Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 96
  1. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The 60 Minutes folks didn't actually create the Killian documents. If that were true, then I see the parallel. Otherwise, they're guilty of laziness, not intentional falsification.
    They used them without appropriate vetting. That may be an appropriate parallel since neither of us knows the motivation or foreknowledge of those involved. If you claim it was just out of laziness then you're giving CBS credit that you don't extend to Fox.

    It was not good, to be sure. And several people (quite rightly) lost their jobs, including Rather (who is widely believed to have retired early as a result of this issue).

    Are you saying that Hannity and his producers should resign as well? If you're stating "Rathergate" as a parallel, shouldn't Hannity be held to the same standard as Rather? I'd hate if you judged CBS more harshly, based upon partisan reasons.
    What "standard" was Rather held to? Was he forced to resign?
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    They used them without appropriate vetting.
    Not vetting appropriately is very different than creating the documents...which is exactly what Fox did with the video. No amount of obfuscation can change that. You'll note I gave no credit to CBS either...I stated that the resignations were appropriate.

    What "standard" was Rather held to? Was he forced to resign?
    According to the Washington Post:

    "It's pretty clear that Dan Rather faced a very unpalatable choice... His contract had at least two more years to run. [Should he] step down now before the outside investigative report, commissioned by CBS News expected in the next few weeks about his botching -- and the network's botching -- of that story about President Bush's National Guard service? Rather [decided] today that it would be better for him to step down on his own terms."
    So, yes, it's pretty clear that Rathergate was the major factor in his early retirement. And regardless of whether it was his investigation or his staffers, he was the face of the news, so he was responsible for what he reported.

    Earlier, you stated "as long as you give all news outlets the same eye of skepticism. I'd hate to think you were giving Fox unwarranted discredit for purely partisan reasons." You seem to believe that Rathergate was an important breach - is creating a false story less serious than not appropriately vetting?

    So what consequence should Fox and Hannity face? Should there be one, or are you advocating a double standard based upon your politics?
    Last edited by Bujin; 11/12/2009 at 11:19 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  3. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Not vetting appropriately is very different than creating the documents...which is exactly what Fox did with the video. No amount of obfuscation can change that. You'll note I gave no credit to CBS either...I stated that the resignations were appropriate.
    They created the video but may have used it without proper understanding of what it was. So, you're actually right in a way, they are different scenarios. FOX used real news footage at an inappropriate time--a daily occurrence in news media. CBS used forged documents. Which is worse? Depends on motivation and foreknowledge, doesn't it?

    So, yes, it's pretty clear that Rathergate was the major factor in his early retirement. And regardless of whether it was his investigation or his staffers, he was the face of the news, so he was responsible for what he reported.
    A major factor is not a forced resignation. Sounds like Rather took the opportunity to bow out before further disgrace. Either way, I really doubt CBS would have let go a legend like Rather over a single incident.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    FOX used real news footage at an inappropriate time--a daily occurrence in news media. CBS used forged documents. Which is worse? Depends on motivation and foreknowledge, doesn't it?
    No, what Fox did was not "a daily occurance". They used footage from another event, which was more crowded, while commenting how well-attended the more recent event was. This wasn't the case of simply using stock footage. The size of the crowd WAS the story, and the video was designed to promote this fiction.

    A major factor is not a forced resignation. Sounds like Rather took the opportunity to bow out before further disgrace. Either way, I really doubt CBS would have let go a legend like Rather over a single incident.
    Rather directly states he was forced to step down: http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/0...lkl/index.html

    Additionally, the CBS News Producer was fired, and the Executive Producer and his deputy both resigned.

    This five year old story distracts from the real question: should Hannity or Fox pay a similar price as CBS did? If not, why not....other than you agree with their politics?
    Last edited by Bujin; 11/12/2009 at 11:50 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    No, Fox didn't do "a daily occurance". They used footage from another event, which was more crowded, while commenting how well-attended the more recent event was. That is fabrication, not simply the use of stock footage - the crowd WAS the story.



    Rather directly states he was forced to step down: Rather: I was forced to step down - CNN.com

    Additionally, the CBS News Producer was fired, and the Executive Producer and his deputy both resigned. So back to the question: should Hannity or Fox pay a similar price?
    It was Rather's choice to step down before the investigation. Hannity could do that now or he could wait until after such an investigation if he feels he will be exonerated. However, I do think an investigation should occur and if there was intentional misleading someone should lose their job.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    It was Rather's choice to step down before the investigation. Hannity could do that now or he could wait until after such an investigation if he feels he will be exonerated. However, I do think an investigation should occur and if there was intentional misleading someone should lose their job.
    Well, then we agree...yay!
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  7. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Do you really thing that a nationally broadcast, professional video production organization don't label their videos? That they put them all in one file system, so that they can be easily mistaken? Or that the videos from September are in the same file location as those from a day ago? Or that the people responsible for editing wouldn't have caught this "accidental" mistake? Really?

