The media likes to build things up then tear them down. Britney Spears, George Bush, Housing as an Investment, dot-com stocks, the Iraq War, the list goes on. 
What do you all think of their coverage - in creating the back to back .com and housing bubbles, and now their coverage helping to deflate expectations, and the bubbles.
Plus, I just wanted to post a picture of Laurie Dhue. Fox sucks, but as one HP'er pointed out, they've got the best newsbabes - and their outfits go so well with the jingoistic American flag in the corner (why, you should ask yourself, is that there?)
39 comments:
BIG Laurie fan! Big.
Whould the Canadian flag in the corner make you happy? Also, though it's to complicated for you to grasp, but FOX has the best business model. In addition, they have the best line-up. You are angry, may be because you are not very smart. It happens.
yeah 5:29...
FOX NEWS: Keeping Bushbots heads FIRMLY in the right place.
Yeh, Laurie's got dem juicy lips, keeping me mind off me fears..
Why all the Bush/Republican bashing on this site. It's begining to resemble more of a socialist bitch site that just happens to touch on the topic of the housing bubble. Now I'm begining to question motives here.
Isn't the guy running this site from England? I thought I read that somewhere. That could explain alot, not to mention the bad teeth
I don't know where the hell he's going with this blog, but it's turning into a pointless, juvenile rant. Oh well, back to Ben's...
She's got some nice DSL's
>>>Why all the Bush/Republican bashing on this site.
Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents in history, so it's only natural that people are "bashing" him just about everywhere.
Even in the very Republican area where I live, lots of people are openly marveling at what a boob he is, something one never heard a year ago.
He's toast.
John, if you are going to teach English learn it firsthand yourself - it is the White House, not a white house.
she is media wh..e.
she's got lovely blonde hair -- why would she dye the roots black?
she's got lovely blonde hair -- why would she dye the roots black?
As for Fox, they have some pretty people doing spouting the Neo-Con OP-ED pieces day and night. Some are pretty to look at, some are pretty stupid (the new "Homeland" guy). Some are pretty annoying(Hannity and O'Reily) and some are pretty much at the apex of their career (Hume).
But aside from that crap channel, they are all complicit in their puffing of prices, and their hype of housing.
I record the BBC everyday on my DVR, its more news and less entertainment.
Anonymous said:
"Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents in history, so it's only natural that people are 'bashing' him just about everywhere.
"Even in the very Republican area where I live, lots of people are openly marveling at what a boob he is, something one never heard a year ago."
Actually, he was at about the same level of unpopularity before 9/11. but his approval ratings soared after he showed up in New York with a hard hat and promised to get the bastards responsible. As soon as his numbers shot up, I knew he and his party would milk the terrorism thing for all it was worth. He hasn't given a single speech since, regardless of place, subject, or circumstance, into which he hasn't (or rather, his speech writers haven't) repeatedly worked the "t" word. His re-election campaign was based entirely on it, and he's still hammering away, oblivious to the fact that nobody's listening anymore. The story about the boy who cried wolf must be one his mother never told him.
I thought Clinton was appalling--the epitome of white trash (albeit articulate white trash), but Bush defies description. He is so stupid, I wonder who is really in charge. The conspiracy crackpots who think he's part of a secret society taking over the world must think he's pretending to be an idiot, but clearly he IS an idiot.
It's about time people opened their eyes and realized that the dumbest man on Earth is also the leader of the free world.
I am not partisan. I thought Gore and Kerry were horrors, too. Where are the statesmen and stateswomen when we need them?
British politics also suck, so moving to London really won't help.
However, a place with a spectacular view in Santa Fe might make me more of an optimist.
I don't hate Bush, but he needs to resign.
The idiot DemoRats believed that the dotcom bubble was the greatest thing in history and blamed Bush for popping the bubble.
funny how mentioning fox news equals bush bashing and being un-American.
didn't say a thing about bush or America. this post was about the media.
but, alas, the fox brainwashing does work. and yes, the jingoistic use of an American flag 24 hours a day on their screen apparently creates the desired effect. makes them untouchable, as criticizing them means criticizing America.
Genius business model.
Wake up (some of you) folks. You're hypnotized.
The Republican Party has become a personality cult, and the true believers cannot bear to hear anyone speak ill of Beloved Leader. Even the gentlest criticisms make them rend their garments and cover their heads with ashes.
It will be interesting to see how they react this summer and fall when Republican congressional candidates run away from Beloved Leader as fast as they can--which they have already begun doing--and then lose one or both houses of Congress anyway.
FOX is not in the business of selling patriotism or else, they are in the business of selling commercials. I wonder that neither Keith or Philip can't get this simple concept. Apparently, this is the direct effect of poor school education in the US. Tunnel vision. If bush-bashing will bring them higher ratings (and they can charge more for advertising!) they will switch in a second. Wake up already. I can't believe that people can be that brainwashed, and this is not funny. The model is indeed genious - they make money in the oversaturated field and they are winning. CNN, ABC and BBC make money too. BBC even taxes UK citizens. What does it all have to do with the housing bubble?
If FoxNews has such a brilliant business model, you sure couldn't tell it from their ratings, which are in a freefall among the coveted 25-54 demographic.
http://tinyurl.com/ghn4s (pdf)
Fox made a conscious decision to tie itself as closely as possible to Bush. That might have been a good idea a couple of years ago, but it's no advantage to be seen as the propaganda mouthpiece of a president whose approval rating is only slightly higher than that of Nixon on the day of his resignation.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Wonder if she's blond all over?
Here is the proper link - http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/original/feb06vs05.pdf - while FOX numbers are in obvious decline, FOX completely dwarfs others in the number of viewers. The ratio varies from 2:1 to 10:1. Total domination at this point of time. Somehow this fact wasn't mentioned. Folks are too shy these days. OK, you invest in MSNBC but I will invest in Rupert.
Good lord - I don't watch TV, but I can't believe you folks think this corn-fed, plasticized, sorority-raised imbecile is attractive. She looks like a slightly cleaned up version of that picture of Jenna Bush gone wild on the cover of the Enquirer. One of the least sexy things imaginable IMO.
I don't hate Bush, but he needs to resign.
President Elmer Fudd? Naw, let's stick with Dubya.
Imaging how much more damage he can do to NeoCon in the next 3 years.
And I don't remember any Democrats blaming Dubya for the dot-com crash. Kind of hard to do, since it had been underway for 6 months before even the 2000 election.
albrt - you do have a point. she does look oddly like one of those bachelor party blow-up dolls
Anonymous said:
"President Elmer Fudd? Naw, let's stick with Dubya.
"Imaging how much more damage he can do to NeoCon in the next 3 years.
"And I don't remember any Democrats blaming Dubya for the dot-com crash. Kind of hard to do, since it had been underway for 6 months before even the 2000 election."
Actually Cliunton and the Democrats took credit for the dot-com bubble; they gushed about how much money the government was bringing in, balancing the budget, etc. They're still bragging about it, ignoring the fact that it was all the dot-com bubble, and that millions of people were very badly hurt by it. Ill-gotten gains may pay the bills, but they're still ill-gotten gains.
Now Idiot Bush is gushing about the high level of "home ownership" in the United States, completely ignoring the fact that all these so called home owners don't own anything, and that millions are going to lose everything, while "investors" make out like bandits. Both presidents are repulsive.
As I said earlier, I am not partisan. The Democrats who refer to Republicans as "Neocons" and compare them to Nazis are egotistical, malicious and infantile. So are the Republicans who compare Democrats to Stalin. Neither side sees the big picture, because it is focused only on one side: the left or the right. Observes in the center can see both sides, and they're mirror images of one another.
The Democrats worshiped Clinton exactly the same way that Republicans worship Bush, and they defended him no matter what. The man was a scumbag, and still is. Bush may behave better in public, but he hasn't a clue about running the country. He was just somebody the Republican Party chose because he could bring in megabucks, not because of anything he stood for. I can't be the only person who remembers that when he was first running, he didn't even have a platform. He didn't stand for anything. He and his little crew also engaged is nasty political trickery.
So it all comes home to roost.
Forget getting Democrats elected; forget getting Republicans elected. Start thinking as independents, and stop boot-licking. The two sides have created the mess we now find ourselves in, so why reward them?
Ah, Laurie Does
I agree with this guy 100%.
Why all the Bush/Republican bashing on this site. It's begining to resemble more of a socialist bitch site that just happens to touch on the topic of the housing bubble. Now I'm begining to question motives here.
If the Busheviks want to be in a place where their fearless leader is never criticized, they need to stick to the wingnut echo chamber. Out here in the "reality-based community," where the rest of us live, Bush is very unpopular.
the Democratic party, on the endangered species list since 2000.
>>>while FOX numbers are in obvious decline, FOX completely dwarfs others in the number of viewers.
{clawing frantically through manure heap} There must be a pony in here somewhere!
Amazing you idiot Dems...so angry that Fox leans right...I admit it does. Yet, for decades you have had the full, biased left leaning support of the 3 networks and most print media. Let's do some CNN bashing, or MSNBC, how about the Today Show?, NY Times anyone? Get real. Dems will not win back congress either. You guys are fossils, and will be useless in 08'
Anybody who thinks that multinational corporate media outlets are liberal clearly has no idea what the word means.
Only a genuine fool would believe that outfits like General Electric and Microsoft are leftist.
Yeah, I do believe that NBC, ABC, CBS evening news, as well as CNN are biased and supportive to the causes of the left. It is plain fact.
Yeah, I do believe that NBC, ABC, CBS evening news, as well as CNN are biased and supportive to the causes of the left. It is plain fact.
Since it's a plain fact, then you shouldn't have any trouble providing some evidence.
While you're at it, you might also want to explain why enormous multination corporations, which own all the "mainstream" media outlets in this country, would be interested in promoting an agenda that is hostile to enormous multinational corporations. Are they suicidal or just really stupid?
Watch O'Reilly, he gives plenty of evidence every night @ 8PM est.
I will try last time, Philip. Say, I am going to advertise my latest product. I have a choice – a network whose numbers declined 10% YOY from 1 million to 900,000 or a network whose numbers went up 100% from 45,000 to 90,000. What will be my choice to get the best coverage? Use your brains... I'm a foreigner, I don't care if they have an agenda, every network has. Somehow you don't object to CNN 's or ABC's agenda, but you don't like that FOX pushes one of its own. It's your problem. As the only semi-conservative cable outlet, FOX found the way to resonate with the most of the audience. They went right after the audience with the best purchasing power (as average). Apparently this simple idea never caught your mind. No wonder. At this point FOX is #1, you can't twist poll numbers, though, somebody here tried. For the time segment buyer like me, they provided ME with the opportunity to expand MY business. Get it? And if CNN will climb to #1 spot, I'll split my budget. Thus, FOX will have to readjust to protect their cash flow. To which level of high school I have to go down to put it in to you brainwashed head?
P.S. I see you started to write the White House correctly. Now you have to come with your own ideas, not with the childish rant. I know its tough, I know.
Now, get back to the housing issues, and stop fighting windmills.
What a waste...
Skytrekker-
Re. your long list of fascist tendencies that are becoming evident in the US:
The list ended with sthg. like "the only thing we don't have yet are concentration camps".
OK folks, here's some wierd news. I live in WA state, up near the Canadian border. There was an article in a local paper here a few weeks ago about how they are building "holding buildings" for illegal immigrants outside of Blaine, WA.
My first thought? Blaine is not exactly the border of choice for illegal immigrants. Very few Canadians desperately wanting "in" to the US these days. And WAY fewer illegals from other parts of the world when compared to the SW American border.
So what gives, why the buildings designed to hold hundreds?
Some people around here assume they are the "concentration camps" of the new millenium. Specifically, they think they are designed to hold American citizens who disagree with whatever hits the political fan.
Me? I don't know WHAT to think. And, of course, would prefer not to think about it at all.
Anybody know anything about this? If you do, please do tell .
All this talk about 'right v left' viewing of cable news statistics reveals the following. For Tuesday March 21, the percentage of viewers for FOX for 'the total day' was 44.23% compared to that of CNN, MSNBC, HLN, CNBC. For 'prime time' it was 49.24%. That seems to me to be fairly close to the registered percentage of republican to democrat voters. In other words we all watch what viewpoint we happen to agree with. Now can we please get on with concentrating on the problem at hand and decease with the 'party crap'.
(although I do wonder what would happen if you added in ABC, CBS, NBC)
Post a Comment