fox news bias

The issue: After an intense campaign that cost more than $75 million, California's voters have approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, dealing a huge blow to the gay rights movement and setting the stage for another round of court battles over the volatile issue.First approached by the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco a few weeks after the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in May, the Mormons were the last major religious group to join the campaign, and the final spice in an unusual stew that included Catholics, evangelical Christians, conservative black and Latino pastors, and myriad smaller ethnic groups with strong religious ties. Shortly after receiving the invitation from the San Francisco Archdiocese, the Mormon leadership in Salt Lake City issued a four-paragraph decree to be read to congregations, saying “the formation of families is central to the Creator’s plan,” and urging members to become involved with the cause. interviews with the main forces behind the ballot measure showed how close its backers believe it came to defeat — and the extraordinary role Mormons played in helping to pass it with money, institutional support and dedicated volunteers.“We’ve spoken out on other issues, we’ve spoken out on abortion, we’ve spoken out on those other kinds of things,” said Michael R. Otterson, the managing director of public affairs for the Church. “But we don’t get involved to the degree we did on this.”

Fox News Admits Bias!
http://www.slate.com/id/2119864/

"The usually disciplined foot soldiers at Fox News have long maintained that their news organization is not biased in favor of conservatism. This charade is so important to Fox News that the company has actually sought to trademark the phrase "fair and balanced" (which is a bit like Richard Nixon trademarking the phrase "not a crook"). No fair-minded person actually believes that Fox News is unbiased, so pretending that it is calls for steely corporate resolve. On occasion, this vigilance pays off. Last year, for example, the Wall Street Journal actually ran a correction after its news pages described Fox News, accurately, as "a network sympathetic to the Bush cause and popular with Republicans." Getting one of this country's most prestigious newspapers to state that up is down and black is white is no small public-relations victory, and if we can't admire Fox News' candor, we can at least marvel at its ability to remain on message."

As this article states, while they claim to be fair an balanced, many of the stories from Fox News site are slanted one way or the other. FAIR themselves claim that Foxnews is the most biased name in news. I decided to try another news source to compare the article with theirs. I found another article on the same subject easily and it was slanted the same way. Both articles are overwhelmingly sympathetic towards pro gay marriage and paint a negative and cold picture of the mormon church. Sometimes I think that this station takes the blun for media bias when other stations present their information in the same way.

Here is the CNN Article:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/06/state.laws/index.html?iref=newssearch

I think that alot of bias comes from the journalists themselves, not necessarily the station. Especially when regarding issues as emotionally charged as this one, I think that it is really hard for a journalist not to keep ther own opinions out of their writing.

media bias

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,459544,00.html

Amber and Matt W.

1. The information is accurate

2. All of the information was one-sided. It seemed penned to make the mormon church look bad. their side had no voice.

3. There were no real experts in this article, just high standing members of the gay and lesbian marriage movement. Only one for the mormon church was recorded which gives a substantial bias to the anti-gay marriage movement.

4. not applicable

5. We do not think there is a status quo on the gay marriage rights issue. Our current population seems drastically divided one way or another.

6. What is the effect of having conversational quotes in the article versus official written statements?
The article had a deliberate and more personal feel towards the pro gay rights movement while the other side presented was presented as cold and unfeeling towards the people being persecuted against.

teens online

I think that this frontline special was a great wake-up call to parents about how kids are using the Internet. This new medium has created several new positive and negative influences for teens especially. I cannot believe how fast the internet has changed our culture. This generation uses the internet for everything from research to satisfying social needs that go unfulfilled in our own lives. Friends are contacting each other through social networking sites rather than meeting face-to-face and we are also using this medium to create and maintain our most private relationships. All teens need to be informed of the dangers and precaution they should take online but I did however think this tv spot was overblown. I found this article from the MIT Technological Review and felt it presented some good points about online use:

"For almost a decade now, the debate about youth and new media technologies has been polarized around two conflicting mythslet's call them the Myth of the Columbine Generation and the Myth of the Digital Generation. The first is driven by fear, the other hope, but both distort the reality kids and parents must negotiate in the online world, and both exaggerate the centrality of digital media in children's lives.Parents, educators, and policymakers can get whiplash trying to respond to the competing pull of these two myths. One pulls us toward wiring every classroom in the country so that kids may enjoy the benefits of digital access, the other mandates filtering programs in school and library computers since kids can't be trusted once they log on."

