From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
Fox's "slavish adherence to the White House line"

August 23, 2004 10:05 AM

The Toronto Star on Fox News Channel's modus operandi of "parroting Republican ideology, waving the flag and glorifying American military might," with big props for Outfoxed: "It is a view that has gained increasing currency with the surprising popularity of Outfoxed, filmmaker Robert Greenwald's detailed look at Fox's slavish adherence to the White House line."

More from the archive in Outfoxed.

Fox's "slavish adherence to the White House line" (08.23.2004)

Next Entry: Congressional terrorists (08.23.2004)
Previous Entry: Why Google's IPO was a success (08.22.2004)

Read the 11 comments.


Talk about toeing the party line, given the attention lavished on President Bush's service in the Air National Guard earlier this year, we thought that newspapers such as the Washington Post and the New York Times would want to devote comparable attention to John Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia story.

To date, however, we have been wrong. Neither the influential mainstream newspapers nor the broadcast television networks have reported the meltdown of Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia story. The Kerry campaign's lame efforts to resurrect a version of the story that contradicts what Kerry has said for the past 25 years, but allows Kerry to continue using his Vietnam experiences, real and imagined, for his own political purposes.

Whatever the reason when it comes to scrutiny of Sen. Kerry's veracity, the mainstream media are saluting, but they are decidedly not reporting for duty.

Mon Aug 23 2004 8:21 AM


Chris Matthews is now officially off the deep end. He completely distorted a section of a piece with Michelle Malkin in which she was discussing how the veterans in Unfit to Command had suggested that one of Kerry's purple hearts was from a self-inflicted wound into putting words into Malkin's mouth that she somehow believed that Kerry had intentionally inflicted his own wounds.

It was stunning. It is almost like the major media outlets have decided to answer the question about media bias once and for all. Their answer?

"We are whores for the Democrats."

Mon Aug 23 2004 1:48 PM



Those are not your words. You quoted verbatim from an article without providing attribution. That's called plagiarism:

Plus, the article you chose to plagiarize was complete nonsense. Here's the rebuttal:

Kerry's story checks out, unlike the flip-flops of the Swift Boat Liars, who maintained that Kerry was a war hero, right up to the point where he started running for President.

Mon Aug 23 2004 1:59 PM


Likewise, the text saying "We are whores for the Democrats" was copied and pasted (perhaps by the author) from this post:

This is how the right wing works. No brains, just copy and paste all over the web. If they can control the television and radio stations and have their zombies cut-and-paste all day and repeat talking points until they are blue in the face, this minority of ideologues can control the national dialogue.

Mon Aug 23 2004 2:09 PM


Love your post Paul, especially the "We are Whores" line.

Mon Aug 23 2004 2:25 PM


That was a quote, dummy.

Mon Aug 23 2004 3:15 PM


Copied no doubt.

"This is how the right wing works. No brains, just copy and paste all over the web. If they can control the television and radio stations and have their zombies cut-and-paste all day and repeat talking points until they are blue in the face, this minority of ideologues can control the national dialogue"

I know I read that exact same post somewhere - only substitute LEFT for RIGHT. But it was written in referance to JOHN KERRY'S acceptance speech at the DNC.

I hope you sent him a similar email concerning his failure to attribute quotes to the original speakers.

Tue Aug 24 2004 6:11 AM


Published excerpts substantiate the claim by SBVT that the candidate obtained his first Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound.

In Kerry's own words -- found on page 189 of "Tour of Duty" (BRINKLY) "an entry from his diary about a subsequent excursion, written on December 11, 1968, nine days after the incident that got Kerry his medal," Kerry asserted that his crew remained cocky and feeling invincible "because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven't been shot at yet are allowed to be cocky." Brinkly (in slavish adherence to the Kerry campaign) does not include the date in his book, but other left wing writers apparently did't get the word that DATES AND FACTS ARE IMPORTANT.

Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair (Hail, the Conquering War Criminal Comes) did quote the exact entry from Kerry's diary (included the date). Kerry's own diary admits that he hadn't been under fire two weeks AFTER he claims to have been injured by enemy fire.

Is this going to be another moment "seared in his mind" that turns out to have several differant versions (definition of "in", definition of "enemy"?), or are his own supporters exposing him for the lying SOS he is?

Right now the DNC is puckering up its asshole in fear the 2004 campaign is about to blow up in its' face. After investing literally hundreds of mllions of dollars in Kerry they are just wishing he would shut the fuck up so they can cover up all the turds he leaves laying in his wake. This isn't going to like 2002 when New Jersey Democrats picked Lautenberg to replace Torricelli after Torricelli torpedoed his own campaign. ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN are all pitching in to try and salvage this election, and FOX is just afraid to make a leap and start covering Kerry in detail. Do they really think that if they can keep the lid on till November it won't blow off in December?

Tue Aug 24 2004 8:55 AM


The user "dhermesc" epitomizes the mean-spiritedness of the replican far right. He (or she?) sounds like Bill O'Reilly with the venom dripping off of his words.

What most of us want is a better country, and to get there we need to be informed. If our news media is being unduly influenced by a political party (right or left), it's a big problem in a so-called democracy.

The mergers and acquisitions that have taken place in the media are alarming and need to be addressed. That's the real issue here. We are losing the essence of our democracy as the news becomes more and more one-sided.

Food for thought, regardless of political viewpoint.

Mon Sep 27 2004 12:12 AM


WOW, that put me in my place. If only we could all have the decorum of Chris Matthews.

The main issue the democrats seem to have isn't the contraction of news services, its the expansion, anyone dream of a FOX News service back in 1990? 10 years ago no one would have believed that millions of common people in their PJs could make Dan Rather eat crow on national TV. He presented his case on TV and the people called BS on his "evidence" and the people where right.

Old Dan must have forgotten that times have changed. Back in 1988 Rather presented "The Wall Within" to the American people which CBS trumpeted as the "rebirth of the TV documentary. To bad all their "Vietnam" veterans where frauds and charlatans. A basic background check on any of these individuals would have revealed them for the fakes they where. Instead CBS had a "great" story (even if it was fiction) and ran with it. With the "Good Old Boy" system between the networks up and running CBS received nothing but accolades for the riveting "documentary". Even after documented evidence that was procurred through the Freedom of Information Act presented to CBS, they refused to admit they where wrong. Other parts of the story where equal in their fiction, Rather's use of bogus statistics on the rates of suicide, homelessness, and mental illness among Vietnam veterans statistics that can also be easily checked. Today such a piece of shit for reporting would be torn to shreds and spat back in CBS's face.

Back in '88 CBS pulled off the coup in "journalistic integrity" by simply refusing to acknowledge the truth and the other networks went along with it. CBS president Howard Stringer defended the network with with denial. "Your criticisms were not shared by a vast majority of our viewers," adding that "CBS News and its affiliates received acclaim from most quarters . . . In sum, this was a broadcast of which we at CBS News and I personally am proud. There are no apologies to make." Without the expansion of news media and the internet we would have been greeted with the "fuck the truth we have a story" stance with the current "Rathergate".

Mon Sep 27 2004 7:51 AM


Notice the difference between the righties' posts, and the lefties'? Pretty obvious ones. The righties are about "me me me", their precious party, money, "how does ... benefit ME?" and so forth. Republicans are loyal to their party to the exclusion of all else, including America. Their idealogy - the furtherance of SELF, at the expense of all else - is selfish, greedy, simple-minded, and dangerous. They do not care for the "public good" or the "common man," - each man for himself! is their motto.

The republicans do not want to hear any dissent against thier party, their President, or any dissent at all. If given ultimate power, Republicans would go back to draconian days and abolish any speech that is not "patriotic" and supportive of the regime in power. This is Un-American, Un-Democratic, and borders on fascism, but they do not see that - to the Rightie, it is the people that have the gall to actually speak out and dissent against the government that are the Un-American traitors. Put aside the fact that citizens' right to dissent against their government is the DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC of a free democratic society - the righties want nothing to do with such drivel.

Bottom line: Republicans need and want a MONARCHY. They want a king to rule them, without the silly, interfering windbag Senators and Congressman gumming up the works with long rhetoric and voting. One man, one King, to rule America - his word law, his edicts un-stoppable, the military at his every whim, and the citizenry had better fall into line behind him and keep their mouths shut.

Does that sound like the America YOU used to know? Of course not. But it is the America that most Republicans drool about, and would have tomorrow if they possibly could.

Republicans - traitors, all.

Thu Oct 7 2004 10:41 AM

Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam


Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Weekly Artists Chart