Jon Stewart to O'Reilly: "Are you still referring to" Fox as a "news organization"?
February 03, 2010 9:06 pm ET
From the February 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Back then it was Jon following puppets making prank phone calls, now it's Jon following a female comedian making penis jokes. I don't think there is any shift in the type of show since both are comedy shows.
However, I think it's a little hard for people watching FNC to see the line between news and opinutainment when Bill O follows Shep Smith (who is supposed to be doing real news).
Just as it would be misleading to put Dr. Phil on Comedy Central & still brand it a comedy channel, it's equally bizzare to say Fox News is News.
Even their so called "News" portions show political bias & spout opinion. It's not always necessarily the anchors, Fox likes to use banners & tickers on the screen to shift a story more towards their liking.
Now, that's all fine & good, I suppose, so long as we call them out for their irresponsible "journalism". The problem is, Fox News denies they're anything but "Fair & Balanced". They are obviously not.
What Stewart could have done is expose Fox for being, simply, a lousy news network. A plethora of good examples to back it up, too. Then, conclude by saying that the Fox audience doesn't really watch for the real news. They watch for the anti-liberal slant. (News is not Murdoch's game plan. Audience share is.)
I did love when Stewart compared O'Reilly to the thinnest kid at fat camp. O'Reilly's ego probably saw that as a compliment.
i'll report, i'll decide... it's dishonesty... because most if not all of you are smart enough to know the difference, even when it's presented by fox news... simply disagreeing with their opinions and badmouthing their audience is no kind of argument on this point...
reporting from murderland ranch,
i'm mookie von zipper
massmurdermedia
keep defending the supposed fair and balanced media arm of the neo cons.
there's nothing to defend here but the reality of one's ability to distinguish news from opinion... apparently you're not capable of doing so, but i guess that's fox news' fault for only telling the truth 0.1% of their broadcast day... so if news corps is the big evil bad boy on the block, i guess that makes ge, viacom, disney and time/warner truth-telling do-gooders full of sunshine and puppy dogs...
Fox is probably the biggest misinformer in the news and also the most influential so take your pick at any other mainstream organization.
"here's nothing to defend here but the reality of one's ability to distinguish news from opinion... apparently you're not capable of doing so,"
Apparently you are incapable of analyzing the problem here. Fox presents their opinion as if it were news. I know its BS, MMFA knows its BS, but many people watch Fox believing that its truth and fact rather than opinion backed up by misinformation.
Yes news corp is the "evil bad boy on the block," and the others although I doubt full of "puppy dogs" or "sunshine," at least have some sort of integrity. Yes, they don't always report correctly or without bias but compared to Fox they are awfully sunshiny.
The shows on FOX are all broadcast on the FOX NEWS channel. Not the FOX News and Sometimes Opinion channel. None of the shows carry a disclaimer about it being an opinion show.
The so-called fair and balanced "News" shows (the ones that aren't supposed to be opinionated) even call upon talking points made by opinion commentators on their own network and use it as news- saying things like "People are buzzing about the recent allegations that..." and "Some say the President has...". When really, FOX is the only network spouting that garbage.
cable news network, under your criteria, should be called cable news and opinion network by virtue of the fact they employ larry king, wolf blitzer, rick sanchez and christine armanpour to do opinion shows... or maybe since they are known simply as cnn they get a pass... and msnbc gets a pass for olberman, matthews and maddow because the word "news" is not in the name of their channel... how about cnn headline news, they have nancy grace, but while i never watch her, i have the sneaking suspicion she's not merely reading headlines... the fcc should look into that...
where does this leave newspapers?... you're probably in agreement with stewart that they are "passive" objects, plus many of them don't have the word "news" in their name either, so they can report opinion, sports and entertainment as well...
brilliant observation there, good catch...
http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/fox_news_channel
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/pagespage/2009/10/how-news-views-at-fox.html
The above link Jon Stewart exposes the lie that there is a seperation of Faux opinion and news.
30 reasons why Fox News is not legit
For instance, a legitimate news organization does not:
Source its research to "conservative blogs."
Purposefully present stories out of context.
Regularly declare "Victory!" when a White House initiative fails.
Ignore a breaking news story that embarrasses the Republican Party.
Invite fringe conspiracy theorists to appear on news shows.
Suggest during a news program that Democrats voted to "protect pedophiles, but not veterans."
Routinely accuse the president of the United States of being like Adolf Hitler.
Describe itself as the "voice of the opposition."
Air more than 100 commercials promoting partisan political rallies.
Show 22 clips of health care reform opponents who attended town hall forums, and none of health reform supporters.
Purchase full-page newspaper ads to spread falsehoods about the news competition.
Invade the privacy of second-grade students.
Promote violent political rhetoric.
Fail to fact-check a murder story before airing allegations about it.
Allow a news anchor to suggest a Supreme Court nominee is guilty of "reverse racism."
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200910270002
as for 30 reasons fox news is not legit, i'll spare our readers from addressing all of them, as weak and tired as they all are... but megyn kelly didn't float the sotamayor opinion of her "better conclusion" quote out of whole cloth, it had already been cited by partisan republican's in public office and conservative talk hacks as reverse racism and therefor was a legitimate question to her interviewee... and if media matters has a problem with protecting the privacy of second-graders, why not take that up with the person who posted the video on youtube in the first place?... it wasn't drudge or fox news... finally, you didn't cite this one but it's one of the 30, i will agree that while o'reilly's producers stalking people who won't take their phone calls is creepy and unprofessional, congressman grayson was fair game, as reporters from many media outlets confront senators and congressmen in the halls of the capitol building on a routine basis and this practice has come to be accepted...
The concern here is not whether we can tell the difference, rather it is that others have demonstrated the inability to tell the difference by echoing Fox's misinformation as if it were fact. Whether Fox claims to be news or opinion they make false claims to further their opinions, "be it out of ignorance or dishonesty."
And when casual viewers turn on "Fair and Balanced" Fox "News," they expect to see NEWS, not 25 pages of editorials during primetime with 10 pages of news (which makes references to its own editorial pages). They should call themselves "Fox Opinion Network" and place a disclaimer saying that over half of their "facts" are not really facts. At least drop the fair and balanced motto and switch it with something like "blatantly biased," so people know what they aregetting themselves into.
Now, I believe you are smart enoug
as the self-appointed spokesperson for the casual fox news viewer, you should know that if they weren't getting what they expect then they wouldn't keep tuning in by a margin of more than that of the competition combined... unless, if they're like me, they are hoping to see sean hannity waterboarded by chimpanzees to the brutal metal strains of dethklok... we'll keep hope alive...
Now I am not saying that all other channels operate under complete truth, but the intelligent people here realize that Fox has much less concern for truth.
And I hope that you realize that I do not mean to speak for all casual viewers but I have seen the way people react in shock and outrage as Fox makes their false claims (as I am willing to bet you have too).
When it comes to ratings, its a bit simplistic to say Fox's superior ratings shows that all viewers are getting what they think they are getting. How many people watch Fox because they believe its Fair and Balanced or because they think they are getting the "truth." They still tune in, though they are not getting what they think they are. I am actually an avid Fox news watcher because it is so entertaining and they stick to politics 24/7 where CNN gets boring when they decide to talk about balloon boy all day lol.
And yes, the chimpanzees were a nice touch...
Probably lost a bet . .
Bildo will be reading his [cough] random e-mails for weeks berating him for allowing Stewart to appear . .