FAUX News 'balanced' Coverage of Petraues Hearings

[Nbadan]

Dear activists, colleagues, and friends...


To laugh at the ridiculousness, to scream at the outrageous or to... Well fox went to new lows in their analysis of Petraeus' testimony last week. When our friends at Media Matters let us know that they had 7 to 1 analysts in favor of escalation, it was hard to believe, even for FOX! 22 minutes supporting the escalation and only 3 and half against it. They went to such great lengths, they even cut away to Ann Coulter when Democrats questioned Petraeus!

Bill had an idea to show all this in 90 seconds, so he and Jonathan jumped right into it. Then we argued amongst ourselves for two days about what we should do about it? What could we ask, encourage, motivate folks to do. Yelling at the TV screen not being a desired option.

So we throw the question to you, our activists and media observers. What should be done about FOX? And given this ridiculous imbalance, should we encourage liberals and Democrats to stop going on FOX until the rules are fair, the deck is not stacked?

Give us your thoughts…

Robert Greenwald
and the Brave New Films team

Here is the resulting video:

FOX's "balanced" analysis of the Petraeus hearings (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Af5Q0EbadE)

[George Gervin's Afro]

Fox is biased.. I would have no problems with the dems avoiding the network all together. Can you imagine a post democrat presidential debate show on Fox? With Ann coulter and Sean hannity giving an unbiased viewpoint on the Dem presidential candidates and their views? Brit HUme?... I don't blame the dems from staying far, far away...

[Ignignokt]

Msnbc

[xrayzebra]

Fox is biased.. I would have no problems with the dems avoiding the network all together. Can you imagine a post democrat presidential debate show on Fox? With Ann coulter and Sean hannity giving an unbiased viewpoint on the Dem presidential candidates and their views? Brit HUme?... I don't blame the dems from staying far, far away...


Yeah, it would be great to see them trying to answer
some tough questions. But no worry, they wouldn't dare
go on Fox because Moveon.org wont allow it. And they
give the marching orders for the Dimms.

[Medvedenko]

xray...do you truly belive Ann Coulter is the voice of your party and that she has the best interests of all americans. Please......

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yeah, it would be great to see them trying to answer
some tough questions. But no worry, they wouldn't dare
go on Fox because Moveon.org wont allow it. And they
give the marching orders for the Dimms.



tough questioning and fair questyioning are 2 different things ray.. don't play stupid

[Oh, Gee!!]

tough questioning and fair questyioning are 2 different things ray.. don't play stupid

Ray don't play, man. Ray don't play.

[Jamtas#2]

Republicans have Fox to go on much like Democrats have the Daily Show, Real Time and other shows and outlets to go on. There is a political swing to all the news networks and news shows. Each side just seems to point to the other and think they are the only "fair and balanced" one. (i.e. All republicans think like ann coulter and all dems think like moveon etc...)

[Oh, Gee!!]

Daily Show is a comedy show on COMEDY CENTRAL!!! Fox News holds itself out as a real news organization.

[Jamtas#2]

Daily Show is a comedy show on COMEDY CENTRAL!!! Fox News holds itself out as a real news organization.

while that may be true, there are a great number of people who get their news from shows like the Daily Show and that also carries the support of youth culture.

[ChumpDumper]

Has The Daily Show or Real Time ever claimed to be 1) a news source or 2) fair and balanced?

[Jamtas#2]

Has The Daily Show or Real Time ever claimed to be 1) a news source or 2) fair and balanced?

Do people 1) still get their news stories and info from there 2) do people form the opinions based on those shows?

[Oh, Gee!!]

while that may be true, there are a great number of people who get their news from shows like the Daily Show and that also carries the support of youth culture.

check out the brains on this guy. :wtf

[Oh, Gee!!]

Do people 1) still get their news stories and info from there 2) do people form the opinions based on those shows?


people can get their news from a loud mouth neighbor, does that mean the neighbor is a news organization?

[ChumpDumper]

Do people 1) still get their news stories and info from there 2) do people form the opinions based on those shows?Irrelevant. People could say they get their news from houseplants. To my knowledge, houseplants make no claims of journalistic integrity or impartiality either.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Irrelevant. People could say they get their news from houseplants. To my knowledge, houseplants make no claims of journalistic integrity or impartiality either.


are houseplants fair and balanced?

