Fox News: The New “Liberal MSM”

On The Daily Show yesterday, Stewart demonstrated how “conservative” rhetoric on Fox has flipped since the election of President Obama. As Gawker put it:

Stewart and his staff dug deep into the archives to find some great footage of various Fox News personalities vehemently condemning the very behaviors that they’re now so enthusiastically championing, like criticizing the president during a time of war and taking to the streets in protests. These are the types of things that liberals do! So Fox News = the new liberals!

The quality of these videos isn’t very good, but you can always go to the Comedy Network site for a better version (or if these are removed for copyright violation).

The hypocrisy is astounding, but oh so predictable.

Advertisements

42 Comments

Filed under Humour, Media Bias

42 responses to “Fox News: The New “Liberal MSM”

  1. Amusing, somewhat fair commentary.

    On a more tragic, but pehaps no less hypocritical, level, what’s the take on Ted Kennedy seeking to now allow for an appointed replacement should he not finish his term.. after the laws in Mass. were specifically amended in 2004 to assure that Mitt Romney couldn’t appoint a replacement for John Kerry if he didn’t finish his term.

    Stone.
    Glass house.
    etc.

  2. What I hate are those LIEberals and their bad haircuts. That Hannity guy has one bad LIEberal toupéeish hairstyle.

  3. As I understand it, the appointment would just be on an interim basis until the special election is held in 140 days or something like that and Kennedy insisted that the individual chosen would have to commit not to run in that election.

    Not quite the massive hypocrisy you make it out to be. Besides, it’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison with the flip-flop of an entire cable news outfit.

  4. sapphireandsteel

    so is it more of a glass houses and throwing tomatos?

  5. Ti-Guy

    The first commenter at Gawker echoes a sentiment I’ve been experiencing since I moved back to Canada (after living for a while among people less media-addled to still possess functioning memories):

    Why is it that “The Daily Show”, which is supposed to be comedy, is the only one that goes into the video library & compares their old sayings with their current sayings?

    That’s why ABC, CBS & NBC see their news ratings fall & fall. If they did this a couple of times a week, they would get new viewers

    I’m constantly astonished by the refusal of our journalistic class to highlight the glaring contradictions among our public figures. With politicians, inconsistency is something we have to live with, but when it comes to intellectuals, pundits, business gurus and other journalists, there seems to be some code of honour that prevents anyone from pointing out how generally sloppy their thinking is, which is revealed through these contradictions.

  6. Ti-Guy

    Rob:

    what’s the take on Ted Kennedy seeking to now allow for an appointed replacement should he not finish his term.. after the laws in Mass. were specifically amended in 2004 to assure that Mitt Romney couldn’t appoint a replacement for John Kerry if he didn’t finish his term.

    Wow, you’re working double-time to accuse non-Conservatives of hypocrisy, aren’t you?

    This is less a political issue than a media one, Rob. And why should I, as a Canadian, frankly care about laws for replacing US senators? Why do you?

  7. I just noticed because of Skinny Dipper that Hannity and Harper have the same hairdo.

  8. “Stone.
    Glass house.
    etc.”

    bemusing, somewhat irrelevant comentary.

    herring.
    red.
    etc.

    KEvron

  9. It’s also funny RT that you’re now attacking people on the right for acting the same way the left did for 8 years of Bush. Disrupting town hall meetings, threatening the safety of elected officials, street protests, nazi references, death threats & so on were perfectly fine for the left to do when opposing Bush.

    And for the record, I deplore those on the right for acting in the manner the way the left did for 8 years. It was wrong then, it’s still wrong now. There’s a lot to go after Obama on w/o resorting to such tactics.

  10. I’m not “attacking” people on the Right; I’m making fun of them. 😉

  11. all kidding aside:

    KEvron

  12. specific examples, mcguire.

    KEvron

  13. YES. McGuire gets it.

    The point is, simply, we should be quicker to respond to the issues in a pointed and sensible way, as opposed to simply attacking by one line, brainless, “zingers”, or other unproductive and, frankly, offensive attacks that ignore the point.

    ..though, sometimes, I think maybe I’m the one missing the point, and perhaps entertainment and “rallying the troops” is maybe the predominant point of political blogs.

    If so, my bad.

  14. Ti-Guy

    Disrupting town hall meetings, threatening the safety of elected officials, street protests, nazi references, death threats & so on were perfectly fine for the left to do when opposing Bush.

    You pulled most of this out your arse. The only thing that remotely resembles reality is comparing Bush to Hitler (which, considering his dictatorial administration and his, well, high crimes and misdemeanours, wasn’t really a stretch) and are perhaps confusing harsh language and swearing with death threats. As for protests…American right wingers should be grateful that they weren’t worse. Frankly, they were excessively timid, in my view.

    Stop wasting everyone’s time, wingnut.

  15. Ti-Guy

    YES. McGuire gets it.

    Wrong again, Rob .

  16. Rob — This blog is meant to be entertaining as much as anything else. I’ll leave the “deep thinking” to others. Frankly, I just don’t have the time or patience for it these days.

  17. “which, considering his dictatorial administration and his, well, high crimes and misdemeanours, wasn’t really a stretch”

    you should realize that that argument, regardless of its cogency, won’t float with rob or mcguire. they’re in deflection mode.

    KEvron

  18. Ti-Guy

    Rob:

    I think maybe I’m the one missing the point, and perhaps entertainment and “rallying the troops” is maybe the predominant point of political blogs.

    Well, rallying the troops, perhaps. But the point of any media product is to present something in a way that grabs people’s attention, hopefully by appealing to their intelligence and sense of humour and not by pandering to their ignorance, their petty hatreds or their irrational persecution complexes.

    I suspect you know all of this already.

  19. “YES. McGuire gets it.”

    he sure does: “deflect. deflect. deflect. muddy. muddy. muddy.”

    KEvron

  20. Ti-Guy. If it’s OK for you to think of Bush as Hitler, then it’s OK for someone on the right to do the same. One can come to the same crazed reasoning about B.O. as you have about Dubya

  21. Ti-Guy

    you should realize that that argument, regardless of its cogency, won’t float with rob or mcguire. they’re in deflection mode.

    I don’t do it for them. I do it to keep myself grounded, especially when it comes to people who are reasonably well-educated, like Rob.

  22. sapphireandsteel

    Two wrongs don’t make a right McGuire. You learned that when you were young and it still applies.

  23. Ti-Guy

    One can come to the same crazed reasoning about B.O. as you have about Dubya

    On what evidence?

    ….Do you actually understand that word, by the way?

  24. Ti-Guy

    Two wrongs don’t make a right McGuire. You learned that when you were young and it still applies.

    That doesn’t work either. Two wrongs do quite often make a right; it depends on the context in which a wrong is engaged and what outcome is to be achieved.

    For example, when it comes to dealing with profoundly dishonest people, it’s quite often imperative to demonstrate to them quite clearly that dishonesty has consequences. So I’d support, up to a point, entrapping such people until one is convinced their behaviour will change from in the future.

  25. Ottlib

    Ti-Guy said:

    “I’m constantly astonished by the refusal of our journalistic class to highlight the glaring contradictions among our public figures.”

    Take a look at the glaring contradictions of our journalistic class. I have seen many pundits argue one way only to argue the complete opposite just months later. Which in and of itself is not a bad thing but you could at least acknowledge that you have changed your position and state the reasons why.

    I have seen it from virtually every pundit and it cuts across political leanings and newspaper chains, although some are worse than others and those worst examples do not all work for the Sun Group.

    Maybe our media does have some scruples after all and will not demand politicians do what they are obviously not willing to do themselves. Maybe they are worried that if they point out the contradictions by politicians others would point out theirs. Or more likely, they are as cynical as the politicians and believe that voters/readers/viewers have short memories and short attention spans so they do not need to be consistant.

    Either way if I were much smarter I would be looking at the relationship of why there is a parallel trend of the viewership/readership for the MSM falling off at similar rates to the reduction of voter turnout/participation in politics amongst the electorate.

  26. Kevron – here’s the thing.

    As much as Ti-Guy seems to make sport of arguing with everything I say, in the midst of it, he often actually makes a cogent point here and there, and I’ve actually quoted him in my own commentary, agreeing with him..

    You, on the other hand, are a simplistic stooge of the left and the concept of cogent, reasonable discussion is quite clearly beyond you.

    Go play with Canadian Cynic where you and your pals can amuse yourselves with fart humour – leave the rational discusion to the adults.

  27. rob, i stopped at “here’s the thing”.

    KEvron

  28. “Do you actually understand that word, by the way?”

    “evidence” or “fascist”? not that the answer will change….

    KEvron

  29. fourteen traits, water muddiers.

    KEvron

  30. Ti-Guy

    Ottlib:

    What we’re dealing with is not inherently a problem with either journalism or disengaged citizens that, once properly identified, will yield *the* solution that will fix it all. Rather, we’re dealing with a complex system (which has a very defined meaning) that has to be constantly infused with information and feedback to maintain equilibrium.

    In the case of journalism, for example, the real issue is not the motivations of journalists that should concern us, but how quickly their mistakes are corrected/clarified and that these corrections be presented to pretty much the same audience who were exposed to the errors in the first place (a very big failing with respect to established practise). Otherwise, we have problems that are particular to complex systems: a small error can set off a chain of events that lead to a much bigger crisis later on. Case in point: a couple of liars feeding bad intelligence to the US administration that ends up in the biggest foreign policy blunder the US has ever committed, one that I believe, eventually, will prove to have been the tipping point into irreversible decline.

    All news/current affairs media agents (and that even includes bloggers) will have to start thinking of themselves as part of a complex system and operate like that if they intend to prevent bigger crises (and I’m not convinced that’s an imperative with too many of them) and if they wish to prevent stricter, more specific regulation, which is quite often at odds with freedom of thought and expression and can have all kinds of unintended consequences.

    I don’t have any hope of that happening, however, since most people see their actions in a much more restricted context, the consequences of which are expected to play out only in the shortest of terms.

  31. Ti-Guy

    Rob, don’t mind KEvron. He’s got a good instinct for bad faith. Which I do as well. And that’s why I argue with you. Not because I enjoy it, but because I detest bad faith.

    By the way, Canadian Cynic is not the only non-Conservative blog out there. It’s not even a particularly political blog. It’s mostly a blog for skeptics who appreciate the value of swearing.

  32. “He’s got a good instinct for bad faith.”

    i appreciate that. yes, i do know bullshit when i’ve tread in it.

    KEvron

  33. … did he really drag cc into it again?! rob surely must be a lawyer; he has a natural gift for engaging in argumentative fallacies.

    i’d ask if you can name the particular fallacy, rob, but the real question is will you?

    KEvron

  34. Hmmm….I don’t recall the left toting rifles and guns where there are angry crowds – a dangerous situation to say the least.

    To prove what? Oh, yes, they can carry them. Wow.

  35. “rob, i stopped at “here’s the thing”.

    Kev.. I’m suprised you got past “here’s..” Good for you. Reading for comprehension is the starting point.

    But you still get to sit at the kids table.

  36. And Ti-Guy, the nearest I can understand about your concept of “bad faith” is that I refuse to respond in simplicities.

    That’s fine I suppose.. I mean, as often as not I’m getting some wacked conservative pissed at me as a wacked liberal.. so, I guess from the point of view of being a zealot of some particular ‘ism’, I probably do speak in “bad faith” as I don’t have “faith” in dogma of any kind, though, in my own view, the idea of supporting people to be “more” independant and responsible for their welfare pulls me into the conservative camp, and the idea of government being more of an impediment to freedom than not probably pulls me into the mildly libertarian camp.

  37. rob, i stopped at “here’s the thing”….

    KEvron

  38. Ti-Guy

    I mean, as often as not I’m getting some wacked conservative pissed at me as a wacked liberal.

    Please provide evidence of this.

  39. “I probably do speak in ‘bad faith’ as I don’t have ‘faith’ in dogma of any kind”

    i’ve never thought of you as a troll, rob, but if you keep publishing garbage like this, i’m going to continue to give you a rash of shit.

    mala fides, mouth piece.

    KEvron

  40. Ti-Guy

    I’m sure you know what “bad faith” means, Rob. You’re a lawyer, after all.

  41. Gordon S

    Maybe you want to bump this up to a full-on post, since you link to DS and CR a fair bit. It’s about how to play the clips from the American version of their websites, which are much better designed.

    Using Mozilla, install this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addons/versions/967

    Once installed, go to Tools, Modify Headers.

    Select “Add” from the dropdown box. In the first field, enter “X-Forwarded-For” without quotes, and in the second box, add “12.13.14.16”, again without quotes. Leave the third field blank.

    Click the add button, and it should appear in the main box. Make sure it is enabled.

    Go to configuration, and enable the “Always On” option.

    Restart Mozilla, and it should work, and you should be able to play the videos no problem.

  42. Gordon S

    I meant to put .15, but .16 should work, too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s