Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 10:26 AM
Fri Dec 11
53 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/30/09
bill o reilly freak out is the besssssttt
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
Seriously though, the best way to deal with O'Reilly's publicity stunts is to not give them, well, publicity. Bashing on O'Reilly's techniques by doing the same exact thing? Watch out, Alanis Morissette is about to break out singing any second now.
I know it's "politics" (or at least innarnetz politics) but the ends don't justify the means, especially when the ends is nothing more than putting O'Reilly's name on everyone's lips.
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
Yeah, I know, not on the same level as assassinating a president. But saying that one network is more balanced than another is like saying firebombing is less deadly than nuking.
07/30/09
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-feldman/fox-pundit-wishes-for-oba_b_103500.html
07/30/09
I have to say though, that I remember the remark made during the campaign. It was a rather strange remark that Hillary Clinton made about RFK in reference to Obama's newfound lead in the polls halfway through '08
Here's the New York Times article putting the HuffPo column in perspective. It's so easy to make people look bad if you shave off a few seconds here and there and avoid researching. That was just one commentor on Fox News making a rather ill-mannered remark about another senator's tasteless comment during an election cycle.
I think this is a clear case of "lurk moar".
07/30/09
That's funny because it's exactly what Fox News does every day!
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not under any delusions that the same tactics aren't exercised by every corporate news source. It's only good business when they edit statements and video in just the right way to accentuate what they believe the viewers want to see. However, having watched plenty of live Fox News broadcasts in their entirety, they seem to do it to the point of transparency. It's as if they don't even care to PRETEND that they're actually balanced, fair, or unbiased.
Fox is a great source for a laugh though.
07/30/09
I'm sorry but most gamers are fairly ignorant about politics, and have only enough passing interest to be easily swayed by sound bites and bumper sticker slogans. This makes them easily persuaded by advertising, and the arguments with the most money behind them (which they mistake for respectability). Thus all the 'libertarians' in this thread, and all the so called conservatives who are nothing more than uniformed dolts driven to their beliefs not from an educated understanding of politics and sociology, but by a blinding hatred of 'hippy liberal lefty communist homos', this comical caricature of anyone who isn't conservative or (ugh) libertarian. It's this straw man that corporatist propaganda outlets like Fox News keep propping up to facilitate the hate fest that drives modern 'conservatives'. Because your beliefs are not driven by a rational support for conservative policy (obviously, since it has failed so disastrously since Reagan), but by your opposition to a position you don't understand, because you only know the comic book version of it propagated by a network and movement who have a monetary incentive to lie to you.
If you really understood what progressives are, and have done for this country, you'd find that you're not as opposed to it as you thought (in fact you might even find out you're a dirty librool yourslef). But there isn't a progressive television network, newspaper, or think tanks funded by billionaire robber barons that distribute talking points to a network of talk radio hosts. There aren't bumper stickers, or 30 second sound bites. If you want to learn anything resembling the truth, you're going to have to open a book.
And if you can't be bothered to really educate yourself about something as complicated and nuanced as politics, sociology, history, and economics, if you're really gullible enough to believe Fox News is an actual news network, or that you even know what it means to be 'conservative' or 'libertarian' in this era, then maybe you should spare us all your pointlessly regurgitated 'opinion' until you actually know what you're talking about.
/End Rant, now back to some more falafel jokes.
07/30/09
07/30/09
Seriously, attacking commentators on the internet for being too conservative? On a viddyo game blog no less?
07/30/09
Later Rinse Repeat. The first part of his or her message was great. Then... Oops, Zombie Belvedere hit the hypocrite branch on the way down.
It's OK, though... Everyone's a hypocrite in some way.
07/30/09
07/30/09
Remember: Everyone is a hypocrite in SOME fashion in their life. Hypocrisy is human nature, because we need SOMETHING to say about our enemies, so if they're just like us we'll pretend we're not. This is pretty universal.
I'm by no means defending hypocrisy just supplying a null to this...
07/30/09
07/30/09
I know who let 'em in, it was Bill O'Reilly!"
07/30/09
07/30/09
It's not. There are multitudes of examples of this across the internet. I'm not saying any other network doesn't put their spin on things, but Fox does not offer "both sides."
If they were at all reputable, they would stop with this "Obama is a racist!" "Obama doesn't have a birth certificate!" "Obama is a secret Muslim!" nonsense.
Any good source of journalism knows to weed this sort of nonsense out, or at least call attention to how wrong it is.
07/30/09
Offering "both sides" of an "argument" is NOT balance. Nor should journalists strive for some false sense of "balance" because "balance" does not equal the objective truth.
Climate change is a prime, perfect example of why "balance" in journalism does not tell people the truth. Giving a tiny, tiny minority of experts who disagree with an overwhelmingly large majority of experts an equal voice is absurd.
The media's job is to inform viewers of the truth. NOT put both sides of some stupid topic out there and let citizens decide for themselves if they believe it or not. Most other industrialized nations don't have this problem the way America does. Not anywhere near to this extent, at least.
Despite what conservatives like to think the entire media is generally slanted towards the right BECAUSE of this sense of balance the media thinks it has to have.
I mean, news networks, not just Fox, are ACTUALLY giving people time on-air to say that Obama wasn't born in America and that the Democratic healthcare proposal will MANDATE that senior citizens be put to death!
People who spout that kind of shit aren't even worthy of being given the finger, furthermore a national damn televised platform.
By contrast, of course, it's no secret at this point that the news networks went out of their way during the Iraq war run up, for example, to marginalize liberal or anti-war voices. It's also been shown multiple times over the years that the Sunday morning news shows like MTP consistently have more Republicans or conservatives on than Democrats...by a pretty wide margin.
The reason people like Fox is because they slant the news to fit their worldviews. The other networks generally don't do this.
And no, Fox's whole broadcast DAY is slanted to the right. They basically have about 5-6 hours of the day devoted to just reading the news. The rest of it is literally opinion and commentary shows.
07/30/09
Successful Bill O'Riley is Successful
07/30/09
07/30/09
He just SITS THERE and WATCHES this FILTH and it makes him SO OUTRAGED that he just CAN'T take his EYES off of their smooth, BOUNCING BREASTS and their TENDER, SOFT THIGHS.
It's DISGUSTING and it makes Bill SICK and he just DOESN'T understand why people WATCH such DEGRADING FILTH!
07/30/09
I understand most people here don't like the "decency" argument for keeping things like this off of the internet and t.v., but understand that if someone complains and the company changes its practices, without being forced by law, then no egregious misdeed has been done.
That being said, I think it is fairly likely that O'Reilly advocates government intervention to keep media "clean." You should realize, however, that if you're simply not a fan of right-wingers, there are far worse than O'Reilly out there. Bill O'Reilly should not really be thought of as FOX's Keith Olbermann, because in O'Reilly's defense, he truly is less the political hack between the two. Hannity is the one your looking for if you want Olbermann's true bizarro world form.
Digression aside, I do not agree with the argument that these people are being hypocritical when they play an advertisement that they are against. If they are trying to persuade people to join them in rejecting the ad, then why not get a little pathos going by displaying in its entirety the intended target of derision?