« David Horowitz is a loser, or, Ahmad al-Qloushi's essay is the gift that keeps on giving | Main | Il Papa »

April 01, 2005

Comments

Steve

Lol, I guess if a liberal has a questionable record, who is fox news to attack it? They should just report the idiocy of a liberal like pure fact, like all the other major news networks do. Never mind the guy has no idea what he's talking about, it's a fact cause a liberal said it! Who is fox news to question?

Ryan

Attacking the message by attacking the messenger is the strategy that all demagogues revert to when they have no substantive means of refuting a particular claim. I just wish people (and mostly the audiences of these demagogues) would recognize it more often, and alienate themselves from this garbage.

here's what's left

steve, maybe next time you comment on this site, you could do a little research. or, if not do some research, at least do what i suggest in the post. indeed, i linked to a media matters piece that documented brit hume's lie with the exhortation that the whole thing should be read. i didn't reprint it because my readers can read it themselves.

but the more obvious point, which you seem to have missed, is that rather than address the study, hume engages in an "ad hominem" attack. he attacks the credibility of the source (incorrectly, as it turns out) rather than deal with what the source said.

as the media matters piece reports, watson didn't write the report. he co-chaired the board, but the report itself was put together by a large panel. the piece i linked to said that. furthermore, the "questionable record" that hume refers to turns out to be overstated and factually inaccurate.

Anthony

A new Fox News report suggests that a UN study on wcosystems is faulty. The report was supervised by Fox News anchor Brit Hume, who boasts a questionable track record on journalistic integrity.

Steve

Hume is a COMMENTATOR, who has the right to express any opinion he wants. If he feels the source is not credible, he can go right ahead and say it. He's not lying, he's giving an opinion, which most likely he can back up with facts. On top of that, if anyone at fox news knows a source to be flawed, we the people want to hear about it. I don't condone fox pulling a Dan Rather, for either side. Apparently you do, as long as it benefits you liberals.

Cheryl

Steve, you are brainwashed. I suggest psychotherapy. Immediately. Before you hurt yourself.

If that is too ambitious for you, you could always go read the UN report. That is, if you are smart enough to understand it. You do know about rates of reaction from your chemistry class in college, I presume, and you know what happens to the population of a bacterial culture once it starts to run out of food and the toxins build up? I hope? Or am I asking too much of you?

Ryan

Steve,

As it turns out, Hume is touted as the "straight news man" by FOX News. He is supposed to be the pivot of the teetering balance that FOX likes to put into cute slogans.

I agree with you. Hume uses his position to editorialize about news stories. He's a demagogue, plain and simple. (And if you don't know what a demagogue is, look it up. It'll do you some good.) Therefore, he is betraying his position as a newsman. Do you ever wonder why the left side of the blogosphere is so distrusting of the mainstream press?

It's because they've betrayed us. They've given up covering union news in favor of Wall Street news. They've decided to cover the rising cost of gas, but they don't dig deep into what this could mean in the long term. I could go on and on.

The problem is that we should be able to have a moderately high baseline trust in the integrity of the press. If it was so, I could just wait for a news story to come along that I find important, but underreported, and then go research it myself. Unfortunately, the major news outlets, with FOX being the epitome of this movement towards intellectual dishonesty, I can't trust much of anything that comes out of ABC, CNN, NBC, etc.

I agree that Hume has the right to say what he wants, but he has the responsibility to get the facts right, and present the details of a story (especially one as complex as this one) with the right amount of balance. What Hume is trying to do here is discredit the work of over a thousand scientists. If you are willing to take the word of a "COMMENTATOR", as you put it, over the words of these brilliant men and women, then I can only hope that people like yourself will be out of political power soon. You are killing our nation from the inside. I would call you a traitor, but I don't think you're doing it intentionally.

opit

When I was in sales training people in TV commercials were called "talking heads". In this day of infomercials by all and sundry, who forgets anchors "read from a script" ? Why do you think we're all on the net ? Might have something to do with choking on B.S. from the "media". I know reporters try but the system is corrupt. Spam is not a new phenomenen.

Steve

First Cheryl, get a grip. Calling everyone that disagrees with you "brainwashed" is just a more sophisticated way of labeling the other side "poo poo heads". Second, don't bring up irrelevant subjects to try to prove how "dumb" I am. You may think you know alot Cheryl, but intelligence is not just spouting random facts, it's knowing what facts are relevent and what's not. Bacterial culture and rates of reaction has nothing to do with whether Hume has a right to say what he said on TV.

Thanks Ryan for your more reasoned comments, although I disagree you. Hume runs his own show on fox, so whatever they like to portray him as (politically) is ultimately irrelevent. Hume is a commentator, and, like you said has the right to say whatever he likes. I personally agree with him. My faith in the UN... well, it's just not there. Whether 1 UN scientist says something or 1000, what matters to me is that a UN scientist(s) said it. That instantly takes away it's credibility, and I think that's how Hume feels about it too. Now you may disagree with that point of view, which is fine, but that doesn't mean Hume was irresponsible in pointing out what he believes. After all, CNN does the same thing for your side.

The comments to this entry are closed.