If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Author booted from Benghazi interview for calling Fox a "wing of the Republican party" declines to go on MSNBC, saying, "You're just like Fox, but not as good at it"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 250
    More: Followup, Fox News, Tom Ricks, MSNBC, military affairs  
•       •       •

10522 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Nov 2012 at 4:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



250 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-28 04:16:01 PM

ManateeGag: and was he thrown of MSNBC too or did they let him continue?


He used to be on Olbermann's show a lot back when he was on MSNBC. Not sure if that's related or not.
 
2012-11-28 04:16:19 PM

ManateeGag: and was he thrown of MSNBC too or did they let him continue?


I suppose his declining to go on in the first place is sort of like him throwing himself out?
 
2012-11-28 04:16:42 PM
He's wrong: Both networks revel in hyperpartisanship. FNC's revelers just happen to be blonde.
 
2012-11-28 04:17:14 PM
MSNBC, which gives three hours every morning to a Gingrich Revolution Republican congressman and has non-opinion based news shows that are neutral to network standards is just like Fox which has zero liberal hosts of any kind and displays bias in what should be non-opinion based news broadcasts. 

Sorry, having some liberal opinion programs does not make them Fox. They have a conservative led program too, and remain neutral outside of opinion shows. Fox does not feature this sort of balance, it is wall to wall propaganda.
 
2012-11-28 04:17:27 PM

Tavillion: Mike_LowELL: Say what you want about his opinion on FOX News, but he hit ACORNBC dead-on.

I swear I've come to look forward to your posts more and more. And I'm taking notes.


Seriously. I hated him at first, but man, he's one of my favorites now
 
2012-11-28 04:18:17 PM
As much as I enjoy watching TRMS at least a couple of nights a week, he's not all that wrong. Ed Schultz is probably the worst of the bunch, closely followed by Lawrence O'Democrat. Maddow and Harris-Perry at least maintain fingertip-contact with reality.

Still, bias towards facts is better than bias towards "Bullshiat Mountain".
 
2012-11-28 04:18:28 PM

Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.


I suspect most people would agree that it's neither of those, and I'd like to believe that most people would agree that whatever it is, it's not on cable television.
 
2012-11-28 04:18:50 PM
The best journalism out there, right now, is Al Jazeera and the BBC. Considering the recent scandals, however, it might actually be Al Jazeera.

Scary world, eh?
 
2012-11-28 04:19:42 PM

Sgt Otter: Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.

I can't say I disagree with "neither FNC or MSNBC."


It is hard to argue.

Of course, nowadays there are no other options I know of offhand. Al-Jazeerah?
 
2012-11-28 04:20:00 PM

nekom: So, is Benghazi a scandal yet?


No, but they can't tell a chicken from the pile of feathers that's left.

farm5.staticflickr.com 

www.inspirefusion.com
 
2012-11-28 04:20:14 PM

zedster: cman: The problem is is that we Americans dont want real news. We want Brangelina, we want to be scared out of our shoes, we want to be taught how to think. News organizations cannot exist on news because people dont buy that crap. That is why we have Fox News and MSNBC, because it sells. Partisan news networks sell.

unless we try we will never know :-/
As anyone tried a more serious news station in the US market? I don't real consider AJE in that category based on the fact they have a large backing of ex-BBC people and target the Middle East and African stores, so not really US market oriented


Why would you want 24 hours a day of just news? That's boring. You're not going to watch TV all day anyway. Just DVR the PBS News Hour and watch that instead.
 
2012-11-28 04:20:15 PM

furiousxgeorge: MSNBC, which gives three hours every morning to a Gingrich Revolution Republican congressman and has non-opinion based news shows that are neutral to network standards is just like Fox which has zero liberal hosts of any kind and displays bias in what should be non-opinion based news broadcasts. 

Sorry, having some liberal opinion programs does not make them Fox. They have a conservative led program too, and remain neutral outside of opinion shows. Fox does not feature this sort of balance, it is wall to wall propaganda.


Joe Trippi Disagrees

I was watching election night and was like WTF is Trippi doing on Fox News, but this article makes it seem like either he actually enjoys it or has suffered extreme Stockholm syndrome.
 
2012-11-28 04:20:33 PM
He got booted off of Fox.
He declined an invitation from MSNBC.

I, too, think he should reconsider the differences in his position, even if he sees no difference in the networks.
 
