+- Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net)
+-- Forum: Tendo City: Metropolitan District (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Ramble City (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=44)
+--- Thread: Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine (/showthread.php?tid=6208)
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - A Black Falcon - 28th May 2011
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-roger-ailes-built-the-fox-news-fear-factory-20110525?page=1
Very interesting article. It's long, but explaining the whole Fox News story takes a while. The charts showing how almost all Fox hosts follow the talking points precisely is particularly valuable. Of course everyone already knew that Fox does this stuff and has done it for years, but still it's interesting to see it all laid out there clearly.
Those charts are here: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/distort-attack-repeat-20110524?page=2
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - Great Rumbler - 28th May 2011
Fox News is a wasteland.
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - A Black Falcon - 28th May 2011
Didn't you used to watch it?
Someone here did, at least, I'm pretty sure.
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - Great Rumbler - 28th May 2011
Not anytime within the past 4 or 5 years.
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - A Black Falcon - 28th May 2011
It wasn't much different then though...
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - Fittisize - 28th May 2011
A Black Falcon Wrote:It wasn't much different then though...
People change!
Anyways, I read the article and I have much to say but I don't really have the energy to get into it too deeply. But maybe a few quick reflections are in order. It was interesting for sure, but I don't really much appreciate the writer's incredibly biased stance and his focussing on Ailes' physical characterstics and other unimportant details. Consider this bizarre description of the man: "The 71-year-old Ailes presents the classic figure of a cinematic villain: bald and obese, with dainty hands, Hitchcockian jowls and a lumbering gait." Are you kidding me? "Hitchockian jowls"? What godly purpose does this stereotypical illustration serve? It's just a simplistic way to establish him as somebody to be hated and feared as a relentless megalomaniacal right-wing operative bent on corrupting the political system and blatantly misinforming the public for his own selfish purposes. It's cheap, hackish-writing designed to inflame emotions based on preconceived notions of "evilness." Whatever. The writer later returns to Ailes ugliness, saying he is "balding" to cast him alongside Rush Limbaugh, as if their relationship wasn't already clear-and-present given their professional and personal history. It's completely inconsequential, but that's the type of character the author created, and it's a theme that pervades throughout. This isn't a fair or accurate depiction of either Ailes or Fox News, and the article lacks basic journalistic integrity.
Furthermore, I'm troubled by the villanous characterization of Ailes on the basis that he allegedly manipulated the power of television for his own personal gain, as if he was the worst and most evil person to ever encourage somebody to say something nasty or misleading, and how this was all part of a master plan to create a poisinous news empire laden on dishonesty and polemics. What immediately springs to mind in this regard is the infamous "Daisy" ad used in LBJ's presidential campaign, which came before Ailes.
<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/63h_v6uf0Ao" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
It's said in the article how Ailes "minted" Chris Matthews at CNBC, who is so obviously on the other side of the political spectrum as Ailes' virulent conservatism. Maybe there's a side of him that's truly an entertainer and wishes to cultivate talent when he sees it?
Finally, a big "meh" to the charts. I hate quantitative stuff like that, especially alongside such a biased article. It lacks any meaningful judgement and there's so much room for methodoligical errors and deliberately skewing and presenting data to meet the ends of your established position.
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - Great Rumbler - 29th May 2011
A Black Falcon Wrote:It wasn't much different then though...
All the liberal commentators, such as they were, are totally gone. You've got Sean Hannity by himself for a whole hour and Glenn Beck. Plus, Obama's election, the Democrats taking Congress, and the rise of Tea Party movement have made things way worse than they've ever been. Doesn't mean that Fox News was a serious news station back then, because it wasn't, but there's been a definite change.
Edit: Fittisize, I don't think the point of the article is to somehow suggest that Ailes is the first person to do this kind of thing or that he's evil for wanting lots of money, but that no one has been able to carry out such a wide-spread propaganda campaign in the guise of real news as Ailes is doing right now [and fairly successfully].
Rolling Stone Analyzes Fox News' Spin Machine - A Black Falcon - 29th May 2011
Great Rumbler Wrote:Edit: Fittisize, I don't think the point of the article is to somehow suggest that Ailes is the first person to do this kind of thing or that he's evil for wanting lots of money, but that no one has been able to carry out such a wide-spread propaganda campaign in the guise of real news as Ailes is doing right now [and fairly successfully].
You are absolutely right. Fittisize's criticisms are very, very minor compared to the reality of what Ailes is doing. It paints him as a bit evil because he's an extremely partisan very far right conservative dedicated to spinning an entire major news channel that way, and successfully.
Fittisize Wrote:Furthermore, I'm troubled by the villanous characterization of Ailes on the basis that he allegedly manipulated the power of television for his own personal gain, as if he was the worst and most evil person to ever encourage somebody to say something nasty or misleading, and how this was all part of a master plan to create a poisinous news empire laden on dishonesty and polemics. What immediately springs to mind in this regard is the infamous "Daisy" ad used in LBJ's presidential campaign, which came before Ailes.Ailes has done that far more successfully than anyone before, though -- there's never been as partisan a news network. Traditionally news networks tried to be nonpartisan. Sure, they'd have some bias, but we haven't seen this kind of bias in television news ever before, before Fox News; it'd only been seen in some newspapers, never TV. Ailes' extremist agenda pushes American politics rightward, and helps keep the Republican party all on message. There is no prescedent for it; MSNBC is a pale imitation in comparison, from the left side. I mean, sure MSNBC is left of center, but nowhere remotely near as much so as Fox News, and without the unity of messaging.
Creating an unprecedented news empire based on dishonesty and polemics is EXACTLY what Ailes has done.
As for the "Daisy" ad, nasty political campaigns have a very long history -- the Adams-Jefferson race in 1800 was quite viscous, and things have not improved since then -- but that's different from a news channel dedicated entirely to supporting one political party against the other one.
Quote:It's said in the article how Ailes "minted" Chris Matthews at CNBC, who is so obviously on the other side of the political spectrum as Ailes' virulent conservatism. Maybe there's a side of him that's truly an entertainer and wishes to cultivate talent when he sees it?Yes, he tries to find people able to spread the right-wing agenda in an entertaining fashion. Certainly true, this is television after all and ratings matter.
Quote:Finally, a big "meh" to the charts. I hate quantitative stuff like that, especially alongside such a biased article. It lacks any meaningful judgement and there's so much room for methodoligical errors and deliberately skewing and presenting data to meet the ends of your established position.The article is much, much less biased than Fox News is.