[ChumpDumper]

are houseplants fair and balanced?I have seen no commercials with American flag graphics making that claim.

[Oh, Gee!!]

what if the houseplant delivers the news in a funny and irreverent way? would that mean Jon Stewart is a houseplant?

[ChumpDumper]

what if the houseplant delivers the news in a funny and irreverent way? does that mean Jon Stewart is a houseplant?We never really see anything below desk level. He could be potted for all we know.

[ChumpDumper]

A better comparison to the shows mentioned above is made with talk radio.

Anyone getting the bulk of their news and opinions from either these shows or talk radio is a moron.

[clambake]

ok ok i'll turn down the volume

[George Gervin's Afro]

A better comparison to the shows mentioned above is made with talk radio.

Anyone getting the bulk of their news and opinions from either these shows or talk radio is a moron.


I torture myself daily by listening to limpballs and whannity. I am not surprised anymore to hear people call in and proudly proclaim that they make their kids listen to them. not only that they heap praise on these fools they tell their kids that they are getting the 'real' news....

[Jamtas#2]

check out the brains on this guy. :wtf

I could really care less what your opinion of me is. throw out all the taunts and insults you want

[Jamtas#2]

people can get their news from a loud mouth neighbor, does that mean the neighbor is a news organization?

does their neighbor reach the ears of and influence millions?

[Nbadan]

How many times can Sean Hannity say Moveon.org in one day?

:lmao

[Jamtas#2]

Irrelevant. People could say they get their news from houseplants. To my knowledge, houseplants make no claims of journalistic integrity or impartiality either.

If you want to be a democrat who believes that the media is either slanted republican or balanced, then dont be shocked to find republicans who think the news is either slanted towards democrats or balanced.

Mainstream media and shows like daily show do influence the thoughts and opinions fo the masses. The influence happens on both sides, conservative and liberal, to deny it is ignorant.

[ChumpDumper]

Look around, dude. Houseplants are everywhere.

[Jamtas#2]

A better comparison to the shows mentioned above is made with talk radio.

Anyone getting the bulk of their news and opinions from either these shows or talk radio is a moron.


That could be true. Unfortuantely, the votes of all those people carry the same weight as everyone else so the slanting of facts by both sides does have a great influence.

[ChumpDumper]

If you want to be a democrat who believes that the media is either slanted republican or balanced, then dont be shocked to find republicans who think the news is either slanted towards democrats or balanced.I don't think any media is without bias. Some organizations seem to care less abou it than others.


Mainstream media and shows like daily show do influence the thoughts and opinions fo the masses. The influence happens on both sides, conservative and liberal, to deny it is ignorant.Masses are dumbasses. People would get tased a lot less if they listened to me.

[johnsmith]

That could be true. Unfortuantely, the votes of all those people carry the same weight as everyone else so the slanting of facts by both sides does have a great influence.

Exactly. Really, that's the problem with people like Rush, and Rosie. They are two peas in a pod that speak to the generally uninformed and sway stupid voters. I firmly believe that 90% of voters are so disengaged to what is happening throughout the world that they get most of their political news from the E channel.

[ChumpDumper]

That could be true. Unfortuantely, the votes of all those people carry the same weight as everyone else so the slanting of facts by both sides does have a great influence.Unfortunately this nation is full of gullible idiots who can't think for themselves so they have someone do it for them.

On both sides.

[johnsmith]

People would get tased a lot less if they listened to me.


:lol

[George Gervin's Afro]

How many times can Sean Hannity say Moveon.org in one day?

:lmao



he has been telling the herd that they should just call the dems the ' moveon.org democrats' aboiut 300 times already... I guess sean is in tune with the 'if you repeat it enough times people will believe it to be true' theory..

[Nbadan]

he has been telling the herd that they should just call the dems the ' moveon.org democrats' aboiut 300 times already... I guess sean is in tune with the 'if you repeat it enough times people will believe it to be true' theory..

He's an idiot....everything he says about Move,org, you could turn around and apply it to him....

[Holt's Cat]

Does Fox News owe its ratings to conservative viewers or to its anti-conservative viewers? You decide...

[Holt's Cat]

Seriously, you morons haven't figured it out. The talking heads on both political sides count on you dumbasses who disagree with them hanging on their every word, be it on the radio or on cable TV. They want you posting about them on the internets and repeating their name again and again. Good job.

[Nbadan]

Seriously, you morons haven't figured it out. The talking heads on both political sides count on you dumbasses who disagree with them hanging on their every word, be it on the radio or on cable TV. They want you posting about them on the internets and repeating their name again and again. Good job.

So just ignoring them is the answer? what happened to confronting evil head-on? Besides, it's not like the millions of regular listeners of Sean Insannity or Rushbo are gonna take anything we post on this fine internets seriously...but there are millions of fence stragglers who never hear the other side of political arguments from our M$M, many of whom studies have shown now get their news primarily from the internets....and they are usually the best informed....

[Jamtas#2]

So just ignoring them is the answer? what happened to confronting evil head-on? Besides, it's not like the millions of regular listeners of Sean Insannity or Rushbo are gonna take anything we post on this fine internets seriously...but there are millions of fence stragglers who never hear the other side of political arguments from our M$M, many of whom studies have shown now get their news primarily from the internets....and they are usually the best informed....

No, but if you only attack those on one side of the political spectrum and ignore the nutballs on your side, you end up in a neverending argument with people on the opposite side of you defending the nuts on your side and attacking the others; all the while never moving towards getting rid of those nuts.

[Holt's Cat]

So just ignoring them is the answer? what happened to confronting evil head-on? Besides, it's not like the millions of regular listeners of Sean Insannity or Rushbo are gonna take anything we post on this fine internets seriously...but there are millions of fence stragglers who never hear the other side of political arguments from our M$M, many of whom studies have shown now get their news primarily from the internets....and they are usually the best informed....

Hook, line, and sinker.

[clambake]

yep, all the back and forth is meaningless. we should look at circumstances without the verbal spin.

bush has divided the world more than bin ladin.

[DarkReign]

Couldnt agree more with Holt and Jamtas. Its all a distraction to create a divide.

[Wild Cobra]

(i.e. All republicans think like ann coulter and all dems think like moveon etc...)
Main problem is with your remark is that MoveOn believes they own the democrat party and has proven they can weed out those who dissent like Joe Liberman. Nobody I know of suggests that dems think like MoveOn, just that they have tremendous power. Ann Coulter and other conservative pundits don'tt wield or abuse the power she has like MoveOn will.

[Nbadan]

The wing-nut pundits have given this story legs and Moveon.org more credibility than it could have ever afford to pay for on its own...

What you got to remember is that when wing-nut talk-radio first started, it wasn't successful either, in fact, many shows payed for play, and many still do on some affiliates like Bill Lie'Likely....but the wing-nuts own George Soro, Rupert Murdoch and Scaffie poured lots of $$$ into promoting the shows...they became popular over time...Rush, for instance, averages about 2 million listeners...that's political power ...and you can't let that power go unchecked by just ignoring it.....that's to big of an advantage...

...unfortunately for the left, it doesn't have as many deep pockets as it takes to play progressive radio on many markets to make it successful...so the web became the obvious choice to fight back...

[Ignignokt]

This is the kind of thread where everybody bitches about the lack of luster in the media and circle jerk each other about how wise and above the fray they think they are. Then compounded by Dark Reign or Holt cat coming to take the higher ground by declaring both sides are stupid, that's why they lurk and hardly voice a strong oppinion.

[Nbadan]

...while I agree with your comments about the later, I think there is an even deeper relationship between the world of realpolitik and our very human nature that has already doomed us...


The USA's military spending is now close to $2 billion a day. This fall, the country will begin its seventh year of continuous war, with no end in sight. On the horizon is the very real threat of a massive air assault on Iran. And few in Congress seem willing or able to articulate a rejection of the warfare state.

While the Bush-Cheney administration is the most dangerous of our lifetimes - and ousting Republicans from the White House is imperative - such truths are apt to smooth the way for progressive evasions. We hear that "the people must take back the government," but how can "the people" take back what they never really had? And when rhetoric calls for "returning to a foreign policy based on human rights and democracy," we're encouraged to be nostalgic for good old days that never existed.
The warfare state didn't suddenly arrive in 2001, and it won't disappear when the current lunatic in the Oval Office moves on.

Born 50 years before George W. Bush became president, I have always lived in a warfare state. Each man in the Oval Office has presided over an arsenal of weapons designed to destroy human life en masse. In recent decades, our self-proclaimed protectors have been able - and willing - to destroy all of humanity.

