PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”


KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 10:21 PM
FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”

February 10, 2011 7:20 am ET by Eric Boehlert

Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: “I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”

Indeed, a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Matters confirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation, virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate without the slightest regard for fairness or fact checking.

“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”

And that’s the word from inside Fox News.

Note the story here isn’t that Fox News leans right. Everyone knows the channel pushes a conservative-friendly version of the news. Everyone who’s been paying attention has known that since the channel’s inception more than a decade ago. The real story, and the real danger posed by the cable outlet, is that over time Fox News stopped simply leaning to the right and instead became an open and active political player, sort of one-part character assassin and one-part propagandist, depending on which party was in power. And that the operation thrives on fabrications and falsehoods.

“They say one thing and do another. They insist on maintaining this charade, this façade, that they’re balanced or that they’re not right-wing extreme propagandist,” says the source. But it’s all a well-orchestrated lie, according this former insider. It’s a lie that permeates the entire Fox News culture and one that staffers and producers have to learn quickly in order to survive professionally.

“You have to work there for a while to understand the nods and the winks,” says the source. “And God help you if you don’t because sooner or later you’re going to get burned.”

The source explains:

“Like any news channel there’s lot of room for non-news content. The content that wasn’t ‘news,’ they didn’t care what we did with as long as it was amusing or quirky or entertaining; as along as it brought in eyeballs. But anything—anything--that was a news story you had to understand what the spin should be on it. If it was a big enough story it was explained to you in the morning [editorial] meeting. If it wasn’t explained, it was up to you to know the conservative take on it. There’s a conservative take on every story no matter what it is. So you either get told what it is or you better intuitively know what it is.”

What if Fox News staffers aren’t instinctively conservative or don’t have an intuitive feeling for what the spin on a story should be? “My internal compass was to think like an intolerant meathead,” the source explains. “You could never error on the side of not being intolerant enough.”

The source recalls how Fox News changed over time:

“When I first got there back in the day, and I don’t know how they indoctrinate people now, but back in the day when they were “training” you, as it were, they would say, ‘Here’s how we’re different.’ They’d say if there is an execution of a condemned man at midnight and there are all the live truck outside the prison and all the lives shots. CNN would go, ‘Yes, tonight John Jackson, 25 of Mississippi, is going to die by lethal injection for the murder of two girls.’ MSNBC would say the same thing.

“We would come out and say, ‘Tonight, John Jackson who kidnapped an innocent two year old, raped her, sawed her head off and threw it in the school yard, is going to get the punishment that a jury of his peers thought he should get.’ And they say that’s the way we do it here. And you’re going , alright, it’s a bit of an extreme example but it’s something to think about. It’s not unreasonable.

"When you first get in they tell you we’re a bit of a counterpart to the screaming left wing lib media. So automatically you have to buy into the idea that the other media is howling left-wing. Don’t even start arguing that or you won’t even last your first day.

“For the first few years it was let’s take the conservative take on things. And then after a few years it evolved into, well it’s not just the conservative take on things, we’re going to take the Republican take on things which is not necessarily in lock step with the conservative point of view.

“And then two, three, five years into that it was, we’re taking the Bush line on things, which was different than the GOP. We were a Stalin-esque mouthpiece. It was just what Bush says goes on our channel. And by that point it was just totally dangerous. Hopefully most people understand how dangerous it is for a media outfit to be a straight, unfiltered mouthpiece for an unchecked president.”

It’s worth noting that Fox News employees, either current or former, rarely speak to the press, even anonymously. And it’s even rarer for Fox News sources to bad mouth Murdoch’s channel. That’s partly because of strict non-disclosure agreements that most exiting employees sign and which forbid them from discussing their former employer. But it also stems from a pervasive us-vs.-them attitude that permeates Fox News. It’s a siege mentality that network boss Roger Ailes encourages, and one that colors the coverage his team produces.

“It was a kick ass mentality too,” says the former Fox News insider. “It was relentless and it never went away. If one controversy faded, goddamn it they would find another one. They were in search of these points of friction real or imagined. And most of them were imagined or fabricated. You always have to seem to be under siege. You always have to seem like your values are under attack. The brain trust just knew instinctively which stories to do, like the War on Christmas.”

According to the insider, Ailes is obsessed with presenting a unified Fox News front to the outside world; an obsession that may explain Ailes’ refusal to publically criticize or even critique his own team regardless of how outlandish their on-air behavior. “There may be internal squabbles. But what [Ailes] continually preaches is never piss outside the tent,” says the source. “When he gets really crazy is when stuff leaks out the door. He goes mental on that. He can’t stand that. He says in a dynamic enterprise like a network newsroom there’s going to be in fighting and ego, but he says keep it in the house.”

