PRETENDING enough) to be "center of the road" by having two dipshits argue at each other makes them somehow the "common sense" alternative for "non-ideological" people who simply want to be "pragmatic". CNN is garbage, I'm getting pissed off thinking about it. I don't need any of you to "prove" this to me with links you got forwarded to you because I have eyes and a brain.

I don't need any of you to "prove to me" that NBC is owned by GE and their network agenda is necessarily tied into the political and economic agenda of their parent company. I don't need you to "prove to me" that NBC has been known to run stupid bullshit stories based on "anonymous sources" which were false and had dire consequences. I don't need any of you to show me a stupid picture from 6 years ago that you just saw on another forum to "prove" this to me, because I am able to critically watch this and I don't need to be fed it like a baby.

Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?

Wei Wu Wei
04-05-2012, 08:46 PM
Wei seems to have left after making his accusations, maybe when he comes back he can finish what he started here before he posts anything else.

You know you have a very special place in my heart rock, but you must also know that I have other things to do besides monitor this forum all day (as much as I'd love to). I just got done running for an hour and now I need to take a shower before I visit some friends.

Hawkgirl
04-05-2012, 08:50 PM
Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?


Simmer down Francis. I think you are confusing FOX news opinion shows like Hannity and perhaps O'Reilly with their actual News. Fox news does not intentionally distort stories. If they do, please give us a reference.

But even with shows like Hannity, he will still have a few liberals on this show to defend their side. O'Reilly will invite asswipes like Sharpton as well.

Let's circle back to FOX NEWS reporting. List a single example of news distortion. Just one example.

Apache
04-05-2012, 09:13 PM
Just watch the damn channel, are you that unable to do any critical thinking on your own that you need someone to spoonfeed it to you?

Watch the channel with a critical perspective and it's obvious.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that MSNBC is a weak, hypocritical, liberal circle jerk devoid of any honest criticism aimed at college kids and yuppies who want to feel good about their stupid pet causes. I can see that because I'm not a moron. It's so bad it's embarrassing. I feel sorry for every free trade liberal douche I see on that channel.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that CNN is a totally inane, pointless, empty filler channel who spend more time focusing on "hot twitter updates" than they do real journalism. It's a stupid network that does no in depth reporting, no interesting stories. Their entire shtick is simply putting a Tea Party Conservative on the air next to a Planned Parenthood Liberal and having them shit out of their mouths at each other, and pretending like this is some kind of profound platform for "moderate debate" where we can "find common ground". They think pretending (and I can't emphasize this PRETENDING enough) to be "center of the road" by having two dipshits argue at each other makes them somehow the "common sense" alternative for "non-ideological" people who simply want to be "pragmatic". CNN is garbage, I'm getting pissed off thinking about it. I don't need any of you to "prove" this to me with links you got forwarded to you because I have eyes and a brain.

I don't need any of you to "prove to me" that NBC is owned by GE and their network agenda is necessarily tied into the political and economic agenda of their parent company. I don't need you to "prove to me" that NBC has been known to run stupid bullshit stories based on "anonymous sources" which were false and had dire consequences. I don't need any of you to show me a stupid picture from 6 years ago that you just saw on another forum to "prove" this to me, because I am able to critically watch this and I don't need to be fed it like a baby.

Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?

so in other words, you got nothin'...


gee... surprise!

Odysseus
04-05-2012, 10:13 PM
Fox News does stuff like this every day, their bias is obvious and known to everyone and the quality of their "journalism" is laughable. It's simply a lowest-common-denominator infotainment network for right-wing propaganda.

I don't have to "fall over myself" over this, everyone knows it, including yourself. It's so obvious that even the most hardened conservatives know it, which is why their only defense for Fox News is "but other networks are LIBERAL!" as if that said anything about the merit of Fox.

It doesn't even need to be said about Fox.

As for these other networks, who are you trying to prove this to? I know msnbc, nbc, abc and the rest are garbage. I know CNN is unwatchable empty filler. So you are saying a lot of people who work at these networks are Democratic-style liberals. Okay, I'm not arguing with you.

You make these claims, but whenever you are called upon to back them up with examples, you disappear. Why is that?


Just watch the damn channel, are you that unable to do any critical thinking on your own that you need someone to spoonfeed it to you?

Watch the channel with a critical perspective and it's obvious.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that MSNBC is a weak, hypocritical, liberal circle jerk devoid of any honest criticism aimed at college kids and yuppies who want to feel good about their stupid pet causes. I can see that because I'm not a moron. It's so bad it's embarrassing. I feel sorry for every free trade liberal douche I see on that channel.

I don't need any of you to "prove" to me that CNN is a totally inane, pointless, empty filler channel who spend more time focusing on "hot twitter updates" than they do real journalism. It's a stupid network that does no in depth reporting, no interesting stories. Their entire shtick is simply putting a Tea Party Conservative on the air next to a Planned Parenthood Liberal and having them shit out of their mouths at each other, and pretending like this is some kind of profound platform for "moderate debate" where we can "find common ground". They think pretending (and I can't emphasize this PRETENDING enough) to be "center of the road" by having two dipshits argue at each other makes them somehow the "common sense" alternative for "non-ideological" people who simply want to be "pragmatic". CNN is garbage, I'm getting pissed off thinking about it. I don't need any of you to "prove" this to me with links you got forwarded to you because I have eyes and a brain.

I don't need any of you to "prove to me" that NBC is owned by GE and their network agenda is necessarily tied into the political and economic agenda of their parent company. I don't need you to "prove to me" that NBC has been known to run stupid bullshit stories based on "anonymous sources" which were false and had dire consequences. I don't need any of you to show me a stupid picture from 6 years ago that you just saw on another forum to "prove" this to me, because I am able to critically watch this and I don't need to be fed it like a baby.

Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?

Wei, you are a lying, hypocritical Marxist windbag, and I don't need anyone to prove it to me, you just are.

You claimed that Fox has falsified news the way that NBC has. You do need to prove it, because it's a serious charge. If you cannot cite one example, then say so and admit that you're simply parroting propaganda.

NJCardFan
04-05-2012, 10:58 PM
You make these claims, but whenever you are called upon to back them up with examples, you disappear. Why is that?



Wei, you are a lying, hypocritical Marxist windbag, and I don't need anyone to prove it to me, you just are.

