The Conservative Media- Page 3

Posted: 10/3/13 at 2:56pm

I'll say it: MSNBC is most certainly "The news."

The Daily show is a humor program that comments on current events. Colbert Report is political satire.

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 2:57pm

Joe, i agree 100%

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:24pm

I don't think msnbc is "the news." It's commentary. Generally insightful.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:30pm

^Agreed. It's just as much commentary as Fox News. I love me some Chris Hayes though.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:31pm

"the news" is NPR, BBC America, and Al-Jazeera America.

Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC are not "the news." They are 'news service' conglomerates desperate for ratings and primed to whore out any national tragedy or controversy to gain attention.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:33pm

I don't think Fox News is commentary. It's propaganda. I don't know how George Will is going to fare there. I learned a lot about what he really thinks when I heard him on Alec Baldwin's excellent podcast, "Here's the Thing."

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:35pm

AL-JAZEERA??? Why am i NOT suprised that the official Al Qada-headcutting-network is a favorite of yours.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:38pm

Al-Jazeera provided the best coverage of the Syria crisis and the current Government shutdown.
There definitely is a difference in the type of commentary coming from MSNBC and Fox. MSNBC deals mostly in facts. Although Morning Joe can be pretty awful.

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:42pm

MSNBC deals mostly in facts

You mean the network that proudly brings you this racist huckster in primetime

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:43pm

"Al-Jazeera provided the best coverage of the Syria crisis and the current Government shutdown. "

Exactly, Erik. The only connection they have to Al-Jazeera is the fact that they're owned and financed by them. It's run completely separate from the Al-Jazaeera us Americans have irrationally come to hate and fear.

"There definitely is a difference in the type of commentary coming from MSNBC and Fox. MSNBC deals mostly in facts."

Hm. I don't know. It's more about how they deliver those facts. But both channels are a joke. If I have to watch network news, I can kind of stomach CNN.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:45pm

I find CNN to be almost as bad as FOX.

[romantico]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:48pm

A 20 year old pic of Al Sharpton when he was overweight.As much as I despise Rush I feel the same when they show old pictures of him when he was over weight as well. How desperate of you Sue.

How about this racist/homophobe over at Fox?

[romantico]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:48pm

Or this one?



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/23/sean-hannity-confronted-o_n_92961.html

Updated On: 10/3/13 at 03:48 PM

[PTOPhan]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:49pm

TheaterDiva, I, too, thought the Jimmy Kimmel survey was hilarious,with so many respondents talking about how terrible Obamacare is and how much better they like the Affordable Care Act. However, I suspect (hope?) that most people know there's no difference. They probably just took the funniest answers. If this were a news program, they'd inform everyone about the percentage that got it right and the percentage that got it wrong. Nevertheless, I think it's legitimate commentary on the news.

The reason that I consider Jon Stewart and Jimmy Kimmel pieces like the ACA/Obamacare interview to be legitimate commentary on the news is that they're using the words people say to skewer them. There's nothing fictitious about the pieces they're putting together. If someone gets "news" from Jon Stewart, that person will be well-informed, which is more than I can say about getting "news" from Fox.

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:49pm

Al Jazeera claims that it is editorially independent,[133][134] though much of its funding comes from the Qatar government. In 2010, United States Department of State internal communications, released by WikiLeaks as part of the 2010 diplomatic cables leak, claim that the Qatar government manipulates Al Jazeera coverage to suit political interests.[135][136]
In September 2012, The Guardian reported that Al Jazeera's editorial independence came into question when the channel's director of news, Salah Negm, stepped in at the last minute to order that a two minute video covering a UN debate over the Syrian civil war include a speech by the leader of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani.[3] Staff members protested that the speech was not the most important aspect of the debate, and that it was a repetition of previous calls for Arab intervention.[3]
T

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:52pm

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 3:53pm

"If someone gets "news" from Jon Stewart, that person will be well-informed, which is more than I can say about getting "news" from Fox."

I agree with that and also love Mr. Stewart but would hope those same people are also receiving their news from more traditional sources as well (in addition to the Daily Show), such as the AP and NPR.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:03pm

"They probably just took the funniest answers. If this were a news program, they'd inform everyone about the percentage that got it right and the percentage that got it wrong."