It’s clear that Fox News has become a misleading, partisan outlet. But here’s what the source stresses: Fox News is designed to mislead its viewers and designed to engage in a purely political enterprise.

In 2010, all sorts of evidence tumbled out to confirm that fact, like the recently leaked emails from inside Fox News, in which a top editor instructed his newsroom staffers (not just the opinion show hosts) to slant the news when reporting on key stories such as climate change and health care reform.

Meanwhile, Media Matters revealed that during the 2009-2010 election cycle, dozens of Fox News personalities endorsed, raised money, or campaigned for Republican candidates or organizations in more than 600 instances. And in terms of free TV airtime that Fox News handed over to GOP hopefuls, Media Matters calculated the channel essentially donated $55 million worth of airtime to Republican presidential hopefuls last year who also collect Fox News paychecks.

And of course, that’s when Murdoch wasn’t writing $1 million checks in the hopes of electing more Republican politicians.

So, Fox News as a legitimate news outlet? The source laughs at the suggestion, and thinks much of the public, along with the Beltway press corps, has been duped by Murdoch’s marketing campaign over the years. “People assume you need a license to call yourself a news channel. You don’t. So because they call themselves Fox News, people probably give them a pass on a lot of things,” says the source.

The source continues: “I don’t think people understand that it’s an organization that’s built and functions by intimidation and bullying, and its goal is to prop up and support Republicans and the GOP and to knock down Democrats. People tend think that stuff that’s on TV is real, especially under the guise of news. You’d think that people would wise up, but they don’t.”

As for the press, the former Fox News employee gives reporters and pundits low grades for refusing, over the years, to call out Fox News for being the propaganda outlet that it so clearly is. The source suggests there are a variety of reasons for the newsroom timidity.

“They don’t have enough staff or enough balls or don’t have enough money or don’t have enough interest to spend the time it takes to expose Fox News. Or it’s not worth the trouble. If you take on Fox, they’ll kick you in the ass,” says the source. “I’m sure most [journalists] know that. It’s not worth being Swift Boated for your effort,” a reference to how Fox News traditionally attacks journalists who write, or are perceived to have written, anything negative things about the channel.

The former insider admits to being perplexed in late 2009 when the Obama White House called out Murdoch’s operation as not being a legitimate new source, only to have major Beltway media players rush to the aid of Fox News and admonish the White House for daring to criticize the cable channel.

“That blew me away,” says the source, who stresses the White House’s critique of Fox News “happens to be true.”


http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102100007

Really? No way, the media distorts and outright lies to serve an agenda? Simply astonishing.

HonestChieffan
02-10-2011, 10:23 PM
I love when George Soros people hate on Murdochs people

KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 10:24 PM
I love when George Soros people hate on Murdochs people

Ya i'm still waiting on the CNN rebuttal, should be some juicy stuff in there. We probably won't see anything until a Repub takes office.

KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 10:42 PM
Breaking News:

Water IS Wet.

Chiefshrink
02-10-2011, 10:44 PM
I love when George Soros people hate on Murdochs people

:thumb: Media Matters once again!!:shake:

FAX
02-10-2011, 10:45 PM
What about the Crypt Keeper's nephew dude? He and that Irish guy had their own show that featured some left stuff, didn't it?

FAX

KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 10:45 PM
:thumb: Media Matters once again!!:shake:

Are you saying Media doesn't matter? Who else would be there to brainwash us?

FAX
02-10-2011, 10:50 PM
This raises an interesting question in my mind.

Generally speaking, which group of people do you think are physically uglier in the face ... Liberals or Conservatives?

FAX

KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 10:50 PM
This raises an interesting question in my mind.

Generally speaking, which group of people do you think are uglier ... Liberals or Conservatives?

FAX

Depends...Which Network covers it?

Which Network would you trust? I can give you the answer if you tell me(for marketing purposes) if you prefer Fox or CNN?

Frankie
02-10-2011, 11:03 PM
FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AIX_0nMlIBU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

patteeu
02-10-2011, 11:15 PM
This raises an interesting question in my mind.

Generally speaking, which group of people do you think are physically uglier in the face ... Liberals or Conservatives?

FAX

I report, you decide. ;)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/images/demrepub_women.jpg

KILLER_CLOWN
02-10-2011, 11:18 PM
I report, you decide. ;)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/images/demrepub_women.jpg

ok here's the official tally

fauxnews 1
Communist News Network 0

Do not worry if your "side" loses you will have a chance to argue your point while the country is being destroyed inside out.

Bewbies
02-11-2011, 12:51 AM
I prefer to get my news in Prison Planet. I spent a lot of time there last week learning about how Glenn Beck is CIA, doesn't know it, or maybe he's a plant by the LDS church. Agent Provocateur!! Maybe, he might just be a guy who cries a lot and CIA doesn't fuck with guys like that.

Bewbies
02-11-2011, 12:53 AM
I would also like to report that there is no place you can get your news that isn't filtered. All reporters, writers, editors, producers and the like have their own personal views and beliefs, and all news is filtered through that.

Except at Fox News. There the aliens beam down stories that are completely made up and a bunch of actors create little videos to make it look like something real happened. And the brain dead knuckle-draggers among us (hint, conservatives) eat it up like candy.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 06:42 AM
I would also like to report that there is no place you can get your news that isn't filtered. All reporters, writers, editors, producers and the like have their own personal views and beliefs, and all news is filtered through that.

This is true—only Fox claims to be fair and balanced as if it isn't filtered. It's more obvious these days that CNN is left and Fox is strongly NeoConservative. When it shows, it looks bad. Places like antiwar.com, Lew Rockwell, American Conservative, Takis, Chronicles, Cato, Reason make no qualms about what they are upfront and you know what you're getting. This is how the internet can take down our ruling elites which are in both parties. It creates a multiple viewpoint system.

Royal Fanatic
02-11-2011, 06:49 AM
Am I the only one who read the OP and thought it would have been nice if the anonymous former employee of Fox News had not been anonymous?

HonestChieffan
02-11-2011, 07:13 AM
I would also like to report that there is no place you can get your news that isn't filtered. All reporters, writers, editors, producers and the like have their own personal views and beliefs, and all news is filtered through that.

Except at Fox News. There the aliens beam down stories that are completely made up and a bunch of actors create little videos to make it look like something real happened. And the brain dead knuckle-draggers among us (hint, conservatives) eat it up like candy.


When Og chiseled the first newsrock the same thing was said.

KILLER_CLOWN
02-11-2011, 07:15 AM
Am I the only one who read the OP and thought it would have been nice if the anonymous former employee of Fox News had not been anonymous?


Probably one of those Swedish infobabes, take your pick as to which one.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 07:18 AM
Probably one of those Swedish infobabes, take your pick as to which one.

LMAO

They seem to have a few Italians.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 07:21 AM
Not just Murdoch's "news."

The "24" show was nothing but Zionist propaganda aimed at justifying waterboarding and inciting hate against Islam and especially Israel's #1 enemy Iran, never mind Iran arming and funding those at war with those behind 911 on 911 in Afghan...

The "24" show had just the opposite, and Iran and AQ were just pals (assuming you are all just as dumb as W and don't know the difference between a SUNNI and a SHIA) and united to get the US...

Just about every peep from Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol was a made up whopper linking Saddam and AQ, connecting all ends of Murdoch's "empire."

Jaric
02-11-2011, 07:22 AM
How about that. Those Zionist sure can make entertaining television. Maybe they aren't all bad afterall...

:rolleyes:

patteeu
02-11-2011, 07:49 AM
Am I the only one who read the OP and thought it would have been nice if the anonymous former employee of Fox News had not been anonymous?

No

patteeu
02-11-2011, 07:51 AM
Probably one of those Swedish infobabes, take your pick as to which one.

More likely some flunky straight out of college who couldn't hack it and lost his job getting coffee for the on-air talent.

chiefforlife
02-11-2011, 07:51 AM
I report, you decide. ;)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/images/demrepub_women.jpg

Now That is some FOX news. Hehe

patteeu
02-11-2011, 07:54 AM
Not just Murdoch's "news."

The "24" show was nothing but Zionist propaganda aimed at justifying waterboarding and inciting hate against Islam and especially Israel's #1 enemy Iran, never mind Iran arming and funding those at war with those behind 911 on 911 in Afghan...

The "24" show had just the opposite, and Iran and AQ were just pals (assuming you are all just as dumb as W and don't know the difference between a SUNNI and a SHIA) and united to get the US...

Just about every peep from Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol was a made up whopper linking Saddam and AQ, connecting all ends of Murdoch's "empire."

Iran works with both Sunni and Shia terror groups when it serves their purposes.

KILLER_CLOWN
02-11-2011, 07:57 AM
Iran works with both Sunni and Shia terror groups when it serves their purposes.

ROFL

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 08:12 AM
Iran works with both Sunni and Shia terror groups when it serves their purposes.



Typical Zionist misinfo. Iran is very pro Shia, because it is overwhelmingly Shia. The other problem is the definition of "terror, since "terror" to you means
terror against Israel and just Israel, really groups fighting to regain the land Israel stole from them.

And on 911, with two term elected moderate Rafsanjani as President, Iran was arming and funding THE NORTHERN ALLIANCE, and holding 300 potential AQs for the UN, and giving us help working with TNA to kill Taliban, at least originally when W deployed only 12k, or barely enough to take and hold Kabul and Khandahar, and not enough to encircle OBL at Tora Bora.


The real truth about Iran and 911 is here...


ht tp://w ww.prospect.o rg/cs/articles?articleId=11539

patteeu
02-11-2011, 08:23 AM
Typical Zionist misinfo. Iran is very pro Shia, because it is overwhelmingly Shia. The other problem is the definition of "terror, since "terror" to you means
terror against Israel and just Israel, really groups fighting to regain the land Israel stole from them.

And on 911, with two term elected moderate Rafsanjani as President, Iran was arming and funding THE NORTHERN ALLIANCE, and holding 300 potential AQs for the UN, and giving us help working with TNA to kill Taliban, at least originally when W deployed only 12k, or barely enough to take and hold Kabul and Khandahar, and not enough to encircle OBL at Tora Bora.


The real truth about Iran and 911 is here...


ht tp://w ww.prospect.o rg/cs/articles?articleId=11539

OK, leaving aside the term "terror" which I used as shorthand, lets look at your example of a group being used by Iran. The Northern Alliance had both Sunni and Shia factions. It's highest profile leader, Ahmad Shah Massoud, was a devout Sunni.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 09:03 AM
OK, leaving aside the term "terror" which I used as shorthand, lets look at your example of a group being used by Iran. The Northern Alliance had both Sunni and Shia factions. It's highest profile leader, Ahmad Shah Massoud, was a devout Sunni.


Indeed, there are Sunnis who stand up to Sunni terror groups like AQ and Taliban.


From wiki


The political parties (factions) in contrast to the commanders played only a minor role in the war against the Taliban:

* Islamic Party of Afghanistan - Jamiat-i Islami - Made up of mainly Persian-speaking Sunni Tajiks officially led by Burhanuddin Rabbani.
* Islamic Movement of Afghanistan - Harakat-i Islami - Shia Tajiks and Hazaras led by Ayatollah Muhammad Asif Muhsini.
* Islamic Unity Party of Afghanistan - Hezb-i Wahdat - Made up of Shia Hazaras and supported by Iran, led by Mohammed Mohaqiq and Karim Khalili.
* National Islamic Movement of Afghanistan - Junbish-i Milli - Made up of Uzbeks and former communists, led by Abdul Rashid Dostum.
* Islamic Union for the Liberation of Afghanistan - Ittihad-i Islami - Sunni Pashtuns, led by Abdul Rasul Sayyaf.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 09:12 AM
So, like I said, Iran will work with either Sunni or Shia as long as it serves their purpose. Iran will even work with AQ or the Taliban when it suits them.

Example (http://www.google.com/m/url?client=safari&ei=MV9VTaCcAZS0MLy9rKMB&hl=en&oe=UTF-8&q=http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/06/iranianbacked_afghan.php&ved=0CCEQFjAF&usg=AFQjCNGSSSJ4eZUXuCuNvtSYlyTXeYbmsg)

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 09:13 AM
"Everyone knows the channel pushes a conservative-friendly version of the news."


LOL!!!


Yes, because "conservative" now means...


1. being a bigger spender than Carter with a Dem Congress
2. socializing senior drugs by lying about the cost
3. making OBL "not a priority"
4. sending way too few after the "not a priority"
5. flipping off those at war with OBL with our troops still there
6. intentional lies to sell out our troops in Iraq over precisely nothing in US national interest, "liberating" millions of fresh new recruits for OBL
7. taking a budget surplus and a strong economy and porking and socializing it to a trillion dollar deficit and a depression
8. when depression hits, sub human "conservative" President says "waaa, why did this (the depression) have to happen on my watch?" as if his porking and socializing and multiple counts of treason had nothing to do with it



The "US media" was very very happy to let Rupert take over the "GOP media," and destroy the GOP from within, purging it of those "anti-semitic" fiscal conservatives and replacing them with treasonous sub human Bible Thumping Socialists who not only parrot every lie they are told, but believe every lie, because there was nothing in birdbrain prior to parroting to refute it...

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 09:19 AM
So, like I said, Iran will work with either Sunni or Shia as long as it serves their purpose. Iran will even work with AQ or the Taliban when it suits them.




Iran in 2001 was another total validation of the strategy of Bush 41, that after Desert Storm with Saddam neutered, Iran moderated, elected a moderate, and was pursuing moderation by trying to off AQ and Taliban.

What W did was sell out completely to Doug Feith, George Tenet and the rest of the Zionist cabal, flip off Iran with "axis of evil," give Ahmadinejad his campaign ads for 2005, which were

1. the US calls us evil even as we were fighting those behind 911
2. the US is lying, doesn't want OBL, but rather wants to invade IRAN because ISRAEL is in control of the W White House
3. endless video of Iraqi Sunnis blowing up Iraqi Shia mosques
4. the US response to 3 of not allowing the Shias to arm, which is when they became "insurgents armed by Iran" according to FIXED


Without W and his multiple counts of treason, Ahmadinejad never wins, never gets close to winning in 2005 (which ended in a runoff between him and Rafsanjani).

W is Ahmadinejad's bestest buddy, since without W, Ahmadinejad would be just another toothless radical out of power...

patteeu
02-11-2011, 09:42 AM
Yet another installment of LaDairis' non sequitur theater? How can I change this channel?

Okie_Apparition
02-11-2011, 10:37 AM
That carp mouthed old brunette gets me hot. So hot I have to use an old toliet paper tube as a cock splint(Trailer park viagra). I will go to towne on about any thing that moves.

Bewbies
02-11-2011, 10:39 AM
Yet another installment of LaDairis' non sequitur theater? How can I change this channel?

Convince him the Chiefs are a Zionist team and he'd be more suited for the secularist Raiders?

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 12:36 PM
ROFL

And American covert ops used a terrorist group called MEK for terrorist activities in Iran after we invaded Iraq. Car bombs kidnappings of officials etc.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 01:05 PM
And American covert ops used a terrorist group called MEK for terrorist activities in Iran after we invaded Iraq. Car bombs kidnappings of officials etc.

Great. So what?

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:08 PM
You change the channel by not going into those threads or reading those posts. Pretty simple, really.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 01:09 PM
This raises an interesting question in my mind.

Generally speaking, which group of people do you think are physically uglier in the face ... Liberals or Conservatives?

FAX

There's no "generally" about it.

To a man, liberals are hideous trolls with no exceptions.

Frankie
02-15-2011, 01:30 PM
University of Maryland study:

Fox News viewers are much more likely than others to believe false information about American politics, a new study concludes.

The study, conducted by the University of Maryland, judged how likely consumers of various news outlets and publications were to believe misinformation about a wide range of political issues. Overall, 90% of respondents said they felt they had heard false information being given to them during the 2010 election campaign. However, while consumers of just about every news outlet believed some information that was false, the study found that Fox News viewers, regardless of political information, were "significantly more likely" to believe that:

--Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

--Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

--The economy is getting worse (26 points)

--Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

--The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

--Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

--The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

--When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

--And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

In addition, the study said, increased viewership of Fox News led to increased belief in these false stories.

LaDairis
02-15-2011, 01:34 PM
"Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring"


Wow. Just wow. Absolutely no scientist alive states that "climate change" has not occurred for the past four billion years, and will not continue to occur. What we disagree with is a theory that man made CO2 is "warming" anything, since the highly correlated satellite and balloon data shows precisely no warming in the actual Earth atmosphere despite the documented rise of CO2 from 270ppm to 380 ppm, and a British Court certified that ice core data shows precisely no correlation between CO2 and past temperatures...

ChiefsCountry
02-15-2011, 01:39 PM
Convince him the Chiefs are a Zionist team and he'd be more suited for the secularist Raiders?

Hunts were big supporters of Bush, there you go. :p

patteeu
02-15-2011, 02:20 PM
University of Maryland study:

Fox News viewers are much more likely than others to believe false information about American politics, a new study concludes.

The study, conducted by the University of Maryland, judged how likely consumers of various news outlets and publications were to believe misinformation about a wide range of political issues. Overall, 90% of respondents said they felt they had heard false information being given to them during the 2010 election campaign. However, while consumers of just about every news outlet believed some information that was false, the study found that Fox News viewers, regardless of political information, were "significantly more likely" to believe that:

--Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

--Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

--The economy is getting worse (26 points)

--Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

--The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

--Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

--The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

--When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

--And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

In addition, the study said, increased viewership of Fox News led to increased belief in these false stories.

This is a repost and it's already been thoroughly debunked.