We've accommodated ourselves to this insanity. And I do mean "we" - including those of us who fret aloud that the impact of our peace-loving wisdom is circumscribed because our voices don't carry much farther than the choir. We may carry around an inflated sense of our own resistance to a system that is poised to incinerate and irradiate the planet.

Maybe it's too unpleasant to acknowledge that we've been living in a warfare state for so long. And maybe it's even more unpleasant to acknowledge that the warfare state is not just "out there." It's also internalized; at least to the extent that we pass up countless opportunities to resist it.

Like millions of other young Americans, I grew into awakening as the Vietnam War escalated. Slogans like "make love, not war" - and, a bit later, "the personal is political" - really spoke to us. But over the decades we generally learned, or relearned, to compartmentalize: as if personal and national histories weren't interwoven in our pasts, presents and futures.

One day in 1969, a biologist named George Wald, who had won a Nobel Prize, visited the Massachusetts Institute of Technology - the biggest military contractor in academia - and gave a speech. "Our government has become preoccupied with death," he said, "with the business of killing and being killed."

That preoccupation has fluctuated, but in essence it has persisted. While speaking of a far-off war and a nuclear arsenal certain to remain in place after the war's end, Wald pointed out: "We are under repeated pressure to accept things that are presented to us as settled - decisions that have been made."

Today, in similar ways, our government is preoccupied and we are pressurized. The grisly commerce of killing - whether through carnage in Iraq and Afghanistan or through the deadly shredding of social safety-nets at home - thrives on aggressive war and on the perverse realpolitik of "national security" that brandishes the Pentagon's weaponry against the world. At least tacitly, we accept so much that threatens to destroy anything and everything.

As it happened, for reasons both "personal" and "political" - more accurately, for reasons indistinguishable between the two - my own life fell apart and began to reassemble itself during the same season of 1969 when George Wald gave his speech, which he called "A Generation in Search of a Future."

Political and personal histories are usually kept separate - in how we're taught, how we speak and even how we think. But I've become very skeptical of the categories. They may not be much more than illusions we've been conned into going through the motions of believing.

We actually live in concentric spheres, and "politics" suffuses households as well as what Martin Luther King Jr. called "The World House." Under that heading, he wrote in 1967: "When scientific power outruns moral power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men. When we foolishly minimize the internal of our lives and maximize the external, we sign the warrant for our own day of doom. Our hope for creative living in this world house that we have inherited lies in our ability to re-establish the moral ends of our lives in personal character and social justice. Without this spiritual and moral reawakening we shall destroy ourselves in the misuse of our own instruments."

While trying to understand the essence of what so many Americans have witnessed over the last half century, I worked on a book (titled "Made Love, Got War") that sifts through the last 50 years of the warfare state and, in the process, through my own life. I haven't learned as much as I would have liked, but some patterns emerged - persistent and pervasive since the middle of the 20th century.
The warfare state doesn't come and go. It can't be defeated on Election Day. Like it or not, it's at the core of the United States - and it has infiltrated our very being.
What we've tolerated has become part of us. What we accept, however reluctantly, seeps inward. In the long run, passivity can easily ratify even what we may condemn. And meanwhile, in the words of Thomas Merton, "It is the sane ones, the well-adapted ones, who can without qualms and without nausea aim the missiles and press the buttons that will initiate the great festival of destruction that they, the sane ones, have prepared."

The triumph of the warfare state degrades and suppresses us all. Even before the weapons perform as guaranteed.

Third World Traveler (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Norman_Solomon/Warfare_State.html)

[Nbadan]

Anyway, back to MoveOn.org....the Cornyn resolution to censure MoveON, supported by 25 Demos ...has become the shining example of why the Iraqi open-ended occupation will continue thanks to weak-kneed Demos, until the Iraqis force us to leave...


But it's far more serious than that. The fact that 25 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution is an indication of how deeply disconnected they are from the values that most Americans share. After all, polls taken after General Petraeus' testimony revealed that his show had barely changed public opinion on Iraq. Before he testified, a majority expected him to paint a rosier picture than reality -- to lie before Congress about the effectiveness of the surge, just as the MoveOn ad accused him of doing.

...

With such a boneheaded move, Senate Democrats showed again that there is no limit to their Pavlovian responses to military issues. They stand petrified that they'll be called dirty, America-hating hippies who "oppose the troops" by Republicans, that they'll invite a conservative back-lash if they show spine on ending the open-ended occupation of Iraq or that they'll appear "soft on terror" or anti-military. It is the same unique paranoia about military issues that will likely keep a U.S. occupation force in Iraq until the Iraqis force our hand. The legislative process will remain hopeless as long as there is a group of Democrats who embrace every narrative that the hawks in Congress put out there.

...

That they didn't doesn't just reflect on their political tone-deafness; something more frightening is going on. By capitulating to the GOP's spinmeisters, they became complicit in putting the military on a pedestal, tacitly endorsing the idea that you can go after politicians who lie, but not generals, even generals who are rumored to have political aspirations.

I won't mince words: glorifying the military -- placing it above reproach, suggesting that it is inappropriate to question its officers on the same terms as we question civilian leaders -- is a giant step towards fascism. In condemning the anti-MoveOn resolution, Barbara Boxer said: ""This is the United States of America. We don't condemn single ads or organizations. We condemn every attack on the glory of our military." I don't hold members of the military responsible for the decision to invade Iraq, but when we forget that they're serving in an illegal, immoral and unpopular war, and talk about how we have to condemn any attack on the military's "glory," we're getting into serious Kim Jong Il territory.

Alertnet (http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/63160)

[Nbadan]

Keith Olbermann's Count Down (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20896378/) preaches to the choir...worth watching....

[Jamtas#2]

Main problem is with your remark is that MoveOn believes they own the democrat party and has proven they can weed out those who dissent like Joe Liberman. Nobody I know of suggests that dems think like MoveOn, just that they have tremendous power. Ann Coulter and other conservative pundits don'tt wield or abuse the power she has like MoveOn will.

Ok, so when Rush and O'Reilly called for a boycott of the dixie chicks because Natalie Maines made a disrespectful comment about the president (nevermind the fact that both of them made many disrespectful comments about Clinton when he was in office) they didn't have any influence over much of the conservative base?

I remember McCain being vilified by the Republican base when it was thought that he would run as an independent several years ago.

Point being, both sides do it. And then all their supporters spend their time and energy trying to convince everyone else that only the other side does it (or that their side does it, but the other side is much worse)

[Wild Cobra]

Ok, so when Rush and O'Reilly called for a boycott of the dixie chicks because Natalie Maines made a disrespectful comment about the president (nevermind the fact that both of them made many disrespectful comments about Clinton when he was in office) they didn't have any influence over much of the conservative base?

I don't remember if a boycott was asked for, but it wasn't necessary. County music has its roots in conservatism. All that was needed was for the listeners of country music to hear the disgraceful remarks. The commentators in this case had little power beyond bringing the facts to light. It was the consumer who made the decision. In the case of Liebermann, MoveOn supported a democrat for the primaries that was against the war. Liebermann was for it. They spend big money to get him the democrat nomination. Liebermann still proved himself the better man by winning as an independent.



I remember McCain being vilified by the Republican base when it was thought that he would run as an independent several years ago.

LOL... I don't care for McCain much myself. I have no use for RINO's, but still prefer them over most democrats.



Point being, both sides do it. And then all their supporters spend their time and energy trying to convince everyone else that only the other side does it (or that their side does it, but the other side is much worse)

Sure, but MoveOn has serious financial power. They can at will make or break democrat candidates. They are the most powerful political force I have ever seen in the USA.

[ChumpDumper]

Sure, but MoveOn has serious financial power. They can at will make or break democrat candidates. They are the most powerful political force I have ever seen in the USA.:lmao :lmao :lmao

[xrayzebra]

Hey Hillary is going on FOX for an interview with Chis Wallace,
wonder if she cleared it with Moveon.org

[ChumpDumper]

She had to, and so do the Republicans -- they are the most powerful political force ever in the USA.

[clambake]

Hey Hillary is going on FOX for an interview with Chis Wallace,
wonder if she cleared it with Moveon.org
well ray, she was smokin in this interview. Not what you expected?

[George Gervin's Afro]

She had to, and so do the Republicans -- they are the most powerful political force ever in the USA.


They are so powerful I had to call them and ask permission if I could watch the interview.. :lol