NationStates Jolt Archive

I just received my copy of "Outfoxed" in the mail today, was just curious if you had received yours yet? I'm tempted to watch it right now..lol, but I figure I should wait till Zeppistan gets home.

If you have received yours, let me know what you thought of it. I'll let you know what I think and I'm sure Zep will as well after we watch it.

Peace,
Stephanie

Watch it now! Watch it now!

Then give updates to those of us who can't afford DVDs!!!

Watch it now! Watch it now!

Then give updates to those of us who can't afford DVDs!!!

LOL... it's only $10 (USD) it's really not that much. I also received "Uncovered:The Whole Truth About The Iraq War" last week.. Zep and I loved that one. All their experts had basically no less then 20 years in the CIA, former CIA director, Foreign service, former White House legal council, who actually makes a rather serious charge against Bush for misleading the Congress which is a federal offence. It was great. It showed leading CIA experts saying that Powell's address to the UN "to make the case for war" was at best "embarrassing" to those in the intelligence community who knew better. It's pretty harsh on Cheney. It was done by the same guy who did "Outfoxed" it was excellent. So, if using "Uncovered" as an example, I'm sure "Outfoxed" will be just as excellent.

Steph, I work for a not-for-profit organization. $10 represents a substantial amount of my paycheck. :)

Steph, I work for a not-for-profit organization. $10 represents a substantial amount of my paycheck. :)

Fair enough, I will give you my thoughts, as will Zep no doubt and I know Incertonia said he had sent away for it as well, so I'm sure he will have thoughts on it too. We will strive to be as objective as Fox news..lol haha j/k :)

Serious, I'm sure you'll get a more "Fair & Balanced" assessment from us.. ;)

FNC is conservative? Oh, wow. Tell me something I don't know. What I would like to see is a similar doc made about CNN. I have watched them frequently and I am almost certain that they have a left-wing bias. Most of it is subliminal:

What stories they choose to report: FNC is the only channel I have found that reports the openings of schools and hospitals in Iraq. All you hear from CNN is the bad news from Iraq. CNN's Iraq is a chaotic firework show, while other sources (and not just FNC) suggest that things are, for the most part, stable and that things are drastically improving over there.

The order of the stories they report: On a daily basis, I watch CNN report abuse in Iraq (live or recap). It's typically followed by a debate, then an update of whatever Kerry happens to be doing. They show something bad, link it to Bush, and boost his opponent. Try watching it and you'll see that.

The time spent reporting different stories: I heard almost nothing out of them about the UN oil-for-food scandal, but they spent an incredible amount of time talking about Abu Ghriab and "how high up the ladder it goes," while showing pictures of Bush. It was then found Bush had nothing to do with the abuse, but they didn't choose to spend much time reporting about that. If you watch, they also spend an inordinate amount of time reporting on the Kerry campaign or discussing the Kerry campaign; far more than what they say about Bush.

Absence of malice: reporting what is accurate, but not true. Remember the big crisis about Bush's national guard service? It turned out there were some payroll stubs that went missing. CNN was all over this, but they neglected to mention that every national guard payroll record for everyone in that time was missing. Why? No, Bush did not have them destroyed, as was implied. The reason was because the military was making the transition between storing such records on paper and storing them on microfilm. Some of the records were lost in the process.

Believe it or not, even the graphics: take a good look at their "Decision 2004" graphic sometime. Keep in mind that blue states means Democratic, red states means Republican. The "Decision 2004" graphics shows a red circle with an elephant in it next to a picture of Bush, and a blue circle with a donkey in it next to a picture of Kerry. Fair enough. Below that is the white lettering "Decision 2004". Good so far... wait. Why is there a large blue star in there, too? Sort of drowns out the red.

Yes, I would be very interested in seeing a similar documentary about CNN.

If the case can be made against CNN then is SHOULD be made. I think that the Republicans would make the case in a heartbeat if they could, as they have the money and resources to it.

Isn't it the law for a network to give Candidates equal airtime? I don't know this for a fact, but I could have sworn I heard this somewhere.

edited to say: I also have Outfoxed and The Truth about the Iraq War on the way. yay.

Just an FYI, during the war, especially with the protests, FNC was bashing the protesters and saying how stupid they were...

Fox is fairly unbalanced! Now they're getting sued, with an action in the FCC to force them to stop lying about themselves!

Steph,
I haven't gotten it yet, but you can be certain that when I do get it, I'll be watching it more than once.

Reynes,
I would wholeheartedly support any close look at the reporting practices of CNN or any other major news network. Just be prepared to be surprised by your findings. Like I've said many times before--the media's general bias is not ideological; it's profit-based.

