Media Bias

Post Reply
User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:31 am

You know how the US treated prisoners at Abu Ghraib and other sites where the CIA held people known or suspected of being involved in the insurgency in Iraq: outright abuse and torture. Many Americans found that highly repugnant, but there are always some that are happy to have their government use its power to stomp and mangle -- common humanity and international accords be damned.

One of Fox News's prominent Trump cultists believes his Dear Leader should enact the Bush-era torture protocols domestically against those he views as undesirables. And why not? What's the good of turning the US into the richest banana republic in the world if you can't torture citizens who've brought themselves to the attention of the federal Special Squads and regular law enforcement? Don't you dare call it fascism!!

The perpetually concerned chunk of vomitus Tucker Carlson gets mention in the piece as well, teeing up a question which provided the acting head of the Department of Homeland Security with an opportunity to muse about locking up demonstrators for unspecified 'conspiracy' charges.

'Fox News Host Brian Kilmeade: We Need to "Interrogate" Antifa Like We Did to Al Qaeda'
Fox News host Brian Kilmeade ramped up the network’s rhetoric against protesters against police brutality on Tuesday, calling for law enforcement to lock up left-wing activists and “interrogate them almost like you would al Qaeda.”

With protests flaring up over the Labor Day weekend—some featuring violent clashes between far-right, pro-Trump groups and antifa, the loosely affiliated, leftist anti-fascist movement—Kilmeade appeared Tuesday morning on the Fox Business Network to demand more action against antifa protesters.

“We’ve seen over 100 days of protests in Portland,” Fox Business host Ashley Webster wondered aloud. “It has been another weekend of violent protests in Seattle. The Michigan GOP headquarters building was vandalized with anti-police statements. I want to know, it becomes increasingly frustrating, when does this end?”

Kilmeade, meanwhile, immediately replied that the demonstrations could come to an end when police officers “are empowered to stop it” and mayors use federal resources to combat it. At the same time, he called for protesters to be treated as enemy combatants of the state while implying that they should be tortured.

“When we start convincing these antifa—these law enforcement officials to not let the antifa individuals go,” the Fox & Friends co-host exclaimed. “Sit there, lock them up, and interrogate them, almost like you would al Qaeda because they are undermining our country the same way these Islamist extremists were doing it.”

“We were dead serious about that,” he continued. “We’re not dead serious about this.”

Kilmeade calling for enhanced interrogation techniques on American protesters comes on the heels of Fox News star Tucker Carlson’s months-long campaign to push the Trump administration to designate social justice movement Black Lives Matter and antifa as domestic terror organizations.
The US is blessed to have such a beacon of patriotism and righteousness as Fox News to remind the world of all that is good and just about America.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Sep 09, 2020 8:56 pm

I somehow doubt they'd be quite so eager for the gov to 'interrogate' right-wing and white-supremecist seditionists - you know, the one's who've killed more than 300 US citizens since 9/11.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Mon Sep 14, 2020 4:05 am

55mins.

Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:04 pm

Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:40 pm

An outstanding legal victory! Fox News won in the defamation case brought by Karen McDougal (one of Trump's mistresses). Tucker Carlson had told malicious lies about her on his show, which is defamation, as it's generally understood. However, the Fox News white-shoe legal team successfully argued that no reasonable person expects Tucker Carlson to tell the truth on any given day, even when he says something like 'the following are undisputed facts.' (Though the story below fails to note it, that is how Carlson introduced his lies.)

Since Carlson is acknowledged by all as a purveyor of falsehoods (not the words of the Fox News legal team, but the essence of their argument), McDougal was not substantially harmed by the lies he told about her. Ruling from a Trump judge. Yay, Tucker Carlson! Yay Fox News. :lol:

'Judge Throws Out Ex-Playboy Playmate’s Lawsuit Against Fox News: Tucker Carlson Didn’t Defame Karen McDougal'
A federal judge dismissed former Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal’s lawsuit against Fox News. The lawsuit alleged that on-air comments from host Tucker Carlson, such as “Now that sounds like a classic case of extortion,” were defamatory. The judge said Carlson’s statement amounted to rhetorical hyperbole and “opinion commentary intended to frame a political debate.”

U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, a Trump appointee, said in an order summarized on the Southern District of New York docket that McDougal’s amended complaint offered “only conclusory allegations about Mr. Carlson’s alleged biases and otherwise pursues theories that are pre-empted by long-standing precedent.”

...

A lawyer for McDougal argued in court documents that Carlson defamed his client when he accused her of orchestrating a shakedown by “approach[ing] Donald Trump and threaten[ing] to ruin his career and humiliate his family if he doesn’t give them money.” The attorney argued that Trump “never once claimed that he was extorted.”

Judge Vyskocil ruled that McDougal did not offer a “plausible” argument that Carlson’s words were “statements of fact”

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:46 pm

If Carlson said "the following are undisputed facts" and the case still wasn't upheld then it seems pretty open and shut - everyone can call Tucker a liar with impunity.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:49 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:46 pm
If Carlson said "the following are undisputed facts" and the case still wasn't upheld then it seems pretty open and shut - everyone can call Tucker a liar with impunity.
I don't have a clip queued up but in another article about this ruling, there is a direct quote from Carlson's show:
[I]n the portion of the monologue that McDougal alleged is defamatory, Carlson explicitly said: “Remember the facts of the story. These are undisputed.” Again, the remarks were clearly couched to make it clear they were not opinion, but facts.
Last edited by L'Emmerdeur on Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:59 pm

He's a lair. A big, fat, pants-on-fire liar for cash. No doubt he'll claim the judgement is an endorsement of the 'facts'.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:14 pm

Oh yeah. In Trumpistan, Tucker Carlson and Fox News have been vindicated.

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 13812
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: philobarbaros
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Sean Hayden » Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:26 pm

I can't stand how it's being spun as a win because Fox, yet again, had to admit they lie for a living.

The real story is the stupid ruling, dear god it's bad.
The primary product of pine is pineapple.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:09 am

You get what you pay for I guess.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 5673
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Antifa Provocateur
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Seabass » Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:55 pm

Joe wrote:
Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:57 am
I'd counter with the complete description of the Russian active measures campaign in the Mueller Report and report of the Senate Intelligence Committee that demonstrate the the reach and effect of the operation, backed by intelligence gathering and sworn testimony. You try to minimize it as "a Russian Facebook group," but that's not what the investigations have found. I've linked the reports in case you want to see the amount of evidence available, but here's a pretty good synopsis from Politifact to start with.
Fact check: Were Facebook ads the extent of Russian election interference?

The short answer: No.

The long answer: The redacted version of Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed a years-long plot by the Russian government to interfere in the U.S. that investigators called "sweeping and systemic."

As to the amount of money expended on Facebook ads, the company said Russian operatives did spend less than $200,000 on advertising on the platform — but that doesn't account for the organic content the operatives created and shared.

Not only were influence specialists within Russia's Internet Research Agency purchasing normal advertisements, they were authoring their own posts, memes and other content as they posed as American users.

They also reached out to politically active Americans, posing as like-minded supporters, and helped organize rallies and other events in the real world.

Facebook says the Internet Research Agency may have reached as many as 126 million people. Separately, Twitter announced that about 1.4 million people may have been in contact with IRA-controlled accounts.

The social media aspect of the interference was just one dimension. Cyberattackers also went after political victims in the United States — whose emails and other data were released publicly to embarrass them — and state elections officials and other targets. And there may have been other avenues of interference as well.

The origins of the scheme

Russian operatives lied to get into the U.S. as early as 2014 on "intelligence-gathering missions." They traveled across the country to get the lay of the land before ramping up efforts to try to interfere with American politics.

By September 2016, two months before the U.S. presidential election, the Internet Research Agency was working with an overall monthly budget that reached over $1.25 million. It employed hundreds of employees, a graphics department, a data analysis department, a search-engine optimization department, an IT department and a finance department, according to an indictment filed last year by Mueller's team.

And it hasn't stopped.

The U.S. military reportedly blocked the Internet access of the IRA during last year's midterm elections to keep it from interfering with the midterm election. U.S. Cyber Command also targeted Russian cyber operatives, according to a report by The New York Times, with direct messages letting them know that American intelligence was tracking them.

And in October, a Russian woman was accused, according to a criminal complaint filed in federal court, of conspiring to sow discord and division in the U.S political system.

That conspiracy, the complaint said, "continues to this day."
I'm not through with the Senate report, but it shows that The Trump campaign was in contact with at least three Russian spies that we know about, and was leaking internal polling data to one of them.

So how does the Fox gaslighting stack up? What's their viewership? In 2016, it looks like 4 to 5 million for the big shows like Hannity and Carlson, and they averaged a rocking 2.4 average primetime viewers. That's pretty good, but Facebook estimated the Russian ads may have reached 126 million Americans, and who knows how many Americans were reached by the Wikileaks email dumps.

So tell me again how Fox News, with an annual revenue of about $11.5 billion is a bigger threat than a major power with an annual revenue of roughly $250 billion and the 5th largest economy in Europe.

Maybe instead of hand waving like "we'd grow old and die before getting through all the evidence," you should present more actual evidence.

As for the first amendment constraining this nebulous "political will" you reference, you are beating a strawman. I never said anything about concern for our rights. Recall the context
....and, of course, through the courts your government has made it clear that where Fox is concerned, no matter the scale of the threat, they are not a legitimate target. You'll find more political will and funds to infiltrate my socialist block party, than Fox fucking "news".
All I said was "Damn that first amendment!" You're putting words in my mouth.

If your claim about the courts is true, you should be able link to the court opinion or opinions so I can judge for myself if the First Amendment was a factor in the case. Can you do that?
Have you seen this study?

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=54374

You can't really gauge the impact that Fox News has on US culture by looking at Nielsen ratings...
"No, no, no, not God bless America. God damn America!" —Reverend Jeremiah Wright

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 29676
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:00 pm

It's not an either-or thing.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Joe
Posts: 2840
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:10 am
Location: The Hovel under the Mountain
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Joe » Sun Oct 25, 2020 12:13 am

Seabass wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:55 pm
Joe wrote:
Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:57 am
I'd counter with the complete description of the Russian active measures campaign in the Mueller Report and report of the Senate Intelligence Committee that demonstrate the the reach and effect of the operation, backed by intelligence gathering and sworn testimony. You try to minimize it as "a Russian Facebook group," but that's not what the investigations have found. I've linked the reports in case you want to see the amount of evidence available, but here's a pretty good synopsis from Politifact to start with.
Fact check: Were Facebook ads the extent of Russian election interference?

The short answer: No.

The long answer: The redacted version of Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed a years-long plot by the Russian government to interfere in the U.S. that investigators called "sweeping and systemic."

As to the amount of money expended on Facebook ads, the company said Russian operatives did spend less than $200,000 on advertising on the platform — but that doesn't account for the organic content the operatives created and shared.

Not only were influence specialists within Russia's Internet Research Agency purchasing normal advertisements, they were authoring their own posts, memes and other content as they posed as American users.

They also reached out to politically active Americans, posing as like-minded supporters, and helped organize rallies and other events in the real world.

Facebook says the Internet Research Agency may have reached as many as 126 million people. Separately, Twitter announced that about 1.4 million people may have been in contact with IRA-controlled accounts.

The social media aspect of the interference was just one dimension. Cyberattackers also went after political victims in the United States — whose emails and other data were released publicly to embarrass them — and state elections officials and other targets. And there may have been other avenues of interference as well.

The origins of the scheme

Russian operatives lied to get into the U.S. as early as 2014 on "intelligence-gathering missions." They traveled across the country to get the lay of the land before ramping up efforts to try to interfere with American politics.

By September 2016, two months before the U.S. presidential election, the Internet Research Agency was working with an overall monthly budget that reached over $1.25 million. It employed hundreds of employees, a graphics department, a data analysis department, a search-engine optimization department, an IT department and a finance department, according to an indictment filed last year by Mueller's team.

And it hasn't stopped.

The U.S. military reportedly blocked the Internet access of the IRA during last year's midterm elections to keep it from interfering with the midterm election. U.S. Cyber Command also targeted Russian cyber operatives, according to a report by The New York Times, with direct messages letting them know that American intelligence was tracking them.

And in October, a Russian woman was accused, according to a criminal complaint filed in federal court, of conspiring to sow discord and division in the U.S political system.

That conspiracy, the complaint said, "continues to this day."
I'm not through with the Senate report, but it shows that The Trump campaign was in contact with at least three Russian spies that we know about, and was leaking internal polling data to one of them.

So how does the Fox gaslighting stack up? What's their viewership? In 2016, it looks like 4 to 5 million for the big shows like Hannity and Carlson, and they averaged a rocking 2.4 average primetime viewers. That's pretty good, but Facebook estimated the Russian ads may have reached 126 million Americans, and who knows how many Americans were reached by the Wikileaks email dumps.

So tell me again how Fox News, with an annual revenue of about $11.5 billion is a bigger threat than a major power with an annual revenue of roughly $250 billion and the 5th largest economy in Europe.

Maybe instead of hand waving like "we'd grow old and die before getting through all the evidence," you should present more actual evidence.

As for the first amendment constraining this nebulous "political will" you reference, you are beating a strawman. I never said anything about concern for our rights. Recall the context
....and, of course, through the courts your government has made it clear that where Fox is concerned, no matter the scale of the threat, they are not a legitimate target. You'll find more political will and funds to infiltrate my socialist block party, than Fox fucking "news".
All I said was "Damn that first amendment!" You're putting words in my mouth.

If your claim about the courts is true, you should be able link to the court opinion or opinions so I can judge for myself if the First Amendment was a factor in the case. Can you do that?
Have you seen this study?

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=54374

You can't really gauge the impact that Fox News has on US culture by looking at Nielsen ratings...
Maybe, but I can compare the relative reach of Fox in comparison to Russian active measures using them. After all, I wasn't disputing Fox's impact. I was asserting that the scope and reach of Russia's efforts shouldn't be minimized.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"as far as strong, i am hard as a rock and tough as a nail. no one will bring me down. no one. i am the debonator. the tnt. and jesus has my back door pal!" - D. C. Bockemehl
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 34794
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Media Bias

Post by Tero » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:02 am

Cable and satellite TV reaches rural Americans. City folks have lost interest.
From 2016 to 2017, the portion of Americans who often rely on local TV for their news fell 9 percentage points, from 46% to 37%. By comparison, reliance on network TV news declined from 30% to 26%. Cable TV news use remained more stable, with 28% often getting news there last year, compared with 31% in 2016.

Education and income also play a role in local and network TV news consumption habits. For instance, among adults who have completed college, 26% often get news from local TV and 21% from network TV – much less than those with no more than a high school degree (47% and 31%, respectively). News use on cable varies little by education or income, however.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... -they-are/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests