Fox News - Why the 180 on Protesters?

@anniepa (27275)
United States
September 15, 2009 6:19pm CST
There are some of you from the right who have been singing the praises on Fox News recently, especially when it comes to their coverage of the tea parties and the town hall meetings where "real Americans" spoke out against our corrupt government, ya-da-ya-da. Some of you have accused "the other" networks of ignoring this "grassroots movement" or of even "lying" and misleading viewers. I'm not going to deny that MSNBC, for example, took a slightly different approach in their coverage of the protests and the march on Washington D.C. on September 12. However, I'm not posting this thread to slam Fox News or any other network for how they've handled the current events or to compare Fox to MSNBC, CNN or any of the major networks. I'd like instead to compare Fox News to...Fox News! I'd seen side by side clips in the past where various Fox personalities and guests have spoken quite unfavorably about the anti-war protests that were held during the Bush Administration and then heaped glowing praise on the current crop of "real Americans". I'd never been able to find a link to post showing this comparison but not, thanks to Comedy Central's Jon Stewart of all people, I have one now! http://robsimmoralwhackyjournal.blogspot.com/ It's interesting to watch the "usual suspects" Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin speak so eloquently about all of these great Americans exercising their freedom of speech as they march on Washington and other cities across the nation. They didn't give a whole lot of air time to the nasty signs and pictures of President Obama as Hitler while CNN and MSNBC gave them possibly a bit more than "equal time", unlike the unflattering pictures and signs about former President George W. Bush during the Iraq War protests. The nicest thing said about the anti-war protesters seemed to be that they, according to Malkin, were "throwing a tantrum". Can any of you Fox News fans at least admit the inconsistency in their coverage? I believe protest is good and we all have the right to speak out for or against our government as long as they're peaceful and civil. What do you think? Annie
2 people like this
8 responses
• United States
16 Sep 09
I really enjoyed the women talking about the "muslims" taking over. WOW, and this is what this movement is about? For all of you Repubilcan appologist, I can't wait to hear how you defend comments like this. I had to agree 100% with Jon, it is funny how the people that were the "real Americans" that blindly followed Bush in violating the constitution, and called the people that defended our constitution UNAMERICAN (Sean Hannity was the number one example of this). But, NOW if you are again a "real American" when you do what Sean wants you to do by attacking the Obama administration. You just have to laugh at this logic.
@anniepa (27275)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Sooner, debater didn't say anything of the sort. The problem is the GOP has no "real" spokesperson" these days so it's easy for some people to wonder if or even "assume" people on the fringe actually do speak for the mainstream of the party. I'm not so "blissfully ignorant" that I believe that, but the way the more rude and uncivilized people act the more praise they get from the far right it's clear they sure have a lot of influence. Annie
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Annie he said "WOW, and this is what this movement is about?" If he thinks this woman's statements are "what this movement is about?" than he's basically dubbing her the spokesperson. "the more rude and uncivilized people act the more praise they get from the far right" Well I don't see anyone here praising that woman. You and debater just want to use hate blogs and spliced clips since apparently it's all either of you can muster to back your points sometimes.
• United States
17 Sep 09
Sooner, it is like anything in life, if you hear it once, you might dismiss it, but when you hear a lot from a parties "base". I am just happy that it is one of YOUR crazies that said it. You can try to call me names all you want, I am married, you really need to do much better than that. Oh Yeah, and your football team SUCKS!!
