Why Does Fox News Have More Power Than Any Progressive in the Country?

As we can all see now, when Fox says jump, the Obama administration asks how high? (Then jumps one inch less and considers it a progressive victory). Is there anyone Obama won't fire or throw under the bus if Fox asks him to? What if they ask Obama to fire himself? Would he do it? Or would he just fire Biden and say he met them halfway?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/why-does-fox-news-have-mo_b_655327.html

Van Jones, ACORN, Dawn Johnsen, Shirley Sherrod. First sign of trouble, throw someone overboard. When they fired Van Jones, I said they were only encouraging Fox. But that wasn't some genius prediction; it was only the most obvious thing in the world. Do you think the bully won't take your lunch money tomorrow if you give it to him today?

If progressive bring that up to Obama and suggest he be fired for that memo, they'd probably be called fuckn retards.

They make a lot of noise, far more than the left. After all, they have an entire industry to make noise.

When they squeak, their clownish followers act. They make tea, they march, they get in the news. No act on the left gets a tenth of the media coverage as 100 tea partiers in Search Light.

The have more power because they are held to a different standard. If a person on the left is perceived to make a misstatement, they pounce and destroy. A person on the right can do anything and be forgiven. Look at the difference between Dan Rather and Breitbart. Rather made a report on Bush and the national guard. Though what he said was correct, his use of one forged document (forged by whom? we don't know) doomed his career. Breitbart actually makes up lies, forges videos, or pays for them to be forged, yet he continues to be accepted on the right and at the center.

voluntarily draw a comparison between Rather and Brietbart ...

That pretty much sums it up ...

A career JOURNALIST, who spent DECADES doing rock solid straight reporting, got it RIGHT, with one bad source and he is now a running joke ...

A guy who SHOULD be a running joke, some nobody never has been who sits in a basement drumming up the most baseless possible BS, and the MSM treated him with kid gloves through this ...

UNFRIGGEN REAL ...

Nobody will hold Breitbart to a standard.

Predominantly old, male and white. Younger folks don't watch TV news as much or without using other sources like the internet to get other views. Old guys like my dad are the ones watching this crap. Validates his worldview and doesn't require learning about new tech stuff.

I think that's why they rate so high. Their demographic are the remaining TV news watchers. Others don't watch as much. Also, so many businesses run their stupid "news" all day in their lobbies and waiting rooms. It sucks.

n/t

I'm not saying this is your postion, but the current "centrist" theme around DU could be summed up this way:

"We cant do anything about FOX news b/c it will piss off a bunch of people who will never vote for us. It will cause a network who already lies about us to continue to lie about us. It will cause people who already believe lies about us to believe lies about us."

Is there a such phrase as circular excuse making? If not, there needs to be.

FOX scares the crap out of them, and they know that when it comes down to it, MOST progressives will hold their nose and vote dem.

as david cross so succinctly put it; what're you gonna do gramma? vote for kucinich?!!

n/t

I'd love to see the people who control our party call for Hannity's firing- or do denyFOX all access until he is fired- for instance. My guess is that centrists are not up for anything ieven remotely like that. What do you think?

For all I know, FOX news probably hits Vilsak up for milk money everyday at lunch.

Centrists seem to LIKE being bullied these hacks, but progressives are and have been ready to rumble.

I've seen numerous occasions where progressives jump on a Democrat for saying something that could be misconstrued by the RW.

That's the problem with labeling everyone who disagrees with you a "centrists," a lot people fall into the same traps, and then try to justify why they're right for doing what they criticize others for doing.

Second request. Back up your claim.

Also, I'm not labeling everyone who disagrees with me as a "centrist"- I'm labeling Dems whoare more responsive to FOX and conservative swing voters than they are to the DEM base as "centrists."

Maybe DEMS who side with the GOP on things like the war or the budget or taxes shouldnt even be called centrists, maybe they should be called conservatives. Not because I disagree w/ them, but for their far right positions on major issues.

He offered her a "unique new position" at the agency.

And the new position would be concerned with civil rights. Not with helping family farms.

Shirley Sherrod might do very well in a civil rights position, but that's not the point.

The point is that Tom VilSuck is a MonSatan shill, and because of that, he considers family farmers the enemy. No doubt whomever he has in mind to replace Shirley Sherrod at her old job will have the same "MonSatan friendly" views.

Bratfart's sloppy racist video edits merely provided VilSuck as a convenient excuse to get rid of a dedicated public servant.

She needs her job back. Her job needs her back. VilSuck needs to be GONE.

The white parts, in between the text. I wish there was more ass-kicking text there, instead.

:thumbsup:

Cenk is a fool.

Why cant they even TRY?

The left seems to have plenty of bark but almost no bite.

When RW bastards were overtaking townhall meetings and doing tea party expresses everywhere, the left sat back and complained.

Whenever they fail to energize their base or fail to control the message, they can always just make up an excuse and blame voters.

If the left has no bite, then it is only b/c the people we elected refused to throw us that teething bone.

and the media is a subsidiary of the GOP.

We target Democrats, even when Democrats attempt to target the media.

I remember how people jumped on Kerry for supporting a return to an updated fairness doctrine.

They know better than to attack fellow Liberals-they know that the FOX and Hannity is the target.

So long as the brave centrists lead the chaerge on this, we dont need to worry about them attacking other DEMS. Right? They have th focus, drive and smarts to pull it off. Right?

So when do they start?


Also-Which Liberals attacked Kerry for supporting the FD? Name some names.

I want to know which Liberals are going to stop all those brave, stout-hearted centrists from a campaign to attack & discredit Sean Hannity.

Thanks for the heads up on that- now just name their names so we know who to look out for.

Same with O'Reilly and Beck.

As long as they say what the boss wants them to say, their jobs are safe.

Their boss knows that he is speaking to a reliable demographic that will reward him for having them speak.

I see no reason why this means that DEMS should be too frightened to make the threat.

They should threaten to deny FOX news access or credentials unless they fire hannity.

If FOX refuses to fire Hannity- it's still a win for us- we hurt FOX if we deny them access to the WH or any DEM, and we excpose the issue of them constantly lying to a larger audience.

In the end, DEMS could say:

"FOX made a choice- it decided that lying to it's viewers was more important than adhering to good, old fashoined American standards of truth and honesty."

But the truth remains that as long as Hanity speaks to the demographic they want to appeal to he will keep his job.

They are simply not held to the same standard.

The problem we face is that if we speak out directly against FOX and such we are engaging in a war that serves no real end. Attacking Fox doesn't win one vote. It's listeners have their own subset of false facts and slippery truths, and will not change their minds no matter what anyone else says. They are also a very active demographic that will act reliably especially in midterm elections and off year elections when they can have a disproportional effect on an election. When only 30% of the people vote, and the majority of that 30% believe the Gospel according to Hannity, stirring them up by direct attacks can be devastating.

Now, the question remains, how do we threaten to withhold Fox's credentials?

And dont see how any of your numbers is an excuse for failing to fight FOX.

Bush fought CBS and it gained him votes- it gained him a victory, as a matter of fact.

So what if they continue to believe Hannity- they were never going to vote for us to begin with.

And no question remains at all-either DEMS allow FOX to access to them and the WH, or they dont. What do you mean, how do they threaten to wihhold it? They just do it. No interviews with DEMS. Do not set one foot in the WH. No press pass. Bye-bye- you are trespassing.

Why reward FOX news with continued access? Seems more logical to PUNISH your ememies when they attack you, as opposed to continueing to play nicey-nice kissy face. Gee, I guess I'm just a crazy liberal for thinking that way.

So what is your plan- to just keep on letting FOX do whatever it can and will, with no hit back, ever?

Tell me your plan- not an EXCUSE- a PLAN for taking on FOX news.

My plan is to hurt them by denying them access to the WH- you have failed to explain why we cant do that. We wont LOSE a single vote over it- and you might be wrong- it could be a step towards winning over the votes of Liberals & independents who have given on haviong DEMS stand up for them.

As long as they say what the boss wants them to say....

Unfortunately, in the US today, 'the boss' of pols and appointees is not someone who ever stands for an election.

If I'd gotten that video clip, the first words out of my mouth would have been, "Where's the rest of it?" Then I would have proceeded to obtain it, and then I would have contacted Ms. Sherrod and asked her what the deal was.

Sure the NAACP could have stopped Briet-barf and Faux in their tracks by releasing the full tape right away. But that's no reason for the MSM to have tossed their most basic precept--there's more than one side to a story.

:headbang:
rocktivity

Add that to the fact that the administration is gun shy about these matters after the Rev. Wright fiasco.

Hope not, but from all the excuse making I see, my hopes are crashing.

The Wright thing dragged on for far too long. Once they have all the facts, they need to act. But not before.

But that doesn't mean more people are watching. It just means FAUX pays businesses to play their stupid treasonous content in their establishments (office, restaurant, whatever)

Maybe I should sign up for their program? If Murdoch wants to buy me a new TV and pay my Scamca$t bill, I'll tell him it's on his shitty "news" network. Which of course, it won't be. But I'll still watch House, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Fringe and maybe a couple things on FX, so it's not like he's really losing money.

...and you request that they change the channel, and they refuse to do so, and tell you that the TV is required to be on that channel, then obviously somebody connected with that channel is paying that business to air the channel.

It ain't rocket science.

Fox News must be on?

But this is happening all over the country. Many different types of businesses. And why are you defending FAUX Noise anyway? I thought even the DLC hated those assholes?

And if it were true, do you really believe that other news channels wouldn't be reporting on this?

If liberals rallied around President Obama at any time when an election wasn't involved, their concerns would be given greater weight. Too many in the liberal blogosphere were counting down the seconds to claim they were betrayed and Obama was a sellout.

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

A huge differnce being that Air America has no record of lying as FOX does. Yet we still have Rahm & the DLC calling us "fucking retards."

Can you imagine a Republican calling FOX news viewers "fucking retards"- see the difference now?

If Obama refuses to go after FOX-it wont be b/c Liberal bloggers stopped him.

I thought he didnt care what Liberal bloggers thought to begin with- after all, that's just a small "Liberal Fringe" or "Fucking retards" according to his own admin.

Knowing this, dont tell us he cant go after FOX b/c "the far left" is not helping or demanding it enough.

Republicans are so monoethnic that they tend to fall in line. Therefore the leader (Rush- radio and Fox TV) is more powerful. There are so many interests on the left that there is a constant balancing act to keep a plurailty somewhat appeased.

actually, I am beginning to think Ms. Sherrod doesn't need our help, she is kicking Fox and Breitbart's asses all by herself.

All I see is ignored.

Good luck w/ that...

the same reason why microsoft has so much power over computer owners or walmart over consumers.....

i think progressives need to ignore it except to smack it down when egregious...but a whole strategy tit for tat is futile and gives them fuel.....

or organize anything with real power. Because we waste time with symbolic green party campaigns to "raise awareness" instead of running serious candidates who can win. Because we ignore anything progressive Obama does but complain non-stop about any slight or compromise. Because half of us sit around and wait for LBJ to push through a big government program to solve all of our problems instead of answering the Presidents call to organize mass social movements. Because when it's time to face the opposition we turn on each other instead.

In HuffPo, no less.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

The sad part, I think, is that he has no idea where his personal "contributions" to journalism sit on the problem/solution spectrum.

their message out", than they are in getting more money. In the long run they make more money anyway, that is inevitable, but they just pumped millions and millions for years into grooming their spokesmen and buying the whole table.

There are vast regions of this nation where there is no alternative to Reich-Wing Media except even crazier Reich-Wing.

There are no such ideologues on the left. Plenty of money, but no real interest beyond their own position in the game they've won.

We have a pile of people ('ideologues'), what we seem to be lacking is the same amount of media channels.

My personal solution is to revoke all public media licenses (radio, TV) given to religious organizations, and turn them over to publicly run, publicly funded, groups.

and those that we could bring up as billionaire "friends of the left", have shown any interest in combating the Big Lie Campaign.

Where are any of SKG? They have their pet issues that they fund as a hobby, but none are willing to make the real commitment Mellon-Scaife (one example) made. And why should they? This system of taking from the least has worked out very well for them.

The rest of the media is too cowardly to call Fox out on their lies, that why they get away with this crap.

Part of it is also because right wingers are less educated, and therefore more willing to buy into an emotional argument, even if it makes no logical sense when you really think about it. That ignorance of the GOP fuels right wing talk radio, and lots of Fox programs are structured just like their radio show (many of their big names have radio shows).

The rest of the media also needs to learn to start to call out Fox on their lies, and paint them as a propaganda network that's not credible.

If we're ever going to overpower Fox in the media, we need MSNBC to dump their few conservative shows and be brave enough to call out Fox and conservatives on all their lies, even if it risks making themselves not look as professional. Either that or we need someone to start their own 24 hour news channel.

Another reason why we don't have a 24 hour news channel is because, like I said above, emotional arguments just sell better over this kind of media, but liberals are less interested in that. We want to hear detailed arguments that back up an opinion, that explain the logic behind it. To today's media the research involved in fact checking stuff like that is just too much, especially since they know it wouldn't be exciting as an emotional show, or an emotional argument.

to do something.......instead of writing and calling and taking action,
like them fucking RWers do!

:kick: