• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

"I Lost My Dad to Fox News"

Fox News = UFC

MSNBC = Bellator
 
As said a few posts above, it's not as much that Fox News is conservative. It's that they aren't, but claim to be, while being bad at news and generating religious and racial fear in their audience.

 
Last edited:
Fox News:current events::Deadspin:sports

The fans of both are completely indoctrinated.
 
i've been told cosmos is premering on primetime this Sat. on "ALL" FOX affiliated channels... i would be shocked if that also meant their news network.
 
A black guy explaining the Big Bang on FOXNews? No way.
 
dmcheatw said:
i've been told cosmos is premering on primetime this Sat. on "ALL" FOX affiliated channels... i would be shocked if that also meant their news network.
Click to expand...

On Fox News it will be done like Mystery Science Theater 3000 with religious right sarcasm.
 
dot com said:
On Fox News it will be done like Mystery Science Theater 3000 with religious right sarcasm.
Click to expand...

I would 100% watch a show like that.

I would also watch the inverse: scientists MST3000 watching televangelism.
 
Last edited:
e8fa168071900131f02a005056a9545d




You can never get all the facts from just one newspaper, and unless you have all the facts, you cannot make proper judgements about what is going on.

Harry S. Truman
 
Last edited:
Figured this article was a good reason to bring this thread back up. This is the best read I've seen on this topic.
http://fusion.net/the-long-lucrativ...dium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Fusion_facebook

If you want to understand intra-GOP warfare, the decision-making process of our president, the implosion of the Republican healthcare plan, and the rest of the politics of the Trump era, you don’t need to know about Russian espionage tactics, the state of the white working class, or even the beliefs of the “alt-right.” You pretty much just need to be in semi-regular contact with a white, reasonably comfortable, male retiree. We are now ruled by men who think and act very much like that ordinary man you might know, and if you want to know why they believe so many strange and terrible things, you can basically blame the fact that a large and lucrative industry is dedicated to lying to them.
Because there was a lot of money in it for various hucksters and moguls and authors and politicians, the conservative movement spent decades building up an entire sector of the economy dedicated to scaring and lying to older white men. For millions of members of that demographic, this parallel media dedicated to lying to them has totally supplanted the “mainstream” media. Now they, and we, are at the mercy of the results of that project. The inmates are running the asylum, if there is a kind of asylum that takes in many mostly sane people and then gradually, over many years, drives one subset of its inmates insane, and also this asylum has the largest military in the world.
For years, the conservative movement peddled one set of talking points to the rabble, while its elites consumed a more grounded and reality-based media. The rubes listened to talk radio, read right-wing blogs, watched Fox News. They were fed apocalyptic paranoia about threats to their liberty, racial hysteria about the generalized menace posed by various groups of brown people, and hysterical lies about the criminal misdeeds of various Democratic politicians. The people in charge, meanwhile, read The Wall Street Journal and The Weekly Standard, and they tended to have a better grasp of political reality, as when those sources deceived their readers, it was mostly unintentionally, with comforting fantasies about the efficacy of conservative policies. From the Reagan era through the Bush administration, the system seemed to be performing as designed.

But if this was a reasonably useful arrangement for Republicans, who won a couple close elections with the help of their army of riled-up kooks, it was a fantastic deal for the real engine of the right-wing propaganda machine: companies selling newly patented drugs designed to treat the various conditions of old age, authors of dubious investing newsletters, sellers of survival seeds, hawkers of poorly written conservative books, and a whole array of similar con artists and ethically compromised corporations and financial institutions. The original strategy behind demonizing the “mainstream media” may have purely political, to steer voters away from outlets that tended to present information damaging to the conservative cause, but the creation of the conservative media was also a revenue opportunity for shameless grifters from the very start, as Rick Perlstein showed in his classic Baffler piece on the snake oil-salesmen of the right.
The bottom-feeding amorality of the sorts of people who sponsored the right-wing press, and the crummy nature of the products and services sold, shows exactly who was supposed to be consuming it: suckers. Or, more specifically, trusting retirees, with a bit of disposable income, and a natural inclination to hate modernity and change—an inclination that could be heightened, radicalized, and exploited.
The grown-up Republicans in Washington, meanwhile, still existed in their own genteel bubble of misinformation—they convinced themselves that the occupation of Iraq would be over and done with in a few easy months—but the major figures in the Bush administration, and its allies in Congress, were not men who got the majority of their news from “Free Republic” and Alex Jones. They put their faith in a fairly traditional conservative orthodoxy: That you can use the levers of power to quietly enrich your friends and their firms, while pleasing the masses with some combination of tax cuts, loud proclamations of religiosity, and a modest, popular war or two.
But the complete and inarguable disaster of the Bush administration—a failure of the conservative movement itself, one undeniable even to many consumers of the parallel conservative media—and his abrupt replacement by a black man, caused a national nervous breakdown among the people who’d been told, for many years, that conservatism could not fail, and that all Real Americans agreed with them.
Rather rapidly, two things happened: First, Republicans realized they’d radicalized their base to a point where nothing they did in power could satisfy their most fervent constituents. Then—in a much more consequential development—a large portion of the Republican Congressional caucus became people who themselves consume garbage conservative media, and nothing else.
That, broadly, explains the dysfunction of the Obama era, post-Tea Party freakout. Congressional Republicans went from people who were able to turn their bullshit-hose on their constituents, in order to rile them up, to people who pointed it directly at themselves, mouths open.
Now, we have a president whose media diet defines his worldview, interests, and priorities. He is not one of the men, like most of those Tea Party members of Congress, whose existing worldview determined his media diet—who sealed himself off from disagreeable media sources. He is, in fact, something far more dangerous: a confused old man who believes what the TV tells him.
Click to expand...


Here’s the real, non-ideological difference between Republicans and Democrats:
Democrats by and large are convinced that no one actually supports their agenda, and they devote a not insignificant amount of time and political capital to explaining to their own constituents why they cannot pursue goals that a majority of them support. (“I supported single payer since before you were born,” says Nancy Pelosi, who has the legislative and leadership record of someone who may support single payer but clearly doesn’t actually expect it to happen in our lifetimes.)

Conservatives, especially those who came up during the Obama era, have, more or less, the opposite problem: They’ve convinced themselves that their agenda is hugely popular and that everyone supports them.
There’s actually been some research on this: Politicians—both liberal ones and conservative ones—believe that the electorate is more conservative than it actually is. Conservative politicians believe the electorate is much more conservative than it actually is. Once you learn this, suddenly a lot of things about how elected officials act make more sense.
The most important major divide among Congressional Republicans isn’t between moderates and conservatives, or establishment and anti-establishment politicians, but between those who know that their agenda is hugely unpopular and that they have to force it through under cover of darkness, and the louder, dumber ones who believe their own bullshit. And for those loud, dumb members, egged on by a media apparatus that has trained its audience to demand the impossible and punish the sell-outs who can’t deliver, those more tactical members are cowards and RINOs.
Click to expand...
 
I have to admit I did not notice the bag of Funyuns. That's a nice touch.
 
Really enjoyed RedEye, which was just cancelled. Gutfeld was better than Shillue but the show was solid regardless. Don't watch any other programming regularly. Might occasionally tape Watters or Gutfeld on a weekend, but with the agenda-driven mission these cable news outlets continue to be embracing, I've stayed mostly away.
 
I used to watch Red Eye on occasion back when I watched cable news. Amy Schumer used to be a regular on there back in the day.
 
Yeah, I don't think that show can be replicated. You have the likes of Huckabee, Kucinich and Gary Johnson on a comedy show with the likes of Shumer, Jim Norton, Anthony Cumia, Greg Proops or Sherrod Small and then you throw in loose cannons like Gavin McInnes. Clearly a show on another level that I'll miss.
 
And then there's music. From Buzz Osborne of The Melvins to Mike Estes of Skynyrd to Dave Brockie of Gwar to Kurt Loder, the show had, at minimum, a nice variety of musicians and critics, which I believe are of great quality as well.
 
Last edited:
One odd fact about that show is Andrew Breitbart helped get that show green-lit. Many don't know he got the Huffington Post off the ground as well. Nonetheless, he was on the show a lot and would either explain news he just broke or break news all the time. If you watched those shows you would completely understand why Breitbart became so powerful. He was engaging, magnetic, committed, passionate and funny on a personal level. The show did not espouse his politics, which was good.

Do I think Breitbart reported fake news when he was alive? Sure. Do I think he did legitimate reporting that created moments I've never seen before? Yes, namely taking over Weiner's press conference and silencing the media with the "one provable lie" comment. At that moment, I knew this guy had become the most powerful media personality in the country. Another would be, I think a Glenn Beck protest, or some protest where he just asked some simple questions to protesters that they couldn't answer and they went away. Completely fed into the narrative that they were hired. Maybe he hired them to prove a point. These days, who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top