Fox News alters photos of New York Times journalists - Page 3

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

looks like we've got another one who didn't watch the video

here's the 3rd link to the vid: Link

Yeah, I clicked it before....Do you have a compass and a map to the video I can borrow, the link you gave is a long and treacherous journey without some sort of guidance.

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 04:23 PM

OK, 2 seconds on youtube and I found the video.

YouTube Video

They ended the piece (which is hosted by a weather man and a sports guy

) with the dog photoshop complete with dog barking sound effects. You think this is serious HOW?

Stylerod · 07-08-2008, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

OK, 2 seconds on youtube and I found the video.

YouTube Video

They ended the piece (which is hosted by a weather man and a sports guy ) with the dog photoshop complete with dog barking sound effects. You think this is serious HOW?

So the guy was fired by Fox News and now is in charge of attacking fox news for the NYT's so they made fun of him by altering his picture. I think it's pretty funny.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Nurse Betty

thewise1 is the smartest man here?

It was a morning talk show, made for entertainment in the morning. They are hardly a news program.

The point is that he was looking at them more critically than the average viewer would have.

And, sorry, but they also give the news, and this was a very serious character assassination piece until the very end when they showed an obvious photoshop.

The original photos they showed were not.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

This is what they're getting up in arms about? Holy crap, stop whining about stupid shit.

No, it's the other photographs.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

Does the word "context" mean nothing anymore?

Sure it does, but apparently you didn't watch the video to provide that context before commenting on the very end photograph.. so maybe not to you?

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

OK, 2 seconds on youtube and I found the video.

YouTube Video

They ended the piece (which is hosted by a weather man and a sports guy ) with the dog photoshop complete with dog barking sound effects. You think this is serious HOW?

It's not the dog photoshop people are talking about

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Sure it does, but apparently you didn't watch the video to provide that context before commenting on the very end photograph.. so maybe not to you?

I'll wait while you catch up w/ the thread

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's not the dog photoshop people are talking about

OK, a segment that ends with a dog photoshop and even has sound effects HOSTED by a weather man and a sports guy....SERIOUS JOURNALISM ONLY going on there!!!

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

OK, a segment that ends with a dog photoshop and even has sound effects HOSTED by a weather man and a sports guy....SERIOUS JOURNALISM ONLY going on there!!!

Uh, beforehand it was a character assassination piece. They ended it on a light note, but that's beside the point here.

Stylerod · 07-08-2008, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Uh, beforehand it was a character assassination piece. They ended it on a light note, but that's beside the point here.

Why shouldn't they go after the people that are always going after them???

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Uh, beforehand it was a character assassination piece. They ended it on a light note, but that's beside the point here.

...so what makes you think you're getting straight news from the fox morning program? Again, it's a weather man and a sports guy morning BS chatter. Why on earth would you take it seriously? If it was Shepherd Smith or Brit Hume, yeah, you might have a point. They're a wacky horn away from being a morning zoo.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Why shouldn't they go after the people that are always going after them???

Fox news isn't a person. It's a corporation. If someone writes an article about it's viewership numbers, that's a legitimate piece of journalism.

Going after someone's personal life, how much money they make, etc, is character assassination.

Have you actually read the article they posted that lead to Fox going after these guys personal lives (instead of facts in the article)? No? Didn't think so.

Here's a link to it: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/28/ar...=1&oref=slogin

There's nothing in that piece that can even be construed as an attack, and if Fox felt it was wrong, they should have tried to correct the record instead of personally attacking the journalists and manipulating photographs to make them appear to look worse than they are, in effect, lying once again to their viewers.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

...so what makes you think you're getting straight news from the fox morning program? Again, it's a weather man and a sports guy morning BS chatter. Why on earth would you take it seriously? If it was Shepherd Smith or Brit Hume, yeah, you might have a point. They're a wacky horn away from being a morning zoo.

Are you serious?

The dog thing I don't care about, because it's an obvious photoshop, and viewers can distinguish fiction from reality in that easily. The other is supposedly a file photograph of the people they're talking about, and since they aren't household names and it's unlikely most don't know what they look like, they aren't able to distinguish fiction from reality in that case

It's part of a larger, more disturbing trend by Fox to bend the facts to support whatever agenda they're pushing, even if it means lying to their viewers about it.

Stylerod · 07-08-2008, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Fox news isn't a person. It's a corporation. If someone writes an article about it's viewership numbers, that's a legitimate piece of journalism.

Going after someone's personal life, how much money they make, etc, is character assassination.

Have you actually read the article they posted that lead to Fox going after these guys personal lives (instead of facts in the article)? No? Didn't think so.

Here's a link to it: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/28/ar...=1&oref=slogin

There's nothing in that piece that can even be construed as an attack, and if Fox felt it was wrong, they should have tried to correct the record instead of personally attacking the journalists and manipulating photographs to make them appear to look worse than they are, in effect, lying once again to their viewers.

As Artie Lang would say on the Howard Stern Show. "They made fun of me. Waaaaa...."

Like Tank said, their morning show is just a goofball show, at least the few times I have actually seen it.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 04:58 PM

The point isn't them making fun of anyone, the point is trying to pass something off as real that isn't to their viewers.

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

The point isn't them making fun of anyone, the point is trying to pass something off as real that isn't to their viewers.

you're acting like they're trying to cover up watergate, they photoshopped 2 people on their wacky morning show. It's an entertainment program and it alters absolutely nothing.

motivez · 07-08-2008, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

you're acting like they're trying to cover up watergate, they photoshopped 2 people on their wacky morning show. It's an entertainment program and it alters absolutely nothing.

No, I'm not saying it's the biggest deal in the world, or the worst thing Fox has ever done, but it yet again highlights their lack of journalistic integrity and willingness to distort the facts to their viewers if they think it'll make their case.

I didn't expect Fox apologists to care about it. They never care about anything Fox does that's wrong.

TankRizzo · 07-08-2008, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by motivez