I threw out my TV in 1992.

Since then I've spent my idle hours preparing a very special translation of Proust. No, really. Also, I'm preparing documentation of a new element to present to the Internacionale Alliance d'Chemistray at their Brussels 2010 Conference. It'll be on the bottom left on the Periodic Table: Criderilium. Wicked unstable! Detectable only with expensive lab gear! Only exists in certain arithmetically dynamic representations!

OK, not really. But the point is I've never made time for Fox in my home. It's amazing that anyone does. CNN either. Or ABC NBC or Lifetime or MSNBC or any of those assholes. If they have you convinced that what they say about things is important, then you deserve to have your winch cranked and your energy squandered.

People don't listen when I point out it's important to check the voting record of a candidate. Why should I expect them to listen when the subject is unpleasant reporting?

I'm guessing this is either about Fox referring to Michelle Obama as Barack's "babymama" in its newsfeed or about one of its anchors asking if the Obamas were engaging in a "terrorist fist-bump." Both of which are unprofessional and detracted from overall coverage, IMHO...but so was hearing MSNBC anchors muse idly a few months ago about whether Jeri Thompson "works the pole," and I bet no one was e-mailing Amy's friends demanding that people protest to MSNBC about that. My acquaintances who were up in arms about Fox and the Obamas appear never to have heard of that bit.

And yes, that knowledge is taking up space in my brain that should be used for something more relevant to society. Oh well. (Of course, I didn't see any of this, except in the form of video snippets/images online, because I get all of my news from the Internet...)

Given Fox News argued in court that there is no laws making lying in a news broadcast illegal how can anyone take anything they report seriously?

One little detail; do it sounds like censorship?

The lady's goal here is to have FOX to change their editorial line about a subject. Asking a news station to change their content to obey the whims of an outsider's group sounds really like censorship to me.

I wonder what would had been the reaction of the Democrats if some republican bloke had asked the same favor for McCain...

Toubrouk writes:

"The lady's goal here is to have FOX to change their editorial line about a subject. Asking a news station to change their content to obey the whims of an outsider's group sounds really like censorship to me."

No, it's not. And defining censorship downwards like this is useless.

Look, if someone doesn't like something he or she sees on a television news broadcast, and writes a letter or sends an e-mail asking for what that person believes is a more balanced approach, that's not censorship. There's no coercion there, no threat, no chilling effect.

The expression of disagreement is not censorship. Nobody who puts their speech out there in public should be immune from criticism. And those who cry censorship at the first hint of disagreement or criticism only demonstrate that they can't defend their speech on its own merits.

A guy I've known for almost 15 years now uses any excuse, or no excuse, to talk about Obama. He assumes I'm voting for the guy, because what sort of person wouldn't? I have not disabused him of this notion, because I need all the friends I can get.

Anyway, what Crid says. I express my opinion of TV news by not watching it.

Amy says:

"And no, in case you're wondering, I'm not going to change the title of this blog item to 'Mentally Challenged Things People Do.' So save your carpal tunnels, and don't bother e-mailing me to complain."

Just think. I remember when "mentally retarded person" was introduced as a general euphemism for both "moron" and "idiot"--less than 50 years ago, as I recall. (Full disclosure: I grew up in the Ozarks, so the trend probably started earlier everywhere else.) And now people have decided "retarded" needs a euphemism.

By the way, don't call me a "hillbilly." The preferred term is "altitude enhanced person." It doesn't apply just to Ozarkers, either. It's also an Appalachian appellation.

My daughters call those people "short bus riders". As in, "Pay no attention to Axman, he rides the short bus!" o_O

Try holding even remotely conservative opinions in an academic setting. I'm libertarian, but any doubt about the Democratic party's regard for my rights gets me lumped in with the rest of the Bush-lovers. There is a serious monoculture here, though I've been able to find a few kindred spirits.

Axman- What part of the Ozarks?

> I get all of my news from
> the Internet...

You and all the other young'uns. Now that you mention it, that's probably the way to convince people not to watch TV.

Not by telling them that it's a silly, corrupt, lying shitbox, but by saying "TV is for old people".

Last night I listened to a podcast of John Batchelor's show from KFI, which I believe hails from L.A. There was a discussion about how Obama operatives are silencing all criticism of their candidate by playing the race card each & every time. A brilliant strategy, even though it's absolutely dreadful for healthy discourse in America.

Then I read about a number of conservative bloggers who have had their blogs temporarily banned and shut down. How? Allegedly by Obama supporters flagging them en masse.

This is the same fascist nonsense that is going on here in Canada with our dreadful "human rights" commissions. In both cases their mantra is the same: "Of course we believe in free speech, as long as we agree with it." This is beyond scary!

"Given Fox News argued in court that there is no laws making lying in a news broadcast illegal how can anyone take anything they report seriously?"

Hey, CBS beat them to it. First with 60 Minutes being declared a "news magazine", exempting them from strict ruling on content, and then with that Rather guy and his Microsoft Word document.

Why do you think I am constantly insisting that people look for the data source, rather than listen to editorials called, "News"?

Cronkite has long been out of the building.

Crid, NW Arkansas, and my stomping grounds overlapped into SW Missouri. I attended high school at Rogers, AR.

LMM, You are right, I was misinformed in my last post.

Axy- Two years in Springfield during the mid-80's... It was enough!

I just realized that I virtually never watch TV news anymore, and I'm better informed than I've ever been.

Amy posted some video of a TV reporterette named Lara Logan a ways down the page. Apparently she's hot stuff on the screen these days. I never heard of her before Amy's post.

15 years ago I could have identified all the major correspondents for all the networks.

Hooray for the net!

A guy I've known for almost 15 years now uses any excuse, or no excuse, to talk about Obama. He assumes I'm voting for the guy, because what sort of person wouldn't? I have not disabused him of this notion, because I need all the friends I can get.

Man, does that scenario sound familiar...

>I remember when "mentally retarded person" was
>introduced as a general euphemism for both
>"moron" and "idiot"

Ah, the march of progress. How about

Crippled -> Handicapped -> Disabled

Euphemisms eventually come to mean exactly what their predecessors meant. Then, of course, they aren't euphemisms any more...

"Crippled -> Handicapped -> Disabled

"Euphemisms eventually come to mean exactly what their predecessors meant. Then, of course, they aren't euphemisms any more..."

Bradley, exactly. Note:

Lichfield ("lich"="body") -> Graveyard -> Cemetery -> Memorial Garden/Park

Leaving out "cemetery," which substitutes an elegant French word for the English, the first element of the compound changes from naming the corpse, to the hole it's placed in, to the abstraction of memory. The second goes from "field" to "yard" to "garden/park," each more elegantly groomed than the previous. It's stuff like this that persuades me human beings are the most interesting species of ape on the planet.

Crid, about Springfield, I know what you mean. I have relatives there who are fun to visit, but we all prefer to gather at someone's farm or a park farther south, in the hills and hollers.

Well, I have to chime in on this as the sibling of someone who is diagnosed with Mental Retardation and Autism. These are medical diagnoses -- not a trendy word you can use to insult someone.

What the community of people with special needs is asking of everyone is to stop turning their everyday reality into an insult. Its not about being PC -- its about respect. My brother is retarded medically, but he would never do these things that so often get called that word. Using it only shows that you clearly have no understanding of its meaning. Its easy to pick another word and stop sounding like an idiot.

hrwxdvp

klpemy atewlh