2012-11-28 04:20:51 PM
nice try libs but he apologized to Fox News and now he's on the attack biting the hand that USED to feed him.
 
2012-11-28 04:21:29 PM
one lethal cock-up
 
2012-11-28 04:21:32 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: It is a false equivalency by a mile, but at least he can claim his integrity.


hardly
 
2012-11-28 04:21:39 PM

Lexx: The best journalism out there, right now, is Al Jazeera and the BBC. Considering the recent scandals, however, it might actually be Al Jazeera.

Scary world, eh?


Excellent point. And from what I've seen of AJ recently, they've quite a few former CNN reporters.
 
2012-11-28 04:21:57 PM

Cythraul: BronyMedic: Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.

Well, it's certainly not Infowars.

I do have to give this man a round of applause. At least he's sticking to his principles, and saying what a LOT of Americans feel at this moment. They're tired of the news not reporting the news, and instead spinning it to serve the agenda of a political faction.

MSNBC =/= Fox News. It's a bit of a false equivalency. His comment reeks of 'they're all bad, and I have now found a way to feel superior to it all.' Seems a bit egotistical.

So I'd really like to know which news sources he feels are legitimate and unbiased, if any.


So you probably think that the two party system works great, then, right?
 
2012-11-28 04:22:06 PM

Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.


NPR.

They did their own review to determine if they have a bias. Turns out they interview more Repulicans than Dems, and feature more negative stories about Obama than GOP politicians.
 
2012-11-28 04:22:15 PM

BronyMedic: JerseyTim: Yeah, fark having jobs and shiat.

Well, I know personally when I'm pushing 60, I don't want to retire. I still want to work 96 hours a week.

/derp.


The thing that suprised me at retirement was that I had no idea how I ever had time for "work" at the 7am-7pm thing.

Like the Tooth Fairy, retirement is not what you were told.
 
2012-11-28 04:22:47 PM

tlchwi02: BronyMedic: MSNBC does not equal Fox News, you're absolutely right. It still doesn't mean they don't have an obvious bias. And to be fair, if you're NOT watching the news and taking everything in with a grain of skepticism on how it's reported or the follow-up there of, you're doing it wrong.

i think the problem i have with fox is that their bias pervades their entire organization. If i tune in to see a pundit, i generally expect some level of bias, because they are opinion people. But when i turn it on during the day, i expect to see normal news reporting, without a bias. When you watch MSNBC's pure news coverage, its just news. When you watch CNN's pure news coverage, its just news. When you watch Fox's pure news coverage, its still biased.


Really? Andrea Mitchell and Martin Bashir are amongst the worst offenders on any channel. Tamron Hall has gotten into the act, too. And then when you have the obvious primetime opinion-makers, Maddow and Matthews, anchoring the election coverage, instead of legit news folks like, say, Chris Jansing or Alex Witt, your network really can't say it walks the neutral ground at any standpoint.
 
2012-11-28 04:24:30 PM
Well, he's dead on. The observations made in this thread that MSNBC doesn't compare to Fox are exactly the same thing he's saying; he's just saying it with a less charitable view than some posters here because MSNBC doesn't flatter his political beliefs. If MSNBC were as effective as Fox, we would expect to see conservatives more incensed about it and liberals more ready to argue that MSNBC is unbiased - because the reporting would mesh more easily with the narratives pushed by each of those worldviews.
 
2012-11-28 04:24:46 PM
I wish more journalists would write like Melinda Henneberger. This was a nice article.
 
2012-11-28 04:25:40 PM
i614.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-28 04:26:06 PM
I think part of the problem, that people have with Fox, MSNBC, CNN etc....is they
equate their 24/7 coverage as "news". I don't watch much of any of them anymore,
got burned out during the run up to the election.
I know that Fox has a newscast between 7pm - 8pm (eastern), and when it is over
that idiot Sheppard Smith says "that is the news, the OPINION starts now.
Everything after that are OPINION shows, not NEWS shows.
I'm sure MSNBC is the same. They have a news show, then OPINION shows
the rest of the night.
I just got tired of the talking heads, and resorted to READING the news from various
news sources on the web (USA, ENGLAND, RUSSIA, CHINA, FRANCE, JAPAN, etc),
instead of someone telling me the news.
 
2012-11-28 04:26:58 PM
that's pretty awesome.
 
2012-11-28 04:27:27 PM

Lexx: Considering the recent scandals, however, it might actually be Al Jazeera.


