Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Yeah... it may be better for a news agency to be quiet about someone using the exact same news strategies as they do.

[Aqizzar]

I watched a little MSNBC coverage of the proceedings and wanted to vomit. Fairly exact quote from an anchor, "You know, I don't want to seem mean, but isn't he looking kind of frail? I mean, he's eighty one years old and his testimony seemed slightly, I don't know, doddering..." Beyond that they were talking about "How could the CEO of a global corporation not know what one reporter in one company that was one percent of his whole operation was doing secretly?" As if it were incredulous to think otherwise.

Go back and watch how Fox News was practically felating itself over the "scandal" of an NPR executive caught in a doctored video making a comment about Muslims, and try to talk about piling on with a straight face.

Or for that matter, how NewsCorp hired the same media coaches as other outlets who've testified to Parliament, who went on the radio a few days earlier to express that Murdoch's best strategy was to say in as many ways and few words that he knew nothing about how his any of business operate.  Not express that was sure there was no law breaking, testify that literally knew nothing about how his businesses were being managed.  That wasn't an inquiry about a few reporters, he was asked about what the people he personally put in the charge of the paper said or knew at the time.  And when you build, as intentionally as Murdoch has in the past, a reputation for personally managing and directing every aspect of your business, and the paper is placed under the direction of managers Murdoch has in the past named his star players and confidants, it is a little incredulous to hear him say he knew absolutely nothing at any time about what has become abundantly clear was an endemic practice at News of the World.

[Neonivek]

who went on the radio a few days earlier to express that Murdoch's best strategy was to say in as many ways and few words that he knew nothing about how his any of business operate.  Not express that was sure there was no law breaking

Actually that is because legally it is a much better defense.

If you actually don't know how your buisness opperates then your not really guilty of anything except owning a company that performed illegal activities. The only way to get around it is to say that he does in fact know what happens.

If you are running your buisness and they do an illegal activity and you simply didn't know they would be. It leaves room to possibilities of negligence, intentionally looking the wrong way, or in otherwords willful ignorance. You can attack it without changing the statement.

It makes perfect sense that he would deny knowing absolutely anything. Heck it was likely his lawyers who told him to stick with that story (though given who I am talking about... I wouldn't be surprised if he possessed that much foresight)

[Nadaka]

MSNBC is an admittedly biased news organization. As progressive as I am, it annoys even me.

Ideally, news organizations don't have a camp. CNN and BBC do a reasonable job of avoiding that. Sometimes to my frustration, treating people like the Vaccine-Autism nuts as if their opinion is as valid as people who have actual facts on their side.

[alway]

The number of victims of the phone hacking is in the thousands; hardly the work of a single person. Then there's bribing of public officials to cover it up. On top of it all, there was News Corp itself paying off potential whistle blowers in order to keep it hidden.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/20/james-murdoch-gordon-taylor-payoff
tldr version of the linked article: There was an '08 incident in which phone hacking by NotW was discovered, it was blamed on a sole reporter, but a court case came up which would have shown it was much more widespread, and resulted in a massive payout in order to keep the new evidence from coming to light.

And to be fair, if you've any sense, any cable news will make you want to vomit return the vomit to sender. Because, let's be honest, not enough happens on any given day to warrant more than a few hours of coverage; the rest must be filled with feces.

[Nadaka]

Most news channels repeat the same crap 12 times a day.

HLN has Nancy Grace calling people baby killers.
Fox has people spouting off about Obamacare.
CNN can't stop gabbing about their latest celebrity interview and pretending that Pierce Morgan is a decent interviewer.

Yea, they get 2 maybe 4 hours of actual news in a day.

[Leafsnail]

Interestingly, Piers Morgan actually a good friend of Rebekah Wade, and I think he's currently wanted as a witness into the inquiry (since several of his diaries seem to hint at her illegal activities).  He's also a former editor of News of the World, of course.

[Nadaka]

I didn't know that. I just thought he was a talentless hack.

[Leafsnail]

And now you know he's a talentless hack who used to edit News of the World and is close friends to the management of News Corp.

[nenjin]

Ah, that explains a lot. When he was hired I was like "Who is Piers Morgan and why should I give a shit that he works for you now?" Guess CNN wanted to parlay his popularity with the British and NotW into a new image for Americans.

[Africa]

MSNBC is an admittedly biased news organization. As progressive as I am, it annoys even me.

Ideally, news organizations don't have a camp. CNN and BBC do a reasonable job of avoiding that. Sometimes to my frustration, treating people like the Vaccine-Autism nuts as if their opinion is as valid as people who have actual facts on their side.

Sup NPR

I find it hilarious that their very calm, serious and generally quite balanced news coverage gets portrayed as biased to the left. Well...that could be because people who examine many sides of an issue thoughtfully and dislike sensationalist shouting matches tend to lean left, huh?

Today Terry Gross was interviewing a guy about this shady organization of corporations and Republican state legislators which just had a bunch of papers leaked about it, and then she got in the national chairman of the organization. He repeatedly interrupted her, interpreting her articulate (if topically aggressive) questions as liberal propaganda designed to make him look bad. In other words, he assumed he was on the liberal equivalent of Fox News. Best part was, he came off looking extremely sketchy and more or less admitted his main interest is to help big business create laws, and no selective editing, loaded questions, presentation of questionable statistics, or other Fox News-type shenanigans were needed - just straightforward questioning and as much time given as he wanted for his responses.

[Neonivek]

You have yet to hear dumb news casters Africa.

You know, the ones who completely miss the point of what the people they are interviewing are saying?

[Africa]

Oh I've heard it.

Also, you people need to stop saying "incredulous" when you mean "incredible." They are different words. GOD

[Dsarker]

In the sense of both dealing with the unbelievability of something.

[RF]

The other was "Big" George Webley. Two people without any real preexisting medical conditions that have blown the whistle on News Corp are found dead in their homes? Hmm...

It's going to "be found" that Sean Hoare had a bottle of whiskey and some cocaine with him in his home due to the fact he used to have drinking and drug problems (apparently he got clean a few years ago, but you know what they're going to say) and probably George Webley just "died at the old age of 53".