You claimed that Fox has falsified news the way that NBC has. You do need to prove it, because it's a serious charge. If you cannot cite one example, then say so and admit that you're simply parroting propaganda.

Wee wee is one to talk considering his idea of honest journalism is Al Jazeera.

Rockntractor
04-05-2012, 11:12 PM
You know you have a very special place in my heart rock, but you must also know that I have other things to do besides monitor this forum all day (as much as I'd love to). I just got done running for an hour and now I need to take a shower before I visit some friends.

The first thing you are going to do when you have time to post here will be to either back up the claims you made in this thread or admit you were just grandstanding.
Don't bother posting in any other thread until you have done one or the other.
We all are sick of this.

txradioguy
04-06-2012, 06:02 AM
Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?

I can. But you won't like or accept my answer. Never midst he fact I've been in broadcasting since 1989. It won't fit your template and you'll simply dismiss it out of hand.

txradioguy
04-06-2012, 06:03 AM
Wee wee is one to talk considering his idea of honest journalism is Al Jazeera.

And worse yet...what he knows of Fox News he gets from Media Matters.

Zeus
04-06-2012, 02:41 PM
Somme folks are so used to the overwhelmingly liberal slant to news reporting that ever since Fox News came along with straight forward news reporting they are so certain that it's conservative propaganda.

Thing is there must be a reason that since fox news began broadcasting it's been number one in viewership with 5 or 6 of it's programs consistently in the top ten. One can look at the stats and see that it's not even close fox News is overwhelmingly number one.

txradioguy
04-06-2012, 02:43 PM
Somme folks are so used to the overwhelmingly liberal slant to news reporting that ever since Fox News came along with straight forward news reporting they are so certain that it's conservative propaganda.

Thing is there must be a reason that since fox news began broadcasting it's been number one in viewership with 5 or 6 of it's programs consistently in the top ten. One can look at the stats and see that it's not even close fox News is overwhelmingly number one.


Ding! Ding! Ding! We have the winnah!

Arroyo_Doble
04-06-2012, 03:08 PM
Somme folks are so used to the overwhelmingly liberal slant to news reporting that ever since Fox News came along with straight forward news reporting they are so certain that it's conservative propaganda.


Those who control the information control the person. In a mind control cult any information from outside the cult is considered evil, especially if it is opposing the cult. Members are told not to read it or believe it. Only information supplied by the cult is true. ... Cults train their members to instantly destroy any critical information given to them, and to not even entertain the thought that the information could be true.


~ From How Cults Work

Hawkgirl
04-06-2012, 06:51 PM
Those who control the information control the person. In a mind control cult any information from outside the cult is considered evil, especially if it is opposing the cult. Members are told not to read it or believe it. Only information supplied by the cult is true. ... Cults train their members to instantly destroy any critical information given to them, and to not even entertain the thought that the information could be true.


~ From How Cults Work

And that is why Fox News is portrayed as EBILLLLLLLL by the MSM.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 07:18 PM
Bumping for Wei widdo commie!

Arroyo_Doble
04-06-2012, 07:23 PM
And that is why Fox News is portrayed as EBILLLLLLLL by the MSM.

Yes. That is the lesson of that quote. Nothing can be trusted but Fox. All others lie. Only Fox tells you the truth.

JB
04-06-2012, 07:52 PM
<snip>

~ From How Cults WorkSo true.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_l8KK3gGxQ

JB
04-06-2012, 07:55 PM
Now, can any of you watch Fox News critically, without being force-fed like a baby, and see it for what it is?Sorry, no can do.

I need you to post links to justify post# 21.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 09:37 PM
You have unfinished business Wei.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 10:33 PM
You aren't going to spam the board until you provide some examples and proof of your allegations Wei, or you can just admit you were exaggerating for effect, sometimes known as lying your ass off.

Hawkgirl
04-06-2012, 10:47 PM
Yes. That is the lesson of that quote. Nothing can be trusted but Fox. All others lie. Only Fox tells you the truth.

Yes. Of course.

Wei Wu Wei
04-06-2012, 10:47 PM
who can spot what's wrong with this image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

Hawkgirl
04-06-2012, 10:49 PM
who can spot what's wrong with this image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

Me! Pick me!

The unemployment rates are actually higher since many of the unemployed have stopped looking for work and have stopped receiving government assistance.

Apache
04-06-2012, 11:01 PM
who can spot what's wrong with this image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

the bls numbers don't match the facts... what do i win?

Wei Wu Wei
04-06-2012, 11:03 PM
Simmer down Francis. I think you are confusing FOX news opinion shows like Hannity and perhaps O'Reilly with their actual News. Fox news does not intentionally distort stories. If they do, please give us a reference.

But even with shows like Hannity, he will still have a few liberals on this show to defend their side. O'Reilly will invite asswipes like Sharpton as well.

Let's circle back to FOX NEWS reporting. List a single example of news distortion. Just one example.

I hear this a lot, "opinion shows" are treated as an entirely different animal, even though they are the vast majority of the broadcasting schedule.

If we look at a Fox News schedule http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=3

In a 24 hour period, there are 3 hours total dedicated to news without editorials, opinions, or "discussions" by right-wing pundits. There's another 2 hours of reading headlines and a group of right-wing pundits spinning it.

During the primetime 7 hours, there is one single hour dedicated to news without pundit commentary. http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=2

That means in a full 24-hour cycle, 87% of the broadcast time is dedicated to opinion shows, pundit panel shows, gimmicks and stupid entertainment shows.

The 4 hours that are dedicated to news headlines

So they spend almost 90% of their entire broadcasting day parading pundits, "opinions", and outright propaganda, and try to play the "real news" card because they have 3 hours of reading headlines?

You know exactly what this is.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 11:06 PM
I hear this a lot, "opinion shows" are treated as an entirely different animal, even though they are the vast majority of the broadcasting schedule.

If we look at a Fox News schedule http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=3

In a 24 hour period, there are 3 hours total dedicated to news without editorials, opinions, or "discussions" by right-wing pundits. There's another 2 hours of reading headlines and a group of right-wing pundits spinning it.

During the primetime 7 hours, there is one single hour dedicated to news without pundit commentary. http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=2

That means in a full 24-hour cycle, 87% of the broadcast time is dedicated to opinion shows, pundit panel shows, gimmicks and stupid entertainment shows.

The 4 hours that are dedicated to news headlines

So they spend almost 90% of their entire broadcasting day parading pundits, "opinions", and outright propaganda, and try to play the "real news" card because they have 3 hours of reading headlines?

You know exactly what this is.

This convoluted mess that you wrote is somehow creating an equivalency to changing a 911 call to foment racial strife?

NJCardFan
04-06-2012, 11:09 PM
I hear this a lot, "opinion shows" are treated as an entirely different animal, even though they are the vast majority of the broadcasting schedule.

If we look at a Fox News schedule http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=3

In a 24 hour period, there are 3 hours total dedicated to news without editorials, opinions, or "discussions" by right-wing pundits. There's another 2 hours of reading headlines and a group of right-wing pundits spinning it.

During the primetime 7 hours, there is one single hour dedicated to news without pundit commentary. http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=2

That means in a full 24-hour cycle, 87% of the broadcast time is dedicated to opinion shows, pundit panel shows, gimmicks and stupid entertainment shows.

The 4 hours that are dedicated to news headlines

So they spend almost 90% of their entire broadcasting day parading pundits, "opinions", and outright propaganda, and try to play the "real news" card because they have 3 hours of reading headlines?

You know exactly what this is.

Again, this is a bold statement coming from someone who thinks Al Jazeera is unbiased reporting.

Wei Wu Wei
04-06-2012, 11:21 PM
Again, this is a bold statement coming from someone who thinks Al Jazeera is unbiased reporting.

I've never claimed that Al Jazeera was unbiased, you're the only one who keeps saying that. There is no such thing as unbiased reporting. Every organization is going to bring a perspective and how that organization is funded is going to color the bias. If Al Jazeera is doing a story on Qatar, I would take it with several grains of salt.

However, there is a significant difference in the quality of the journalism and standards of reporting between Al Jazeera and Fox News. There's no point in arguing this, so I'll make this as simple as can be.

If you even have the slightest shred of integrity on this subject, then try it yourself:

Click this link the moment you read this post and watch Al Jazeera English for 10 minutes. http://www.aljazeera.com/watch_now/

Hopefully it's 10 minutes later, now turn it onto Fox News right and watch it for 10 minutes. Go ahead.

If you can't see the difference between these two networks, you are intentionally keeping your head in tthe sand.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 11:27 PM
I see nothing yet to back up Wei's claims in post #21, is it just me?

Apache
04-06-2012, 11:28 PM
I hear this a lot, "opinion shows" are treated as an entirely different animal, even though they are the vast majority of the broadcasting schedule.

If we look at a Fox News schedule http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=3

In a 24 hour period, there are 3 hours total dedicated to news without editorials, opinions, or "discussions" by right-wing pundits. There's another 2 hours of reading headlines and a group of right-wing pundits spinning it.

During the primetime 7 hours, there is one single hour dedicated to news without pundit commentary. http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/printable_schedule.html?day=2

That means in a full 24-hour cycle, 87% of the broadcast time is dedicated to opinion shows, pundit panel shows, gimmicks and stupid entertainment shows.

The 4 hours that are dedicated to news headlines

So they spend almost 90% of their entire broadcasting day parading pundits, "opinions", and outright propaganda, and try to play the "real news" card because they have 3 hours of reading headlines?

You know exactly what this is.

so mr. fail, you cannot back up....
Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei

Fox News does stuff like this every day...... can you?
you're pissed because al jizzinytheirhairya is not a trusted news source. you're pissed because the alphabet news gets called on blatant lies by fox commentators AND you're pissed because your baseless claim is thrown in your face...


hyperbole much?

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 11:31 PM
so mr. fail, you cannot back up....... can you?
you're pissed because al jizzinytheirhairya is not a trusted news source. you're pissed because the alphabet news gets called on blatant lies by fox commentators AND you're pissed because your baseless claim is thrown in your face...


hyperbole much?

I have seen him prove nothing yet, he just keeps throwing more accusations out there.

Wei Wu Wei
04-06-2012, 11:42 PM
Is this how you always go about your critical thinking? You absolutely refuse to do even the most basic research or looking into something unless someone force feeds it to you?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fox+news+distortions

There are countless examples.

I know the game you are playing. You are pretending that if you don't see it, it doesn't exist, therefore if you try your hardest to not see something, you can prevent it from being true. It's so blatant. You are trying really hard to not see it, which is why you will fall head over heels to argue, but you cannot spend 20 seconds doing a google search.

I admitted the flaws and faults and bias in liberal news organizations, are you guys so insecure that you need to protect Fox News with such valiance?

Who are you trying to fool? I know it, you all know it. It's like admitting what you already know is this taboo sin.

Get over it.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 11:45 PM
Is this how you always go about your critical thinking? You absolutely refuse to do even the most basic research or looking into something unless someone force feeds it to you?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fox+news+distortions

There are countless examples.

I know the game you are playing. You are pretending that if you don't see it, it doesn't exist, therefore if you try your hardest to not see something, you can prevent it from being true. It's so blatant. You are trying really hard to not see it, which is why you will fall head over heels to argue, but you cannot spend 20 seconds doing a google search.

I admitted the flaws and faults and bias in liberal news organizations, are you guys so insecure that you need to protect Fox News with such valiance?

Who are you trying to fool? I know it, you all know it. It's like admitting what you already know is this taboo sin.

Get over it.

Directing me to a Google page isn't going to work Wei.

Rockntractor
04-06-2012, 11:49 PM
Is this how you always go about your critical thinking? You absolutely refuse to do even the most basic research or looking into something unless someone force feeds it to you?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fox+news+distortions

There are countless examples.

I know the game you are playing. You are pretending that if you don't see it, it doesn't exist, therefore if you try your hardest to not see something, you can prevent it from being true. It's so blatant. You are trying really hard to not see it, which is why you will fall head over heels to argue, but you cannot spend 20 seconds doing a google search.

I admitted the flaws and faults and bias in liberal news organizations, are you guys so insecure that you need to protect Fox News with such valiance?

Who are you trying to fool? I know it, you all know it. It's like admitting what you already know is this taboo sin.

Get over it.

This has got to be the lamest bullshit you have pulled yet! I'm supposed to do Google searches for you to try to prove you right. Are you a complete idiot?

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:16 AM
This has got to be the lamest bullshit you have pulled yet! I'm supposed to do Google searches for you to try to prove you right. Are you a complete idiot?

If you have any interest whatsoever on facts, you do some research. It's really not that complicated.

Your very statement here illustrates your entire motivation. "I'm supposed to do Google searches for you to try to prove you right. Are you a complete idiot?"

What do you mean "do google searches for me to try to prove me right"? How about do google searches for yourself? How about expanding your knowledge from various sources for it's own value. How about do google searches to find information to get a better idea of what's real and what's not? It is just a game to you. It's not about facts, not about reason, not about discussion, and sure as hell not about learning. All this is to you is a pissing contest.

It's not my job to teach you things, it's not my job to lead you to water, hold your head down and force you to drink it. I don't lose anything if you bury your own head in the sand. I'm not playing whatever game you seem to be playing. If you believe that intentionally avoiding information somehow makes you "win", then by all means, enjoy that victory.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:19 AM
If you have any interest whatsoever on facts, you do some research. It's really not that complicated.

Your very statement here illustrates your entire motivation. "I'm supposed to do Google searches for you to try to prove you right. Are you a complete idiot?"

What do you mean "do google searches for me to try to prove me right"? How about do google searches for yourself? How about expanding your knowledge from various sources for it's own value. How about do google searches to find information to get a better idea of what's real and what's not? It is just a game to you. It's not about facts, not about reason, not about discussion, and sure as hell not about learning. All this is to you is a pissing contest.

It's not my job to teach you things, it's not my job to lead you to water, hold your head down and force you to drink it. I don't lose anything if you bury your own head in the sand. I'm not playing whatever game you seem to be playing. If you believe that intentionally avoiding information somehow makes you "win", then by all means, enjoy that victory.

You don't teach in any school, your an idiot. You make claims you can't back up and then talk in circles when your called on them. what a fraud!

Apache
04-07-2012, 12:23 AM
Is this how you always go about your critical thinking? You absolutely refuse to do even the most basic research or looking into something unless someone force feeds it to you?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fox+news+distortions

There are countless examples.

I know the game you are playing. You are pretending that if you don't see it, it doesn't exist, therefore if you try your hardest to not see something, you can prevent it from being true. It's so blatant. You are trying really hard to not see it, which is why you will fall head over heels to argue, but you cannot spend 20 seconds doing a google search.

I admitted the flaws and faults and bias in liberal news organizations, are you guys so insecure that you need to protect Fox News with such valiance?

Who are you trying to fool? I know it, you all know it. It's like admitting what you already know is this taboo sin.

Get over it.alright wei, i checked your link. went to the huffpo page, which btw was a link to mediamatters ( no bias there ), but i digress. the first story i come across is about kevin jennings. it aired stating the boy was 15 not 16... was it a gross misrepresentation of facts? was it 'investigated' as nbc did? nope...


EDITOR'S NOTE: Since this story was originally published, the former student referred to as "Brewster" has stepped forward to reveal that he was 16 years old, not 15, at the time of the incident described in this report.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/30/obamas-safe-schools-czar-admits-poorly-handled-underage-sex-case/#ixzz1rKDV1fnp

it was corrected...

again, you fail, even a cursory search proves you wrong...

Hawkgirl
04-07-2012, 01:15 AM
If you have any interest whatsoever on facts, you do some research. It's really not that complicated.

Your very statement here illustrates your entire motivation. "I'm supposed to do Google searches for you to try to prove you right. Are you a complete idiot?"

What do you mean "do google searches for me to try to prove me right"? How about do google searches for yourself? How about expanding your knowledge from various sources for it's own value. How about do google searches to find information to get a better idea of what's real and what's not? It is just a game to you. It's not about facts, not about reason, not about discussion, and sure as hell not about learning. All this is to you is a pissing contest.

It's not my job to teach you things, it's not my job to lead you to water, hold your head down and force you to drink it. I don't lose anything if you bury your own head in the sand. I'm not playing whatever game you seem to be playing. If you believe that intentionally avoiding information somehow makes you "win", then by all means, enjoy that victory.

You're obviously not responding to a very simple request...let's try it in retard talk...

You thay Fox news is no good liars. We thay, peas be specifik and gimme esample. You thay, go google.


We say, that's no good. Give us esample.



We are waiting Weewee. You've written several post asking us to prove your stance...when all you have to do is give us ONE example. One example of deliberate inflammatory distortion to get more viewership...or for whatever reason.ONE Weewee..ONE example.

txradioguy
04-07-2012, 05:41 AM
so mr. fail, you cannot back up....... can you?
you're pissed because al jizzinytheirhairya is not a trusted news source. you're pissed because the alphabet news gets called on blatant lies by fox commentators AND you're pissed because your baseless claim is thrown in your face...


hyperbole much?

No he can't and never will be able to back up his claim. Seems to be a recurring theme among Libs here.

Which is why I sat and behind what I said earlier about him being presented the facts an dismissing them out of hand because they don't fit his template.

Odysseus
04-07-2012, 12:10 PM
Yes. That is the lesson of that quote. Nothing can be trusted but Fox. All others lie. Only Fox tells you the truth.

That's pretty much al Qaeda's position. Remember Bin Laden's advice to his subordinates about how to put out their 9/11 tenth anniversary message?


Bin Laden and his aides hoped for big terrorist operations to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001. They also had elaborate media plans. Adam Gadahn, a U.S.-born media adviser, even discussed in a message to his boss what would be the best television outlets for a bin Laden anniversary video.

“It should be sent for example to ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and maybe PBS and VOA. As for Fox News let her die in her anger,” Gadahn wrote. At another point, he said of the networks: “From a professional point of view, they are all on one level — except [Fox News] channel, which falls into the abyss as you know, and lacks objectivity, too.”

In other words, our enemies know that most of our media can be manipulated by their propaganda and will present their case to the American people, while Fox cannot be.


However, there is a significant difference in the quality of the journalism and standards of reporting between Al Jazeera and Fox News. There's no point in arguing this, so I'll make this as simple as can be.

If you even have the slightest shred of integrity on this subject, then try it yourself:

Click this link the moment you read this post and watch Al Jazeera English for 10 minutes. http://www.aljazeera.com/watch_now/

Hopefully it's 10 minutes later, now turn it onto Fox News right and watch it for 10 minutes. Go ahead.

If you can't see the difference between these two networks, you are intentionally keeping your head in tthe sand.

Yeah, there's a huge difference. Al Jazeera is an Islamist propaganda factory. It's the Pravda of the global jihad. Ten minutes of tastefully executed, carefully presented lies is still ten minutes of lies.


If you have any interest whatsoever on facts, you do some research. It's really not that complicated.

And yet, you never do any. You made the claim that Fox does the same thing that NBC does, which is fabricate evidence to support its narratives. When called on it, you resorted to bluster and a pathetic backpedaling in order to pretend that you didn't mean what you said, or that we are somehow distorting your position. The facts, which you claim that we aren't interested in, are that NBC falsified an audio clip in order to make a false charge of racism in a highly volatile news story. You claim that Fox has done the same thing, so the burden of proof is on you to provide an example. If you cannot do so, then admit it, or else we will know that you are a liar and a fraud.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:13 PM
You're obviously not responding to a very simple request...let's try it in retard talk...

You thay Fox news is no good liars. We thay, peas be specifik and gimme esample. You thay, go google.


We say, that's no good. Give us esample.



We are waiting Weewee. You've written several post asking us to prove your stance...when all you have to do is give us ONE example. One example of deliberate inflammatory distortion to get more viewership...or for whatever reason.ONE Weewee..ONE example.

I already posted your ONE example.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?48414-Ah-NBC-Thank-You-For-Proving-There-Is-A-Liberal-Bias-In-The-Media&p=496349&viewfull=1#post496349

Now you can stop fixating on it and address the rest of my posts in this thread.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:27 PM
I already posted your ONE example.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?48414-Ah-NBC-Thank-You-For-Proving-There-Is-A-Liberal-Bias-In-The-Media&p=496349&viewfull=1#post496349

Now you can stop fixating on it and address the rest of my posts in this thread.

You have no idea how idiotic you have made yourself look here, if you ever had any credibility you don't anymore!

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:33 PM
Yeah, there's a huge difference. Al Jazeera is an Islamist propaganda factory. It's the Pravda of the global jihad. Ten minutes of tastefully executed, carefully presented lies is still ten minutes of lies.

Give an example. Watch AJE for 10 minutes and specify which lies you saw. We always require proof.




And yet, you never do any. You made the claim that Fox does the same thing that NBC does, which is fabricate evidence to support its narratives. When called on it, you resorted to bluster and a pathetic backpedaling in order to pretend that you didn't mean what you said, or that we are somehow distorting your position. The facts, which you claim that we aren't interested in, are that NBC falsified an audio clip in order to make a false charge of racism in a highly volatile news story. You claim that Fox has done the same thing, so the burden of proof is on you to provide an example. If you cannot do so, then admit it, or else we will know that you are a liar and a fraud.

I already gave an example but sure I'll give more


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=1

Fox News' Martha MacCallum displays a series of video clips which she claims were from the previous weekend. This includes a clip of Joe Biden talking about the ecconomy. She says multiple times that these videos were taken over the weekend, even though the video of Joe Biden was taken during the campaign.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=2

Fox News deceptively edits a clip of a Q&A session. A question was asked "why don't we just have a European style system?". The President repeats the question and goes on to say he does not support such a plan, but Fox News edits the clip to simply show Obama repeating the question, so it appears he is supporting it. They remove the part where he says he disagrees with it.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=4

Fox News claims to have gone back and done analysis on the stimulus and presents their research and findings. In reality, it is not Fox News' research, but a GOP press release which Fox claimed as it's own.



http://mediamatters.org/research/200908240024

Chris Wallace gives several distortions concerning the veterans health administration.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/03/fox-news-chyron-fails-mat_n_182981.html

Fox News reports that Obama's budget plan was 4 times bigger than the costliest Bush budget. This is a simple outright lie. Bush sent budgets of 2.9 Trillion and 3.2 Trillion. Simple basic 3rd grade math.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:34 PM
You have no idea how idiotic you have made yourself look here, if you ever had any credibility you don't anymore!

So you still can't see what's wrong with that image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:36 PM
So you still can't see what's wrong with that image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

I'm not playing where is waldo with you.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:40 PM
Well that image was presented on Fox News and is an example of obvious distortion. I also gave several more examples just a moment ago.

So now can anyone address my other points? I won't hold my breath.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:46 PM
Here is a crock

http://mediamatters.org/research/200908240024

Chris Wallace gives several distortions concerning the veterans health administration.

Chris Wallace hosted former Bush administration aide Jim Towey to discuss his recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, "The Death Book for Veterans,"
Wallace interviews this guy so this makes Fox distorting the news?
If you don't like Jim Towey take it up with him, when Fox does an iterview with someone that wrote an article in another publication, how is that distorting news?
As always everything you write is a distortion and waste of time.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:49 PM
Try again Wei, everything you have posted is insignificant at best.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 12:52 PM
This is your home for awhile Wei.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:55 PM
Here is a crock


Wallace interviews this guy so this makes Fox distorting the news?
If you don't like Jim Towey take it up with him, when Fox does an iterview with someone that wrote an article in another publication, how is that distorting news?
As always everything you write is a distortion and waste of time.

What about the rest of the examples?

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 12:56 PM
Try again Wei, everything you have posted is insignificant at best.

hahaha

So I'm asked to give one example, I give several, and you decide "they don't count". So now I get my posts deleted?

What a joke.

Zeus
04-07-2012, 12:57 PM
So you still can't see what's wrong with that image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

OMG they left out the unemployment number for December and they say it's for 2011 :cold:

NJCardFan
04-07-2012, 01:08 PM
who can spot what's wrong with this image?

http://i.imgur.com/1VqYF.jpg

Nothing wrong with this image. It's the unemployment numbers for 11/12ths of 2011. And, if I'm not mistaken, Obama was president in 2011. Did I miss something?

NJCardFan
04-07-2012, 01:13 PM
OMG they left out the unemployment number for December and they say it's for 2011 :cold:

Which means that this was probably from a December broadcast hence the missing month. And for the record, the unemployment rate for December 2011 (http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-01-06/december-unemployment-report/52410436/1) was 8.5%. Still don't know where wee wee is going with this. There is nothing wrong with that graph.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 01:21 PM
What about the rest of the examples?

Sorry dude, they were so insignificant that they are meaningless, you said that Fox news on a daily basis distorts the news like NBC did with their editing of the 911 tape that they used to intentional make Zimmerman look like a racist.
I think it is time for you to admit that this was a gross exaggeration by you at best.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 01:28 PM
Sorry dude, they were so insignificant they are meaningless, you said that Fox news on a daily basis distorts the news like NBC did with their editing of the 911 tape that they used to intentional make Zimmerman look like a racist.
I think it is time for you to admit that this was a gross exaggeration by you at best.

I gave examples, you can choose to ignore them if that makes you feel better.

It's clear what you are doing.

I proved my point, if you want to go through and continue delete all my posts so that no one sees it, then have fun. If you want to ignore it to make yourself feel better, have a blast.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 01:53 PM
I gave examples, you can choose to ignore them if that makes you feel better.

It's clear what you are doing.

I proved my point, if you want to go through and continue delete all my posts so that no one sees it, then have fun. If you want to ignore it to make yourself feel better, have a blast.

Sorry dude, they were so insignificant that they are meaningless, you said that Fox news on a daily basis distorts the news like NBC did with their editing of the 911 tape that they used to intentional make Zimmerman look like a racist.
I think it is time for you to admit that this was a gross exaggeration by you at best.

Odysseus
04-07-2012, 02:32 PM
Give an example. Watch AJE for 10 minutes and specify which lies you saw. We always require proof.[p/QUOTE]

Too easy. Just read this article: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2010/02/2010226201512998938.html

The entire article is Arab propaganda. The "Ibrihimi Mosque" is the tomb of Abraham. It was the second holiest site in Judaism, after the Temple Mount, and the building above it was built by Herod, 700 years before Mohammed raped his first virgin. The Israelis turned it into a heritage site after Palestinians desecrated it during a Ramadan celebration, in which they urinated near the ark and spread Hamas flags around the tomb. You can read about it here: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/152542#.T4CFPvvy92A.

Everything that Al Jazeera reports is biased in the same way. They repeat the most outrageous propaganda as fact and ignore facts that interfere with their narrative. Now, for the rest of your examples.

[QUOTE=Wei Wu Wei;496454]I already gave an example but sure I'll give more

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=1

Fox News' Martha MacCallum displays a series of video clips which she claims were from the previous weekend. This includes a clip of Joe Biden talking about the ecconomy. She says multiple times that these videos were taken over the weekend, even though the video of Joe Biden was taken during the campaign.

Okay, Fox took an older clip and misstated the date. However, the rest of the administration reps were making the same case, over the weekend. The crux of the story was that the administration was claiming that the economy had turned a corner when it hadn't. And, the use of the clip might have been an error, but HuffPo assumes that it was deliberate. OTOH, the editing of the Zimmerman tape was deliberate.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=2

Fox News deceptively edits a clip of a Q&A session. A question was asked "why don't we just have a European style system?". The President repeats the question and goes on to say he does not support such a plan, but Fox News edits the clip to simply show Obama repeating the question, so it appears he is supporting it. They remove the part where he says he disagrees with it.

Okay, so show us the whole clip. HuffPo doesn't. It ought to be easy to find.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=4

Fox News claims to have gone back and done analysis on the stimulus and presents their research and findings. In reality, it is not Fox News' research, but a GOP press release which Fox claimed as it's own.

Or so HuffPo claims. If you track back through their links, the story originates with Media Matters, which is hardly a reliable source. In fact, most of these stories track back through Media Matters. If anything, HUFFPO is taking Media Matters talking points and presenting them as news, just as it claims that FOX has done.


http://mediamatters.org/research/200908240024

Chris Wallace gives several distortions concerning the veterans health administration.

Again, Media Matters has zero credibility.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/03/fox-news-chyron-fails-mat_n_182981.html

Fox News reports that Obama's budget plan was 4 times bigger than the costliest Bush budget. This is a simple outright lie. Bush sent budgets of 2.9 Trillion and 3.2 Trillion. Simple basic 3rd grade math.

Again, a Media Matters track back, but this one backfires on them. They ran the images of the caption, but neglected to run the video, in which the discussion is about how Obama's budget deficit is 4X greater than Bush's largest. That's another reason why Media Matters is a joke.

Odysseus
04-07-2012, 02:41 PM
I gave examples, you can choose to ignore them if that makes you feel better.

It's clear what you are doing.

I proved my point, if you want to go through and continue delete all my posts so that no one sees it, then have fun. If you want to ignore it to make yourself feel better, have a blast.

The only example that you provide that comes close is the Biden clip, and Fox corrected it the next day, in the same time slot, on the same show. If it was an accident, they did the right thing in how they corrected it. Everything else is just Media Matters bloviating.

Rockntractor
04-07-2012, 02:56 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/2544509.gif

And now back to our regularly scheduled programing, a special thanks to Ody.

txradioguy
04-07-2012, 04:36 PM
You have no idea how idiotic you have made yourself look here, if you ever had any credibility you don't anymore!

What poor wee wee fails to realize is that we HAVE watched AJE...which is the very reason we ridicule it like we do.

That and we realize that by his claiming that AJE is "unbiased"...he illustrates that he's the useful idiot he accuses us all of being for not watching it.

Wei Wu Wei
04-07-2012, 05:38 PM
That and we realize that by his claiming that AJE is "unbiased"...he illustrates that he's the useful idiot he accuses us all of being for not watching it.

Show me where I ever claimed that AJE is "unbiased". I have specifically said the opposite of that every time the topic comes up.

Odysseus
04-07-2012, 06:04 PM
Show me where I ever claimed that AJE is "unbiased". I have specifically said the opposite of that every time the topic comes up.

The point is not whether you call it unbiased, it's that you consider it reliable at all. Al Jazeera is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization for Hamas and other terrorist groups. It provides a venue for Brotherhood members, including the Brotherhood's spiritual guide, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. This would be like MSNBC putting Al Sharpton on the air to discuss the Trayvon case, in terms of sheer, unbridled bat$#i+ conflict of interest.

Here is one of many articles on the subject that shows the connections:


Al-Jazeera's Dirty Little Secret
By STEVEN STALINSKY | March 14, 2007
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/al-jazeeras-dirty-little-secret/50403/

"Al-Jazeera Satellite Network, the Greatest Arab Media Organization." — Ikhwanweb.com, the Web site
of the Muslim Brotherhood, October 25

Since the war on terror began, many Arab reformists have spoken out against "the culture of hate" that has
incited its people to terrorism. The TV network Al-Jazeera is often at the center of this criticism.
Arab reformists who have witnessed first-hand incitement on Al-Jazeera often discuss its connection to the
Ikhwan movement, aka the Muslim Brotherhood. This organization is one of the world's leading Islamist groups,based in Egypt and founded in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna. Today, its ideology influences groups ranging from Hamas to Al Qaeda.