Absolutely agree, PTOPhan. But multiple polls have gotten the same results. Even if it's not switching the names, the polls reveal that many people's kneejerk response is to say that don't like Obamacare, but then they agree with it item by item.

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:04pm

""Al-Jazeera provided the best coverage of the Syria crisis and the current Government shutdown""

What should concern Westerners is that the ideology of men like Al Jazeera host Sheik Qaradawi saturates many of the network’s programs, and is gaining wider acceptance among Muslim youths in the West. In its “straight” news coverage on its Arabic TV broadcasts and Web sites, Al Jazeera’s reports consistently amplify radical Islamist sentiments (although without endorsing violence explicitly).

For example, the phrase “war on terror” is invariably preceded by the contemptuous prefix “so-called.” The words “terror” and “insurgency” are rarely uttered with a straight face, usually replaced with “resistance” or “struggle.” The phrase “war in Iraq” is often replaced by “war on Iraq” or “war against Iraq.” A suicide bombing is called a “commando attack” or, occasionally, a “paradise operation.”l Jazeera’s Web site can be less subtle. On Dec. 12, after religious leaders and heads of state all over the world condemned President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran for staging a Holocaust denial conference in Tehran, the headline on the site read, “Ahmadinejad Praised by Participants of the Holocaust Conference in Tehran, but Condemned by Zionists in Europe.”against American civilians in Iraq.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/opinion/17pearl.html?pagewanted=all

Updated On: 10/3/13 at 04:04 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:22pm

I said Al-Jazeera America, you POS. Oh! And Native Americans and Russians and something something.

ETA: for clarification, that was *not* directed at Reg. Updated On: 10/3/13 at 04:22 PM

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:28pm

ummm its the same company. you know like Toyota, and Toyota America.

if you want to support that vile company, while youre ready to condemn Walmart. that says a lot about you LIZAHEAD


the same company that wikileaks exposed that the Qatar government manipulates Al Jazeera coverage to suit political interests.

the same ones that broadcast Danniel Pearls and other Americans beheadings.

the same ones that Osama was able to send his videos to for years without getting caught.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:34pm

"Al Jazeera's Arabic service is not anti-American, best I can tell from former students of mine who work there and other Arabic speakers I trust. But whether the coverage is anti-American is irrelevant in our free society.

Anyway, those earlier images more than anything represented a lapse in what we consider broadcast standards of decency. I disagree with running such footage, but Al Jazeera was not alone around the world and even in the U.S. in doing so. Many serious people, moreover, support showing gruesome pictures of war as a testament to a reality that we too easily forget.

What is most relevant is that the network is not characterized by hate speech, according even to American diplomats and military leaders I know. Unlike some of my colleagues and free speech advocates, I draw a line on propagating or even repeating hate speech, except when reporting on the depths of the hatred or the speech itself. Defining hate speech is a judgment call, but so is so much in life."


The More You Know

[suestorm]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:40pm

seriously, NPR is your source? taxpayer funded radio? mine was the NY TIMES


""Anyway, those earlier images more than anything represented a lapse in what we consider broadcast standards of decency. I disagree with running such footage""

FAIR ENOUGH.

But whether the coverage is anti-American is irrelevant in our free society.

SOME PEOPLE MIGHT CONSIDER MSNBC or FOX anti-american, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT HERE, BUT WHAT AL JAZEERA DID IS CLOSE TO CONSORTING WITH THE ENEMY. ITS AS IF THEY TELEVISED NAZI KILLING JEWS OR RAN TAPES OF HITLER WHILE HE WAS HIDING IN HIS BUNKER BEFORE THE RUSSIANS FOUND AND KILLED HIM. WE RIGHTLY WOULDNT STAND FOR THAT.

Updated On: 10/3/13 at 04:40 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:42pm

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 10/3/13 at 4:48pm

Even reading commentary without seeing its posts reveals it's still insufferable. How can you guys stand it? STILL so hung up on Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley, an event it's obsessed by even though it happened before it was born????? Also, nobody here has ever defended Al Sharpton. It's s straw sock argument.

Updated On: 10/3/13 at 04:48 PM