Not by a mile. Al Jazeera's reporting is good at pushing a certain type of provincial Arab worldview, and does so consistently. The BBC may be a bit comfortable with the British government but does pretty well in covering the rest of the world.
 
2012-11-28 04:27:37 PM

Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.


I'm on his side. The broadcast news shows are decent. NPR is great. Reuters, AP, etc.
 
2012-11-28 04:27:40 PM

Gyrfalcon: Sgt Otter: Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.

I can't say I disagree with "neither FNC or MSNBC."

It is hard to argue.

Of course, nowadays there are no other options I know of offhand. Al-Jazeerah?


I'm of the opinion that the best sources of news tend to be print rather than video. I read both the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, and consider myself pretty well informed. When I make the mistake of turning on FNC or MSNBC and happen to catch them covering a news story that I had previously read about in either the WSJ or NYT, I almost always find the TV coverage to be superficial, one-sided, and apt to leave the viewer under-informed or misinformed. If I want superficial with a side of questionable journalistic standards there's a whole universe of blogs I can read without having to watch a talking head shouting at me from the left or the right.
 
2012-11-28 04:28:29 PM
He'd better watch his mouth. Soon he won't be able to get an interview on TMZ because they're afraid of being called a tabloid rag. Nor will he ever bathe again, due to that "you're wet" comment.
 
2012-11-28 04:28:30 PM
Hand that man a Pulitzer Prize!

He courageously reports what Fox and the MSM don't want you to know.

That they have become a band of partisan hacks since the silly old "there's two sides to every story--the Democratic Side and the Republican Side--and provided you give twenty seconds to a spokesperson from the DNC and RNC, spinning pseudo-issues like whirling dervishes, you're objective and have done your job competently and well" rule went to Hell in a handcart.

Advertisement
Al Jazzeera: America's most trusted news source!

Advertisement
Mother Beeb: So sometimes we get it wrong? No big woof!
 
2012-11-28 04:28:49 PM
Author booted from Benghazi interview for calling Fox a "wing of the Republican party" declines to go on MSNBC, saying, "You're just like Fox, but not as good at it"

Looks like MSNBC needs some
youngsgifts.com
 
2012-11-28 04:29:28 PM
Both FNC and MSNBC cable News channels suck. One blows the right and the other blows the left (relatively speaking)

Does this mean if I'm watching CNN, I'm probably doing it with smug superiority?
 
2012-11-28 04:30:00 PM

thornhill: Cythraul: I wonder what his idea of a non-biased news source is, then.

NPR.

They did their own review to determine if they have a bias. Turns out they interview more Repulicans than Dems, and feature more negative stories about Obama than GOP politicians.


also on average NPR listeners are the most well informed of any broadcast media viewers/listeners
 
Bf+
2012-11-28 04:31:37 PM
I like this guy. I do.
But he forgot to end with "so vote Republican."
 
2012-11-28 04:32:08 PM

X-Geek: [i614.photobucket.com image 373x330]


How does being annoyed by someone (in this case two things) make one feel superior? Its farking annoying to hear people spin news constantly.
 
2012-11-28 04:32:56 PM
Maddow is the only one I watch. Her voice is like honey to my ears.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:08 PM

zedster: furiousxgeorge: MSNBC, which gives three hours every morning to a Gingrich Revolution Republican congressman and has non-opinion based news shows that are neutral to network standards is just like Fox which has zero liberal hosts of any kind and displays bias in what should be non-opinion based news broadcasts. 

Sorry, having some liberal opinion programs does not make them Fox. They have a conservative led program too, and remain neutral outside of opinion shows. Fox does not feature this sort of balance, it is wall to wall propaganda.

Joe Trippi Disagrees

I was watching election night and was like WTF is Trippi doing on Fox News, but this article makes it seem like either he actually enjoys it or has suffered extreme Stockholm syndrome.


Appearing on the network is not the same as hosting a three hour show every day. I mean, this is exactly the type of clearly not thought out false equivalence that has led to the differences between the networks being ignored.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:10 PM
Claiming that the Benghazi attack was similar to the last five attacks against embassies is nonsense, and to the extent he is calling out anyone, right or left, for stating so, he is an idiot.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:23 PM

coco ebert: MSNBC is not as bad as Fox but I've been watching cable news more since before the election and yes, MSNBC is definitely soft on the Obama administration, particularly when it comes to foreign policy. If Bush had been pulling the same crap as Obama they would have been all over that sh*t.


