by HoldEmAccountable, Sun Oct 07, 2007 at 07:15:11 AM EDT
This morning (Oct. 7, 2007) on Fox News Sunday, Nancy Pelosi went out of her way to thank Rupert Murdoch's Fox for being pro-environment. "Look at that, Fox News, leading the way in environmental protection and reversing global warming."
Pelosi praising Fox:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vuo9cwGl_C0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vuo9cwGl_C0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
But Robert Greenwald's YouTube video "Fox Attacks: The Environment" shows that Fox is a consistent global warming denier. And while Rupert Murdoch recently said NewsCorp will be carbon neutral, Sierra Club president Carl Pope points out, "The most meaningful action companies...can take to help the planet is to make sure the public knows the truth about global warming. That means rejecting Fox's pattern of misinformation."
by Hugh Stearns, Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 10:39:02 AM EDT
Why is Rupert Murdock financing Hillary Clinton? Here is what is written about Murdock's involvement in American politics on Wikipedia,
In the US he has been a long-time supporter of the Republican Party and was a friend of Ronald Reagan. Regarding Pat Robertson's 1988 presidential bid, he said, "He's right on all the issues." Many Christian conservatives were dismayed when Robertson sold his television network to Murdoch. Murdoch's papers strongly supported George W. Bush in both the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.
Murdoch's publications worldwide tend to adopt conservative views. During the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, all 175 Murdoch-owned newspapers worldwide editorialized in favor of the war. Murdoch also served on the board of directors of the libertarian Cato Institute. News Corp-owned Fox News is often criticized for a strong conservative and anti-liberal bias.
On May 8, 2006, the Financial Times reported that Murdoch would be hosting a fundraiser for Senator Hillary Clinton's (D-New York) Senate reelection campaign. Murdoch's New York Post newspaper opposed Clinton's Senate run in 2000.
Clearly Murdoch knew that Clinton could win a senate seat in New York but cannot win a presidential bid.
If you think that Murdoch has had a radical conversion in his political views, just tune in to Fox News and take a look. No, clearly Murdoch is funding the Democrat that he knows will allow Fox News to most viciously attack in killing any hopes for a Democratic Presidency. Sadly, most Democrats continue in their blissful ignorance, unwilling to take a critical look at the very billionaire media mogul that they love to lambaste with platitudes of indignation.
My cursory look at Clinton's most recent FEC report (http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C0
0431569/A_EMPLOYER_C00431569.html) of July 15 revealed massive corporate donations, but most striking were those from Murdoch owned companies. I do not have a full list of Murdoch owned companies, but counting only those companies that I know to be owned by him, I added up over eighty-nine thousand dollars in contributions.
Sadly, most Democrats are oblivious to the fact that decision about our candidates are not just being made by major corporations, but by major corporations who are looking to make profit by ridiculing us. Rest assured that neither Clinton nor the DLC are so clueless.
by DoIT, Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 04:59:43 AM EDT
I've been reading that yesterday Ann Coulter called Obama a Terrorist. I found this on Taylor Marsh. Crooks and Liars says that Coulter linked Obama to Terrorism. While everyone is entitled to their opinion the video of what she actually said disputes this. She did make a very bad joke that I won't pass along and then she repeated it hoping someone would get it. But she never said the word terrorist. Did she mean to imply that Obama is a terrorist or to associate his name with it? Sure. Most likely. Probably so. But she didn't say he was a terrorist or that he was involved in terrorism.
Before anyone accuses me of being a Coulter apologist or of being in league with her let me set the record straight. I think she is a self important despicable immoral person that will say anything, tear down anyone to make herself seem viable. Her only ideology is hate and me. I call her Rushette.
But having made this important distinction I return to my original premise. Two important blogs misled people about what she said on Hardball yesterday. And while I don't disagree with the "gist" of what they say, I do have a problem with a "progressive" site presenting innuendos as if they were facts. That is what Fox News and people like Tony Snow are for. So my question to the "progressives" here is: Shouldn't we be presenting a better standard of reporting when we are criticizing the other side for their obvious distortions and bias?
by AdamGreen, Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:01:34 PM EDT
From the diaries, jerome
Tonight, I saw the DC premiere of Michael Moore's new movie, Sicko. At the event, I also saw and had a conversation with Fox's Mort Kondracke -- who confirmed himself to be a mindless hack.
First, the movie...Sicko was amazing. I don't often tell people to go see movies, but go see this movie -- and bring a couple of your nonpolitical or Independent friends too.
When I saw Al Gore's movie, I went in thinking "Yeah, I support the environment" and left passionately considering myself an environmentalist. When I saw Sicko, I went in thinking "Yeah, we need to improve health care in this country" and left thinking "Holy cow - we need a health care revolution."
See it. See it. See it. And bring your friends.
by msnook, Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:40:19 AM EDT
Recently, MSNBC began running a news ticker through commercial breaks to keep viewers "engaged," even if only for the few moments they forget to keep not-paying-attention during commercials. Ever the competitor, Fox came up with its own plan: 8-second animated segments between commercials featuring an Arab-looking, Arab-sounding, taxi-driving man in NYC who we see talking to himself through the rear-view mirror. Oleg (the character's name, which I learned after a bit of digging online) is learning to speak English like a good little assimilator, so an artificial voice on a tape reads a phrase and then Oleg repeats.
Here were the first words I ever heard Oleg utter. (And as Dave Barry says, I swear to you I am not making this up): "Which detention facility am I going to?" If Fox was trying to get my attention, it worked. A mere 30 seconds later, with Oleg's enemy-combatant status still fresh in my mind, his shifty little eyes reappeared in the rear-view mirror, the same artificial voice finished a phrase, and then Oleg said: "Where is my court-appointed attorney?"
Get it? It's not racism because he's just repeating after the tape! He must have gotten that tape second-hand from some terror-cell rummage-sale -- what an innocent explanation. Oh, and if you take the time to look up the web site, (which I'm sure all Fox viewers will) you'll see that there is no hidden message reifying ubiquitous and readily-available negative stereotypes regarding Arabs (or taxi drivers, or people who don't speak English, or people who frequent detention facilities and mooch off the state for counsel like those welfare moms mooching with school lunch) because Oleg is Greek... technically. I mean, "Greek born," as his bio says.
He's probably still one of them on the inside.
More on Fox's newest multi-media racial slur below the fold...