FOX manipulates video to attack Obama

[HopeOverFear]

Fox manipulates video to attack Obama

by Jed Lewison

Media Matters has caught another Fox fabrication.

This time, Fox News 'reporter' Wendell Goler repeatedly aired a video clip in which President Obama seems to declare his support for imposing a "European-style" universal health care system on the United States. Goler used the clip to support Republican attacks on the President's spending policies and his supposedly "European" priorities.

The problem is, President Obama never said any such thing. The clip Goler used was from a March 26 online town hall event, and President Obama was paraphrasing a written question submitted by the audience. In his answer, the President said that while he does support universal health care, he doesn't support imposing a European or Canadian system on the United States.

I actually want a universal health care system; that is our goal...whether we do it exactly the way European countries do or Canada does is a different question, because there are a variety of ways to get to universal health care coverage... I don't think the best way to fix our health care system is to suddenly completely scrap what everybody is accustomed to and the vast majority of people already have. Rather, what I think we should do is to build on the system that we have and fill some of these gaps.

Despite the plain meaning of President Obama's words, Fox and Goler took them completely out of context to support the President's Republican critics.

It wasn't an accident -- Fox aired at least three different versions of Goler's hit piece. Watch the video, starting with what President Obama actually said:

[MUAD_DIB]

1. The FCC needs to talk to FOX about their license.

[DJ13]

6. The cable Fox News doesnt need an FCC license

The FCC only deals with over the air broadcasters.

[margotb822]

7. This may be a dumb question, but

who is the regulating body for cable tv? And, what will happen to the FCC once all tv goes digital?

[onenote]

9. certain aspects of cable's operations are regulated at the federal level

others at the state and/or local level. But no level of government has authority to regulate cable's content.

And I'm not sure what your question about tv going all digital means. Apart from the fact the signals will be sent in digital format rather than analog, the FCC's role in regulating over the air broadcasting is unchanged.

[jberryhill]

12. Nobody and nothing

Digital television will still be broadcast over the air.

Cable-only networks will remain cable-only.

[margotb822]

20. Well, I guess that shows how much

of this teevee thing I understand.

So, if I could get cable companies to carry it, I could broadcast any show I make up, regardless of content? What about censorship? Who determines what needs to be censored when? The other night, I was watching Comedy Central and they had a Chris Rock stand-up on that was unedited and uncensored. I liked it, but I was surprised that the language was on cable and not a specialty channel.

[jberryhill]

23. If you'd like....

I'll run a wire to your house, you pay me, and I'll put any signal through it you want and I feel like.

"Who determines what needs to be censored when?"

The cable channels themselves, based on their understanding of their market.

[MUAD_DIB]

8. My bad. Maybe that should change.

If BushCo can redefine the meaning of torture then the FCC should redefine the meaning of broadcast.

[onenote]

10. fortunately,while BushCo was able to redefine the Constitution, they

didn't get around to redefining the part of the First Amendment that protects the editorial discretion of subscription services, including cable television.

[MUAD_DIB]

16. Wat about hate speech or outright llying to incite hatred?

[onenote]

18. if it were to cross the line between protected and unprotected speech

but if you read up on the case law, you'll see that bar is set very very high -- far higher than anything faux is doing.

[jberryhill]

24. There is no law against "hate speech" in the United States

And it's okay to whip up as much hate as you want to.

You cannot specifically direct an angry mob to break windows across the street from where they are gathered, and a few other things, but if you are talking about incitement to riot, you need a mob right there and then, to incite, and not some amorphous remote viewership.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. No, no, no.

You do not want the FCC anywhere near cable or you're going to see them crack down on networks like Cartoon Network, Comedy Central, SPIKE, TNT and other networks that air adultish programing.

[MUAD_DIB]

15. My main concern is over hate broadcasting and seditious intent.

[Drunken Irishman]

26. I know and I understand your point.

But the FCC is shit. It's shit at the network level and it'll be shit at the cable level.

[HopeOverFear]

27. is there even a point to the FCC anymore?

[mwooldri]

29. I'd like a US implementation of the UK's OFCOM please.

Cable broadcasters and satellite broadcasters need to get licenses to broadcast from the UK for the UK (unless they just beam into the UK from a foreign satellite, undesirable because you don't get the audience otherwise). Even Fox News has a license from OFCOM. That's how they got censured for criticizing the BBC about something political and not giving the BBC rebuttal time. The culprit here? John Gibson.

The US FCC are certainly prudes when it comes to "adult programming". Simple way to regulate: impose a watershed that between 5am and 9pm programming would be basically no more than PG-13 in nature, unless there are controls in place that allows a viewer to opt in to more adult programming. Programming closer to R-Rated would be permissible after 9pm but must cease by 5am. This frees up broadcast TV (which generally does not have an opt-in method) to air more adult-ish programming, the "expanded cable" networks like CN, Comedy Central, Spike TNT etc to air what they air anyway... and Playboy TV can still air because you generally have to opt into that programming anyway by way of an extra subscription.

[onenote]

17. delete

[mwooldri]

30. But OFCOM would need to talk to Fixed News about it then...

... would be an odd way around it but Fixed News has a licence to broadcast to the UK. This licence is regulated by the UK regulators, and as such they have to comply with their programming code.

All we need is a load of UK buddies and file a bunch of complaints with OFCOM. They'd be required to investigate and if found in violation, Fox News would be censured. Enough censures come licence renewal and hmm....

Mark.

[uponit7771]

2. They're getting deseperate...

...

[ObamaKerryDem]

3. And they constantly whine about a "liberal media"...

:eyes:

[margotb822]

4. Can we petition the FCC to make them take "news" out of their name?

This is absurd!

[onenote]

13. Delete

Brain fart on my part.

[margotb822]

19. Oh, ugh, that's even worse...nt

[onenote]

21. oops., my bad. confusing two threads

The Fox News Channel distorted Obama's position on Universal Health Care.
The Fox broadcast network is refusing to air Obama's press conference.

[margotb822]

22. what a surprise, fox sucking at broadcasting and confusing people

haha

[Cha]

5. Lying mediawhores..

Is there not something the admin can do about this shit? You know someone connected to the Obama team is monitoring this, too.

Thanks, MediaMatters..you are invaluble!

[FightingIrish]

11. Sometimes opinion blurs into reporting but this is nothing but deceit

The ham handed way they butchered the truth should cost them something more than just their already tarnished credibility. They shape the facts to fit the pointed heads of their viewers and seem to have no shame about doing it. They know we get it but can't do anything about it. We live in a time when the truth can mean life or death and yet they sell their bullshit with a wink and a nod. Barack Obama gets criticized for choosing his words with great thought and deliberation and then they just cut and past like a late show gag video.

[struggle4progress]

25. FOX should be required to register as a PAC

[Joe the Liberal]

28. Fox news manipulating videos and distorting the truth? No, that can't be right.

I'm utterly shocked this has happened, I mean a credible news source such as fox would surly NEVER do this kind of thing. :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:


Fox doesn't even try to be subtle about it anymore, it's obvious what they do and where they stand that anyone with half a brain would know they are full of shit. What's scary is that they have a pretty large viewership.