• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rupert Murdoch's Fox broadcast licences targeted by US ethics group

Somerville said:
No Media Matters is a real organisation but the problem comes from the statement about how its "specific purpose is to destroy Fox News". Rather its "specific purpose" is to call out all manner of falsehoods and bias in American media, not specifically FoxNews.

for example: Front page post from the Media Matters site May 07, 2012 10:56 am ET
Meet The Press' David Gregory Pushes Absurd NY Post Talking Point

Like the song goes: Paranoia runs deep and into your mind, lies will seep.
Click to expand...


Really... Since your head is firmly burried in the sand, your words are quite meaningless:

Media Matters' war against Fox

The liberal group Media Matters has quietly transformed itself in preparation for what its founder, David Brock, described in an interview as an all-out campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” aimed at the Fox News Channel.

The group, launched as a more traditional media critic, has all but abandoned its monitoring of newspapers and other television networks and is narrowing its focus to Fox and a handful of conservative websites, which its leaders view as political organizations and the “nerve center” of the conservative movement. The shift reflects the centrality of the cable channel to the contemporary conservative movement, as well as the loathing it inspires among liberals — not least among the donors who fund Media Matters’ staff of about 90, who are arrayed in neat rows in a giant war room above Massachusetts Avenue.

The strategy that we had had toward Fox was basically a strategy of containment,” said Brock, Media Matters’ chairman and founder and a former conservative journalist, adding that the group’s main aim had been to challenge the factual claims of the channel and to attempt to prevent them from reaching the mainstream media.

The new strategy, he said, is a “war on Fox.”

In an interview and a 2010 planning memo shared with POLITICO, Brock listed the fronts on which Media Matters — which he said is operating on a $10 million-plus annual budget — is working to chip away at Fox and its parent company, News Corp. They include its bread-and-butter distribution of embarrassing clips and attempts to rebut Fox points, as well as a series of under-the-radar tactics.
Click to expand...

Media Matters' war against Fox - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
 
Manc Skipper said:
The US has laws regarding fitness to run a company too... American rightie-tighties usually love the Daily Heil, it's not leftist by any stretch of the imagination!

" ...Rupert Murdoch must have his U.S. broadcast licences revoked following the UK parliamentary select committee's highly critical report on phone hacking, a watchdog has said.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is demanding that the Federal Communications Commission pull the plug on News Corporation's 27 Fox channels.
The move should go ahead, said CREW's director Melanie Sloan, because Murdoch has 'clearly failed the character test embedded within U.S. media law'.
Under FCC rules, only people with 'good character who serve the public interest' can run broadcast frequencies... "


Read more: Ethics watchdog demands action as UK MPs say Rupert Murdoch 'not fit' to run major firm | Mail Online
Click to expand...



From your link: Philip Davies said: ‘Many people may conclude that some people’s conclusions were written before any of the evidence was ever heard, and I think that is very sad.’ Mr Davies said MPs had heard nothing to suggest Mr Murdoch was not a ‘fit and proper’ person – dismissing it as a ‘completely ludicrous’ conclusion.


Rupert Murdoch said last week that Mr Brown had threatened to ‘make war on your company’ in 2009 after the Sun endorsed David Cameron – a claim Mr Brown denies.

Mr Watson has also been accused of profiting from the hacking scandal after publishing a book on the affair last week. The book stated that the Culture Committee was ‘preparing a report which would make clear the extent to which News International had misled Parliament’.


Read more: Ethics watchdog demands action as UK MPs say Rupert Murdoch 'not fit' to run major firm | Mail Online


Read more: Ethics watchdog demands action as UK MPs say Rupert Murdoch 'not fit' to run major firm | Mail Online



Sounds like there's plenty of corruption to go around.
 
Grim17 said:
Really... Since your head is firmly burried in the sand, your words are quite meaningless:



Media Matters' war against Fox - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I post an accurate statement contradicting an earlier one about "specific purpose" of Media Matters and instead of admitting "OK - so Media Matters does post criticism of other media outlets" Nope, I supposedly have my "head buried in the sand" and therefore - no matter how truthful my words may be, they are meaningless.

Got it. Facts are not to be used in arguments with righties.
 
Somerville said:
Hmmm, I post an accurate statement contradicting an earlier one about "specific purpose" of Media Matters and instead of admitting "OK - so Media Matters does post criticism of other media outlets" Nope, I supposedly have my "head buried in the sand" and therefore - no matter how truthful my words may be, they are meaningless.

Got it. Facts are not to be used in arguments with righties.
Click to expand...

Media Matters president declares a war on Fox News, and you call me "Paranoid".

What ever pal.
 
Somerville said:
Hmmm, I post an accurate statement contradicting an earlier one about "specific purpose" of Media Matters and instead of admitting "OK - so Media Matters does post criticism of other media outlets" Nope, I supposedly have my "head buried in the sand" and therefore - no matter how truthful my words may be, they are meaningless.

Got it. Facts are not to be used in arguments with righties.
Click to expand...

From their own 'about us' page: "Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."

They are a one sided, biased, political organization, that based on the requirements to be a 501(c)(3), should not have that non-profit status. In addition, they 'make' news, and have been quoted in the mainstream media, as if they were an unbiased, non-partisan source of some sort.
 
Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
Hmmm, I post an accurate statement contradicting an earlier one about "specific purpose" of Media Matters and instead of admitting "OK - so Media Matters does post criticism of other media outlets" Nope, I supposedly have my "head buried in the sand" and therefore - no matter how truthful my words may be, they are meaningless.

Got it. Facts are not to be used in arguments with righties.
Click to expand...

We appear to be talking past each other. An accusation was made that Media Matters was created for the "specific purpose" of attacking Fox News, I noted that it also criticises other media outlets, thereby negating the "specific purpose" attack. The reply then notes that Media Matters was formed for the "correction of conservative misinformation", which if one were to follow the sequence of posts would apparently indicate the poster believes only FoxNews is conservative and therefore Media Matters only attacks FoxNews. to which I say - huh?

Arbo said:
From their own 'about us' page: "Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."

They are a one sided, biased, political organization, that based on the requirements to be a 501(c)(3), should not have that non-profit status. In addition, they 'make' news, and have been quoted in the mainstream media, as if they were an unbiased, non-partisan source of some sort.
Click to expand...
 
Somerville said:
We appear to be talking past each other. An accusation was made that Media Matters was created for the "specific purpose" of attacking Fox News, I noted that it also criticises other media outlets, thereby negating the "specific purpose" attack. The reply then notes that Media Matters was formed for the "correction of conservative misinformation", which if one were to follow the sequence of posts would apparently indicate the poster believes only FoxNews is conservative and therefore Media Matters only attacks FoxNews. to which I say - huh?
Click to expand...

Media Matters has finally and openly admitted that there is a "War On Fox" but that was apparent from day one. Certainly there are other conservative views out there but Fox News carries the most conservative commentators, which s why they are so despised by the leftists.

Media Matters' war against Fox - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
 
Grim17 said:
This is another demonstration of the left wanting to stifle speech they don't agree with... In other words, just another day at the office for them.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, have you paid any attention to what Murdoch and his now defunct News of the World newspaper did over there? I'm guessing not, otherwise you wouldn't have posted what you did.
 
Grant said:
Media Matters has finally and openly admitted that there is a "War On Fox" but that was apparent from day one. Certainly there are other conservative views out there but Fox News carries the most conservative commentators, which s why they are so despised by the leftists.

Media Matters' war against Fox - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...

That and the fact that they are the propaganda wing of the Republican Party.
 
Wiggen said:
That and the fact that they are the propaganda wing of the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

You're a regular viewer, are you?

Which Fox commentator do you believe forms the propaganda wing of the Republican Party?

Alan Colmes perhaps? Do you know of any propaganda wings of the Democratic party on TV, or do you find MSNBC, for example, fair and balanced?
 
Arbo said:
Can you find an example of media matters going after ABC, NBC, MSNBC, or CBS?
Click to expand...