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6313)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Inconsistency from Hannity, Ingraham and Malkin? Hell yes. They're conservative and don't hide it. Beck was on CNN during the time when most anti-war protests were going on, so I don't really know how he carried it. If you're speaking of the people with opinion shows, then, of course, you will find opinion hosts to be inconsistent -- they have their respective biases. In terms of actual NEWS coverage, the only difference I see in Fox's coverage of anti-war protests and anti-government protests is the actual amount of time they're giving the latter. But showing what liberal networks fail to has been their bread and butter here recently. The more they show what other networks fail to, the more their ratings climb. I'm not sure what you're looking for in all this. People to admit Fox News is bias? Yes. Fox has some leanings. I call them NON-liberal (progressive), and liberals immediately equate that to right-wing. But when Greta, Shep and Geraldo air, as well as when Colmes pops up or Williams chimes in, the anti-government protestors (and ACORN and czars) are still getting massive news time. O'Reilly and the crew of Fox's morning news grilled the "loons" who brought out their Hitler signs. They grilled and brought attention to the birthers. The biggest difference I see is that MSNBC ONLY airs the loons and ignores the regular people -- which make up the vast majority of the crowd. And I wouldn't think that was so bad if they didn't go out of their way to ignore the loons who show up at anti-war protests. Both networks seem to have leanings here. But it certainly doesn't even out! lmao ... Kneeling down to the left so incredibly far that you won't even cover Jones or ACORN or show ANYTHING but the few crazies at protests is beyond bias, and is in no way the same thing as being a little inconsistent (which I haven't seen in their actual 'news') when it comes to protests. I'll own up to Fox being more crooked (or is it crookeder?) than the ideal version of media should be. But I don't personally subscribe to a little bias making up for the extreme leanings of multiple networks. If you want Hannity to be "fair," don't hold your breath. He's a zealot.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27275)
• United States
16 Sep 09
I understand that some networks will be more to the left and others more to the right. I think they almost have to be in today's 24/7 news cycle in order to get and hold a loyal audience. My only problem is when people make the claim with a straight face that Fox has no bias at all, that they're actually "fair and balanced" as their slogan claims. I've read several times here on myLot that the "other networks" haven't covered the ACORN scandal or the story about Van Jones but that's not true, they HAVE covered those stories because I saw them. Maybe not as much as Fox has but I heard one commentator say that's because the Van Jones story, for example, really wasn't that significant in the scheme of things because he wasn't a very important part of the Administration to begin with. As I said in my OP I have no problem with people from either side of the aisle protesting or being engaged in the process in other ways. I say it's about time. I don't personally care for the nastiness and personal attacks that we could do without but that's just me, I suppose. Annie
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
16 Sep 09
" I heard one commentator say that's because the Van Jones story, for example, really wasn't that significant in the scheme of things because he wasn't a very important part of the Administration to begin with." annie, the problem is that commentator AND you are missing the more important point there, it doesn't matter what position he held in the administration, just the fact that someone like him was even IN the administration at all was HUGELY signifigant. Why don't you get that?
• United States
16 Sep 09
If you wanna compare them to the idea of media, the mythical no-sides impartiality, Fox isn't really all that fair and balanced at all. Compare them to other news networks, Fox IS the most fair and balanced thing running.
@ZephyrSun (7382)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Well I am not a FOX fan but, that sure was a good take on the events. It is the same ol same ol, good if my side does it not if the other side does it.
2 people like this
@ZephyrSun (7382)
• United States
16 Sep 09
They probably just borrow the idea from the war protesters therefore used all the same signs and just put Obama instead of Bush.
2 people like this
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Please Annie. You're using a joke news show that is well known for using snippets and spliced videos to mislead people for laughs. It's sad how many people treat that show as a news source. John Stewart even addressed it once yelling "Don't do that! We make stuff up!" I like John Stewart, but he's a comedian Annie. I'm not surprised to see a stupid hate blog take it seriously, but you should know better. Bill O'Reilly addressed a similar Daily Show clip here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eslo4ItxlVs
1 person likes this
• United States
16 Sep 09
Taskr, FOX has been known to do the same thing, the difference is that Jon's show is ment to be a joke. FOX "News" is just a JOKE. I find it funny how the when Democrats protested the war, FOX called them names, and questioned their patriotism. Now the people doing the same thing are "real Amiercans". Can you say HYPOCRACY?
2 people like this
@anniepa (27275)
• United States
16 Sep 09
You're kidding, Taskr...The Daily Show isn't REAL news...lol? The "stupid blog" had nothing to do with it, I just wanted to make the video available for readers to see. I'd seen these "snippets" before on NON-comedy shows. Are you denying that Fox News had a whole different attitude about the anti-war protesters during the Bush Administration? THAT'S what this thread is about, not whether Jon Stewart gives the "real news" or not. Annie
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
16 Sep 09
The point is that he manipulates and splices video clips for comedic effect. I've already given you proof of him misrepresenting the facts to get a good laugh. I'm not faulting him, he's a comedian. I'm just saying that it's kind of naive for you to think that he's a valid source, and I pointed out your use of a hate blog because you use them rather frequently.
@Rollo1 (16654)
• Boston, Massachusetts
16 Sep 09
There's a difference between news reporting and opinion. For instance, it doesn't really matter what Keith Olberman's opinion is, he can take whatever angle he likes on a story. What makes a huge difference is whether or not the news branch of the organization just refuses to REPORT a story. Everyone you named is a political commentator. People watch them to listen to their opinions and because they like the stories that are talked about. If you listen to or read Michelle Malkin, you know what side she's on before you do it. Same goes for the writers at the Huffington Post. People seek out others who share their opinions. But if you watch shows like Bill O'Reilly, you will notice that he brings in panels of people from all sides of the political spectrum and often there will be disagreements. You have to admit that's at least attempting to give both sides. News is different, news is what's happening, not just what anyone thinks about it. When it comes to news, real news, the absolute truth is that many of the major news outlets just don't even bother to report the news they would rather you didn't hear. I know because I spend a lot of time searching their websites and if you did a search this week, you'd have assumed there was only one ACORN video and that ACORN had thoroughly excoriated the naughty troublemakers who shot the video and that they were avidly pursuing charges for the illegal activities of the journalists involved. You wouldn't see that the same exact thing happened in three offices of ACORN in three different cities. You wouldn't know that in three separate offices, ACORN employees offered advice on getting a HUD loan for a brothel in which underage girls would turn tricks and that they gave out tips on defrauding the IRS. You wouldn't know that there is a fourth video. When those other news sources only show the signs they think make the protesters look bad, that's mild stuff. That just reflects the political leanings of the editorial staff. When they simply won't report on the corruption in an organization that has received $54 million in federal funds, that's just dereliction of duty.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27275)
• United States
16 Sep 09
The thing is they HAVE reported ALL these things! It's possible they haven't devoted as much time to them as you'd have preferred but they've certainly certainly reported them. Most of the MSNBC shows also bring in panels from all sides and they certainly have their share of disagreements and their mikes don't get cut if they disagree too strongly. Getting back to the actual topic of this discussion, given the fact that these commentators are on tape strongly criticizing those who dared to speak out against the government a few short years ago would it be unreasonable to ask them to explain why they feel those past protesters were so "evil" and the current ones are model citizens who are simply defending what's right? If they're really sincere and true to their beliefs they shouldn't have a problem defending those beliefs, should they? Annie
@ParaTed2k (22980)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
16 Sep 09
I guess it's good that I've only said two things about anti war protests and protesters... 1) That they do need to realize that their actions are being used as a weapon of propoganda against the US. 2) It is just as Constitutional to protest any war as it is to fight in it. ~~~~~~~~ One of the things I found pretty funny about my first few years in the Army. The Sergeants who trained me were mostly of two camps... Vietnam war vets... and Vietnam war protesters. ;~D
1 person likes this
@mcowiti (232)
• Kenya
16 Sep 09
it sounds that you have done your research properly and it makes me believe what you are just trying to put across concerning fox news. may be we need to think about it further!
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
16 Sep 09
She used a hate blog and a video spliced by a comedian who routinely misrepresents the facts for a laugh and you think that's "proper research"? I sure hope you don't work in an industry where proper research is every required.
@anniepa (27275)
• United States
17 Sep 09
Thanks, mcowiti! I didn't "use" a "hate" blog, it just happened to be where I found the video which wasn't "spliced". In case you didn't know, mc, according to Taskr any blog that isn't ultra-conservative is a "hate blog"...lol! I'm not sure what sources are acceptable but I do know I haven't found one yet...lol! Annie
@coolcoder (2019)
• United States
16 Sep 09
I'm not going to deny that MSNBC, for example, took a slightly different approach in their coverage of the protests and the march on Washington D.C. on September 12. A slightly different approach? Try pure condescension and hatred for the protesters, which was so evident in the way they covered the protests. However, I'm not posting this thread to slam Fox News or any other network for how they've handled the current events or to compare Fox to MSNBC, CNN or any of the major networks. Then why are you posting this thread? I'd never been able to find a link to post showing this comparison but not, thanks to Comedy Central's Jon Stewart of all people, I have one now!http://robsimmoralwhackyjournal.blogspot.com/ Yeah,that's hard core, impartial, completely objective journalism there. They didn't give a whole lot of air time to the nasty signs and pictures of President Obama as Hitler while CNN and MSNBC gave them possibly a bit more than "equal time", unlike the unflattering pictures and signs about former President George W. Bush during the Iraq War protests. Can you untangle that a bit? You've completely lost me. I believe protest is good and we all have the right to speak out for or against our government as long as they're peaceful and civil. What do you think?Annie Did you know that there were NO arrests during the protest in Washington? How much more peaceful can you get? Compare that to some of the protests against Prop.8 in California or some of the anti-war protests (remember Code Pink?). There is a vast difference.
@N4life (851)
• United States
16 Sep 09
Hmmm..could that be a difference in the way protests are being handled under this administration as opposed to the last....
1 person likes this