29 Mar 2011, 1:24 pm
29 Mar 2011, 1:29 pm
29 Mar 2011, 1:33 pm
29 Mar 2011, 1:36 pm
29 Mar 2011, 1:39 pm
Media Matters would not exist without Fox, and Fox reaps great benefits from having such a perfect (it's even actually Soros backed!) bogeyman literally "declaring war" on them to point to when they claim the liberals are out to get them. It almost makes me wonder if Soros has some Newscorp stock squirreled away somewhere, or if Rupert Murdoch quietly funnels money to MMFA... Is that too cynical of me? 
29 Mar 2011, 1:45 pm
Dox47 wrote:
Media Matters would not exist without Fox, and Fox reaps great benefits from having such a perfect (it's even actually Soros backed!) bogeyman literally "declaring war" on them to point to when they claim the liberals are out to get them. It almost makes me wonder if Soros has some Newscorp stock squirreled away somewhere, or if Rupert Murdoch quietly funnels money to MMFA... Is that too cynical of me?
It wouldn't surprise me. In a class war, keeping the underclasses not only ignorant but violently ignorant is a good thing. Seeing legitimate information like Media Matters could seriously hurt the class war and empower the citizens again rather than the aristocrats.
29 Mar 2011, 1:46 pm
Dox47 wrote:
Media Matters would not exist without Fox, and Fox reaps great benefits from having such a perfect (it's even actually Soros backed!) bogeyman literally "declaring war" on them to point to when they claim the liberals are out to get them. It almost makes me wonder if Soros has some Newscorp stock squirreled away somewhere, or if Rupert Murdoch quietly funnels money to MMFA... Is that too cynical of me?
Why would Murdoch waste the money when Mediamatters is already going loco at no cost to him.
29 Mar 2011, 2:11 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Media Matters would not exist without Fox, and Fox reaps great benefits from having such a perfect (it's even actually Soros backed!) bogeyman literally "declaring war" on them to point to when they claim the liberals are out to get them. It almost makes me wonder if Soros has some Newscorp stock squirreled away somewhere, or if Rupert Murdoch quietly funnels money to MMFA... Is that too cynical of me?
Why would Murdoch waste the money when Mediamatters is already going loco at no cost to him.
29 Mar 2011, 2:19 pm
29 Mar 2011, 2:24 pm
Vexcalibur wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
Ah, but Inuyasha, do you not see that wikipedia is on precisely the same level as your beloved commentators?
Not really. Wikipedia actually cites sources.
Anyone can edit wikipedia. That means there are far more people correcting algorithms and are ready to squish any attempts to post made up stuff without sources or use sources from dubious places.
Only Glenn Beck can "edit" his stuff before releasing them.
Back in the young days of Wikipedia, I was a bored teenager, and used to love editing articles in creative ways that would mislead people but look like factual, accurate information. Nowadays it is hard to do this, but I am still hoping somebody out there actually believes some of the s**t I edited, Lesson? Check the sources at the bottom of the page, anything not cited could have been put there by a bored teenager out to confuse you
29 Mar 2011, 2:45 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Why would Murdoch waste the money when Mediamatters is already going loco at no cost to him.
If there was no Media Matters, it would be in his interest to create one; it's possibly the best form of advertising if you're going after an ideological market. The only people who are going to take Media Matters seriously are people who are already inclined to hate Fox and the conservative viewpoint in general, it doesn't hurt Fox one bit. On the other hand, Fox benefits greatly when it's attacked by liberal groups, if reinforces the conservative narrative of a hostile liberal media trying to silence their voices and further entrenches their viewer's loyalty to the network.
Think of it this way; when it comes to politics, a negative endorsement can be more valuable than a positive one. Depending upon the target, a denouncement by Olberman may be better than an endorsement by Limbaugh.
29 Mar 2011, 6:27 pm
Dox47 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Why would Murdoch waste the money when Mediamatters is already going loco at no cost to him.
If there was no Media Matters, it would be in his interest to create one; it's possibly the best form of advertising if you're going after an ideological market. The only people who are going to take Media Matters seriously are people who are already inclined to hate Fox and the conservative viewpoint in general, it doesn't hurt Fox one bit. On the other hand, Fox benefits greatly when it's attacked by liberal groups, if reinforces the conservative narrative of a hostile liberal media trying to silence their voices and further entrenches their viewer's loyalty to the network.
Think of it this way; when it comes to politics, a negative endorsement can be more valuable than a positive one. Depending upon the target, a denouncement by Olberman may be better than an endorsement by Limbaugh.
Essentially the opposite phenomenon of "damning with faint praise." We need an idiom to express this notion. Any ideas?
29 Mar 2011, 6:34 pm
29 Mar 2011, 6:38 pm
29 Mar 2011, 6:47 pm
29 Mar 2011, 7:26 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Do you think getting diagnosed matters? |
20 Dec 2024, 3:29 pm |
| Best Representation I've Seen in Media |
26 Oct 2024, 6:21 pm |
| I sometimes feel that social media should never have existed |
28 Nov 2024, 9:45 pm |
| X users jump to Bluesky (social media) |
28 Nov 2024, 7:15 am |