I think the big difference is that MSNBC clearly delineates news from opinion. They are very one-sided in their commentary (with exceptions, like Joe Scarborough and that one Republican consultant who sat in on election night, but those are few and far between), and arguably even more one-sided than Fox in their selection of talk show guests. (Ed Schultz brings in people who agree with him; Bill O'Reilly brings in people who disagree with him, and then insults them; pick your poison.) But MSNBC's big, big advantage is that their actual news reporting isn't nearly as thoroughly infested by partisan talking points as Fox News is.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:25 PM
Lexx
The best journalism out there, right now, is Al Jazeera and the BBC. Considering the recent scandals, however, it might actually be Al Jazeera.

Scary world, eh?


AJ is terrible unless you are looking to verify your belief that Islam has been in a constant stage of jihad all over the world because the US and Israel have been trying to exterminate Muslims since the days of Muhhamed. I know, the US has been around for 200 years but try explaining that to someone who reads AJ. Speaking of people who red AJ, have you ever read the comment section of AJ? It's an outlet for those cavemen to try to justify stoning women and cutting peoples heads off while running around in the streets screaming "Allah Akbar."
 
2012-11-28 04:34:30 PM

Lumpmoose: Anyone who thinks MSNBC is a mouthpiece for the Democrats is far over-estimating the ability of liberals to form and maintain coalitions.


Cheerleader, not mouthpiece - mouthpiece implies that the party is sending requests, Fox and MSNBC do what they do for their own reasons, not at the behest of one party or the other.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:33 PM
This Benghazi thing and whatever your personal politics are aside, It should be farking obvious that Fox News is Paul Verhoeven movie level of satirical sensationalism. It's like a caricature of a news outlet. It doesn't matter what "side" they're on. I would recognize that no matter what "side" they're on. They're a farking cartoon.
 
2012-11-28 04:34:52 PM
So... when does ol' Sweetcheeks McBallsack (aka halfof33) come in and start derpshiatting about a tu quoque fallacy?


/TU QUOQUE!
 
2012-11-28 04:35:38 PM

halfof33: Claiming that the Benghazi attack was similar to the last five attacks against embassies is nonsense, and to the extent he is calling out anyone, right or left, for stating so, he is an idiot.


Ah, there we go....right on cue....
 
2012-11-28 04:35:54 PM

halfof33: Claiming that the Benghazi attack was similar to the last five attacks against embassies is nonsense, and to the extent he is calling out anyone, right or left, for stating so, he is an idiot.


Were the last 5 attacks even similar to each other ???
 
2012-11-28 04:36:24 PM
They are very one-sided in their commentary (with exceptions, like Joe Scarborough... but those are few and far between),

Three hours. Every day.
 
2012-11-28 04:36:29 PM

Lexx: The best journalism out there, right now, is Al Jazeera and the BBC. Considering the recent scandals, however, it might actually be Al Jazeera.

Scary world, eh?


I just about always consider Al Jazeera the least biased (not necessarily best) source for US political news. The BBC is generally okay if it doesn't involve the UK or any part of the Arab/Palestinian/Israeli conflict, on which BBC is not only biased but often an active participant in spreading misinformation (Jon Donnison, for example).

Generally, wire services like the AP and Reuters are pretty unbiased, if lacking depth.

NPR's Morning Edition is definitely left-leaning but I haven't caught them intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Other programming on NPR, like On the Media & On Point are full blown left but still fact-based. Talk of the Nation is fully a joke.

Most of the major print sources have a smattering of leanings, often far more dependent on the reporter than the publication. I find read-worthy stuff all the time in majors like Wash Post, NYT, WSJ, and yes, even USA Today.
 
2012-11-28 04:37:39 PM

cashdaddy: Ah, there we go....right on cue....


well it would be hypocritical for me not to bash the douche when he is bashing the left.

He's just wrong, so maybe he should just go back to keeping lobsters off his lawn.
 
2012-11-28 04:37:51 PM

Lumpmoose: Anyone who thinks MSNBC is a mouthpiece for the Democrats is far over-estimating the ability of liberals to form and maintain coalitions.


Yeah--but his point still stands. Shilling partisan opinions as facts news is really, really irresponsible. And he's right--Fox news is so much better at it.
 
Displayed 50 of 250 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report