Logo

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 04:11 PM

This doesn't bother me. Fox is playing a lose - lose game, preaching to a progressively more marginalized political demographic. Every one knows Obama's middle name. Everyone who's been paying attention has heard of and knows about Reverend Wright. WhoTF knows what a "baby mama" is and that it's supposed to be an insult anyway? I'm willing to bet my entire current LL balance that Obama is going to get single digit % of the FoxNew's viewership vote at most.

Dnate Mars · 06-27-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cristiano

Oh come on, that is preposterous. Adding an h to my name or spelling yours with a y is not anywhere in the same league of intentionally calling him Osama to continue to try to associate him with being Muslim, a terrorist, etc. If his last name were Hiller, I doubt them calling him Hitler would be brushed off as a simple misspelling.

Serious question, do they still do this? Or has this stopped? And was it proved intentional?

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:12 PM

Is there credence to concerns that Obama is a terrorist muslim intending to eat America's christian babies before instituting Jesus' birthday as a hedonistic gay sex ceremony? With us in the studio today we have Osbama's first grade teacher who recalls the presumptive terrorist nominee drawing a photo of a house on fire in school, which can only reveal his American-hating intentions!

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

Osama's been in the news almost every day for the past 6 years. Daily. Osama, Osama, Osama, Osama... tongues are trained to pronounce the word on sight.

Then suddenly one of the candidates has a name eerily similar. Anyone used to saying "Osama" could easily misspeak and pronounce Obama's name wrong.

Depending on who you are and who you work for, of course, radical leftwingers are going to make a big stink out of your mistake and claim you compared Obama to a known terrorist.

Business as usual in American politics.

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

Yeh. I'm totally believing whatever these clowns put out there.

But you give a pass to a news network that is managed by the guy who helped run the Nixon, Reagan, and Bush (sr) campaigns. I see.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqueline trudeau

This doesn't bother me. Fox is playing a lose - lose game, preaching to a progressively more marginalized political demographic. Every one knows Obama's middle name. Everyone who's been paying attention has heard of and knows about Reverend Wright. WhoTF knows what a "baby mama" is and that it's supposed to be an insult anyway? I'm willing to bet my entire current LL balance that Obama is going to get single digit % of the FoxNew's viewership vote at most.

That's kind of where I was going, Jacqueline. However, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss their following.

Quick Google: In 2004, Fox garnered 55% of the cable news audience. CNN claimed 32%.

I'd suggest that reflects general US population political feelings more than anything else. CNN has gone more global, and MSNBC/other cable outlets don't command nearly the same resources.

In related news: E.D. Hill lost her slot for the "terrorist jab" remark (which, by the way, was 'entertainment/commentary', NOT a news broadcast).

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:21 PM

Fox has made no statements on why she lost her slot, so that's an unverified assumption.

I would certainly like to believe they were related but the network has not stated so.

And their entire lineup is entertainment/commentary. That doesn't change that they present it all as news.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqueline trudeau

But you give a pass to a news network that is managed by the guy who helped run the Nixon, Reagan, and Bush (sr) campaigns. I see.

I'm not giving anyone a pass, Jacqueline.

I don't watch Fox News. I don't follow Hannity, O'Really or Limbaugh. (Once in a blue moon Limbaugh is on my radio going home from lunch, but mainly for the lulz, he's at least funny sometimes, but never moderate).

I have a deep seated mistrust for 90% of the news media in this country. I don't believe we're given the truth, we're given soundbytes for the sake of entertainment and ratings. But that fits with my general mistrust of politics, as well. Lord help us if we could ever find a candidate who didn't have to whore their personal principles to special interest groups just to grab power. We might actually get an effective government for a change.

Not gonna happen, but meanwhile nobody gets a pass from me - not Fox, not CNN, and most certainly not whacko fringe radical groups on ANY extreme with axes to grind.

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:24 PM

You're not giving any validity to the criticisms against Fox at all because they're coming from an organization you dislike.

You're completely disregarding them because you have a seeming axe to grind against MoveOn.

That looks like a pass to me.

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

That's kind of where I was going, Jacqueline. However, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss their following.

Quick Google: In 2004, Fox garnered 55% of the cable news audience. CNN claimed 32%.

And how many actual people does that 55% represent - not many, I'd argue

Quote:

When the presidential horse race heated up dramatically in January, both MSNBC and CNN, which also touts its on-air army of political experts, chalked up near-record primetime increases. CNN soared by 42% in total viewers, and MSNBC rocketed by 37%. Fox News was up by only 9%, but it has nothing to worry about: At an average of 1.76 million viewers, it wound up with 35% more primetime viewers in January than second-place CNN (1.15 million). Further down in the pecking order wasMSNBC and its average of 744,000.

Less than 2 million. And nearly all republican, I'd wager. As the above quote indicates, they are big fish but shedding viewers in a changing polictical landscape. Which ties in to your link about the firing as Murdoch is no dummy.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua Nightshade

You're not giving any validity to the criticisms against Fox at all because they're coming from an organization you dislike.

Where I object to the whole charade is that it's being made into a bigger issue by MoveOn, LA Times and FoxAttacks than it deserves. Like petitioning Fox is actually going to accomplish a thing, other than giving Fox more publicity?

I can see the Fox board room when they receive the petition: riotous laughter followed by back-slapping, knee-slapping and a new script to hand Sean Hannity so he can waste 2 more hours foaming at the mouth over something that doesn't amount to a thing. It'll be great for Sean's ratings, I'm sure.

Hey, Limbaugh calls Obama "the magic negro". It's a standing joke on his show and one I find personally distasteful. Where's the public outrage?

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

Not gonna happen, but meanwhile nobody gets a pass from me - not Fox, not CNN, and most certainly not whacko fringe radical groups on ANY extreme with axes to grind.

What is so whacko about mediamatters? So what if their stated aim is to combat the message that Fox, Rush and that ilk put out? What better way to do that than just publish the transcript of their inane and odious banter. Pulling up the rock and letting what crawls out is very effective. Just ask "macaca" George Allen.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqueline trudeau

Less than 2 million. And nearly all republican, I'd wager. As the above quote indicates, they are big fish but shedding viewers in a changing polictical landscape. Which ties in to your link about the firing as Murdoch is no dummy.

No, he's not. Which might explain why his News Corp was #2 in market share growth last year, while CBS and NY Times lost money:

I don't think Fox News is worried too much.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqueline trudeau

What is so whacko about mediamatters? So what if their stated aim is to combat the message that Fox, Rush and that ilk put out?

Asked and answered.

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

Where I object to the whole charade is that it's being made into a bigger issue by MoveOn, LA Times and FoxAttacks than it deserves. Like petitioning Fox is actually going to accomplish a thing, other than giving Fox more publicity?

I can see the Fox board room when they receive the petition: riotous laughter followed by back-slapping, knee-slapping and a new script to hand Sean Hannity so he can waste 2 more hours foaming at the mouth over something that doesn't amount to a thing. It'll be great for Sean's ratings, I'm sure.

Hey, Limbaugh calls Obama "the magic negro". It's a standing joke on his show and one I find personally distasteful. Where's the public outrage?

I don't get how in one post you downplay their publicly broadcast actions as no big deal and then in another pump up their market share.

If they have 52% viewership and do something stupid, that sounds like a lot of people seeing it to me and thus a big deal.

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 04:41 PM

Sorry, 55% even.

Asher Bertrand · 06-27-2008, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

No, he's not. Which might explain why his News Corp was #2 in market share growth last year, while CBS and NY Times lost money:

I don't think Fox News is worried too much.

Heh, but I am, looking at that graphic. What's it showing, exactly? Net Income/Loss?

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

No, he's not. Which might explain why his News Corp was #2 in market share growth last year, while CBS and NY Times lost money:

I don't think Fox News is worried too much.

Well, News Corps is MUCH more than just Fox News. But that might be true - Murdoch has carried his toy, the NY Post, which has bled red ink since he's owned it. He might do the same for Fox News if it came down to it.

**Io Zeno** · 06-27-2008, 04:51 PM

The fact is, it's hard to gage a cable news station's viewership because people flip around, watching 20 minutes here and there. Shows, specifically, can be rated, like O'Rielly and the rest, people tend to sit through those, they choose to watch a particular pundit.

But I agree with Jacqueline, he would prop it up and fund it even if it lost money because it is, as I said, his personal propaganda tool, just like the Post.

Cindy Claveau · 06-27-2008, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua Nightshade

I don't get how in one post you downplay their publicly broadcast actions as no big deal and then in another pump up their market share.

If they have 52% viewership and do something stupid, that sounds like a lot of people seeing it to me and thus a big deal.

The point of it, Josh, is that it doesn't matter to Fox's regular viewers. Just like most of Rush's regular listeners probably laugh at the "magic negro" remark, I'd wager most of them took the terrorist insinuation in stride because it already fit with their world view.

So, no, not really a big deal in the scheme of things until Fox's detractors start whining and screaming about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqueline trudeau

But that might be true - Murdoch has carried his toy, the NY Post, which has bled red ink since he's owned it. He might do the same for Fox News if it came down to it.

Like that'll happen.

Ned Easterwood · 06-27-2008, 05:06 PM

Thanks Cris.
I signed the petition.
And now, in my usual fashion, I will say no more.

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 05:09 PM

It doesn't matter about Fox's viewers. Significant numbers of people complaining about actions that are disgusting and reprehensible is a good thing regardless of whether or not the people supporting the actions care.

Lexxi Gynoid · 06-27-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

: When the presidential horse race heated up dramatically in January, both MSNBC and CNN, which also touts its on-air army of political experts, chalked up near-record primetime increases. CNN soared by 42% in total viewers, and MSNBC rocketed by 37%. Fox News was up by only 9%, but it has nothing to worry about: At an average of 1.76 million viewers, it wound up with 35% more primetime viewers in January than second-place CNN (1.15 million). Further down in the pecking order was MSNBC and its average of 744,000.

Quote:

Less than 2 million. And nearly all republican, I'd wager. As the above quote indicates, they are big fish but shedding viewers in a changing polictical landscape. Which ties in to your link about the firing as Murdoch is no dummy.

"shedding viewers"? "was up by only 9%" means that they added only 9% compared to the 42% increase for CNN and 37% for MSNBC. It grew by 9%. That is not shedding viewers.

Now if your "shedding viewers" comment is based on something else, sorry.

Joshua Nightshade · 06-27-2008, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua Nightshade

Huh??

"MoveOn started in 1998 as an email group, MoveOn.org, created by computer entrepreneurs Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, the married cofounders of Berkeley Systems. They started by passing around a petition asking Congress to "censure President Clinton and move on", as opposed to impeaching him. The petition, passed around by word of mouth, was extremely successful; ultimately, they had half a million signatures.[citation needed] Buoyed by their success, the couple went on to start similar campaigns, including: calling for more arms inspections rather than an invasion of Iraq (see Popular opposition to war on Iraq); the reinstatement of lower limits on arsenic and mercury pollution, and campaign finance reform. Since then, it has raised millions of dollars for many Democratic candidates.[3] In November 2007, a drive spearheaded by MoveOn caused Facebook to change its controversial new "Beacon" program, which notified Facebook users about purchases by people on their friends list."

"Berkeley Systems was a San Francisco Bay Area software company cofounded in 1987 by Wes Boyd and Joan Blades."

"Joan Blades (b. ca. 1956 in Berkeley, California) was the cofounder in 1987 with her husband Wes Boyd of Berkeley Systems, a San Francisco Bay area software company known for marketing the After Dark screensaver and the You Don't Know Jack trivia game. After selling Berkeley Systems in 1997 for $13.8 million, Blades and Boyd founded the liberal political group MoveOn.org."

California is foreign now?

I'm also still waiting on an explanation for MoveOn being a foreign entity.

jacqueline trudeau · 06-27-2008, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beathag McMahon

Thanks Cris.
I signed the petition.

As did I.

My message to FOX: (optional)

Quote:

Fox on-air talent, listen up. Your head man calls Obama a rock star. Better listen to what he says unless you want to end up like E.D. Hill

06-27-2008, 04:11 PM	#76 (permalink)
jacqueline trudeau Soul Vaccinated Breakin' prims in the hot sun Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Shantytown Posts: 4,118 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 4 SL Join Date: 07/15/2005 Business: Trudeau Classic Sailing Yachts	This doesn't bother me. Fox is playing a lose - lose game, preaching to a progressively more marginalized political demographic. Every one knows Obama's middle name. Everyone who's been paying attention has heard of and knows about Reverend Wright. WhoTF knows what a "baby mama" is and that it's supposed to be an insult anyway? I'm willing to bet my entire current LL balance that Obama is going to get single digit % of the FoxNew's viewership vote at most. __________________ Trudeau Classic Sailing Yachts

06-27-2008, 05:06 PM	#96 (permalink)
Ned Easterwood Just trying to get by Milana's dom and Rhonda's babydoll Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Detroit, Mi. Posts: 16,534 My Mood: SL Join Date: 5/4/2007 Blog Entries: 15	Thanks Cris. I signed the petition. And now, in my usual fashion, I will say no more. __________________ Ned Take 'er easy for all the sinners of the world, dude. Abide. And amen. http://www.dudeism.com/ My Unitarian Jihad Name is: The Claymore of Loving Kindness Unitarian Jihad Bea and Ned's SL Pics (Mostly SFW)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-27-2008, 04:12 PM	#78 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	Is there credence to concerns that Obama is a terrorist muslim intending to eat America's christian babies before instituting Jesus' birthday as a hedonistic gay sex ceremony? With us in the studio today we have Osbama's first grade teacher who recalls the presumptive terrorist nominee drawing a photo of a house on fire in school, which can only reveal his American-hating intentions!

06-27-2008, 04:21 PM	#82 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	Fox has made no statements on why she lost her slot, so that's an unverified assumption. I would certainly like to believe they were related but the network has not stated so. And their entire lineup is entertainment/commentary. That doesn't change that they present it all as news.

06-27-2008, 04:24 PM	#84 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	You're not giving any validity to the criticisms against Fox at all because they're coming from an organization you dislike. You're completely disregarding them because you have a seeming axe to grind against MoveOn. That looks like a pass to me.

06-27-2008, 04:41 PM	#91 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	Sorry, 55% even.

06-27-2008, 04:51 PM	#94 (permalink)
Io Zeno Gone SLU Supporter Stoking the fires of Hell Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: New York City Posts: 16,974 My Mood: Blog Entries: 1 Awards: 1	The fact is, it's hard to gage a cable news station's viewership because people flip around, watching 20 minutes here and there. Shows, specifically, can be rated, like O'Rielly and the rest, people tend to sit through those, they choose to watch a particular pundit. But I agree with Jacqueline, he would prop it up and fund it even if it lost money because it is, as I said, his personal propaganda tool, just like the Post.

06-27-2008, 05:09 PM	#97 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	It doesn't matter about Fox's viewers. Significant numbers of people complaining about actions that are disgusting and reprehensible is a good thing regardless of whether or not the people supporting the actions care.

Logo

Site Navigation