baaaaaaa baaaaaa baaaaaaaa
Interesting that news of MSNBC altering a 911 call creates anger and is always followed by words like sheeple, lamestream media, etc. But when everyone's beloved Fox News does the exact same thing there is not so much as a peep from this crowd about the lamestream media and sheeple.
http://www.okshooters.com/showthread.php?139926-More-Media-Manipulation-Using-Doctored-Audio-Tape
99% of people are sheep being led by the media. The shepherd's may go by different names (Fox News or MSNBC) but they still use the same methods. And the sheeple on both sides of the fence are constantly accusing the other side of blindly following what their shepherds tell them and not being able to see the real truth. The reality is that both sides are right about the other side being "sheeple".
http://www.okshooters.com/showthread.php?139926-More-Media-Manipulation-Using-Doctored-Audio-Tape
99% of people are sheep being led by the media. The shepherd's may go by different names (Fox News or MSNBC) but they still use the same methods. And the sheeple on both sides of the fence are constantly accusing the other side of blindly following what their shepherds tell them and not being able to see the real truth. The reality is that both sides are right about the other side being "sheeple".
Its just as bad, and FoxNews is part of the lamesteam media. I dont trust any of them; there is no bigger propagandist than Sean Hannity.
And you might check that original post again; thats not MSNBC the left wing equivalent to Fox News, thats NBC as in supposedly the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth news.
I'm confused. Is this sorta like we can't complain about Obama's performance without first assailing Bush's performance? Is that it?
Seriously, you're comparing the airing of a paid advertisement to altering 911 recordings, then airing it as unbiased and objective news reporting in order to make a person look more like the perpetrator of a hate crime? Seriously?
ALL "news" media outlets have dismal and misleading "reporting". All of them dress up editorialism as "news". The referenced report from Bloomberg "News" is no different. Did you forget who owns a significant stake in Bloomberg News? Do you really think he's any more objective than Rupert Murdoch? Unfortunately, you just tried the same type of misleading tactics. You relied on an unreliable source as the "truth". Guess where your credibility is now?
I wrote them a letter about this. It'll be ignored like everything else. That's okay cuz now I'm ignoring them too. The talking heads are no different to me than the pols. You can tell if they're lying by checking to see if their mouth is open or not.
That's the point that I was trying to make. Fox is firmly entrenched in the "lamestream" media but everybody seems just fine with listening to what they have to say while denouncing the "lamestream" media all the while. As far the mistake about the NBC thing that's a typo on my part. Your not going to get an argument from me stating that any of the "news" channels are unbiased.
I'm confused. Is this sorta like we can't complain about Obama's performance without first assailing Bush's performance? Is that it?
Seriously, you're comparing the airing of a paid advertisement to altering 911 recordings, then airing it as unbiased and objective news reporting in order to make a person look more like the perpetrator of a hate crime? Seriously?
ALL "news" media outlets have dismal and misleading "reporting". All of them dress up editorialism as "news". The referenced report from Bloomberg "News" is no different. Did you forget who owns a significant stake in Bloomberg News? Do you really think he's any more objective than Rupert Murdoch? Unfortunately, you just tried the same type of misleading tactics. You relied on an unreliable source as the "truth". Guess where your credibility is now?
I completely agree that the Zimmerman tape has much higher stakes than the other. But Fox wasn't airing the audio as an advertisment. They were airing a doctored audio tape as fact and then presenting opinions and arguments based upon that tape. It's the exact same thing that NBC did with the 911 tape. I'm not arguing that the two are equally bad because one invloves a case where someone lost their life, but it is the exact same fallacy. I just found it interesting that in the same day there were 2 threads posted about so called "news" channels presenting doctored audio tapes as factual evidence and the post about NBC doing it elicited many responses about the "lamestream media" and "sheeple" no one had anything to say when Fox did the same thing.
I don't really understand the misleading tactics comment though. And I'm not saying that it has anything to do with Murdoch. I thought everyone knew that the Murdoch family was unhappy with the lack of journalistic integrity of Roger Ailes operation. And I'm not sure why you are questioning my credibility. Are you denying that Fox ran an edited audio tape? Cause I can give you a laundry list of instances when Fox has used doctored, false, or purposely misleading audio, video and images. They are probably the worst offenders.
My observation is that I find it interesting that as a collective group we like to decry the mainstream media as a biased and untrustworthy organization while at the same time lapping up everything Fox News spoon feeds us like it is gospel. All the time ignoring the fact that Fox News is the mainstream media and uses the exact same tatics as the other media outlets that we all hate so dearly. I'm not arguing that NBC is better than Fox News. I'm saying that Fox News is just as bad as the rest of them. Please note that I am not commenting on any single person just our overal collective attitude as a whole.
I didn't see the footage in question because I don't watch Hannity and Greta's mouth creeps me out. What I saw in the other thread was a 30 second paid advertisement. If you're saying Hanity and Greta presented a 30 second paid partisan ad as "news", then I don't know what to tell you. Anyone who watched and considered that "news" is truly too stupid to vote. Too stupid to continue stealing our oxygen as a matter of fact.
I agree that Fox is just as bad. It doesn't matter one bit that they say what conservatives would prefer to hear. I'd prefer to hear unfiltered news that allowed me to use my intelligence to make up my mind. I don't need it "shaped" for my consumption. I couldn't agree that they are worse though. Given NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC, it seems they're outnumbered 5-1. Don't forget, the Big 3 MADE Fox News. Without their slanted and biased "reporting", Fox news woud've never developed an audience. People were sick and tired of decades of spoon fed liberalism. They were desperate for a different product and Fox merely filled the void.
You just can't come on OSA and expect anyone to listen when your message is "But they do it too!"
I didn't see the footage in question because I don't watch Hannity and Greta's mouth creeps me out. What I saw in the other thread was a 30 second paid advertisement. If you're saying Hanity and Greta presented a 30 second paid partisan ad as "news", then I don't know what to tell you. Anyone who watched and considered that "news" is truly too stupid to vote. Too stupid to continue stealing our oxygen as a matter of fact.
I agree that Fox is just as bad. It doesn't matter one bit that they say what conservatives would prefer to hear. I'd prefer to hear unfiltered news that allowed me to use my intelligence to make up my mind. I don't need it "shaped" for my consumption. I couldn't agree that they are worse though. Given NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC, it seems they're outnumbered 5-1. Don't forget, the Big 3 MADE Fox News. Without their slanted and biased "reporting", Fox news woud've never developed an audience. People were sick and tired of decades of spoon fed liberalism. They were desperate for a different product and Fox merely filled the void.
You just can't come on OSA and expect anyone to listen when your message is "But they do it too!"
Mega Dittos GTG. The internet is a wonderful source of news. Just have to be able to sift through the BS and find credible sources. The only news I watch is the local news mainly for the weather.
Well I went over to that other thread and got the real scoop. http://www.okshooters.com/showthread.php?139926-More-Media-Manipulation-Using-Doctored-Audio-Tape
It's not what it was made out to be, so here's my reply:
It's not what it was made out to be, so here's my reply:
OK, to me "doctored" means it was altered from the original content. I just watched the Hannity and Greta (ugh) clips. Both of them discuss and prominently displayed a paid political advertisement. They aren't trying to pass the selectively edited audio in the ad as factual, they're merely commenting on the production of the ad as news. In other words, this isn't Fox altering or editing tape of the SCOTUS hearing and passing it off as news.
While we're at it, both Media Matters and Bloomberg are partisan owned and operated. Media Matters isn't even bashful about it:
So, unless you've got impartial evidence that Fox actually altered the audio in the RNC advertisement, I'd say this dog won't hunt.
Too bad you didn't bother cross checking everything yourself before you posted it. Perhaps you should investigate the partisan slant in ALL major media outlets and see what you come up with? This one doesn't even compare.
Media: Ethics? We don't need no stinkin ethics. We want Obama for four more years.
Pray for America!!!
Pray for America!!!
Similar threads
