Topic of the Day: Fox News
Posted 12 weeks 6 days ago byIf the headshots have looked a little off, it wasn't you.
Media Matters, the watchdog group, has caught Fox News fudging pictures that make the targets of its smears look goofy. In this particular case, a New York Times reporter was called a "bulldog" on-air as Fox News broacast an altered image of his face -- nose enlarged, teeth yellowed and ears widened -- after he penned an article about competition between Fox and CNN. A co-worker at the New York Times compared the image-altering to Nazi-era propaganda.
Does it surprise you that Fox News altered the image? Do you think other media outlets are doing this too? How much does it diminish a media outlet's credibility?
Tags:
Thoughts
Jan
Submitted on July 9th, 2008 by John 2000when you refer to the 'sexualized violence' are you referring to the videos that Greta might show over and over etc, or are you referring to something else specifically?
Fox News shows more
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by janmbFox News shows more sexualized violence and humiliation than probably any other network -- all in the name of condemning it -- while under-showing violence in Iraq, all in the name of supporting it.
corn ..
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by John 2000sure ... I understood your original statement, and really I was just pushing back a bit on your print news statement. So nothing personal there ...
I too have cut way back on TV sources in recent months, but do enjoy an occasional laugh, of which, it is sad to say, I get more chuckles from 'legitimate "news"' than I do from Daley and Colbert (who totally cracks me up). My son commented that Family Guy and South Park provide more accurate social commentary ... and sometimes when I watch, I have to agree (reluctantly).
aieee ... I don't want to ramble
I wonder how media would handle a serious empirically based thesis that argued media to be a leading cause of all social dysfunctions and neuroses worldwide.
2000
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by CORNFINGER66Sorry, John. Not that I have heard of the Blade thing. I can believe it out of the Blade though.
I myself can not watch Fox. But then again I do not watch that much TV.
I do read two newspapers most everyday, front to back. Get more out of the funnies than anything.
Or is that the election coverage, sometimes it is hard too tell the differance.
By the way ...
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by John 2000here is a very nice collection of some exposed media ethics violations over the past few years. I do not find Fox mentioned in many of them :
http://malicrvenipatuljci.blogspot.com/2...
read em and weep.
cornfinger says :
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by John 2000the newspapers haven't used altered images! This is so naive. Just last year there was a big story regarding the Toledo Blade (which has the 81st ranked readership in the nation) -
"Today the newspaper revealed that former staff photographer Allan Detrich, a one-time Pulitzer Prize finalist and four-time Ohio News Photographer of the Year, is apparently a serial digital manipulator of news photographs. Prior to his resignation on April 7, Detrich had submitted for publication nearly 80 doctored images in only 14 weeks."
from : National Press Photographers Association
http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news...
It seems to be a sin, like many others, only when one is caught. Oftentimes the modifications are very slight and arguably inconsequential. But where is the line to be drawn - especially when such inducements as Pulitzer Prizes and personal and agenda advancements come into play? This behavior is exceedingly widespread to the point where entire scenarios are fully planned and staged. Reuters is world renowned for its false and doctored images.
At least the FoxCapade was so amateurish as to be recognizable immediately. The nitwits on the Fox early morning segments are themselves among the biggest jokes I have ever tried to watch - I can't imagine that anyone does. They are absolutely a bunch of impish know-nothings. The joke is almost that Time actually took offense.
But I guess the offended party saw an opportunity to lash back with some sort of 'anti-semetic' commentary ... ad infinitum, yawn.
Real News.
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by CORNFINGER66If you want real news, tune in to John Stewart, or the Colbert Report.
Nough said, Cornfinger
If FOX is Murdok and CNN is Germans from Russia...
Submitted on July 8th, 2008 by KonstantinIf FOX owned by Murdok and CNN
Germans, from Russia's Flees-Van
That trying please in UK big Mama,
While Rus-Polonium, in UK, is baned,
Are both conspire for neo-tech Obama?
They turning rude almost as the Shpigel
Defamed, to kill, Diana by spies-funkels,
As they did burn, once, Washington DC,
As Russia sacked Europe and two Seas
In name of Katrin-Tcerber-Pana-Mudel.
Be vigilant. But how an American can,
A mediocre, while I am plagio-baned?
Konstantin.
Fox News?
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by kevinkindIts a figment. A place where lunitics are free to shout. It only exist if you tune it in. I prefer to tune Fox out.
I love to laugh at fools who take themselves serious. So long as I remember to remind myself that fools can be very dangerous.
SO CALLED NEWS MEDIA
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by REEDDARRELLI think it does not matter what news organization your listening to they all are no longer news worthy,for example look at all the campaigning the networks did and are still doing for Obama.I'm a Democrat and I was really disapointed in the amount of coverage was in favor of Obama,today was no different I heard the commentator on cnn's 360 talking as to how McCain was trying to catch up to Obama,this was the same retoric broadcast during Hillary's campaign.Fox news is a joke but they were the only media organization to go after Obama's misspokes,all the other so called news media were only trying to explain what Obama really meant to say,so we ordinary people could understand what the god like man said.
world public opinion .org
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by John 2000I don't think I am going to put much stock into 'opinion projecting' organizations like 'world public opinion .org' which is a completely globalist view tank which can be seen by looking into the 'board of advisors' and 'staff' under their AboutUs tab.
These are folks that are dedicated to projecting opinions rather than reporting it. NPR? c'mon MathMan.
FoxNews may be far from perfect, but it has it's CNN NBC whorehouses beat by far in terms of balance of commentary. I have a hard time watching any of them anymore except during actual news coverage. With Fox I mostly get tired of All Crisis All the Time in most of its segments.
It depends
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by koolmom21Neither one is all truthful but...
It depends on what you mean by Misperceptions and the Media.
http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/di...
Fox is hardly fair
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by MathManI like to watch Fox for their slant on politics. Fox can be fun. But they are hardly fair. Below are references to a classic study on objectivity of various new sources. Fox devotees had the most misconceptions. The URL for the study is at the bottom.
As the researchers explained in their report, “The extent of Americans’ misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.”
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were “three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/a...
I watch Foxes news and CNN
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by koolmom21I watch Foxes news and CNN. I can see a big difference in them. CNN is the defender of the liberal party and nothing more. I see that Foxes news at least tries to be fair.
Old news(print).
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by CORNFINGER66The papers havn't used altered pictures, they would just use the least flattering.
In my city we have two papers, one leans right, the other left. The left leaning paper when showing a file picture of President Bush. They pick the one that makes him look like a monkey. The right leaner will print the same artical, but use a more flattering picture.
It has been going on for years. I noticed this at least going back to Bush 1.
Ike, I see this all of the
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by John 2000Ike,
I see this all of the time and on most networks, in magazines, and even, yes, newspapers. It is so easy to do this these days of instant everything. Who can resist the temptation? I think the capability exists to alter so-called real time imagery also.
Propaganda? you betcha.
Time/CNN - LOL, the pot is calling the kettle black. Watch how they embellish the holy Obama with their glowing images.
Watchdog (woof) groups ... so pure.
The PollingPoint image of O'Reilly on the right seems quite altered to me.
So far, Howard Scripps seems pretty clean to me.
MEDIA
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by janmbThe MEDIA doesn't keep up with the real news.
They try to steer the way people think by the subliminal messages and asking questions on the bottom of the screen that we may not have thought important enough to dwell on.
The Media shutdown when Bush came aboard and haven't found their way back into America's hearts.
Black OJ
Submitted on July 7th, 2008 by rom12921Is this like the "blacker" OJ image on Time? some years back?
Does it surprise you that Fox News altered the image? Nope.
Do you think other media outlets are doing this too? Yep
How much does it diminish a media outlet's credibility? not much. ratings