Posts

Posted on

So-called “war” between Fox News and White House is war in name only

Any rational human knows that Fox News isn’t a real news network. They blur the line between opinion and news reporting to the point that it all seems the same to them. The White House was only expressing the consensus of the rational people in pointing it out in public and on the record. Like any other right wing group Fox now claims to be a victim. The facts just don’t support Fox News.

Those of us who watch mainstream news programs and the cable networks have known for years that Fox News has been the mouth piece of the Republican Party. The media watch dog site Media Matters even has a video clip showing how Fox opinion bleeds into its news reports:

Fox and other conservatives have come back and said well President Obama and the Democrats have MSNBC as their official voice. The problem with that false equivalency is that a rational person can see a distinct difference between MSNBC’s news reports and their opinion programs. The other proof against such a charge by Fox is that on some of the shows like Hardball and Countdown the hosts and guests disagree with the current administration and say so but that doesn’t get passed on in the news reports like we see time and time again with Fox News.

A more recent dust up involved a reported exclusion of Fox to interview a Treasury official. Fox was crying all day about censorship and then claiming the other networks came to its defense and refused to interview the guy unless Fox was included.

Like most everything coming out the mouths at Fox, the incident didn’t happen the way it claims.

The version Fox has pushed all day is that the network was excluded from an interview roundtable with Feinberg yesterday, and that bureau chiefs from ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN came to Fox’s defense.

TPMDC dug into it, and here’s what happened.

Feinberg did a pen and pad with reporters to brief them on cutting executive compensation. TV correspondents, as they do with everything, asked to get the comments on camera. Treasury officials agreed and made a list of the networks who asked (Fox was not among them).

But logistically, all of the cameras could not get set up in time or with ease for the Feinberg interview, so they opted for a round robin where the networks use one pool camera. Treasury called the White House pool crew and gave them the list of the networks who’d asked for the interview.

The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn’t on the list, was told that they hadn’t asked and the crew said they needed to be included. Treasury called the White House and asked top Obama adviser Anita Dunn. Dunn said yes and Fox’s Major Garrett was among the correspondents to interview Feinberg last night.

Simple as that, we’re told, and the networks don’t want to be seen as heroes for Fox.

WH: We’re Happy To Exclude Fox, But Didn’t Yesterday With Feinberg Interview

But this is also why a news network with only about 3 million viewers can have an effect, good or bad, on a national discussion.

The other networks live inside the same beltway bubble and so when Fox harps a story for many days the others think there is a story there and end up picking it up too – even when it is false or not what it seems.

Take the above incident with the Feinberg interview. Even though it wasn’t a case of the White House saying “No Fox” the CBS Evening News had a story about the non-story and used Fox’s view of it.

(CBS) After months of taking incoming fire from the prime-time stars of Fox News, the Obama White House is firing back, charging that FOX News is different from all other news.

“FOX News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican party,” said Anita Dunn, White House communications director.

“If media is operating basically as a talk radio format, then that’s one thing, and if it’s operating as a news outlet, then that’s another,” Mr. Obama said.

And the White House has gone beyond words, reports CBS News senior political correspondent Jeff Greenfield. Last Sept. 20, the president went on every Sunday news show – except Chris Wallace’s show on FOX. And on Thursday, the Treasury Department tried to exclude FOX News from pool coverage of interviews with a key official. It backed down after strong protests from the press.

“All the networks said, that’s it, you’ve crossed the line,” said CBS News White House correspondent Chip Reid.

President Obama’s Feud with FOX News

It also needs to be pointed out that the White House has never tried to censor Fox or prevent it from covering the White House, it just hasn’t favored it on equal footing to NBC, CBS, or ABC.

Its not like an administration has never tried to freeze out or isolate a network before. In the last administration the Bush Whit House went after MSNBC and NBC while holding meetings with only right wing talk show hosts:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Again the problem with Fox is that it is more a talk radio style program rather than a real journalistic news organization. They pass off lies, rumors, and smears as facts and it bleeds into their “news” reports. The other news programs thinking they are missing a story then report on those lies, rumors, and smears which give them a “creditability” it couldn’t gain on its own just by being “reported” by Fox.

That’s what Fox does – blow up lies, rumors, and smears into stories that don’t deserve to be stories and wouldn’t be if real journalism was being practiced in this country.

Posted on

Digging some Carson Daly

I admit I am not a fan of media personality Carson Daly nor have I been a fan of his late night show Last Call. I may still agree with Jimmy Fallon’s old parody from SNL that Daly is a tool but I have started to like his show a bit better now that it is a magazine format.

Last Call was Daly’s attempt at a traditional talk show with guests, and joky bits. He was trying to play off his popularity from his hosting duty on the old TRL show on MTV. Frankly it was lame. The guests were fine and he had on musical guests who were either new to me or just breaking in the US, but his impression of Jay Leno or Conan O’Brien came off stiff and lame.

A few years into the show it moved to Los Angeles and actually became more lame with the addition of a house band and really unfunny sketches. I watched less and less.

In 2007 the show was forced to go back on the air during the WGA strike or the non-striking members of the show would be fired. I boycotted the show after that.

Then one day I caught an episode. Basically I was writing on the computer and left the TV on after Late Night and Daly was in Seattle or some place touring the best hang out places and what not. His guests were interviewed in a bar or hotel restaurant and sometimes in a studio. The musical guest was filmed playing live at some club and they would spend a short time letting them speak to a camera about themselves.

Basically due to budget cuts Last Call became a magazine style show rather than the old lame talk show format.

Carson Daly is a good host in this style of show where he introduces the segments and interviews the guest.

Posted on

Ohio State Issue 2 is all about money not animal welfare

What do you do when you want to keep special interest groups from telling your state what to do? You change the state constitution. But in a bit of irony it is a special interest group that is wanting the change to prevent another special interest group from doing their job.

State issue 2 will create a 13 member board that would set regulations on the care of livestock and poultry in Ohio.

This proposed amendment would:

1. Require the state to create the Livestock Care Standards Board to prescribe standards for animal care and well-being that endeavor to maintain food safety, encourage locally grown and raised food, and protect Ohio farms and families.

2. Authorize this bipartisan board of thirteen members to consider factors that include, but are not limited to, agricultural best management practices for such care and well-being, biosecurity, disease prevention, animal morbidity and mortality data, food safety practices, and the protection of local, affordable food supplies for consumers when establishing and implementing standards.

3. Provide that the board shall be comprised of thirteen Ohio residents including representatives of Ohio family farms, farming organizations, food safety experts, veterinarians, consumers, the dean of the agriculture department at an Ohio college or university and a county humane society representative.

4. Authorize the Ohio department that regulates agriculture to administer and enforce the standards established by the board, subject to the authority of the General Assembly.

State Issue 2

What is interesting to note is under number 2 above that the standards are tested against how much it would cost to implement them. So while the board would come up with some standards the best ones really wouldn’t be used if they cost too much.

Basically what happened was that the Ohio agribusiness concern went to the legislature and asked for the amendment. The amendment, unlike a regular law, can’t be changed easily if at all once passed. That’s why they wanted an amendment.

Ohio agri-business leaders appealed to state lawmakers earlier this year to place the issue on the ballot after the Humane Society of the United States said it planned to work in Ohio to push for more humane treatment for livestock and poultry. Similar reforms are already in place in seven states, including Michigan.

The thrust of the Humane Society’s proposal would be rules that ban treatment of animals that prohibit them from turning around, lying down, standing up and fully extending their limbs.

Issue 2 supporters blast “out-of-state interests” for wanting to make changes that would harm the Ohio economy and put a kink in the food supply chain.

Justice O’Connor says Issue 2 “inappropriate” for Ohio Constitution

Why would Ohio agribusiness “blast” the Humane Society? Don’t they both have the animal welfare in mind? As we can see this issue is all about the money and not the animals. That’s why people should vote No on State Issue 2.

*Update 10/31/2009*

The pro Issue 2 side has put out two commercials recently. One claimed that passing State Issue 2 would not prevent contaminated foreign grown food from being brought into Ohio. Obviously that is not true since the text of the amendment doesn’t say that, recent incidents of contaminated food were from US growers and producers, and existing food safety laws exist to take care of such incidents when they happen.

The 2nd commercial shows Governor Stickland and other political leaders at a rally in support of the issue. It is simply an appeal to authority. If one looks at the text of the issue and the reasons why it was put on the ballot one can see it was about money and not protecting Ohio.

Posted on

Politicians should stop sucking Corporate nards

John Harwood of NBC gave a quote from anonymous White House source that was disparaging toward progressive bloggers. Those bloggers have been giving the current administration heat for some of their actions and policies that were opposite of what was promised during the 2008 campaign. My response to that quote is in the title of this post.

Progressive bloggers were in an uproar Sunday night after a White House “adviser,” speaking on condition of anonymity, urged them to “take off their pajamas” and get serious about politics.

NBC White House correspondent John Harwood relayed the quote during a segment he shot for Nightly News following a massive gay rights rally in Washington.

Bloggers Furious At White House For Anonymous Ridicule

Posted on

Why real life sports reporting is like my fantasy football team

This past week the Cleveland Browns traded Braylon Edwards to the Jets. Edwards was formerly the 3rd pick overall in the NFL draft and was a Pro Bowl selection is 2007. It seems some experts in sports reporting let that fact cloud their analysis of the trade.

Bob Hunter, a sports columnist for The Columbus Dispatch wrote in his Friday column:

Many of the Browns were concerned about how trading a potential game-breaking receiver, who was a former No. 3 overall draft pick, for a so-so receiver, a special-teams player and two draft picks, believed to be third- and fifth-rounders, makes a bad team better.

Bob Hunter commentary: Rumblings

Those of us who follow the team on a regular basis know why he was traded and this fan is glad they did something with Edwards. In 2008, he had the league top spot in dropped passes at 16. It was excruciating watching time after time Edwards drop a pass. This season he seemed to be improving but he still lacked the supposed game-breaking potential and he then got into trouble at a nightclub at 2:30 in the morning the day after the team lost their last game.

I’m glad Edwards had time to party after the loss….

It reminded me of a long bus trip home when I was on our high school football team as a senior. We had just lost the game but from the laughs and high jinks by the lads on the bus that night you wouldn’t think we did. One of the coaches had enough he stood up and yelled “You just lost a game! Act like it…”

So how is the Edwards situation and Hunter’s reaction to it like my fantasy football team?

Well I have a habit of drafting big names from the previous season who then do squat this season and then I can’t bring myself to dump them because “they scored 10 TDs in 2008!” as if their lack of stats this season will turn around. I can’t waste time on dead weight. Its “what have you done lately” that most coaches operate on and Edwards had his chance through the preseason and 4 games to show he could do better. He didn’t and the team decided to get what they could for him on the market.

Such tunnel vision can effect even TV people paid to watch the games.

During one Browns game one of the CBS commentators complained when Brady Quinn was pulled from the game – “he’s 6 of 8 for 34 yards!” seeming to forget that 6 of 8 for 34 yards before half time is almost the same as being 0 for 8 for a quarterback. Those stats aren’t going to win the game and the coaches were right to pull Quinn from the game. The team still lost the game but Derrick Anderson seemed to spark the team a little bit more than before.

Sometimes, changing teams is better for the player. If Edwards returns to his game-breaking potential we saw in 2007 while on the Jets then good for him, but I still wouldn’t feel bad for the Browns because he wasn’t the same player he was in 2007 and it didn’t look like that Edwards was going to show up this season either.

About Proudly powered by WordPress