Tom Ridge? Fox News never heard of the guy
August 21, 2009 5:16 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
Big surprise, right? Former Department of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge admits in his upcoming book that he was pressured by very senior Bush White House officials to raise the nation's terror level warning and to do it for purely for political reasons.
The story's a big deal and it's been widely reported and commented upon in the last 24 hours. Except at GOP-friendly Fox News, of course, which continues to play dumb about the news story.
According to TVeyes.com, since the terror level story broke yesterday, CNN has mentioned "Tom Ridge" on the air at least 41 times, MSNBC has done it 62 times, and CNN's Headline News, which covers fewer stories each day, mentioned "Tom Ridge" 18 times so far.
Any guesses for Fox News? Did I mention FNC was playing dumb on an epic level?
If you guessed t-w-o, you are correct. According to TVeyes, Fox News has been able to almost completely ignore the Ridge story. It basically does not exist. Four sentences. To date, that's been the sum total of Fox News' reporting on the Ridge controversy. The four sentences were aired on Thursday's Special Report, which was then re-broadcast during the overnight.
BTW, the other cable channels continue to cover the Ridge story today and by midnight I'm guessing MSNBC's total mentions of Ridge will approach 80-90, while CNN's will likely top out around 60. But if I had to place my money, I'd bet that Fox News' two reference will stand firm throughout the day.
Tom Ridge? Never heard of the guy?
Another thing I've long been aware of about FOX is the selective way they report the news. They often ignore major stories that the other networks cover. When Porter Goss resigned as head of the CIA, there was extensive, informative coverage on the other networks about the reasons and ramifications of Goss' tenure and resignation. I kept flipping to FOX that night to see what they were saying about Goss' resignation but it was only mentioned for a five seconds in a news break. As anyone who keeps up with current affairs knew, the CIA was in a shambles post 9/11 about the way Bush and Cheney had politicized and manipulated its findings in the build up to the Iraq war and Goss had been sent there to clean out the people who weren't considered loyal the Bush administration. Oooooh...FOX wasn't about to report on anything unfavorable to Dick Cheney and George W. Bush so they just ignored the story. FOX does this kind of stuff all the time. FOX is NOT a legitimate news agency.
And you have ignored the fact that you are still a blathering idiot of a troll!
Stop wasting our time with your coming in here to speak blatant lies.
I suppose you believe that Fox-Noise is the most honest 'news' channel of them all simply because they have the most viewers?
However, you could easily lay to rest my accusation that you are a 'blathering idiot of a troll' by finding any proof and offering a direct link to any of your past, future, and in the case of this thread, present accusations??
It is actually the other way around, Fox has the most viewers because they are the most honest.
And you show your lack of class with your insults, I guess it is an example of how the progressives are better than the rest of society.Good job, you should be proud.
Are you seriously saying that viewers flock to Fox because they are so honest? Do restaurant patrons flock to McDonald's, Taco Bell etc because they have the best food?
What a joke.
The lowest rated network news program (CBS) has almost three times as many viewers as Fox, CNN and MSNBC, combined.
thats like saying people watch american idol because every singer on the show has a great voice and an amazing future in singing. but last time i checked, not only were a lot of them terrible, but many were made fun of for their atrocious performances (i.e. sanjayah), and were on tv primarily for comedy and ratings.
as much of the media does... and nobody denies that. however, i would like to see a specific example of maddow ignoring stories because i havent seen any. but regarding republicans and fox, when you ignore big stories like this that hurt the party while the rest of the media talks about it, you are taken less seriously for further newsworthy information. you have a moral obligation to report anything big because you are supposedly a news organization.
for example, look at the john edwards affair. neither msnbc or cnn ignored it for a second. they reported it promptly. maybe they were more sympathetic towards edwards about it than they would be towards republican sex scandals, but i think part of that had to do with the fact that at the time his wife was suffering with breast cancer (and still is), but at least they reported on it. the clinton scandal is a different story, but that is a debate for another day. but fox news completely ignored the ensign and sanford affairs acting like they never happened, and only brought them up days later in discussions about how the media would smear them and such... which resulted in no news value reporting, just opinion. so rather than reporting, and even so much as defending the individuals immediately, they just ignore it and bring it up later. i guess they werent prepared for the impact it had. but with edwards and clinton, immediate smear jobs were cocked and loaded.
regardless, the amount of ignoring fox news does on real newsworthy stories pales in comparison to the other networks. its just incomparable. am i wrong?
i would love to hear more analysis from her about fox news.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpi5PaAIj8Q
Basically, if they never admit anything they don't like then their audience will believe and support right wing figures more.
When is comes to a Fair reporting of the news Fox is commiting a Crime.
Any High School News Paper would have led with the Tom Ridge Story.
Any Reporter with any Self Respect would Quit Fox News & go elsewhere to seek their Glory.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
I guess that the good folks here at MMFA also have their own separate miniuniverse.
But that is the way people like it here.
And BTW, I believe that MMFA changed their "mission" to include newsworthy stories, not only mis-information. I guess criminal and hypocritical behavior on the part of the left, is not newsworthy to them.
Yikes!! I can't believe Boehlert is ignoring that blockbuster to write about some piddly partisan nonsense like the GOP manipulating the Homeland Security Dept. in order to try to influence an election. Where are your priorities, Mr Boehlert ??
The "Kennedy hypocrisy in changing laws every few years to benefit his party" bit sounds, in substance, more like something a high school girl would write on her Facebook page about the girl she hates.
Why don't you start your own site, where you can write about these important imaginary issues? I'll bet there are some people who would enjoy having somebody read these things to them after a hard day of wetting themselves and hoisting swastikas at town halls.
And do you deny that Kennedy is a big hypocrite for doing an about face on the law he just got changed in 2004 when the gov was a repub. Now the gov is a fellow dimocrat, so he wants to go back to the old way. How would you classify his actions? Care to comment?
I guess you were really upset about the Texas changes. And by the way, what do you think of Ridge being "nugged" into changing the color codes? Interesting to hear your side of the story but since Fox has only briefly mentioned it, I can wait a few days until after Hannity or Rush gives the word. No hurry
Now the gov is a fellow dimocrat (fairliberal 1:45pm)
Didn't take very long to show your true hypocritical colors, did it?
Outside of that, what can you expect? There are partisan sites on both sides. Do you go to Newsbusters and complain that they're not pointing out some story that reflects badly on Republicans? How about FreeRepublic or LittleGreenFootballs, which don't concentrate on the media?
This isn't in any way comparable to a news channel downplaying a story that hurts their cause, because news channels should act objectively. Partisan sites on either side are not subject to such a standard, especially when those sites aren't even news sites to begin with.
They'd probably be as shocked at comments I make about the left at other websites where what are off-topic distractions here,are actually the subject.
I just don't understand why they don't go find a forum, and a particular thread, where the topic they're obsessed with is the topic. It's like they're wandering into a butcher shop and wondering where the vegetables are, imagining some great conspiracy or hypocrisy.
Can I use that one sometime? Concise and to the heart! :-)
Col., isn't this the same troll that mistook me for Peg Kennedy, the other day? And I look nothing like a Kennedy. So I'd say yes everything and everyone reminds her of a Kennedy.
Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?
Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier: Your winnings, sir.
Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
[aloud] Everybody out at once!
Sounds like Fox News!