Post #72 in this thread

also

CNN's Loesch Revives Obama-Madrassa Smear Five Years After CNN Debunked It

Broadcast News Networks Misrepresent Intelligence On Iranian Nuclear Issues31 percent of stories on ABC's World News, CBS' Evening News, and NBC's Nightly News suggested or left unchallenged suggestions that nuclear weaponization in Iran is imminent.
Click to expand...

Will The Media Let Congress Forget About The Gulf Oil Disaster?
So far ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and Fox News have ignored the panel's assessment report, issued just days before the second anniversary of the worst oil spill in U.S. history. MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan was the exception, running a segment on the panel's findings and the ongoing impacts of the spill.
Click to expand...
 
Grant said:
You're a regular viewer, are you?

Which Fox commentator do you believe forms the propaganda wing of the Republican Party?

Alan Colmes perhaps? Do you know of any propaganda wings of the Democratic party on TV, or do you find MSNBC, for example, fair and balanced?
Click to expand...

Shall we start with the clowns of Fox & Friends and continue on from there with the very attractive and smart (no sarcasm) Gretchen Carlson, the Five o'clock bunch and into the evening hours with Hannity, O'Reilly and Greta. Then there's the boss at FoxNews, Roger Ailes former media consultant for Republican presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush. Add in the various talking heads who are also on the Fox payroll, from Sarah Palin to Karl Rove to Mike Huckabee. Not a liberal in the bunch and most are hard core righties.

MSNBC provides 'balance' for the propaganda that comes out of Fox and is certainly more fair. The longest daily show on MSNBC, three hours, belongs to a former Republican congressman, Joe Scarborough. The day that Ailes gives three hours, five days a week to a former Democratic congress critter of liberal persuasion, we can start talking about 'balance' at Roger's place.

Alan Colmes - the man who used to share a desk with Hannity but got booted because Sean couldn't deal with even a little bit of contradiction. Alan Colmes, who now appears for only a few minutes each week and quite often gets shouted down by other panelists. yeah, they really have some libruls on Fox

MSNBC, propaganda wing of the Democratic Party, not quite. Listen to the evening shows and you will hear a lot of criticism of the President and the Dems in Congress along with praise when they do some things right.
 
Somerville said:
MSNBC provides 'balance' for the propaganda that comes out of Fox and is certainly more fair. The longest daily show on MSNBC, three hours, belongs to a former Republican congressman, Joe Scarborough. The day that Ailes gives three hours, five days a week to a former Democratic congress critter of liberal persuasion, we can start talking about 'balance' at Roger's place.
Click to expand...

You should thank the owners at MSNBC for that, because they must have realized that conservatives in media get ratings, while all their other extreme left wing talking heads are the same sort that drove Air American into the crapper.
 
Arbo said:
Very good. Two whole items, out of how many that they published since they came on line almost a decade ago? Yeah, no bias in them at all.
Click to expand...

TWO? Can't you count? There are four links provided. and everyone was from just the past two months.
 
Somerville said:
TWO? Can't you count? There are four links provided. and everyone was from just the past two months.
Click to expand...

Oh my, a whole four of them! Stunning work by media matters, who has had their 'articles' used, word for word, by the likes of MSNBC talking heads.
 
Arbo said:
Oh my, a whole four of them! Stunning work by media matters, who has had their 'articles' used, word for word, by the likes of MSNBC talking heads.
Click to expand...

It is difficult to argue when the goal posts are on a trailer being pulled by a pickup.

first it was show me where Media Matters has criticised other media outlets - I did that

then it was "only two in the years since Media Matters was founded" - I had provided four from just the past couple of months

not good enough - fine, play with yourself.
 
You are the one that lives in denial of their mission statement.
 
Somerville said:
Shall we start with the clowns of Fox & Friends and continue on from there with the very attractive and smart (no sarcasm) Gretchen Carlson, the Five o'clock bunch and into the evening hours with Hannity, O'Reilly and Greta.
Click to expand...

So you're unaware of Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, Bob Bickle, etc.

Then there's the boss at FoxNews, Roger Ailes former media consultant for Republican presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush.
Click to expand...

So what? In a largely two party country are you surprised that someone may have once worked for one of the political parties? Are you that concerned that someone may have once worked for the democrats? Why the outrage?
Add in the various talking heads who are also on the Fox payroll, from Sarah Palin to Karl Rove to Mike Huckabee. Not a liberal in the bunch and most are hard core righties.
Click to expand...
In fact there are several liberals and i named a few. Why should there be nothing but liberal dorks in the media? And what the hell is a "hard core righty"?
MSNBC provides 'balance' for the propaganda that comes out of Fox and is certainly more fair.
Click to expand...

So you believe this to be "fair"?

Schultz to Dem Senators Who Voted Against Obama: "It's Gonad-Cuttin' Time"

MSNBC's Schultz Slams 'Damn Political Phony' Marco Rubio as 'Not a True American'

Schultz Admits Editing Perry, Doesn't Apologize for Falsely Accusing Him of Making Racist Remark About Obama

Ed Schultz's MSNBC Apology to Ingraham Preceded by Churlish Non-Apology on Radio Show

Ed Schultz: 'The Republican Party Stands For Racism'

Ed Schultz Denigrates Elderly as 'the Almost Dead'

Race Card: Schultz Claims Republicans Have 'Pre-Civil Rights Attitude' On ObamaCare

Ed Schultz: Republicans are 'Bastards Who Want to Destroy the American Dream'

Ed Schultz Meltdown: Harry Reid 'Ball-less' - Won't Shove GOP Bastards Into Ditch

The longest daily show on MSNBC, three hours, belongs to a former Republican congressman, Joe Scarborough. The day that Ailes gives three hours, five days a week to a former Democratic congress critter of liberal persuasion, we can start talking about 'balance' at Roger's place.
Click to expand...

As explained above there are several liberals being paid for their contributions to Fox. You come up with Joe Scarborough??
Alan Colmes - the man who used to share a desk with Hannity but got booted because Sean couldn't deal with even a little bit of contradiction. Alan Colmes, who now appears for only a few minutes each week and quite often gets shouted down by other panelists. yeah, they really have some libruls on Fox
Click to expand...

Like Juan Williams who got booted from PBS? And Colmes still works for Fox on the radio, and still has his weekly appearances. It was he who quit, as he explained at the time, and did not get fired. Like any Liberal, you're are making it up as you go along.
MSNBC, propaganda wing of the Democratic Party, not quite. Listen to the evening shows and you will hear a lot of criticism of the President and the Dems in Congress along with praise when they do some things right.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure!
 
Always nice to see stuff from site like NewsBusters regurgitated. Aren't we supposed to show it when we quote other people's work, failing to do so is plagiarism?

Read more: An Open Letter to MSNBC President Phil Griffin: Take Responsibility for Hateful Ed Schultz | NewsBusters.org

In another thread, I was asked if, as a liberal, I could admit that African Americans could be racists. I agreed they could - case in point, Juan Williams

Bob Bickle - There ain't no such person, there is former Dem strategist, Bob Beckle, of who it has been written, "has absolutely no filter to speak of" and yet at the same time you want to protest Ed Schultz's loose lips.

Alan Colmes describes himself as quite "moderate" - not liberal

Finally, for work calls, I wrote
MSNBC, propaganda wing of the Democratic Party, not quite. Listen to the evening shows and you will hear a lot of criticism of the President and the Dems in Congress along with praise when they do some things right.
Click to expand...
to which, the reply was
Yeah, sure!
Click to expand...
as the final line in a posting which included
Schultz to Dem Senators Who Voted Against Obama: "It's Gonad-Cuttin' Time"

Ed Schultz Meltdown: Harry Reid 'Ball-less' - Won't Shove GOP Bastards Into Ditch
Click to expand...
which would apparently indicate the poster simply found some anti-MSNBC message, quoted from it without credit to the source, but never bothered to actually read the words.
 
Last edited:
Somerville said:
Always nice to see stuff from site like NewsBusters regurgitated. Aren't we supposed to show it when we quote other people's work, failing to do so is plagiarism?
Click to expand...

So because you don't have a credible counterpoint you want to call me a plagiarist?? Those ad hominem attacks are so laughably predictable of leftists!

In another thread, I was asked if, as a liberal, I could admit that African Americans could be racists. I agreed they could - case in point, Juan Williams
Click to expand...

Juan Williams is a racist??? Please explain!

Bob Bickle - There ain't no such person, there is former Dem strategist, Bob Beckle, of who it has been written, "has absolutely no filter to speak of" and yet at the same time you want to protest Ed Schultz's loose lips.
Click to expand...

What point are you trying to make here? Bickle and Schultz are both loud and crude democrats.
Alan Colmes describes himself as quite "moderate" - not liberal
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how Colmes describes himself. He'll be judged by his opinions. Even the most rabid leftists, and that includes Hitler or Stalin, will think of themselves as "moderates".


which would apparently indicate the poster simply found some anti-MSNBC message, quoted from it without credit to the source, but never bothered to actually read the words.
Click to expand...

Really? And what words did I miss? Instead of criticism it is called "anti-MSNBC". LOL!
 
So because you don't have a credible counterpoint you want to call me a plagiarist?? Those ad hominem attacks are so laughably predictable of leftists!
Click to expand...
When you post the words of another person without giving credit - that is plagiarism. Saying you have done such a thing with evidence does not constitute an ad hominem attack. Study a bit more


Juan Williams is a racist??? Please explain!
Click to expand...
Why was Juan Williams fired by NPR?

What point are you trying to make here? Bickle and Schultz are both loud and crude democrats.
Click to expand...
Still unable to spell Bob Beckle's name I see. If he is still a Dem, he is what is known as a Blue Dog, a southern Dem who would have fit well into the Republican Party of the 60s

It doesn't matter how Colmes describes himself. He'll be judged by his opinions. Even the most rabid leftists, and that includes Hitler or Stalin, will think of themselves as "moderates".
Click to expand...
Hitler was not a leftist. He and Stalin would never have called themselves "moderate". They were both proud of the strength of their convictions and in their megalomania. Sort of like Romney calling himself a "severely conservative" governor, huh?

Really? And what words did I miss? Instead of criticism it is called "anti-MSNBC". LOL!
Click to expand...
Read my earlier reply to your claim that MSNBC was as much an arm of the Democratic Party as FoxNews is of the Republicans and how it "never" criticises the Dems. If you bother to read the part where I quoted from your original post, there are two links to attacks by Ed Schultz on Dems.
 
Somerville said:
When you post the words of another person without giving credit - that is plagiarism. Saying you have done such a thing with evidence does not constitute an ad hominem attack. Study a bit more
Click to expand...

Do you understand what ad hominem means? For that matter do you understand what deflection means?

Why was Juan Williams fired by NPR?
Click to expand...

You called Juan Williams a racist. Why should I ask NPR? You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

Still unable to spell Bob Beckle's name I see. If he is still a Dem, he is what is known as a Blue Dog, a southern Dem who would have fit well into the Republican Party of the 60s
Click to expand...

He is still a Democrat. Perhaps he's not as leftist as you would like but he is still a Democrat.

Hitler was not a leftist. He and Stalin would never have called themselves "moderate". They were both proud of the strength of their convictions and in their megalomania. Sort of like Romney calling himself a "severely conservative" governor, huh?
Click to expand...

Right. These Socialists were proud of their ideological convictions and felt they made sense.


Read my earlier reply to your claim that MSNBC was as much an arm of the Democratic Party as FoxNews is of the Republicans and how it "never" criticises the Dems. If you bother to read the part where I quoted from your original post, there are two links to attacks by Ed Schultz on Dems.
Click to expand...

No, I'll not bother going over the thread to read your previous posts. They don't sufficiently interest me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom