It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fox News Tells it like it Should!

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by bitbeam
humans are so polarized now that it's hard to understand what could bring us back together as one peaceful and God loving society, "hard to understand" of course does not mean "impossible to understand" as always answers have been given to us if one is willing to seek


I hear you and agree...but part of the problem is that some folk do not study the issues let alone "seek" in the way of which you are speaking which is from a deeply heartfelt and spiritual place - especially where issues of race are concerned....those who post inflammatory sound bites from the media on this issue have an agenda and it is NOT about understanding, reconciliation, resolution - there is a mean spirit at work in this if you take my meaning...but thank you for your post - I deeply appreciate your perspective.




posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


What Fox News did calling Obama's wife "Baby Mama" is exactly why they are not taken seriously as a news organization. It is inexcuseable and totally deliberate bias, which in journalism school we were taught is a clear sign of a news organization lacking integrity, and probably isn't really a "news" organization at all. It appeals to people like the OP, who clearly is filled with hate. It is nothing but name calling. That isn't what journalists are supposed to do. What Fox News did was incredibly unprofessional.

This is not inconsistent with Fox. They identified Obama as a Muslim. When it was pointed out to them he was actually Christian, they never retracted the story. That would be inexcuseable in any real news organization. They said he was educated at a radical madrasa. Again, not true. No retraction. In fact, Fox has a long history of simply shrugging its shoulders when it has been pointed out something they said was factually incorrect. They don't care. They're not about accuracy.

Fox news, in fact, is the only major "news" organization in the country that is not headed up by a journalist. It is headed by Roger Aisles. Aisles background? He ran media campaigns for republican political candidates. That's an incredible conflict of interest. If any news organization was run by someone who had been a media campaign manager for democratic candidates, it's almost amusing to think what outrage and accusations would come from the right.

But you know what? It doesn't surprise me. This is normal for Fox, which is why they're not taken seriously in professional journalism.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


What Fox News did calling Obama's wife "Baby Mama" is exactly why they are not taken seriously as a news organization. It is inexcuseable and totally deliberate bias, which in journalism school we were taught is a clear sign of a news organization lacking integrity, and probably isn't really a "news" organization at all. It appeals to people like the OP, who clearly is filled with hate. It is nothing but name calling. That isn't what journalists are supposed to do. What Fox News did was incredibly unprofessional.

This is not inconsistent with Fox. They identified Obama as a Muslim. When it was pointed out to them he was actually Christian, they never retracted the story. That would be inexcuseable in any real news organization. They said he was educated at a radical madrasa. Again, not true. No retraction. In fact, Fox has a long history of simply shrugging its shoulders when it has been pointed out something they said was factually incorrect. They don't care. They're not about accuracy.

Fox news, in fact, is the only major "news" organization in the country that is not headed up by a journalist. It is headed by Roger Aisles. Aisles background? He ran media campaigns for republican political candidates. That's an incredible conflict of interest. If any news organization was run by someone who had been a media campaign manager for democratic candidates, it's almost amusing to think what outrage and accusations would come from the right.

But you know what? It doesn't surprise me. This is normal for Fox, which is why they're not taken seriously in professional journalism.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 



Originally posted by ClintK
What Fox News did calling Obama's wife "Baby Mama" is exactly why they are not taken seriously as a news organization. It is inexcuseable and totally deliberate bias, which in journalism school we were taught is a clear sign of a news organization lacking integrity, and probably isn't really a "news" organization at all. It appeals to people like the OP, who clearly is filled with hate. It is nothing but name calling. That isn't what journalists are supposed to do. What Fox News did was incredibly unprofessional.


I'll say to you the same thing I said to the other member who implied this: It's OK for Michelle Obama to use this language, but not OK for anyone else to use it? After all, she set the tone and tenor of that type of ghetto talk back in 2004:

www.rushlimbaugh.com...



Originally posted by ClintK
This is not inconsistent with Fox. They identified Obama as a Muslim.


No they didn't. They reacted to internet accusations that Obama was a muslim. Then they brought guests on from both sides of the aisle to debate the question. Then they left it up to the viewer to make the decision. Sorry if they wanted you to think for yourself instead of spoonfeeding you.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 


"But you know what? It doesn't surprise me. This is normal for Fox, which is why they're not taken seriously in professional journalism."

And to me this is a good thing. professional journalism today is a joke... Btw.. Fox news beats every cable news organization out there today. To say that no one takes them seriously is a lie... CNN is getting killed by Fox and I doubt they don't take that seriously... MSNBC, CBS, ABC, ect... They are all taking a huge hit... What do you people want? Katie Couric and Dan the "News Man" Rather?

The free market is taking care of the news folks. Its not the journalists that set the standard. It’s the consumer and consumers trust Fox more than anyone else and I laugh when people say they are a joke.

As far as Obama and his prissy wife goes is there nothing that they say or do that we are able to criticize? People are so afraid to open this guy up to questions and to me that sounds pretty fascist... Seems no better than Bush and with this communist Obama it will be worse...

Obama's baby mama is an American hating loser and the sooner you realize this the easier it will be to get over the defeat...


But by all means do whatever blows your hair back...



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by ClintK
 



I'll say to you the same thing I said to the other member who implied this: It's OK for Michelle Obama to use this language, but not OK for anyone else to use it? After all, she set the tone and tenor of that type of ghetto talk back in 2004:

www.rushlimbaugh.com...



You didn't even read the very article you cited here, did you? Rush Limbaugh said, of the "whitey" tape rumor, "nobody on our side said they had ever seen it." In other words, YOU are saying Michelle Obama used these words --when even your own pundits are saying, uh, we never said anything about that. So you go ahead and just put words in Michelle's mouth when there's NO EVIDENCE she said those things. You'd be perfect for Fox News. Don't do your research, make claims that have no basis in fact -- I mean really, you should apply there. Of course, Rush is even better, asserting the Democrats put this out -- with no evidence whatsoever. But that's okay, his audience is just like Fox's and make up the facts as they go along,


Originally posted by jsobecky

No they didn't. They reacted to internet accusations that Obama was a muslim. Then they brought guests on from both sides of the aisle to debate the question. Then they left it up to the viewer to make the decision. Sorry if they wanted you to think for yourself instead of spoonfeeding you.


What debate could there possibly be? Obama said he was a Christian. So the assertion here is that he's secretly a Muslim? You're hilarious. So is Fox. Again, they never retracted this asertion that he was a Muslim. Period. This is an historical fact.

And you know what? It's also completely irrelevant to the topic. Your reasoning seems to be that because there's a rumor Michelle Obama said "whitey" a few times on a tape, that makes it okay for a news organization to make a racist slur against her. The lack of logical reasoning is breathtaking.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Perplexed


And to me this is a good thing. professional journalism today is a joke... Btw.. Fox news beats every cable news organization out there today. To say that no one takes them seriously is a lie... CNN is getting killed by Fox and I doubt they don't take that seriously... MSNBC, CBS, ABC, ect... They are all taking a huge hit... What do you people want? Katie Couric and Dan the "News Man" Rather?


When I said not taken seriously, I meant by professional journalists. Some people take the Weekly World News seriously. That doesn't mean it's a professional news organization. Everybody in journalism knows that Fox is really just an extension of the Republican spin machine.


Originally posted by Perplexed

The free market is taking care of the news folks. Its not the journalists that set the standard. It’s the consumer and consumers trust Fox more than anyone else and I laugh when people say they are a joke.


Well you know what, have a good laugh, a great one, because they really are a joke, and they depend on people like you to deny the importance of journalistic integrity. And you deliver. It's more important to have big ratings than journalistic integrity. That's a great direction for the country.


Originally posted by Perplexed

As far as Obama and his prissy wife goes is there nothing that they say or do that we are able to criticize? People are so afraid to open this guy up to questions and to me that sounds pretty fascist... Seems no better than Bush and with this communist Obama it will be worse...


So let me get this straight. Making a racial slur against Obama's wife is "opening this guy up?" Yeah, that's investigative journalism, huh? Let's start calling McCain's wife names as well. Sounds like a an extremely intelligent way to run an election.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette
The problem is, Fox doesn't just 'lean' to the right. It's outrageously biased in ways that other new agencies simply are not.


When I read this, the first thing that popped into my mind was the forged documents regarding GWB's military service. Do you remember that? They were proven to be forgeries almost instantly and CBS continued to parade them as fact. When they finally were forced to admit that they were forgeries, they tried to convince us that even though they were forgeries...it was still the truth (with no proof). If that's not "outrageously biased" then you're worried more about who's being attacked than the integrity of the news being presented.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 


So I guess we are defining integrity based on what you think now? Who sets the standard in your opinion? Who is the bench mark by which we measure journalistic integrity? You are a funny guy...



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ClintK
What Fox News did calling Obama's wife "Baby Mama" is exactly why they are not taken seriously as a news organization. ...
This is normal for Fox, which is why they're not taken seriously in professional journalism.


I hope you're ready for this reply...I agree with you. My intention was not to defend Fox News, it was to present the argument that ALL news organizations are biased and cannot be trusted. The news is nothing more than entertainment nowadays. Those who are of the conservative viewpoint like Fox News because it caters to their beliefs. Those who aren't conservative split their time between most of the other news networks because they're all anti-Administration. I'm curious to see how their presentation switches if/when a dem is in the white house. I haven't decided yet if they lean left or they're just against whoever's in the white house so that they can create controversy...and increase viewership as a result.

I also agree that the "baby mama" comment was out of line. I think my several posts in this thread should give you an idea of my view of racist comments regardless of from which side they come.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Unit541
 


As we all know, if you have one drop of black blood in you, you're black. End of story. At least, thats how a large amount of people see it.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by eric52081
 




TELLS IT LIKE IT SHOULD?????


your brain needs testing mate!!! if this is what one of your major tv stations has been resorting to, then boy, your whole country needs help. this is racial conditioning at it most blatant. where are the intelligent americans? how do you put up with this? its pretty primative...



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
As I said in a different post, Michelle Obama is the stereotypical angry black woman.

If she makes it into the White House, I would fully expect her to have a majority black personal staff, and wouldn't be surprised if she were to bring up and push for more forms of unconstitutional ideas such as "affirmative action" and slavery reparations.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


hold up, how do you know she is a an 'angry black woman'?
have you met her? or have you been told this? who told you this?
and doesn't the current president keep a majority 'white' staff?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbot
reply to post by eric52081
 


What a complete idiot this guy is.

Black people in America have been downtrodden, hung from trees, executed by police and generally had a ridiculously hard time of it. Oh! one tenuous link with a preacher who has more right than most of us to bare ill feeling against the white race and suddenly we have the right to call black people racist?

I know that 51% of the American population is beyond hope but the other 49% need to start taking issue with pathetic ignorant arseholes like the guy who posted this crap.

Sincerely,

Danbot


You took the words right out of my mouth Danbot. It continually surprises me at how most white Americans conveniently forget American history from the early 1800's to 1960. It's like that period of time never happened!

Also think most white Americans have little to no understanding of how African American Christian Churches work. During the slave days, because slaves weren't allowed to congregate in large groups for fear or revolt they were forced to go into the woods to not only worship as they saw fit but also to discuss how they were going to escape to freedom. Slowly, Slave holders realized this was going on and they began bringing them to church. As the Salves were "Christianized" and the slave holders became reassured of their hold on their "property" the slaves again began organizing their cause for freedom by embedding secret codes into their worship music.

Flash forward to the 1930-50's the black church was not only a place of worship but also of community outreach and political strategy - why? Because it was the only place they could gather together without raising suspicion. So, I'm not at all surprised that white America doesn't understand Rev. Wright nor his church but I assure you, it's nothing new or different or antiamerican or racist. You'd be doing the same thing had your grand father been forced to track his family through the woods at midnight because a lynch mob or the KKK came marching up the street towards your house.

It's easy to say that those days are over but I don't have to drive but a 50 miles to see crosses burning.

And one last thing. Folks went absolutely crazy when Michelle Obama said that she was, "for the first time in her adult life proud to be an American" But John McCain just recently said the same thing:



McCain doesn't pick up on Michelle Obama joke

So a man finally got a question into McCain and he had a very different sort of question.

The questioner noted that he had been educated at Princeton and Harvard and made more than $300,000 a year.

"How can I be proud of my country?" he asked.

Get it — he was mocking Michelle Obama and her statement earlier this year that her husband had for the first time in her life made her proud of her country.

Well, McCain either missed the joke or decided to ignore it and answer the question literally. I think it was the former because the individual asking the question had a thick accent that sounded to be either Indian or Pakistani, perhaps suggesting to McCain a recent immigrant grappling with America's image abroad.

"I’ll admit to you that it’s tough, it’s tough in some respects," McCain said, seeming to lend credence to Michelle Obama's observation.

McCain said America needed to be "more humble, more inclusive."

He observed that one of the ways to be proud of the country was to look at our history — and the sacrifices U.S. troops have made abroad.

McCain let his questioner follow up and the individual repeated, but didn't clarify, his line.

In closing, McCain said he was proud of America in part "because of you and what you've been able to achieve and accomplish."


[edit on 6/14/08 by WickedStar]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by TruthWithin
 


I could go into this further but this is derailing the topic at hand and the point of this thread is the unreasonable assumption by fox news that everything uttered out of the mouth of Obama's wife is racially motivated and that she is some sort of a biggoted monster.

What is odd is that no quotes have been put forth by the OP to defend his position on the subject. Instead this thread has been changed to relay the paranoia that this board has repeatedly spewed that our government is going to be taken over by in my opinion a retarded monkey.

The issue at hand is Obamma's wifes supposed racial remarks and how evil she is. Perhaps the OP would like to elaborate on the evils this woman has reportedly spouted.

And also TruthWithin the subject of NPSD 51 would be an excelent one for a debate between us if you are so inclined.


Dude, I agree. If (you) make an assessment of someone and try to persuade others to engage your assessment then you should at least give some people some background otherwise your just spouting platitudes...I follow the news. I read the news mostly, watch it on TV occasionally. And yet I can honestly say I have no clue why people are calling Michelle Obama racist? Seriously, did I miss something or is theory based on politics instead of fact. What the hell did she say?



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 



Originally posted by ClintK

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by ClintK
 



I'll say to you the same thing I said to the other member who implied this: It's OK for Michelle Obama to use this language, but not OK for anyone else to use it? After all, she set the tone and tenor of that type of ghetto talk back in 2004:

www.rushlimbaugh.com...



You didn't even read the very article you cited here, did you? Rush Limbaugh said, of the "whitey" tape rumor, "nobody on our side said they had ever seen it." In other words, YOU are saying Michelle Obama used these words --when even your own pundits are saying, uh, we never said anything about that.


You are confused. What I was talking about was the uproar caused by Fox News using a crawl that referred to Michelle Obama as Barack's "baby momma".

If you had clicked on the picture of her in that link, you would have heard her call Barack "my baby's daddy". Thats the hypocrisy I referred to.

How you were able to get the "whitey tapes" out of that is beyond me.

The rest of your post is, well, just a rant based upon your mistaken interpretation. I think you owe me an apology.

Tip of the Day: If you plan to enter journalism, it is important that you develop your sense of reading comprehension.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by jsobecky]



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by v4vendetta
 


Have you ever listened to her? Seen her speak?

Yes the current President has a majority white staff, ya know why?

Hint: Whites compose the majority in this nation.



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
[edit on 15-6-2008 by jsobecky]

You are confused. What I was talking about was the uproar caused by Fox News using a crawl that referred to Michelle Obama as Barack's "baby momma".

If you had clicked on the picture of her in that link, you would have heard her call Barack "my baby's daddy". Thats the hypocrisy I referred to.

How you were able to get the "whitey tapes" out of that is beyond me.

The rest of your post is, well, just a rant based upon your mistaken interpretation. I think you owe me an apology.

Tip of the Day: If you plan to enter journalism, it is important that you develop your sense of reading comprehension.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by jsobecky]

In the first place, no, I'm not the least bit confused. You just don't write clearly or have good comprehension skills. You said:


Originally posted by jsobecky

I'll say to you the same thing I said to the other member who implied this: It's OK for Michelle Obama to use this language, but not OK for anyone else to use it? After all, she set the tone and tenor of that type of ghetto talk back in 2004


Calling someone "my baby's daddy" is ghetto talk? Uh, no. Complaining about white folks and calling them "whitey," that's ghetto talk. When you label something improperly, which you did, it's inevitable you will be misinterpreted. Women of every race often refer to the father of a child to whom they gave birth as "my baby's daddy." I mean your mischaracterization of what she said is breathtaking.


Originally posted by jsobecky

No they didn't. They reacted to internet accusations that Obama was a muslim. Then they brought guests on from both sides of the aisle to debate the question. Then they left it up to the viewer to make the decision. Sorry if they wanted you to think for yourself instead of spoonfeeding you.


That's not a retraction. What if CNN were to accuse McCain of being a Pagan?. He flatly denies it, they have no evidence to back up their claim. But they refuse to retract it. Instead, they have in a "panel" to discuss whether McCain is or is not a Pagan? That would be okay? Any journalism outlet can say anything they want about someone, no matter how incorrect, and when it is corrected they don't have to retract? They can just invite a few people in to discuss it, leaving the audience that maybe the person is guilty of the accusation, maybe not? That's totally insane.


Originally posted by jsobecky
The rest of your post is, well, just a rant based upon your mistaken interpretation.


How is this based on my "mistaken interpretation:"


Originally posted by ClintK
What debate could there possibly be? Obama said he was a Christian. So the assertion here is that he's secretly a Muslim? You're hilarious. So is Fox. Again, they never retracted this asertion that he was a Muslim. Period. This is an historical fact.

And you know what? It's also completely irrelevant to the topic. Your reasoning seems to be that because there's a rumor Michelle Obama said "whitey" a few times on a tape, that makes it okay for a news organization to make a racist slur against her. The lack of logical reasoning is breathtaking.


Mistaken interpretation of what?



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 



Originally posted by ClintK
Calling someone "my baby's daddy" is ghetto talk? Uh, no. Complaining about white folks and calling them "whitey," that's ghetto talk. When you label something improperly, which you did, it's inevitable you will be misinterpreted. Women of every race often refer to the father of a child to whom they gave birth as "my baby's daddy." I mean your mischaracterization of what she said is breathtaking.


Yeah, it's ghetto alright. Calling someone "whitey is racist.

Look.. I realize you're red-faced embarrassed for jumping the gun and misinterpreting what I said. Forget it - no big deal!

Once again, I don't know how/why you're trying to get "whitey" out of this discussion. Go back and re-read the very first sentence of the OP. That's what the topic of this thread is, not "the whitey papers".




Originally posted by jsobecky

No they didn't. They reacted to internet accusations that Obama was a muslim. Then they brought guests on from both sides of the aisle to debate the question. Then they left it up to the viewer to make the decision. Sorry if they wanted you to think for yourself instead of spoonfeeding you.


Originally posted by ClintK
That's not a retraction.

It's not a retraction because they never made the accusation. They merely reported on what the latest buzz about Obama was, and asked for debate on it.

Now unless you can supply a video or transcript with a Fox journalist saying "Barack Obama is a muslim", you're out of gas.

Do you have such a video or transcript?



Originally posted by ClintK


And you know what? It's also completely irrelevant to the topic. Your reasoning seems to be that because there's a rumor Michelle Obama said "whitey" a few times on a tape, that makes it okay for a news organization to make a racist slur against her. The lack of logical reasoning is breathtaking.

Mistaken interpretation of what?


Once again with the "whitey" thing. Go back to my post and show me where I ever said the word "whitey". SHOW ME, or stfu.

That's your hangup, not mine. Take it elsewhere.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join