Fox News Openly Raises Money For Republicans

This topic came up above in the coin area that some of you may never have visited but I thought I'd bring it down here for all you Fox worshippers.

Interestingly enough, Fox News has it's on-air personalities out raising money for Republican candidates and to date they have raised millions of dollars while being advertised with the Fox News logo to promote the event. MSNBC, CNN, CBS, you name it, you'll never see them out raising money for Democratic candidates while Fox does it routinely for Republicans. There simply isn't another mainstream media organization that would even consider crossing the lines Fox crosses every day. Fair and balanced! What a joke.

Check this out:http://mediamatters.org/research/201004210012

REPORT: Fox Newsers rally for GOP in more than 300 instances and in nearly every state April 21, 2010 10:12 am ET

In recent years, at least twenty Fox News personalities have endorsed, raised money, or campaigned for Republican candidates or causes, or against Democratic candidates or causes, in more than 300 instances and in at least 49 states. Republican parties and officials have routinely touted these personalities' affiliations with Fox News to sell and promote their events

 

moen, are you losing it? What happened to the left's categorizing Fox News as not a legitimate news organization but rather purely entertainment, huh? Entertainers are well-known for endorsing & shilling for liberal candidates, aren't they? You can't have it both ways.
Kinda reminds me of that other thread when you said the dems didn't do something but in your next post you admitted they did. I don't understand?

 

A lot of what I see on that link is not much different than James Carville (recent fundraising letter http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/...villes-Hilarious-Democratic-Fundraising-Email) being on CNN...just to name one person on another network. Face it, there are degrees, but all of the networks have their people who are just promotional tools for their chosen parties.

 

Networks have always used political "experts" but I have yet to see ABC News for example have one of them show up at a fundraising event for a Democrat or anyone else as well as advertise the event on the nightly news and use ABC News logos to promote the event. The mainstream networks aren't nearly as liberally biased as Fox is blatantly the media right arm of the Republican Party. Not even close. The fact that media matters compiled instance after instance of a supposed new organization actively, openly, overtly campaigning for either political party would and should be enough for any intelligent person to figure out that Fox News is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the Right wing in this country. If this were the 1930's in Germany, Ruppert Muddock would be Adolph Hitler and Roger Ailes would be Joseph Goebbels. Tell me how what Fox does is any different than what Adolph Hitler described in Mein Kampf in chapter IV on propaganda?

Mein Kampf contains the blueprint of later Nazi propaganda efforts. Assessing his audience, Hitler writes in chapter IV:

"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (...) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (...) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (...) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood."

As to the methods to be employed, he explains:

"Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side. (...) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (...) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula."

Sounds like Fox's audience to me....

 

Ah, the Nazi reference. When all else fails.....

 

I tend to agree that Fox is the most obvious. However, they all have their political tools and their political leanings. The problem is with all of them. They have many more non-journalists than journalists so they are all very, very short on journalistic integrity. It is all infotainment and the current best infotainment they can exploit is politics. Watch any of them on any election night and tell me that is not true.

Political pundits, analysts, contributors. They are all the same thing...tools for their party given air time. Paid cheerleaders And all of them do it. Fox is just the most obvious...and therefor the easiest to dismiss and possibly the least dangerous because of that. While Fox is the liar that everyone knows is a liar. The others are liars that pass themselves off as the honest man and fool a great many.

 

Man...how could you say that??...They're fair and balanced...just ask Davey. He'll tell ya.

 

I just think that by saying that they all do it overestimates the degree to which the mainstream media engages in partisan journalism and severely underestimates the extent to which Fox routinely crosses the line between journalism and overt propaganda. Every time the assertion is made that equates mainstream journalism and its audience with Fox and its audience, a gross mischaracterization of the truth is perpetrated on all of us. Again, let us not forget what Hitler wrote on this subject, "Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side." Investigation and Fox News go together like oil and water.

I have no problem with people being entertained by Fox but when they start quoting Fox as support for their arguments, I have to throw up a little in my mouth at the thought of people that actually are exactly as Hitler described them over 70 years ago.... "The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another." A person is smart, people are dumb and even Hitler knew how to herd the sheep effectively enough to change the course of history. Who says it can't and isn't happening again?

 

I think that by just glossing over the fact that they all do it, people make many of them more dangerous. It leads to the mentality of 'Well, as long as they aren't Fox, they must be telling me the truth."

Like I said, Fox is the worst but they are far from the only. I think part of the reason Fox is the worst is their format. They have the most 'talk radio' type entertainment programs aired and the most analyst, pundit and talking head cheerleader segments. But, they all have those and they are all slanted.

I don't think Fox's actual news segments (mostly all Shepard Smith) are any further out there than the others. In fact, I think Shepard Smith, in particular, is as good as any news anchor on the other 'News' stations.

 

I do think their actual news segments (which air only a couple of hours a day) done by Shepard Smith are as fair and balanced as any. The other ~20 hours a day...not even close.

 

I find it hard to believe that people would believe everything else they hear just because Fox is so far out there. But I will agree that Fox, by its very nature, sure has the ability to lend just about anyone else more credibility. I just don't think Fox goes through people's heads everytime they hear a news story. That's giving them a little too much credit.

 

You can't dismiss Fox as entertainment on one hand while criticizing them for not acting like a professional news service on the other, that would be hypocritical....oh, wait, I forgot who I was talking to.

 

That is not what I am trying to say. It is the thought that the others should be given such a pass because they aren't as bad as Fox that is the problem I see. Every time somone say 'CNN does this' or 'MSNBC does that' the response is almost always.... 'But look at what Fox does!" It is quite disingenous, in my opinion.

 

Professional entertainment sounds about right to me. Like wrestling.

 

Not realy sure what the problem is, they are at least open in there support they are no way trying to hide the fact that they represent the Republican party in the media arena so as long as any money raised is declaired let them go for it. Talking of fund raising the last report I read was that the Democrats were outdoing the Republicans in this field any way

 

That's all it's always about... who can suck up the most cash. All smoke and mirrors anyway.

 

Steve, You are probably very used to British style journalism. What you call journalism, we call commentary or opinion news. The standard of journalism prior to Fox was objectivity. Fox has more or less lowered the standards for all journalism in this country because it has more sensational appeal to the weaker minds that this country churns out on a regular basis. There is a good reason that this country continues to fall behind other countries in math, science, reading, etc. Look at the first thing we cut in ANY fiscal crisis...Education! There certainly is no cuts proposed in the military budget and we already spend more than all other countries combined on defense. You can't tell me we care about education and go out of our way to undermine the educational system so often. Fox-heads may not be towers of intellect but they will certainly make good little soldiers once the bloated military needs them in the next trumped up war. Sounds like a plan to me and Fox is right there doing its part to bring down the standards of journalism. The funny part is that I don't think the Republican Party is so much the benefactor here as is Fox News itself.

 

This sounds like a post tomc could have made. FOX is responsible for lowering the standards...blah, blah, blah (even though the likes of Walter Cronkite & Dan Rather offered not so subtle liberal ideologies for years prior to FOX). FOX viewers are less intelligent..blah, blah,blah (even though you must watch a TON of FOX prgramming to be so in tune with what they have to say). And then you somehow bring education into the mix? We all know you'll do or say anything to protect your interests. If our education system is held accountible you & your ilk woin't be protected any more. Point fingers at a television network as the problems with our educational system? Now that's a stretch for even you tom,,,err, I mean moen.

 

Steve, Meet a product of the Fox News culture. Blah, blah, blah has replaced actual articulation of thoughts.

 

Yep, typical moen/tomc response. You can't dispute the post, rather it hits home & you have to resort to immature ridicule. "Blah, blah, blah" is appropriate language in this instance as we all know what path this or any of your other arguments will take- all paths lead to protecting your cushy little spot in academia and if anyone disagrees with anything you spew it's only because everyone (except you) is stupid & listen to FOX.