What stories they choose to report: FNC is the only channel I have found that reports the openings of schools and hospitals in Iraq.

I don't know what you consider news, but when they build a new school or hospital in my area, I don't consider that news, if some one gets shot there, that's news!

FNC is conservative? Oh, wow. Tell me something I don't know. What I would like to see is a similar doc made about CNN. I have watched them frequently and I am almost certain that they have a left-wing bias. Most of it is subliminal:

What stories they choose to report: FNC is the only channel I have found that reports the openings of schools and hospitals in Iraq. All you hear from CNN is the bad news from Iraq. CNN's Iraq is a chaotic firework show, while other sources (and not just FNC) suggest that things are, for the most part, stable and that things are drastically improving over there.

The order of the stories they report: On a daily basis, I watch CNN report abuse in Iraq (live or recap). It's typically followed by a debate, then an update of whatever Kerry happens to be doing. They show something bad, link it to Bush, and boost his opponent. Try watching it and you'll see that.

The time spent reporting different stories: I heard almost nothing out of them about the UN oil-for-food scandal, but they spent an incredible amount of time talking about Abu Ghriab and "how high up the ladder it goes," while showing pictures of Bush. It was then found Bush had nothing to do with the abuse, but they didn't choose to spend much time reporting about that. If you watch, they also spend an inordinate amount of time reporting on the Kerry campaign or discussing the Kerry campaign; far more than what they say about Bush.

Absence of malice: reporting what is accurate, but not true. Remember the big crisis about Bush's national guard service? It turned out there were some payroll stubs that went missing. CNN was all over this, but they neglected to mention that every national guard payroll record for everyone in that time was missing. Why? No, Bush did not have them destroyed, as was implied. The reason was because the military was making the transition between storing such records on paper and storing them on microfilm. Some of the records were lost in the process.

Believe it or not, even the graphics: take a good look at their "Decision 2004" graphic sometime. Keep in mind that blue states means Democratic, red states means Republican. The "Decision 2004" graphics shows a red circle with an elephant in it next to a picture of Bush, and a blue circle with a donkey in it next to a picture of Kerry. Fair enough. Below that is the white lettering "Decision 2004". Good so far... wait. Why is there a large blue star in there, too? Sort of drowns out the red.

Yes, I would be very interested in seeing a similar documentary about CNN.

You fool, they are all corporate media stations, and therefore only accountable to rich shareholders. To suggest or imply that CNN is the 'communist news network', as so many on FOX and in the Republican party have done is ridiculous, considering they have a vested interest in keeping right wing policies that are beneficial to corporations.

CNN is centre right, as is most of the democrat party when looking at a broad political spectrum across the Western World, but FOX is extreme right, and it unashamedly uses underhand tactics and peddles half truths and sometimes even lies to get its disgusting message across.

You want to 'liberate' yourself from the 'left wing commie' media I suppose? And your idea of doing this is allowing yourself to become indoctrinated into a Rush Limbaugh style of thinking. Basically - being told what you want to be told, that 'everything in Iraq is doing just fine' and that 'Dubya doing a bang up job at home as well!' How ironic that these kind of sentiments are parralel to those used by the Communists in Soviet Russia when concerning the media; think before you, like all other republicans, start praising the virtues of FOX's 'no-spin' rhetoric.

Same here...

Although there are other more important things that are on the news...

People, it's for money.

The media isn't political. most of the time it's just sensatoinalist. They post what people want to see, and do so in a manner that will grab your attention.

Steph, I work for a not-for-profit organization. $10 represents a substantial amount of my paycheck. :)

So do I, and I get about $8.50/hr for menial labor.

People, it's for money.

The media isn't political. most of the time it's just sensatoinalist. They post what people want to see, and do so in a manner that will grab your attention.

Yes, I'm sure it's just a fluke that Rupert Murdoch just happens to also be a signatory member of PNAC... :rolleyes:

You fool, they are all corporate media stations, and therefore only accountable to rich shareholders. To suggest or imply that CNN is the 'communist news network', as so many on FOX and in the Republican party have done is ridiculous, considering they have a vested interest in keeping right wing policies that are beneficial to corporations.Uh, exactly what the hell are you quoting? I said CNN is left-leaning, not communist.

CNN is centre right, as is most of the democrat party when looking at a broad political spectrum across the Western World, but FOX is extreme right, and it unashamedly uses underhand tactics and peddles half truths and sometimes even lies to get its disgusting message across. Did you even read my arguement, or are you just so far left that you think they are right-wing? I wasn't defending FNC, I was pointing out how CNN does the same thing.

You want to 'liberate' yourself from the 'left wing commie' media I suppose? And your idea of doing this is allowing yourself to become indoctrinated into a Rush Limbaugh style of thinking.Again, who the hell are you quoting? On another note, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. I think that extremism, right wing or left, is a bad thing.

Basically - being told what you want to be told, that 'everything in Iraq is doing just fine' and that 'Dubya doing a bang up job at home as well!'It's not a utopia, but unlike CNN paints it, it isn't hell on earth, either.
How ironic that these kind of sentiments are parralel to those used by the Communists in Soviet Russia when concerning the media; think before you, like all other republicans, start praising the virtues of FOX's 'no-spin' rhetoric.Wow. You sure don't let your stereotypes guide you. I can guess where you get your news. I'll save you the time:

www.ultrahyperliberalfeelgoodnews.org

Well I watched it.. and I now understand even better then before why there are so many misinformed conservatives then I've ever seen in my life time. I don't even blame them all that much, they really believe what they're watching is news. How sad.

Oh, I also forgot, I was more then shocked when they showed how O'Reilly went after Jeremy Glick, this kid lost his father in the WTC on 9/11, but disagreed with the war. They showed how the kid was pretty smart, before he went on O'Reilly's program he used a stop watch to see how long it usually took O'Reilly to shut down any guest who disagreed with him. So Glick was able to get his point in, but then O'Reilly kept telling this poor kid who lost his father that he was a traitor to America and to "shut up" and then O'Reilly told them to cut off the kids mic.. Glick reportly told after that when he was back in the Green room that the producers told him it would be best if he left the building ASAP because O'Reilly had said if he ran into him he didn't want to go to jail..

Fair and Balanced my ass..lol

FNC is conservative? Oh, wow. Tell me something I don't know. What I would like to see is a similar doc made about CNN. I have watched them frequently and I am almost certain that they have a left-wing bias. Most of it is subliminal:

What stories they choose to report: FNC is the only channel I have found that reports the openings of schools and hospitals in Iraq. All you hear from CNN is the bad news from Iraq. CNN's Iraq is a chaotic firework show, while other sources (and not just FNC) suggest that things are, for the most part, stable and that things are drastically improving over there.

The order of the stories they report: On a daily basis, I watch CNN report abuse in Iraq (live or recap). It's typically followed by a debate, then an update of whatever Kerry happens to be doing. They show something bad, link it to Bush, and boost his opponent. Try watching it and you'll see that.

The time spent reporting different stories: I heard almost nothing out of them about the UN oil-for-food scandal, but they spent an incredible amount of time talking about Abu Ghriab and "how high up the ladder it goes," while showing pictures of Bush. It was then found Bush had nothing to do with the abuse, but they didn't choose to spend much time reporting about that. If you watch, they also spend an inordinate amount of time reporting on the Kerry campaign or discussing the Kerry campaign; far more than what they say about Bush.

Absence of malice: reporting what is accurate, but not true. Remember the big crisis about Bush's national guard service? It turned out there were some payroll stubs that went missing. CNN was all over this, but they neglected to mention that every national guard payroll record for everyone in that time was missing. Why? No, Bush did not have them destroyed, as was implied. The reason was because the military was making the transition between storing such records on paper and storing them on microfilm. Some of the records were lost in the process.

Believe it or not, even the graphics: take a good look at their "Decision 2004" graphic sometime. Keep in mind that blue states means Democratic, red states means Republican. The "Decision 2004" graphics shows a red circle with an elephant in it next to a picture of Bush, and a blue circle with a donkey in it next to a picture of Kerry. Fair enough. Below that is the white lettering "Decision 2004". Good so far... wait. Why is there a large blue star in there, too? Sort of drowns out the red.

Yes, I would be very interested in seeing a similar documentary about CNN.While I haven't seen it I believe that Outfoxed backs up its premises with sources. Care to do that rather then relying completely on unsubstatiated anecdotal evidence?

Damn I can't wait to get my copy!!!!!!!!

While I haven't seen it I believe that Outfoxed backs up its premises with sources. Care to do that rather then relying completely on unsubstatiated anecdotal evidence?Try watching it. YOU WILL SEE THIS STUFF. Nothing I can say will make you agree with me. You have to watch for yourself. I can't do running commentary on CNN while it's going. You'll have to watch and come to your own conclusions. These are the ones I have come to.

Stephistan: Are there any plans to bring the film to small, independent theatres?

If the only method of distribution is to pay $10 for it, where do I order from?

Stephistan: Are there any plans to bring the film to small, independent theatres?

If the only method of distribution is to pay $10 for it, where do I order from?

No, it's only being released on DVD.. you can try Amazon.com

Outfoxed (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002HDXTQ/qid%3D1090424325/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-9306405-3435862)

Oh, I also forgot, I was more then shocked when they showed how O'Reilly went after Jeremy Glick, this kid lost his father in the WTC on 9/11, but disagreed with the war. They showed how the kid was pretty smart, before he went on O'Reilly's program he used a stop watch to see how long it usually took O'Reilly to shut down any guest who disagreed with him. So Glick was able to get his point in, but then O'Reilly kept telling this poor kid who lost his father that he was a traitor to America and to "shut up" and then O'Reilly told them to cut off the kids mic.. Glick reportly told after that when he was back in the Green room that the producers told him it would be best if he left the building ASAP because O'Reilly had said if he ran into him he didn't want to go to jail..

Fair and Balanced my ass..lolDid you even SEE what Glick was saying? He was so out of control that security had to take him out of the building! The reason he was invited was because he signed an advertisement accusing the USA of being a terrorist nation. The reason he was removed was because he went berserk. Glick was saying without a shred of evidence that President Bush and Bush the elder were directly responsible for 9/11.

Here's what Glick said:
Our current President now inherited a legacy from his father that's responsible for training militarily, economically, and situating geopolitically the parties involved in the alleged assassination and murder of my father and countless thousands of others.

Of course, O'Reilly's the conservative, so he must be the bad guy.

Remember that this "Outfoxed" is a documentary with the sole purpose of tearing down FNC, and they are not afraid to use Moore-ish tactics to get their agenda across.

My source?
O'Reilly discussed "Outfoxed" and the Glick incident last night.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97934,00.html

Did you even SEE what Glick was saying? He was so out of control that security had to take him out of the building! The reason he was invited was because he signed an advertisement accusing the USA of being a terrorist nation. The reason he was removed was because he went berserk. Glick was saying without a shred of evidence that President Bush and Bush the elder were directly responsible for 9/11.

Here's what Glick said:


Of course, O'Reilly's the conservative, so he must be the bad guy.

Remember that this "Outfoxed" is a documentary with the sole purpose of tearing down FNC, and they are not afraid to use Moore-ish tactics to get their agenda across.

My source?
O'Reilly discussed "Outfoxed" and the Glick incident last night.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97934,00.html

Yes, your quote of what Glick said is true.. however, they showed the whole interview, at NO TIME did Glick say that Bush was behind 9/11 in any way. He said that America's foreign policy was the problem, not that Bush himself had any thing to do with 9/11 even still O'Reilly still went on the next day as a follow up and called him a traitor and said he had said Bush was behind 9/11, and of course Glick had said no such thing.

Glick looked into suing O'Reilly, however was told it was harder to sue an habitual liar then some one who only lies some of the times..lol You have to buy and watch "Outfoxed" it's all there.

What are you going to believe? What you read on a link, or what you see with your own two eyes.. I think I'll go with what I seen with my own two eyes..

Further.. if it was all not true I doubt this would be happening..

Suit Against Fox's use of "Fair and Balanced" (http://cdn.moveon.org/content/pdfs/ftc_filing.pdf)

You must have loved "Farenheit 9/11".

"Outfoxed" is a similar left-wing propaganda piece. Can't you see that these people have their own agenda?

By the way, nobody seems to be contesting what I said about CNN.

Farenheit 9/11 was awesome. Did you see it?

And I said earlier that if there was a case against CNN that I think it would have been made already seeing as how the Replicons have the money to pursue such ventures.

You must have loved "Farenheit 9/11".

"Outfoxed" is a similar left-wing propaganda piece. Can't you see that these people have their own agenda?

By the way, nobody seems to be contesting what I said about CNN.

Unlike you Reynes who has no agenda at all.. lmao :rolleyes:

Farenheit 9/11 was awesome. Did you see it?My dilemma is that I want to know what's in it to be able to debate, but on the flipside, I don't want that pudgy bastard to get a dime of my money.

And I said earlier that if there was a case against CNN that I think it would have been made already seeing as how the Replicons have the money to pursue such ventures.I was not attacking your position. The thing about CNN is that they won't release the files for a doc that Fox released to the guys who made "Outfoxed." It sorta makes a documentary hard to keep accurate if you can't get an interview with the subject of the documentary ("Farenheit 9/11", "Michael Moore Hates America")

About "Michael Moore Hates America," I think they're gonna have trouble getting that off the ground.
1) the title sucks
2) everyone knows what Moore says about us already
3) Moore won't stay still for an interview.

Look at this, Its copied from the FOX news link above.
O'Reilly said:
"Here's what Glick said to us. "Our current President now inherited a legacy from his father that's responsible for training militarily, economically, and situating geopolitically the parties involved in the alleged assassination and murder of my father and countless thousands of others."

Alleged assassination? Glick was saying without a shred of evidence that President Bush and Bush the elder were directly responsible for 9/11. Now that kind of stuff is not only loony, it's defamation. So I terminated the interview."

First off, Glick in no way said that Bush was directly responsible for 9/11. He said that we were responsible for training Osama Bin Laden (The reagan administration trained OBL and Saddamn Hussein) , which is true. It was not defamation, it was a statement of fact. O'Reilly terminated the interview because he did not want that fact aired on his show, whihc is his right, but it also makes him a bad reporter.

Here is a link for those of you who don't know that this is true:
http://volconvo.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1997

IMHO, O'Reilly is a very dangerous man. From what I seen, he should not be allowed on the air. His lies and dis-information is dangerous to the sheeple who might actually believe his nonsense!

My dilemma is that I want to know what's in it to be able to debate, but on the flipside, I don't want that pudgy bastard to get a dime of my money.Download it--Moore was encouraging people to do so not long after the film opened.

Know what this reminds me of? White Nationalist literature you can only order through those catalogues whose address is always a P.O. Box. These filmmakers are spreading the same sort of lies, just in a way that make a larger number of fools believe in them.

How are they in anyway similar?

Because you can order them thru the mail?

Know what this reminds me of? White Nationalist literature you can only order through those catalogues whose address is always a P.O. Box. These filmmakers are spreading the same sort of lies, just in a way that make a larger number of fools believe in them.

Ooo, yummy! Compare Bush to Hitler and the Right has a conniption fit, but it's fine to compare the left to Aryanism and White Nationalism simply because it suggests that FOX news might not be all that "fair and balanced".

Ooo, yummy! Compare Bush to Hitler and the Right has a conniption fit, but it's fine to compare the left to Aryanism and White Nationalism simply because it suggests that FOX news might not be all that "fair and balanced".
If I said something like this people would ignore me.

Any intelligent comments?

Didn't you JUST say something like that?

and I think I made an intelligent query of you in regards to your statement. Wanna take a crack at answering it?

Got it today and just watched it. My first impression is this--it's most effective when it hangs Fox by its own words. The piece about Carl Crawford, senior Bush fellator, umm political correspondent, shooting the shit with Bush prior to a 2000 interview, talking about how his wife is simultaneously campaigning with Bush's sister is damning, and the replay of O'Reilly's hemorrhoidal rage at Jeremy Glick is classic. I'm looking forward to watching it again.

Didn't you JUST say something like that?

and I think I made an intelligent query of you in regards to your statement. Wanna take a crack at answering it?
Yawn! You people are paying good money to be told what you want to hear, the same way White Nationalists send in for their weekly "Purity Newsletter" or some other such nonsense. You're another bunch of sheep shedding the time-earned wool off your back in order to hear some aging wealthy hippy or unhappy prune faced dragon of a woman rant about a politician you don't like. Happy? Good enough explanation?

IMHO, O'Reilly is a very dangerous man. From what I seen, he should not be allowed on the air. His lies and dis-information is dangerous to the sheeple who might actually believe his nonsense!
O'reilly has no shame about his blatent lies--hes a true scum

Yawn! You people are paying good money to be told what you want to hear, the same way White Nationalists send in for their weekly "Purity Newsletter" or some other such nonsense. You're another bunch of sheep shedding the time-earned wool off your back in order to hear some aging wealthy hippy or unhappy prune faced dragon of a woman rant about a politician you don't like. Happy? Good enough explanation?


Oh right.

WE'RE the sheep for calling O'Reilly a biased bad exscuse for a journalist, and you are comparing the Left to Neo-Nazi hate groups.

Youre the one who is happy being told what to think by Murdoch, and his right-wing propoganda machine.

Oh right.

WE'RE the sheep for calling O'Reilly a biased bad exscuse for a journalist, and you are comparing the Left to Neo-Nazi hate groups.

Youre the one who is happy being told what to think by Murdoch, and his right-wing propoganda machine.
Rather glad I don't watch television. Aren't you?

Besides, i'd rather take orders from a evil billionaire tyrant that a greasy haired hippie, after all, the billionaire tyrant is liable to know what he's doing.

You must have loved "Farenheit 9/11".

"Outfoxed" is a similar left-wing propaganda piece. Can't you see that these people have their own agenda?

By the way, nobody seems to be contesting what I said about CNN.It's a bit hard to contest unprovided evidence. Hey, there's a pink elephant at the bottom of my garden. Go on, prove me wrong.

How can actual video footage of what people are saying and doing be considered anything but evidence?