Had It With Fox News
I could spend the rest of my life detailing the near-criminal actions of Fox News and sadly most people tend to agree with yet dismiss these claims simply because they’ve been doing it for so long. Yes, everyone knows Fox News is evil, misinformed, and out to distort the truth…but why are we sitting on our butts about it? Everyone knowing about it isn’t enough; it’s certainly no reason to be complacent. Thankfully there are others out there that feel as I do and are making it a little easier to do something about it.
But before I get to that I want to specifically call attention to some recent crimes of Fox News…
The Terrorist Fist Jab
Thankfully this seems to be quickly becoming a comedy meme, but when it all started Fox News went out and found one idiot who made one comment on one blog (comment, not a post but someone who anonymously responded to a post on a blog) that got deleted shortly after it was posted and used that as an excuse to say that members of the media are calling a fist bump a “terrorist fist jab”. Head’s up Fox News: an anonymous guy who comments on a blog is not a part of the media but you know who is? Fox News, and since you’re the first member of the media to use the phrase, coined it if you will, that makes you responsible for it getting mainstream attention. Fox News took it from the most obscure to mainstream attention – that’s not reporting the news, that’s making or at the very least manipulating it. You called the Obamas terrorists and in some places in the world where the rule of law means something that kind of thing is a crime, called libel. Here’s a couple definitions of libel for you “anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents” or if you prefer “to misrepresent damagingly”.
Photoshop
Jacques Steinberg of the New York Times wrote a piece analyzing the ratings of Fox News versus other networks and showed that other networks were gaining on Fox News. He simply presented factual numbers, indisputable math. Well Fox News responded by airing photoshopped images of Steinberg and his boss – yellowing their teeth, receding their hairlines, giving them unibrows…basically abusing their images like techno-savvy children would. They presented these images AS IF THEY WERE UNALTERED. See the previous section for a definition of libel.
War On Olbermann
Now Keith Olbermann may just be the left’s answer to Bill O’Reilly but with better fact checking but he doesn’t go out to ruin people. Bill O’Reilly on the other hand has publicly stated that he is making it his mission to get Countdown cancelled. Well, anything that Bill O’Reilly is in favour of definitely merits consideration of opposing. As such I’ve set a reminder on my digital cable box for when Countdown is on; to make sure I never miss it. And my increased viewing has shown me that Olbermann’s far from perfect – he needs to elevate his discourse a little as well, he can start by not doing anymore impressions or funny voices as it really deflates his otherwise brilliant and strong arguments. But hey, he makes you laugh and makes you think and throws in some fact-checked news along the way, where else can you get that? Other than on The Daily Show and The Colbert Report I mean.
War On Obama(s)
You would think a news organization, particularly with a slogan “fair and balanced” would have some interest in remaining neutral regarding presidential contenders but they have systematically attacked Obama and I’m not just talking about the “terrorist fist jab”. They insist on describing Michelle Obama as a “baby mama” which specifically refers to an unmarried woman, despite Michelle being married. That’s neither fair nor balanced nor is it even factual. You’ll want to keep your definitions of libel handy as we continue. Bill O’Reilly said he doesn’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless she happens to say what she feels. So either she must lie or he’s going to throw on a sheet, grab a torch and some buddies, and burn a cross on her lawn because she’s free. I won’t bother providing a definition of the word racist. When Michelle Obama said she felt more proud than ever before in her country NOT because of her husband’s success but what the people who support him have accomplished Fox News reported that she was only proud of her country because of her husband’s success – so they reported that she said the exact opposite of what she said. Read that libel definition again. And there’s the constant banging of the “angry black woman” drum – which part of that is bad? Is it wrong to angry, black, female, or is it just the combination that is wrong to the network that constantly has to remind itself that it’s “fair and balanced”? How can you be “fair and balanced” if you’re against angry people, black people, and women? I guess that means you’re “fair and balanced” towards happy white men only?
Like I said, I could go on forever. But identifying the problem is only the beginning. It’s time to DO SOMETHING and here’s a place to start:
http://foxattacks.com/michelle
Get informed, spread the word, sign the petition, and watch Olbermann. And if you’re an American and the rule of law is ever restored, get a lawyer because these people are lying to you and breaking the law in the process.
