Just an observation about FoxNews

[kc2orw]

No big deal but it is in a way about Fox News subtle usage of omission, intentional or otherwise...
During the last primary round I noticed a subtle issue about reporting the results.

Fox it seems neglected to post results pertaining to Ron Paul but CNN did post them. If one had stayed on Fox some might not have thought Ron Paul was not still running. I noticed it and switched to CNN, one click down on the remote, and they had the Ron Paul results listed in the ticker.

I suppose one could come up with some feeble justification for this but honestly it would be feeble at best. One channel posts the information and the other ignores it. Now I wouldn't cast a vote for Ron Paul because I think he was wrong. Still one should pause an wonder how often Fox spins reality by simply not reporting things. Trust me I don't think CNN is wonderful but they do seem to lack the same number of omissions...
Why would anyone trust any news source especially when you, obviously if your reading this, have access to the internet and multiple news sources. ;)

[KG4JYD]

Yes - I worked heavily for the RP campaign.

ALL of the major media outlets did this at one point or another to US Congressman Dr. Ron Paul. It was radio, television, cable, and newspaper who blacklisted him. But it wasn't just Ron. They did it to Tancredo, Biden, Gravel, Kucunich, and even John Edwards!

Yes - the media as it currently exists needs to go! They are NOT friends of the People, they DO have an agenda, and they DO manipulate public image to suit their needs. This election has proven it beyond any reasonable doubt.

[W3MIV]

You're both full of beans. The job of the "media" is to report the news, not popularize unpopular candidates. They "ignore" candidates, not to control their popularity, but as a mere reflection of it. Huckabee enforced his own coverage by doing "stunts" that were out of character for a candidate for the presidency, ergo he drew attention to himself that the various news organizations reported.

Every time Fox showed lists of delegate totals at the bottom of the screen during election returns coverage, Ron Paul was listed along with McCain and Huckabee after the others had dropped out. The raw vote totals for Ron Paul were so ridiculously bad they did not bear showing.

The news media, especially television news organizations, depend upon advertising -- advertising depends upon viewers -- viewers demand interesting things to watch. Dud candidates and drop-outs awaiting the opening of the trapdoor under them are not interesting.

Ron Paul has shown himself to be so much of a dud that he is now about to lose his seat in Congress, and the idiots who support him have grown so desperate that they have been hounding and threatening his opponent for the Texas seat. That speaks volumes about the entire Ron Paul "experience," much of which we have witnessed to our amusement on this very forum.

[K2WH]

Your observation should have been of Ron Paul, a double loser and a reincarnation of Ross Pero. BTW, who is Ron Paul?

[kc2orw]

Yes - the media as it currently exists needs to go! They are NOT friends of the People, they DO have an agenda, and they DO manipulate public image to suit their needs. This election has proven it beyond any reasonable doubt.
I wouldn't disagree at all but mostly I just wanted to point out a simple almost moot observation. I do believe that they engage in omission all the time and for me verifying is pretty simple click up for Fox, down for CNN, and down two for MSNBC. Plus I love reading the news on the Internet as I don't subscribe to print and avoid creating more paper for the recyclers to process.

[K2WH]

I wouldn't disagree at all but mostly I just wanted to point out a simple almost moot observation. I do believe that they engage in omission all the time and for me verifying is pretty simple click up for Fox, down for CNN, and down two for MSNBC. Plus I love reading the news on the Internet as I don't subscribe to print and avoid creating more paper for the recyclers to process.

You get your news from the internet? Now that explains everything. Unfortunately, the printed version (the kind you used to buy), is just as inaccurate. I think you should pull the plug on your computer.

K2WH

[kc2orw]

You get your news from the internet? Now that explains everything. Unfortunately, the printed version (the kind you used to buy), is just as inaccurate. I think you should pull the plug on your computer.

K2WH
Yes but you have access to multiple sources, yahoo will give you more then one source. No back in the bad old print days it was pretty rare to get multiple sources. News in the 60's, 70's, 80's, and part of the 90's was altogether pretty bad and mostly deficient. Oh and unlike others I am very unwilling to cite blogs as they are like CNN and FOX, not much more then Opinion journalism :D

PS: I refuse to engage in name calling perhaps you should consider doing the same. Have a reeeeeeealy nice day there :)
For your edification maybe you need to clean your reading glasses, I forget to do that myself from time to time, make note of my not agreeing with the political positions held by Ron Paul highlighted this time to make it easier on you.
I suppose one could come up with some feeble justification for this but honestly it would be feeble at best. One channel posts the information and the other ignores it. Now I wouldn't cast a vote for Ron Paul because I think he was wrong. Still one should pause an wonder how often Fox spins reality by simply not reporting things. Trust me I don't think CNN is wonderful but they do seem to lack the same number of omissions...
Why would anyone trust any news source especially when you, obviously if your reading this, have access to the internet and multiple news sources.
Some of us have moved past Ron Paul bashing others well I guess they haven't...

[KG4JYD]

You're both full of beans. The job of the "media" is to report the news, not popularize unpopular candidates. They "ignore" candidates, not to control their popularity, but as a mere reflection of it.Are you really that ignorant? You obviously did not pay attention to the media this primary election cycle.

They actually created Huckabee's popularity and completely made Obama into a candidate.

And when they completely leave candidates out of debates (some of whom are sitting Congressmen), out of debates, charts, diagrams, polls, etc, that is called BEING MANIPULATIVE.


Every time Fox showed lists of delegate totals at the bottom of the screen during election returns coverage, Ron Paul was listed along with McCain and Huckabee after the others had dropped out. Perhaps. At that point I wasn't paying much attention, but they did ignore him most of the rest of the time.


The raw vote totals for Ron Paul were so ridiculously badIrrelevant. There is no reason not to give all of the candidates in the race equal treatment. Anything else is biased and skews the race.



The news media, especially television news organizations, depend upon advertising -- advertising depends upon viewers -- viewers demand interesting things to watch. I completely understand that which is why it's really entertainment masquerading as news. But claiming to be "fair and balanced" while completely ignoring candidates (some of whom are record breaker fundraisers, some of who are sitting Congressmen, etc) is anything but fair, balanced, unbiased etc.


Ron Paul is now about to lose his seat in CongressNot hardly. :rolleyes:


and the idiots who support him have grown so desperate that they have been hounding and threatening his opponent for the Texas seat. Proof? :rolleyes:

[KG4JYD]

Yes but you have access to multiple sources, yahoo will give you more then one source. You do realize that MOST stories you hear come from wire reports? This means that "news" in this country originates mostly from a very very very small handful of people.

I work in the radio/news industry. Trust me on this one.

[KG4JYD]

I wouldn't disagree at all but mostly I just wanted to point out a simple almost moot observation. I do believe that they engage in omission all the time and for me verifying is pretty simple click up for Fox, down for CNN, and down two for MSNBC. Plus I love reading the news on the Internet as I don't subscribe to print and avoid creating more paper for the recyclers to process.

I actually canceled my cable 2 weeks ago. I do NetFlix and books.

No longer will I fund the cartel or look at their advertisements. It's kind of like being unplugged from the matrix.

[kc2orw]

You do realize that MOST stories you hear come from wire reports? This means that "news" in this country originates mostly from a very very very small handful of people.
I work in the radio/news industry. Trust me on this one.
Yes and even with multiple sources as links I find much is the same AP story repeated over and over again. Sometimes you get some interesting variation via the European and Asian news markets. But still sometime news is still limited and well from what I see some people are not as observant as they think they are.

PS: It was still worse by far before the Internet became an optional source, believe me in the old days it was easy to pass off nonsense as reality.

[W3MIV]

Proof? :rolleyes:

Check this out:

Dear Mr Peden,

We write to strongly suggest that you drop your campaign for Congressman, in Texas Congressional District 14. You promised that you would not oppose Dr Paul while he was still wanting to remain in the seat, yet you have dishonorably broken your word. If you carry on any further, you must be prepared to pay the consequences.

If you persist, and happen to knock Dr Paul off as the Republican nominee, we - the hundreds of thousands of ACTIVE grassroots supporters of Dr Paul, from across the entire nation, the very same ones that raised $6M in one day, and $20M in 3 months - will fully fund and support an Independent (likely, Dr Paul himself! You didn't think he would just let you have it unopposed, did you?), or some other appropriate candidate, to run against you. We have many within our own ranks that would be suitable. And we won't skimp with the funding. We'll do it in a day, and think nothing of you being left to deal with the loss forever thereafter. Note also that if Dr Paul were to lose the Tx-CD14 GOP nomination, and become free of the GOP party alliance on the Congressional level, it would likely free him up from his inclination/obligation to remain with the GOP at the federal level. You may well be the cause of a third-party presidential run, during which the GOP will surely lose. Do you really want to be known forever within GOP ranks as the person whose extreme selfishness and vanity caused that loss? What would that do to your reputation, and career prospects within the GOP?

And when you do lose, and try to scuttle back to your Mayoral position, expect us to haunt you throughout any political career you may attempt at any time into the future. We will fund and support opposition to any designated enemy of Liberty such as yourself, for ANY position, at ANY time. You won't be able to run for ANY public office without us there working against you.

What Ron Paul has sparked is beyond him now. It is not just a campaign, but a fully autonomous movement for LIBERTY. And we shall not waiver in our resolve to attain such, regardless of the cost. As well as working towards Dr Paul's Presidential bid, we have been busy establishing the infrastructure required to be around as a political force - forever - in order to put a lot more "Ron Paul Republicans" into public office - and to get rid of the ones opposing us. If you proceed as you are, you will have the dubious honor of being our first political scalp, and with many more to come. We have the capability to deliver extreme political force, and are prepared to do so. We are wilfully taking on the full might of the MSM and the Establishment, so we won't think twice about squashing your measly political dreams along the way.

Hell hath no fury like a r3V0Lution scorned! And that we certainly have been, by the MSM and GOP thus far. You DON'T want to add to that.

It seems that you have two choices. Either:
(a) cut your losses, and walk away now, before the state GOP primary, disappearing off our political radar forever, or
(b) carry on, and blow a heck of a lot more of your children's inheritance than you have blown thus far on this spiteful, deceitful, quixotic folly of yours.

Consider yourself warned: For the sake of (1) your reputation, (2) your future career prospects, and (3) your children's inheritance, you need to walk away immediately. The longer you leave pulling out, the more intense our ire. Only an immediate, honorable withdrawal, will placate us. That is, abiding by your word not to compete. Do not even delay your withdrawal until the preselection contest. The r3V0Lution has not been fully mobilized on this matter yet, but can and will be at short notice, should you fail to withdraw from your selfish quest.

We are legion. And we are watching.

You can read it for yourself at:

http://www.dinosforum.com/2008/02/ron-paul-supporter-chris-peden-youd.html

[kc2orw]

I actually canceled my cable 2 weeks ago. I do NetFlix and books.

No longer will I fund the cartel or look at their advertisements. It's kind of like being unplugged from the matrix.

Umm well I am not willing to go that far as well for me print is torture anyway now that they use this light gray ink instead of real black. At least I have contrast control with a computer. Great, maybe not but at least you have some options should a story sound in any way incorrect.

[KG4JYD]

they have been hounding and threatening his opponent for the Texas seat.If you mean promising not to vote for the guy and not to support him yeah I guess. If you mean allegedly calling him on his word, then yes. If you mean opposing him and asking him to withdraw, then yes.

I didn't find anything in that letter "threatening" assuming it was indeed written by a Ron Paul supporter.

[N2RJ]

Are you really that ignorant? You obviously did not pay attention to the media this primary election cycle.

They actually created Huckabee's popularity and completely made Obama into a candidate.

Huckaphoney was actually created by the Iowa voters and the Southern pro-life, pro-bible evangelicals, not the media!

Had he lost in Iowa, he would have faded into obscurity.

Had he NOT had wins in the South, he would have also faded into obscurity.

Ditto Obama. Obama would have been dead in the water, steamrolled by the Klinton machine had he lost in Iowa.

Besides, who else was there on the Dems side, besides John Edwards, that presented a serious challenge to Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Ron Paul - had NO wins in ANY state, except perhaps Alaska, barely pulls out double digits in the polls yet he is surprisingly getting TONS of coverage. Can you explain that?

[KG4JYD]

Ron Paul - had NO wins in ANY state, except perhaps Alaska, barely pulls out double digits in the polls yet he is surprisingly getting TONS of coverage. Can you explain that?I was referring to prior to SuperTuesday but whatever.

And Ron Paul is NOT/was not getting "tons" of coverage.

[n2nh]

You do realize that MOST stories you hear come from wire reports? This means that "news" in this country originates mostly from a very very very small handful of people.

I work in the radio/news industry. Trust me on this one.

Matt, when it comes to covering an election, there are bus/plane loads of reporters following the candidate around. Every news organization sends their own and sometimes there's even a second bus/plane added to hold them all. It's not like an unforeseen event like a quake or a blackout.

Do you really want to know why RP got little coverage? Blame those who were so rabid everytime they didn't like a story about RP. It seemed that if RP wasn't covered as the clone of the Arch-Angel Gabriel, RP supporters were up in arms. If you really didn't want to hear it, then they didn't need to cover it, now did they?

During an election, it's not just a few organizations covering it. And yes, I too worked in radio/news organizations.

[N5NPO]

It seemed that if RP wasn't covered as the clone of the Arch-Angel Gabriel, RP supporters were up in arms.

No big deal really John, but the only angel refered to as an Arch Angel is Michael...
73

[W3MIV]

And Ron Paul is NOT/was not getting "tons" of coverage.

What Ryan was stating is correct. For a nothing candidate who has managed to go nowhere and amass 14 delegates, he most certainly has gotten TONS of coverage -- far more than his paltry performance warrants on the basis of normal news criteria.

At some point it would seem that butting your head against a brick wall of simple fact will cause a dull pain, but you are proving that there is little or nothing in there to hurt.

[n2nh]

It seemed that if RP wasn't covered as the clone of the Arch-Angel Gabriel, RP supporters were up in arms.

No big deal really John, but the only angel refered to as an Arch Angel is Michael...
73

My religion recognizes 3 Archangels by name and alludes to there being many more. Anglicans recognize the same 3. Judaism recognizes at least 7. Eastern Orthodox religions recognize 7 but acknowleges 1000s. Traditionally Gabriel is the Archangel associated with the Annunciation and of Revelations. YMMV :)

Archangel Gabriel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel)

[KW4MW]

I, much like one of the previous posters, rarely watch TV news or read the local rag, preferring to get my information from multiple internet sources.

However I was working out in the gym the other day and someone had tuned one of the TV sets to CNN. Thankfully the TV's are muted and so I don't have to listen to the endless drone that passes for enlightened information in today's world.

I did look up at one point to see Wolf Blitzer yakking about something and in the foreground were billboard sized letters declaring "McCain Associate Indicted"

When I got home I googled CNN and found absolutely nothing concerning McCain and an Indicted Associate. Nothing on any of the other news outlets either. I did finally uncover the story that Blitzer was covering which was that AZ Congressman Renzi (R) had been indicted over a $700,000 land deal. Nothing - repeat nothing - was said in the text concerning McCain's ties to Renzi.

Since the TV at the gym was muted and I was too busy to read the caption crawler I don't know if Blitzer even mentioned McCain’s name but obviously someone in the control booth thought it was a good idea to place McCain's name in connection to the story.

Such is the nature of televised news which relies on sound bites and pop-up statements to titillate their viewers. CNN is neither any better nor worse than any of the other outlets.

Disclaimer: My reporting of this incident has nothing to do with any support I have for McCain but is simply a relating of a single odd news event that I witnessed. And before you dig any further – No, I’m not supporting McCain.

[K3XR]

Observe this.....

http://newsbusters.org/node/19443/print

http://newsbusters.org/node/19446/print

[KG4JYD]

Do you really want to know why RP got little coverage? Blame those who were so rabid everytime they didn't like a story about RP. It seemed that if RP wasn't covered as the clone of the Arch-Angel Gabriel, RP supporters were up in arms. Uhh - not exactly. Then why did Kucinich, Gravel, Tancredo, Hunter, Biden, and even Edwards get similar treatment before the first vote was cast and before the first major fund raising numbers came out?

[KG4JYD]

who has managed to go nowhere and amass 14 delegates, he most certainly has gotten TONS of coverage -- far more than his paltry performance warrants on the basis of normal news criteria.We are not talking about NOW, we are talking about prior to the first ballot being cast.

Of course Ron really deserves very little if any coverage at this point in the race because his chances of winning are practically ZERO.

But a few months ago that was not the case and he was blatantly blacklisted and given less than equal treatment and coverage.

[n2nh]

Uhh - not exactly. Then why did Kucinich, Gravel, Tancredo, Hunter, Biden, and even Edwards get similar treatment before the first vote was cast and before the first major fund raising numbers came out?

Because their supporters didn't chase Hannity down a street in the middle of the night?:D:D:D

[N2RJ]

Uhh - not exactly. Then why did Kucinich, Gravel, Tancredo, Hunter, Biden, and even Edwards get similar treatment before the first vote was cast and before the first major fund raising numbers came out?

Kucinich, Gravel, Tancredo, Hunter and Biden got significantly less coverage than Paul did.

If anyone was shabbily treated, it was Tancredo. Only place that really covered him was CNN, and that's because Lou Dobbs likes his views on illegal aliens.

[N2RJ]

We are not talking about NOW, we are talking about prior to the first ballot being cast.

Of course Ron really deserves very little if any coverage at this point in the race because his chances of winning are practically ZERO.

But a few months ago that was not the case and he was blatantly blacklisted and given less than equal treatment and coverage.

Ron's chances of winning were always close to zero.

The few supporters he had were very rabid and enthusiastic, something which I think is good and bad.

But like a bad relationship you guys need to just let it go.

[K3XR]

DEMS on Fox, guess time are tough.

http://newsbusters.org/node/20974/print

[K4JSR]

... BTW, who is Ron Paul?

You know, "Darned Elected Dude"!! :D

Ahem and harumph!!! :p :cool:

[kf6rdn]

I work in the radio/news industry. Trust me on this one.

I actually canceled my cable 2 weeks ago. I do NetFlix and books.

No longer will I fund the cartel or look at their advertisements. It's kind of like being unplugged from the matrix.

Err.. It sounds like you are not supporting your own employer?

[KG4JYD]

Because their supporters didn't chase Hannity down a street in the middle of the night?:D:D:DWhat does that have to do with anything? We don't even know that Ron Paul supporters were in fact the ones behind that. :rolleyes: