Skip to main content

In case you missed it...

Until around late 2002 to early 2003 I watched Fox 'News' "coverage" about equally with CNN and MSNBC. I say "coverage" because my viewing never included any of their talking head shows.

I could never take Bill "A Current Affair" O'Reilly all that seriously, and found the others (like Sean Hannity) cut from his same cloth of bombastic doctrinaire pseudo-patriotism.

When even their "news coverage" devolved into a constant shrill hype-fest for WAR WAR WAR with Iraq I simply tuned out for good and never looked back.

This is not to say I didn't regularly channel-flip through their "programming" (what a perfect word for it) for occasional 5-10 minute (out)bursts of high-pitched nonsense.

They never failed to deliver and have morphed over the last 6 years from propagandizing alarmists to truly alarming propagandists.

Witness their preposterous alteration (distortion) of the images of two New York Times journalists :



This is truly a new low worthy only of the Nazis or Stalinists.

It reminds of the propaganda posters physically caricaturing Jewish people as misanthropic gnomes with large hooked noses and sharp teeth. (The exaggerated nose of a target whose name is Steinberg certainly strikes me as no accident.)

The only thing more disturbing than these indefensible photo forgeries is the fact that millions of people still swear by Fox News and are daily "programmed" by its propaganda trash.

Comments

Hube said…
Tyler: Really, you've gotta stop the Hitler/Nazi/Third Reich analogies. FNC is hardly alone in such [childish] doctoring; rival MSNBC does it all the time, let alone "major" news outlets that have been caught photoshopping and/or sensationalizing stories based such photos.

I agree it is childish; however, singling out the ONLY major right-leaning network for doing such is disingenuous.
July 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Tyler Nixon said…
Hube - I had a feeling you would show up with objections. As far as other networks doing anything even resembling this crap : show me.

Fox is not a "right-leaning" network. They are a shameless and disgusting propaganda machine for war.

Goebbels would marvel at what Fox is capable of.
July 4, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Tyler Nixon said…
Incidentally, Hube are Stalinist references OK?
July 4, 2008 at 12:26 PM
downwithabsolutes said…
LOL,

I thought it was funny and totally apt coming from a network like FOX.
July 5, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Anonymous said…
Damn it, those propagandists at that network must be in league with Delaware's DMV. Those local morons did the same to my Drivers License photo.

(I think its a button called "fit to form".)

Bastards. (lol)
July 5, 2008 at 7:45 PM
tom said…
I love the "Fox News" parodies on The Simpsons where the news photos have devil horns or Hitler mustaches or similar stuff added to them.
July 6, 2008 at 8:45 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
32 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more