The major problem here seems to be about finding a balance. How much is too much and how far is too far when the internet is concerned? As a culture, we have profoundly mixed views about how much adolescents should be protected from adult realities and almost uniform agreement that children should be protected from pornography. I think a lot of responsibility of how much teens use the internet should be placed on parents.

Teens today face a public life with unimaginably wide possibly for publicity. The internet opens up a whole new world of possibility. We can basically advertise ourselves for friendship, for jobs, and anything else we desire. Because of this, I do no thins it is accidental that teens live in a culture infatuated with celebrity, the “reality” presented by reality TV and the highlypublicized dramas (such as that between socialites Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie).

FCC Regulation

a. describes Dunbar's theories of "The Spinning Door", "Frequent Flying", and "What occurs behind closed doors" in regards to the Center's investigation into the FCC

The spinning Door: This reflects the findings thatr many employees within the FCC are former industry executives and lawyers, and vice versa. Dunbar uses Dorothy Atwood, former chief of the FCC's Wirelind Competition Bureau and discusses her switch to SBC. He points out that while not illegal there is a serious conflict of interest present when this happens.

Frequent FLying: This refers to the "cozy" relationship between the agency and the industry. The study entitled "On the Road Again-and Again" revealed that the FCC had accepted nearly 2.8 million in travel and ebetertainment over eight years. The FCC coutered this attack saying that they were providing services for small businesses etc.. with some aid that would otherwise cost them too much money but a lot of exoenses were unexplainable. These executives flew first class, stayed at lavish hotels, and reflested a lot of unnecessary spending. Congress has put a cap on the amount of travel the FCC can accept however in an ideal situation, all travel money should come from the agency or from a non profit organization.

Behind Closed Doors: the top decision makers at the FCC often "rub elbows" with those they regulate. Before the FCC deregulated many restrictions, several secret meeting went on with industry leaders like SBC and Viacom. These are officially called ex parte meetings.

b. at the end of the article even chairman Powell says that sometimes industry influence over the FCC has gone too far. Has anything happened since the writing of this article in 2003 to change this?
I do not think that much has really happened since this article. With all the other problems going on in the nation, many just are not that concerned with the FCC. Michael Powell is no longer leading and hopefully our new government will make necessary changes. I agree with Stigler in that regulatory agencies are destined to become beholden to the very industry they are supposed to regulate.

Trend-Setting Media

"Often advertising is not about keeping up with the Joneses, but about separating you from them. That's especially true of advertising directed at a particular group, such as adolescents or young-adults - it's called 'dog-whistle' adversiting because it goes out at frequencies only dogs can hear."
Dr. James TwitchellSmithsonian, April 2000

The media has become more and more saturated into our culture today. Marketers seem very well aware that they have the power to set the new trend just by coming up with that perfect ad campaign or getting the right person in Hollywood to represent their product. Life without technology feels impossible with the explosion of cell phones, mp3 players, and blackberry’s etc… Media provides us with entertainment, information, and comfort. As the standard of living in this country is rising, people find themselves investing in digital cables and high speed internet connections, thus increasing their exposure to such media as the World Wide Web and the hundreds new channels that come with digital cable. While everything we experience us as individuals, it is probably the commercials seen on television that have the most influence over our own choices and decisions. In America, the media and advertising are some of the biggest influences on an individual's method of viewing and interpreting the world around them. The influential power of the media is reaching controversial levels and very few aspects of life in America remain outside the pressure of these outlets. Violent programs, biased twenty-four hour news networks, and impossible social standards promoted by advertising are some of the negative byproducts of modern media. Nonetheless, television, radio, print ads, and other forms of media all remain crucial to the dissemination of knowledge and ideals which continue to inform people's views about the world.

If you go to this link, you will read an article about how to generate influential propaganda: http://www.doshdosh.com/the-art-of-propaganda-seven-common-techniques/

I thought this article was interesting because it hit on some major techniques that marketers use to influence its audience. One particular point that this article makes is the importance of appealing to the audience’s emotions. This tactic can be seen in many commercials on TV like the Hallmark card campaigns or as the holiday’s approach, those tacky family food commercials with everyone around the table, talking, laughing, and enjoying a nice holiday meal. The article also lists six other main tactics such as name-calling, glittering generalities, and testimonials. These are just some of the ways that advertisers manipulate language and images to capture our attention. The following are some true statements I have found to be true about advertising:

• Advertising sets us up to feel dissatisfied - even if we think we have everything we need, ads will still try to convince us that there is something else we need.
• Advertisers try to show us how much more satisfied, popular, happy, hip, attractive, sexy, fun and in control we would be if we had their product.
• Fashion and trends are always changing so that we must continually spend money to be current.
• Advertising stresses competition and status versus feeling good about being who you are and accepting others for who they are.

One trend that I think has the most influence in teen culture especially today is the projection of the perfect female body. Images of the thin, idealized female bodies are everywhere. Women—and their body parts—sell everything from food to cars. Popular film and television actresses are becoming younger, taller and thinner. Some have even been known to faint on the set from lack of food (USA today 2006). Women’s magazines are full of articles urging that if they can just lose those last twenty pounds, they’ll have it all—the perfect marriage, loving children, great sex, and a rewarding career. The American research group Anorexia Nervosa & Related Eating Disorders, Inc. says that one out of every four college-aged women uses unhealthy methods of weight control—including fasting, skipping meals, excessive exercise, laxative abuse, and self-induced vomiting. Who introduced this trend? Who taught girls that being thin was the only way to go? Researchers report that women’s magazines have ten and one-half times more ads and articles promoting weight loss than men’s magazines do, and over three-quarters of the covers of women’s magazines include at least one message about how to change a woman’s bodily appearance—by diet, exercise or cosmetic surgery. Television and movies reinforce the importance of a thin body as a measure of a woman’s worth. Canadian researcher Gregory Fouts reports that over three-quarters of the female characters in TV situation comedies are underweight, and only one in twenty are above average in size (BBC News World Edition, Feb 5 2003).

Killing Us Softly is a 20-minute film that is an excellent resource for use by classes or discussion groups that want to explore the impact of advertising images on society's view of women. This is extremely eye-opening.
Here is a link for a seven minute clip from the film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufHrVyVgwRg

Here are some sample images of women in the media:

wirelessing the world

1. CWNs are community wireless networks that allow for open. free accessible, nonproproetary systems to be built using the buying power and economies of scale withing neighborhoods, towns, and cities. CWNs are a way for resident to build rescources in their communities, save money, and free themselves from profit-driven business models. This bridges the digital divide by eliminating one problem facing users: end users having to pay directly for access.



2. Barriers: The battles fought over control in wireless mirror previous technological battles between big business and the greater good. As with the telephone, many wireless providors are made up of powerful, profit focused companies that hold have a niche in the wireless market, These companies belong to a trade group called WiMax. This forum is composed of industry leaders whose interest seems to be maximizing profit. this forum would like to "eleiminate all competing standards before the public has any idea of what the alternatives maight be." this system creates a standards-compliance structure that puts smaller, CWN's at a disadvantage. Bid business is hard to overcome and our current system does not help.

3. The result of fewer companies controlling the market share comes from corporate consolidation and the early buying of technology before anyone else has a chance. controls over wireless technilogies are quickly being consolidated by large corporations whose main interest in bolstering profit. These companies have the money and power to gain control ovder any new develoopment before any small-scale firm. This is a very common and smart business move. If companies don;t consolidate, there will be too many different people involved. Though not very personable and it may not result in cheaper wireless tactics, the networks are easier to control this way.

money as debt

It would seem natural, that money is created by the State, and in fact most Central Banks seem to be owned by the State and run by it. I say "seem" because, to all intents and purposes, it is an apparency. They are almost constituting a "fourth power" in addition to the three legally constituted and well known "traditional" powers, legislative, executive and judicial.
When the State needs money, it does not order the Central Bank to credit some money to the treasury’s account. The State has only two ways to obtain money. One is taxation of it's citizens, the other is borrowing from the banks.
When the Central Bank issues money, this is done in the form of a loan. The State has to borrow this money, and must promise to repay it, with interest. The same is true of course for a private person who needs money borrowing from a commercial bank. The bank is happy to loan, as long as you can show you have security, and promise to repay with interest. The banks are essentially creating money. Banknotes, when they are printed, are considered the property of the Central Bank. They are not given to the State to spend, but are brought into circulation against a corresponding debt. Anyone wanting some of those notes to spend, has to "buy" them by giving up some of their credit. And in any case, most of the money in circulation (more than 90% according to the video) is not banknotes but "credit". When you go to your bank asking for money, the loan you get is created right there in your bank. The "money" consists of figures on your bank account, and it can be spent writing checks, giving an order to transfer or drawing the cash. Banks only have to have a small percentage of their loaned-out money actually available. The rest can be paid out just by moving some figures from one account to another. Money is created just by inserting some numbers into a computer.

2. Why create money as debt? Why not create money that circulates permanently and does not have to be perpetually re-borrowed in interest in order to exist?

An economy needs money so that goods and services can be exchanged. If there is too little money goods will remain unsold, prices will fall and we call this deflation. If the scarcity of money becomes serious, eventually the economy will go into recession, that is, production comes to a halt, people lose their jobs, misery starts to reign. So it is very important that the amount of money in circulation is at all times sufficient for people to buy the goods and services that are being offered. If on the other hand, too much money is available, inflation, which is a general rise in prices that diminishes the "buying power" of money, is the result. Inflation is as undesirable as deflation, and it would be best if money were stable in it's buying power.
At this time, government has only indirect means, to assure such stability, because it is the banks who can determine how much credit to create.
Also with the government unable to create it’s own money, the only way to make sure there is enough money to buy the goods that are on offer, is to continue taking loans! Of course that means to continue to pay interest! That is why governments never have enough money, and why we have to be taxed to the limit of endurance to pay for debt service, in addition to all other government expenditures

1. Do broadcasters use radio and television to quickly and effectively respond to the local communities needs and interests? Give examples to support your answer.

I do not think that broadcasters use radio and television to effectively respond to needs and interests. In my opinion, they are more concerned about ratings and making money. Large media corporations seem to desire to acquire as many stations as possible to expand their influence and business profits as much as possible. I think they are more interested in deleivering their own policies to the public instead of reflecting the people they claim to represent. It is a rare find to see a station that does not have to answer to the conglomerate that owns them. Look at the Clear Channel communications hearing discussed on pgs. 23-25. This company previously owned 1200 stations and were staunch Bush supporters. They benefitted greatly from the policies of Michael Powell. When you read the speech by TC Calvert on pg. 25, it is plain that Clear Communication did not have the public's interests in mind.

2. Are there certain kinds of local programming (Public Media Values) that should be available, but are not being provided by broadcasters? what could some examples of these be?

I think it is the job of local rpogramming to inform its citizens of what is happening in their area as soon as possible, much like Clear communication failed to do in the San Antonio example above. They need to become a positive, informative source of information. We should be able to use local news to warn us of dangers, crimes, etc... that are happening where we live. I think the emerging technology of "smart radios" as defined on page 33 would be a great aid. Opening up airwaves so that medis is not so limited and implementing fair licensing techiniques for this new technology sounds like a great solution.

3. What could the Federal Communication Commission do to promote localism in broadcasting? Explain three of these examples of public-service-oriented projects that are already in process across the US.

UTOPIA- If they raise the money, Utah would deploy to homes and business fiber-optic cables capable of of delivering data at speeds one hundred times faster than the current cables. The focus here is faster, more relaible access.

Public Interest Wireless Providers- utilising public airwaves to provide high speed access via a shared unlicensed spectrum. They offer low cost connections to rural areas and offers opportunities for universal broadband services. I loke this because I live oue in a rural area that currently does not offer wireless. It is so hard for us to get information right now.

LPFM (Low-powered FM Radio)- Constructed at a rapid clip, providing a unique community medium. these have been some of the greates success stories. I have worked for one of these station in high school and admire them as well. these station are totaslly dependant on listeners and local businesses and offer the best local support in my experience. The station I worked for was WAY FM in Grand Rapids Michigan. They are able to currently be totally commercial free.

extras:What Stanford professor and lawyer that we have discussed before is mentioned in this essay?
What organization is he the founder of?
What is the "spectrum" that the authors refer to?

Campaign Debate and the struggle for a free press

This clip from the debate shows the what I think is the negative influence of media on elections. I noticed when watching the clip that neither cadidate seemed to really touch on the issues. They were more interested in mudslinging their opponent for their audience. The purpose of a debate is so that we can see a candidate in action, defending their policy with no media bias. The article from the future of media states that many media mediums reflect the interests of the people who run them. I wholeheartedly agree with his statements. I can see this especially in television news and in newspapers. It is hard to stay completely objective without being influenced by those above yet I do not think this is fair. A professional journalist should not have to color the truth because it does not serve the interest of the media establishment in which they are employed. The presidental candidated have a huge opportunity to have their say without any influence from a biased media whatsoever yet I felt that neither candidate took this opportunity. I would like to see less finger-pointing and be told straight from the source what each candidate want to do without a media bias coming from the journalists themselves and the large conglomerates they work for.

Trials of the Public amateur

When looking in the context of the time that this took place, I understand why this happened. I also think that the government was marginally justified in what they did. I do not agree with the reactionary measure that were taken but Kurtz and Ferrell did break the law, no matter what context or what reason they had. Our country was almost in shambles after 9/11 and the whole situation was completely overblown by the FBI. I cannot imagine being treated like that by the people we pay to protect us, especially in the aftermath of losing your wife unexpectedly. They should have seen the obvious instead of freaking out. I believe in artistic expression and the publics right to knowledge as much as the next person but we cannot cross the boundaries laid out for us by the government. We all need to be held to the same standards otherwise, the law becomes useless to us. This was a very complicated situation.

Quiz Over the Cult of the Amateur

Quiz comments

1984: Web 2.0 Style vs. the shopaholic

My mom does a lot of online shopping and at some point over the last year she created a profile on google checkout. a month ago, she went to make a purchase at one of her favorite stores that uses google checkout and found that both her credit and debit cards she has used online had been automatically saved to her profile. She also uses my google and if you sign in, all your google checkout information is accessible. This would not be a problem if it automatically logged out when you close the browser but it doesn't. We also found out that this information is accessible to anyone that uses the computer if you forget to logout of mygoogle by accident. She has periodically used my computer to shop so I unknowingly have her credit card numbers. i went to amazon.com and ordered a book for class and when I went to checkout, her numbers were there on display. This is scary to know that all of this information can be so easily accessed. I do not really know how this service works but my parents freaked out. Anyone could have gotten a hold of this information. I do not trust online shopping and never do it unless forced. Can you imagine the damage that could have been done if this had fallen into the wrong hands? This definitely makes me think it's worth the gas money to just drive to the mall.

I agree with Keen about the dangers of using the Internet. I never put anything online that I do not to be publicly known about myself.

i report vs. CNN

The top stories for today reveal the real contrast between i report and the official CNN website. On CNN, the highlight is the economic crisis and congress and on i-report, the top story was about the new format of facebook. The stories on i-report are more trivial and superficial. The top daily stories on CNN included information from the campaign trail, world affairs and the war while i-report talks about gas prices in Atlanta and dogs. The user-based i-report is obviously not an official news source. The stories seen in i-report were also more locally based and focused on special interests. This sight seems to show how the definition of news is being revolutionized. What is news and what is newsworthy? It looks like anything is up for grabs here.

Look at these highlights from the facebook article:
Facebook's makeover is sparking an outcry among many of its 100 million users
Facebook unveiled its face-lift in July but forced users to new site only two weeks ago
One online petition against the new Facebook has more than 1.5 million names
Others praise the new site as being better organized, easier to navigate

When did a user-based website become worthy news? Is this the future of news? Many people seem more interested in trivial matters like this than cold, hard news.

The Uncovered Truth

Instead of searching for a specific truth on the net I decided to share my personal experience with an uncovered truth. During my freshman year of college at another University, someone broke into a dorm room and set it on fire using a can of harispray. At first, college officials blamed the two boys who owned the room. There was no evidence of an initial break in and it was basically their word against the fore marshall's. If anyone is unfamiliar with setting fire to dorm's, this type of arson is considered a felony and has serious consequences including a hefty amount of jail time. The investigation went on for a few weeks before the whole incident showed up in a u-tube video turned in by an anonymous student. The culprits had videotaped themselves setting the dorm room on fire and uploaded it there. Their faces we hidden but the police were able to use clothing and other clues from the home movie to find the real offenders. How stupid was that? They were so confidant they were not going to get caught that they uploaded their video for thousands to see. I tried to find the video but it has since been removed. This leads me to point out that police have now been searching the internet more and more for criminal evidence. Is this ethical? Should police be able to use u-tube videos as evidence? I think so. The internet is free game for everyone. The largest problem of using evidence gathered on-line is finding its validity. As we have discussed time and time again in class, because of the universal nature of web 2.0, it makes it harder and harder to find truth and to find trustworthy sources.

untruth: Paul B. Doe reported spotting Elvis on the Deutscheplatz near the Arch of Fierflugen in Berlin on July 11, 1991. Doe was among a group of summer backpackers sampling Europe's splendors, cuisine and pests when they stopped at the platz to discuss their next destination. While several members of the group examined leaflets from restaurants in the immediate area, Doe and fellow backpacker, Ryan Got, saw Elvis talking to the driver of a horse-drawn carriage at the far side of the platz. honorelvis.com

Truth from USA TODAY
When Elvis Presley died Aug. 16, 1977, at his cherished Memphis home, a crowd gathered instantly at the whimsical gates of Graceland. Three decades later, dedicated pilgrims are still out there in the sultry Southern sun.

Communications Revolution