    The conclusion doesn't require data....only a teeny tiny bit of common sense. But, then, common sense is not so common.
    Try to listen more closely please. I said that I doubted that Hannity was directly involved in the video production.

    Oh, so you define common sense now as well. YOU can claim common sense, but others must provide data. Your opinion should be treated as fact, yet you attack others opinions with demands for "data". You continue to display hypocrisy in your arguments.

    KAM
  8. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The 60 Minutes folks didn't actually create the Killian documents. If that were true, then I see the parallel. Otherwise, they're guilty of laziness, not intentional falsification.

    It was not good, to be sure. And several people (quite rightly) lost their jobs, including Rather (who is widely believed to have retired early as a result of this issue).

    Are you saying that Hannity and his producers should resign as well? If you're stating "Rathergate" as a parallel, shouldn't Hannity be held to the same standard as Rather? I'd hate if you judged CBS more harshly, based upon partisan reasons.
    What CBS did was use false information (which others quickly were able to determine was false--either incompetence or intentional falsification on the part of CBS), and attempt to create a substantive news story on that false information.

    What Hannity's show did was state something (number of attendees) and show an incorrect video. Again, I will ask--was the number he stated reasonably accurate or not.

    The difference, here, Mr. Common Sense, is that the Video, while incorrect does not alter the figure stated. In other words, despite being incorrect, it is tangential to the facts of the story.

    With CBS and their false information and false story, it is not tangential, but vital to their claims.

    Fabricated story, vs incorrect video. Common sense tells us that these are different levels of error, but apparently that doesn't matter.

    Has anyone heard whether Hannity's crowd claims (the actual factual issue behind all this) is reasonably accurate or not? Because if it is a matter of an incorrect video, paired with a correct fact, this seems rather (no pun intended) trivial. If the Video was used to create a claim that was false, then that is a different story.

    Also, a reasonable person might consider that this story even if wildly overstating the crowd size is what? A curiosity? Compare this to a News Organization presenting a false story about a Presidential Candidate (who happens to be a sitting President) running up to an election. Hmmm, seems a bit more important to me. A news organization attempting to Sabotage a Presidential Candidate with a fabricated story, vs an incorrect video about a citizen protest.

    Clearly, Fox news must be stopped. Someone in the Administration should get out there and condemn them...oh wait, they already tried that.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 11/13/2009 at 09:14 AM.
  9. #49  
    Clearly, Fox news must be stopped. Someone in the Administration should get out there and condemn them...oh wait, they already tried that.
    Okay, so they get a pass because they're Fox...got it.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  10. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Okay, so they get a pass because they're Fox...got it.
    No, clearly you don't "got it" because I said no such thing. You are really having a problem with accuracy or comprehension--not sure which. I'm just amused by your selective outrage.

    It is getting really pathetic to see leftists of all sorts throwing hissy fits about Fox News, while liberal news media are doing similar things.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 11/13/2009 at 10:55 AM. Reason: Typo
  11. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Honestly, I'd have much more respect for someone saying "okay, they tried to pull a fast one and got caught", then trying to pretend that they believe it was really unintentional.
    Partial re-quote here, just catching up.

    So, in other words, you are saying that I should accept your characterization of this event, and I will gain your respect (or more of it). Wow, really deceptive manipulation you are attempting here. I guess its good that I have no need to gain your acceptance.

    Nice little ploy that you and others keep trying. You deceptively present your opinion as if that is the objective case, and those who disagree with you are factually incorrect. In fact--you are just stating your opinion, which I find perfectly acceptable, but the attempt at deception of course is dishonest.

    Then, you take it one step further. When someone states their views, you demand that THEY present Data, while you present none. You create another distortion, wherein you can just declare things, and others must present you documentation.

    When someone questions that, then you state--"Oh that's common sense" if you disagree with me, you just lack common sense. Sure, that's the case, everyone else is wrong, and you are right.

    I understand how you are trying to present things, which I find common amongst leftists. I'm right and you're wrong, and there's something wrong with you if you don't agree with me, because I'm right. There is no other possibility. So much for open-mindedness that leftists claim to adore. It only extends to those who share your views.

    Is that how you go about living your life? Do you actually get away with this sort of nonsense in the real world? Perhaps you are accustomed to having a captive audience, who is conditioned to believe that you are the authority, and that they should accept what you say. If that is the case, I can see how people who don't accept your declarations might irritate you.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 11/13/2009 at 10:55 AM.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    It was Rather's choice to step down before the investigation. Hannity could do that now or he could wait until after such an investigation if he feels he will be exonerated. However, I do think an investigation should occur and if there was intentional misleading someone should lose their job.
    There will never be an investigation. Hannity is merely a voice for Rupert Murdock's agenda. Rather was an actual journalist. There is a HUGE difference. I mean, if what you are saying is true, Glenn Beck should have been fired for his Obama is a racist comments, but all he got was a weeks vacation out of it...
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    There will never be an investigation. Hannity is merely a voice for Rupert Murdock's agenda. Rather was an actual journalist. There is a HUGE difference. I mean, if what you are saying is true, Glenn Beck should have been fired for his Obama is a racist comments, but all he got was a weeks vacation out of it...
    Yes, Hannity is a commentator and plainly states he is a conservative. His show makes an error with some incorrect video footage, which doesn't change what he actually claimed. Then he admits this error.

    Rather--the "journalist" on the other hand forwards a fabrication, and maintains that he didn't do anything wrong.
    From Wikipedia--so beware: On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rather was interviewed on Larry King Live commenting "Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. ... The truth of this story stands up to this day."


    Yes, a huge difference indeed.

    Beck, whether you agree with him or not was stating his opinion. I wouldn't have said it, but he is entitled to his views. Why should he be fired for stating his opinion that someone else is racist? People call guys like Beck Racist all the time. Why is it ok for some people to make accusations like that, but not others?

    KAM
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Is that how you go about living your life? Do you actually get away with this sort of nonsense in the real world? Perhaps you are accustomed to having a captive audience, who is conditioned to believe that you are the authority, and that they should accept what you say. If that is the case, I can see how people who don't accept your declarations might irritate you.

    KAM
    Ah, yes. Yet again resorting to insults and personal attacks. That's a very mature response indeed.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  15. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Ah, yes. Yet again resorting to insults and personal attacks. That's a very mature response indeed.
    Retreating and claiming to be a victim--is "mature" I suppose? I was questioning the nature of interactions with others. I'm sorry if you think that is a personal attack. You must have an exceptionally broad definition of a "personal attack." I'm trying very hard to focus on what you say, and if I've personally offended you in any way, please accept my apology.

    KAM
  16. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #56  
    Hello Everyone,

    Interestingly enough I saw this:
    MSNBC Uses Fake, ‘Sexy’ Photos of Sarah Palin on Air; Will Network Correct and Apologize? | NewsBusters.org

    On Friday's edition of Morning Meeting, host Dylan Ratigan featured fake photos of Sarah Palin during a mocking segment on why Americans are fascinated with the former vice presidential candidate. While listing the show’s top ten reasons, Ratigan showed a doctored photo of Palin’s head on the bikini-clad body of a woman holding a weapon.

    The host never admitted or addressed the fact that his network was passing off counterfeit pictures to his viewers. Earlier in the segment, Ratigan displayed an image of Palin in a short, black mini-skirt. This photo is also not real. MSNBC should immediately apologize for presenting such false information.

    It's important to remember, several hosts on the network, including Chris Matthews, have mocked Fox News host Sean Hannity for taking video images from the 9/12 rally and then portraying the footage as from a more recent tea party event. After it was brought to his attention, Hannity apologized on Wednesday. How long will it take MSNBC?


    Hmmm, sounds kind of similar. From reading the transcript it seems as if the segment was supposed to be funny, and as such could be classified as satire, but I'm not sure that is the default expectation on a news channel.

    Before anyone states otherwise, I don't view this as a problem, and it has even less relevance than Hannity's screw-up. Neither misrepresentation seems to have any actual impact, although each leaves a false impression.

    Go ahead and start with the condemnations of MSNBC.

    KAM
  17. #57  
    The fake photos just reinforce the point the segment was making - Americans are fascinated with the former vice presidential candidate - so much so people make fake sexy photos of her. Of course they are fake, one look at them shows you that.
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Yes, Hannity is a commentator and plainly states he is a conservative. His show makes an error with some incorrect video footage, which doesn't change what he actually claimed. Then he admits this error.
    What he did was "cook the numbers". He was referring to the attendance when he showed that clip. Do you not think that FOX categorizes and labels all video clips that they have in their archive? Do you not think that Hannity has no say or does not approve anything that gets shown on HIS show? Is it not his credibility that is in jeopardy for everything he states/shows on his show? To me this was nothing more than FOX propaganda to further their agenda, which is, whip up the tea partiers into an frenzy, and to give themselves some credibility for the weak numbers that actually turned out for the rally...

    Rather--the "journalist" on the other hand forwards a fabrication, and maintains that he didn't do anything wrong.
    From Wikipedia--so beware: On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rather was interviewed on Larry King Live commenting "Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. ... The truth of this story stands up to this day."
    As far as we know, he may have not done anything wrong. You don't mind blaming Hannity's staff for the error of using the wrong footage, so I guess you have no problem with Rather's staff not fact-checking a memo they received before it went to air. Unlike Hannity, Rather IS an actual journalist and when his credibility was in question, he did the stand-up thing and stepped down. It may have been overkill for him to lose his job, but at least it was more noble than Hannity's "Oops, my bad" with a smirk mentality.

    Beck, whether you agree with him or not was stating his opinion. I wouldn't have said it, but he is entitled to his views. Why should he be fired for stating his opinion that someone else is racist? People call guys like Beck Racist all the time. Why is it ok for some people to make accusations like that, but not others?

    KAM
    Why was it OK for FOX to label anyone who spoke out or did not agree with Bush and his policies, a traitor? Where they not entitled to their views? This is the same network that Beck works for, and now that they do not like you got elected, their policies conveniently change. So disagreeing with a war is unpatriotic and treasonous, but calling our president a racist is just expressing opinion? the hypocrisy baffles me...
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  19. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    What he did was "cook the numbers". He was referring to the attendance when he showed that clip. Do you not think that FOX categorizes and labels all video clips that they have in their archive? Do you not think that Hannity has no say or does not approve anything that gets shown on HIS show? Is it not his credibility that is in jeopardy for everything he states/shows on his show? To me this was nothing more than FOX propaganda to further their agenda, which is, whip up the tea partiers into an frenzy, and to give themselves some credibility for the weak numbers that actually turned out for the rally...
    "Cook the numbers" would imply that he stated incorrect numbers.
    I'd expect that that video was labelled and someone was either very careless or grabbed it anyway.
    It is Hannity's credibility on the line, and I'm sure he is involved with the segments and what they are. Production details...I'd bet he isn't watching over the shoulder of the production staff. Hannity comes on at 9:00 Eastern? His Radio show ends at...what is it 6:00pm eastern?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    As far as we know, he may have not done anything wrong. You don't mind blaming Hannity's staff for the error of using the wrong footage, so I guess you have no problem with Rather's staff not fact-checking a memo they received before it went to air. Unlike Hannity, Rather IS an actual journalist and when his credibility was in question, he did the stand-up thing and stepped down. It may have been overkill for him to lose his job, but at least it was more noble than Hannity's "Oops, my bad" with a smirk mentality.
    Well, someone screwed it up, and it seems likely it is his Staff although I don't believe he blamed his staff, scapegoating them. I'd remind you that the video (which was partially incorrect and partially correct) was somewhat incidental. Whereas the memo in Rathergate was being used as a key element. Also--what Rather did was a feature that had a long period of time to develop.

    What is stand up about "stepping down" and not admitting you were wrong? to my knowledge he said he wouldn't have done what he did, but apparently still maintains the report was true.

    I'd agree that Hannity shouldn't have been "smirking." It undermines the apology in my view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    Why was it OK for FOX to label anyone who spoke out or did not agree with Bush and his policies, a traitor? Where they not entitled to their views?
    I'm not sure what you are referring to, but is responding to someone's views, denying them that view? If they are attempting to intimidate someone and suppress their expression of their views that would be out of line.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    This is the same network that Beck works for, and now that they do not like you got elected, their policies conveniently change. So disagreeing with a war is unpatriotic and treasonous, but calling our president a racist is just expressing opinion? the hypocrisy baffles me...
    In both cases, someone says or does something, and someone else characterizes them (harshly in these cases). What's hypocritical about that? Are you trying to say that since they said bad things about someone who criticized one President that they should do the same when someone says something bad about another president?

    I'm not sure the policy was "be nice to Presidents." If it were and then they decided to be mean to Presidents then that would be hypocrisy.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 11/13/2009 at 02:34 PM. Reason: Aditional point.
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    The fake photos just reinforce the point the segment was making - Americans are fascinated with the former vice presidential candidate - so much so people make fake sexy photos of her. Of course they are fake, one look at them shows you that.
    Well, using that logic, one could just say that Hannity was OBVIOUSLY using a footage from another event, because the Trees clearly showed the seasonal difference. One look tells you that right?

    To continue a similar justification, Hannity was showing other protests to underscore that the protest movement was widespread and lots of people opposed what the government is doing.

    Anyone can justify anything. I should note--those justifications above do not represent my views, I'm just mirroring what you posted.

    Of course there is another point. Hannity's footage wasn't of what he was talking about (well part of it wasn't), but it actually wasn't fake. The Palin stuff was actually fabricated.

    Also--if they wanted to emphasize "fascination" (as you suggest) then you'd think they'd point out that people are even making fake photos--that's how far it goes. They apparently made no mention of it.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 11/13/2009 at 02:32 PM.
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions