You Don't Say!


The Outfoxed gals try to pull a fast one (or two, or three), but they've been caught in the act, again. With J$P Video!

As we have pointed out, there are many ways to lie. One of the favorites of the Fox haters is the lie of omission, the tactic that uses cherry-picking and selective editing to paint a false picture. The masters of this form of mendacity are the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed cabal). In a classic example from newspup Ellen, they set out to paint Megyn Kendall as a flack for the Duke LaCross defense attorneys. The best way to do that is with the lie of omission:
Megyn Kendall Still Stumping For Duke Lacrosse Players' Defense... [Quoting Kendall]: “The ID of Finnerty was pretty powerful, if you read it. She didn’t hesitate and she teared up. And I will tell you – you know, it’s interesting. Standing at that press conference today with David Evans – it was powerful. I mean, he was compelling. Obviously, he’s a good-looking guy. He spoke extemporaneously and there’s something moving about watching him with his parents.”

Now to the newsmutts, that is not balanced. But just to make sure Kendall's comments are misrepresented, they stop the quote at that point. What are they not telling us? [QuickTime video clip]:



Now why do you suppose they left that part out? Three guesses. But Ellen isn't through distorting. Regarding the importance of the mustache:
Kendall, of course, said it was, then stuck in another defense talking point – again, unrelated to amything [sic] Colmes asked – that “the defense lawyers were clear today to point out – that (Evans’ DNA) was not found underneath the nail, according to them."

What are they not telling us this time? It may have been unrelated to anything Colmes asked, but the point wasn't introduced by Kendall. It was raised by Kimberly Guilfoyle. What, she was there? You'd never know it by reading the newspoodles [QuickTime video clip]:



So by pretending Guilfoyle wasn't even there, they can claim that Kendall stuck in a defense point out of thin air, when the issue had actually been raised by the pro-prosecution Guilfoyle!

And then we have little Janie, who has suddenly acquired a deep sensitivity over issues of language usage:
[Brit] Hume attempted to make [Tony] Snow the victim in all of this and took his side, despite the heavy racial connotations that come along with use of the phrase "tar baby".

It's nice to know Janie is so concerned with "heavy racial connotations", but oddly enough, that was never the case before. On the newshound site itself, the phrase "tar baby" has been used repeatedly. For example:
  • Karl Rove has troubles of his own, but his job is to slime people and he's going to be more busy than a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest trying smear each Republican who wants to get away from the Bush tar baby.

During this discussion, the very same newspooch--Janie--posted repeatedly, but it's what she didn't say that matters. She never uttered one word about the "heavy racial connotations" of that phrase. Oops. But something strange happened in just the past few hours. Here is that page as it appeared yesterday:



And here is that page as it appears now:



Yes! No sooner do the newshounds decide to whip up a storm about "tar baby", then they rush to scrub from their site proof that the phrase had previously been perfectly acceptable! Now why do you suppose that is? Then we have deceitful Donna, who raises selective editing to a fine art:
they've even gone so far as cutting off a Democratic guest who was speaking about the disaster that Iraq has become by inserting a Fox News Alert that wasn't anywhere near an alert....
Dick Harpootlian: We need to get out of Iraq. They can't put a government over there. It's a bunch of tribes that will never see democracy. (overtalk)
Hemmer: Hey, Dick, I apologize. We have some breaking news out of Durham, NC.
Comment: The problem with that 'breaking news' or 'Fox News Alert?' There was none.... Tthere [sic] was no new news.... All they said at this juncture was that they were waiting for news to come out of Durham, NC.

Well, that's more than selective editing; it's a flat-out, card-carrying lie. The alert was not that they were "waiting for news", but that there was news about the grand jury [QuickTime video clip]:



Donna goes on to claim that "talking about how the Iraq war draining all of our resources to work effectively at home is forbidden on Fox", and that's that. End of discussion. But what are they not telling us this time? [QuickTime video clip]:



That's right, immediately after the 30-second update for grand jury news, they went right back to the discussion and picked up where they left off! Now why do you suppose they left that out? Because their aim is to smear rather than tell the truth. When you're a Fox hater, it's often not what you say that counts, it's what you don't say.

posted: Wed - May 17, 2006 at 01:19 PM       j$p  send 
|