One of the most prolific Arab scholars and columnists, Mamoun Fandy, wrote in the London-based Arabic daily Asharq Al-Awsat about the movement's relationship with Al-Jazeera on January 22. "The Muslim Brotherhood has at its disposal media that transcends borders, from newspapers to satellite channels, which have taken over the minds of millions … throughout the entire Arab world," he wrote.

Calling Al-Jazeera "the Muslim Brotherhood channel,"Mr. Fandy discussed the network's activity in the Middle East. "Al-Jazeera … is already propagandizing for the organization. … If you watch a debate program presented on Al-Jazeera … you will be amazed at the supreme effort … to defend the Muslim Brotherhood."
Pierre Akel, founder and editor of a prominent Arabic reformist Web site, Metransparent.com, summed it up on February 9, 2006, "When it comes to satellite television in the region, Al-Jazeera is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood."

A Tunisian intellectual and director of the Netherlands–based Center for Promoting Democracy in the Arab
World, Khaled Shawkat, wrote about the connection between Al-Jazeera and the Muslim Brotherhood in an
article for the progressive Arabic Web site Elaph.com on July 29. "Al-Jazeera has been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood organization," he wrote.

In an article in Metransparent on December 22, 2004, the Arab reformist Abu Khawla also discussed the
Muslim Brotherhood's connection to Al-Jazeera. In addition, he wrote about the channel's religious authority, Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who as a member of the organization left Egypt 45 years ago, seeking asylum in Qatar. "Arabs turn nowadays to satellite TV channels, especially Al-Jazeera … a tool of communications that is so far completely monopolized by fundamentalists,"Mr. Khawla wrote. "In the case of Al-Jazeera, preacher AlQaradawi(a leading figure of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood) is one of its most influentialfounding members. And fundamentalists are in charge of its news programs and talk shows."

The Arabic language version is extremely inflammatory, but the English language site conforms to the overall doctrinal demands of the Brotherhood. If you are really getting your information on the Middle East from them, then it explains a lot about your positions, if not your credulity.

NJCardFan
04-07-2012, 10:25 PM
I remember watching CNN at the outbreak of the Iraq war and they were showing clips from AJ and in one of the clips, AJ was talking to what they said was a 4 year old girl injured in an apparent rocket attack. They asked the girl what hit her house and she said it was a rocket. The reporter asked her what kind of rocket(remember, she's 4 years old) and she said 'an American rocket'. Of course the whole thing was to garner international sympathy for Iraq into thinking that we were bombing civilians but running with the fact that a 4 year old girl knows what country a particular rocket came from, oh, AJ is honest reporting. :rolleyes: And really wee? Getting 'examples' from Media Matters? Seriously? :biggrin-new:

Janice
04-07-2012, 11:01 PM
http://i.imgur.com/In2WP.jpg


The point is not whether you call it unbiased, it's that you consider it reliable at all. Al Jazeera is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization for Hamas and other terrorist groups. It provides a venue for Brotherhood members, including the Brotherhood's spiritual guide, Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Why wouldnt Wei Wu Wei put his trust in whatever org happens to assoc themselves w/the Muslim Brotherhood? After all, our President does.

Muslim Brotherhood envoys met with White House officials in DC (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/05/muslim-brotherhood-envoys-met-with-white-house-officials-in-dc/?test=latestnews#ixzz1rH7ovczU)
Muslim Brotherhood’s $1.5 billion Holy Week Windfall (http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/45812)
Obama, Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood (http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/01/obama-al-qaeda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood/)

"It seems likely that whatever his intentions, Obama’s contacts with the Brotherhood will strengthen it politically and increase its chances of becoming one of the dominant, if not the dominant, political force in Egypt. Being able to boast of Obama’s implicit recognition of the Brotherhood’s importance, the Brotherhood will now have an easier time gaining recruits, soliciting funds, and engaging with other major powers in Europe and elsewhere.

In short, Obama has just handed both al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, two of the most powerful of our jihadist enemies, a major political victory. Granted, at this stage the victory is merely a symbolic one. But in doing so, Obama runs the very real risk of substantively facilitating their struggle for political domination in the Arab countries currently in upheaval, and of enabling their even more substantive successes in the fields of political and military battle against their avowed and most hated enemy: Western civilization.

In short Obama is helping two of the most ruthless and radical Islamic terrorist forces in the world to achieve their long-awaited goal: “Islam uber Alles.”

One cannot help but wonder, which side is he on?"

NJCardFan
04-08-2012, 01:50 AM
I'm still waiting for wee wee to explain why the unemployment graph is wrong.

Lager
04-08-2012, 09:43 AM
hahaha

So I'm asked to give one example, I give several, and you decide "they don't count". So now I get my posts deleted?

What a joke.

What's he talking about, did he have posts in this thread deleted?

Rockntractor
04-08-2012, 09:53 AM
What's he talking about, did he have posts in this thread deleted?

No, all his posts in this thread are still here, I told him to finish this thread before he moved on to others.
he has a habit of making claims without backing them up with any sort of proof or links and then starting another thread in which he repeats the process. He was told to stay here until he backed up the accusations he made.

Lager
04-08-2012, 10:02 AM
No, all his threads in this post are still here, I told him to finish this thread before he moved on to others.
he has a habit of making claims without backing them up with any sort of proof or links and then starting another thread in which he repeats the process. He was told to stay here until he backed up the accusations he made.

Thanks for the clarification, Rock. That does seem to be his "modus operandi".

Odysseus
04-08-2012, 12:34 PM
http://i.imgur.com/In2WP.jpg



Why wouldnt Wei Wu Wei put his trust in whatever org happens to assoc themselves w/the Muslim Brotherhood? After all, our President does.

Muslim Brotherhood envoys met with White House officials in DC (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/05/muslim-brotherhood-envoys-met-with-white-house-officials-in-dc/?test=latestnews#ixzz1rH7ovczU)
Muslim Brotherhood’s $1.5 billion Holy Week Windfall (http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/45812)
Obama, Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood (http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/01/obama-al-qaeda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood/)

"It seems likely that whatever his intentions, Obama’s contacts with the Brotherhood will strengthen it politically and increase its chances of becoming one of the dominant, if not the dominant, political force in Egypt. Being able to boast of Obama’s implicit recognition of the Brotherhood’s importance, the Brotherhood will now have an easier time gaining recruits, soliciting funds, and engaging with other major powers in Europe and elsewhere.

In short, Obama has just handed both al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, two of the most powerful of our jihadist enemies, a major political victory. Granted, at this stage the victory is merely a symbolic one. But in doing so, Obama runs the very real risk of substantively facilitating their struggle for political domination in the Arab countries currently in upheaval, and of enabling their even more substantive successes in the fields of political and military battle against their avowed and most hated enemy: Western civilization.

In short Obama is helping two of the most ruthless and radical Islamic terrorist forces in the world to achieve their long-awaited goal: “Islam uber Alles.”

One cannot help but wonder, which side is he on?"


Hope and Change Cartoons had a great take on this. It seems that Obama is outraged that Augusta still doesn't allow women to play golf. See below for the full court press.

Par for the Coarse (http://hopenchangecartoons.blogspot.com/2012/04/par-for-coarse.html)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IKjtM5C9MSI/T34W7tB7PpI/AAAAAAAAEUQ/oyYXqoKGbUk/s640/Par-for-the-Coarse1.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IKjtM5C9MSI/T34W7tB7PpI/AAAAAAAAEUQ/oyYXqoKGbUk/s1600/Par-for-the-Coarse1.jpg)

Barack Obama, the world's hardest-working man, took time out this week from fundraising junkets and pronouncing the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional to speak out on a matter ofdeep, personal importance to him: golf.


Specifically, he opined that the Augusta National Golf Club should change its membership rules to start admitting women. According to Whitehouse Spokesworm Jay Carney, the president "believes Augusta should admit women. We’re kinda long past the time when women should be excluded from anything."


Except, of course, the president's ownnotoriously "guys only" golf outings. Although in fairness, we can understand why Mr. Obama wouldn't want women in his party, smacking longer drives than he has any hope of hitting.


But on matters of women and hitting, Carney had less to say about this week's affectionate meeting of Whitehouse officials (not the president himself, who was presumably on the links) with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, to celebrate their Obama-assisted rise to power in Egypt and their continuing drive for the kind of Sharia law which would give the ever-frisky Sandra Fluke an endless supply of free stones instead of free birth control.


All of which makes Barack Obama's genuine commitment to women more than a little hard to believe.


Which is why female voters should be seriously questioning whether they should vote for a man who is seen as "unbeatable among women" yet, when it's politically expedient, doesn't see women as unbeatable.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jKeAZbXqGX4/T36DzcSPJlI/AAAAAAAAEUc/DBvmpuVjvKs/s400/ObamaStoningGolf.jpg (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jKeAZbXqGX4/T36DzcSPJlI/AAAAAAAAEUc/DBvmpuVjvKs/s1600/ObamaStoningGolf.jpg)
The president is now making women part of his golf outings.

Janice
04-08-2012, 01:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18VOGykrgHo

Hmm .. hope and Change cartoons seem to have hit the woman .. err nail on the head havent they?

http://i.imgur.com/Kd2DT.jpg
7-Year-Old Daughter Beheaded by Muslim Dad in Iran, Who Suspected She Was Raped by Her Uncle (https://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/7-year-old-daughter-beheaded-by-muslim-dad-in-iran-who-suspected-she-was-raped-by-her-uncle/)

Odysseus
04-08-2012, 03:15 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18VOGykrgHo

Hmm .. hope and Change cartoons seem to have hit the woman .. err nail on the head havent they?

http://i.imgur.com/Kd2DT.jpg
7-Year-Old Daughter Beheaded by Muslim Dad in Iran, Who Suspected She Was Raped by Her Uncle (https://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/7-year-old-daughter-beheaded-by-muslim-dad-in-iran-who-suspected-she-was-raped-by-her-uncle/)

Yep. PC cowardice and lies never seem to go after the powerful. For example, how much you want to bet that the uncle didn't get any punishment for raping that child?

Janice
04-08-2012, 03:50 PM
http://i.imgur.com/kkrR8.jpg

We are talking about our presidents friends here. We're all friends arent we? And speaking of which, where is our friend Wei Wu Wei gone to? Im sure he will have something very beneficial to add about these wonderful friends our nation via our president who legitimizes and "reaches out to" has adopted.

Odysseus
04-08-2012, 11:57 PM
http://i.imgur.com/kkrR8.jpg

We are talking about our presidents friends here. We're all friends arent we? And speaking of which, where is our friend Wei Wu Wei gone to? Im sure he will have something very beneficial to add about these wonderful friends our nation via our president who legitimizes and "reaches out to" has adopted.

He'll no doubt tell us that such things are to be expected from a conservative like Obama. :rolleyes:

JB
04-09-2012, 06:42 PM
Where are we on this? Did wee produce? I see some bunking of his bunk occurred. Is that it?

Rockntractor
04-09-2012, 06:48 PM
Where are we on this? Did wee produce? I see some bunking of his bunk occurred. Is that it?

All we managed to get from him was post #70 that Ody did a fine job of debunking.
All Wei can seems to do is spout media matters talking points and doesn't seem capable of any individual thought of his own.

JB
04-09-2012, 06:56 PM
All we managed to get from him...I clicked his Google search thing the other day. I think one of the results was a site that bunked his results. Pretty funny. What a maroon.

Rockntractor
04-09-2012, 07:02 PM
I clicked his Google search thing the other day. I think one of the results was a site that bunked his results. Pretty funny. What a maroon.

I really expected him to come up with one or two substantial incidents, Fox has been around at least 15 years and everyone pulls at least one good one.
what he fails to understand or doesn't want to admit is how deliberate and calculated the bias has been in this case by the media against Zimmerman, even Fox showed bias, Hannity showed bias at first, Wei should have used that as his example.

JB
04-09-2012, 07:20 PM
I really expected him to come up with one or two substantial incidents <snip>LMAO. I have a couple examples I could give him. They may not rival outright fraud in the editing process like NBC did but I could make an argument for it either way!

The point is, he failed miserably and needed to be poked with many sticks.

NJCardFan
04-09-2012, 10:56 PM
Wee wee is a typical swoop and poop leftist. Regurgitate talking points from ultra left wing sites as fact and when called on the carpet for them, he runs and hides.