Neiled Again

The Outfoxed gals specialize in deceit and chicanery, but sometimes they're tripped up by simple ignorance.

Attention all Fox-haters: 'tis the season to be dishonest. That could apply all year round to the anti-Fox terriers who call themselves the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed mob). Here are a few pickings from the canine grapevine. We first find chrish irate about a Big Story interview with Mary Matalin:
No opposing view, no one to point out her errors, no one to defend Democratic principles and policies. Fair and balanced? HA!

Here, of course, the newspooches claim a peculiar standard. All interviews must be conducted in pairs--sort of like a tv version of Noah's Ark. This is a standard no one has ever suggested taints Meet the Press or Face the Nation. And it's a standard that the newspoodles only seem to raise when it's a Republican getting interviewed. When it's Howard Dean, then the lack of an opposing view is "a refreshing change" from the usual "nonsense". Should the interviewee be Rosie O'Donnell, then the lack of an opposing view is a "refreshing experience".

It is also interesting to note the two interviews that aired just prior to the one with Ms Matalin. Neither Sheila Jackson Lee nor Mike Farrell was paired with an "opposing view".

Was it merely an oversight that the newspups neglected to tell their readers about this? What accounts for their lack of outrage at the absence of an "opposing view"? When it comes to smearing Fox, ethical rules do not apply. Melanie pulls a similar trick when she complains:
Friday morning (December 9, 2005), the news wires carried a story about a new web ad unveiled yesterday by the Republican National Committee titled, "Retreat and Defeat."... The right wing media machine was clicking on all cylinders yesterday. With Fox's help, the GOP's new "web ad" went from being a "web ad " to being a TV ad, and reaching hundreds of thousands more people, in a matter of hours.

Even though Fox only ran a portion of the ad that teed off a discussion that included voices both pro and con (the latter conveniently omitted by Mel), the credulous rushed to gulp down the Kool-Aid:
  • Fox News and other conservative outlets will run these ads repeatedly as a "news report" once it's on their web site."
  • Another cheap shot by Fox to air the ad. Do they really think they are fooling anyone --let alone changing anyone's mind (anyone with an IQ bigger than there hat size that is).
  • Has this appeared on any other "News" networks as a news story about a "Web Ad" or just Fox? They really wil [sic] sink to new lows on any given day won't they?

For some reason, Melanie never bothered to answer that question. Perhaps she didn't want her gullible kennel-dwellers to know that CNN ran a clip from the ad on Anderson Cooper 360, and even more from the ad aired courtesy of Wolf Blitzer. This must be another "cheap shot" from CNN. They really will "sink to new lows on any given day, won't they?". We won't even bother with all the times clips were shown on MSNBC, since who saw them anyhow?

But we close with another example of one of the hallmarks of the newshounds: incompetence. And once again it's Melanie, who manages to squeeze more ignorance into a couple of paragraphs than any other Fox-hater. She asks the question:
Is Neil Gabler Really on Vacation?

Mr Gabler, it will be recalled, is the panelist on Fox News Watch who argued against the "War on Christmas". As such he became a hero for the hounds who believe that the birth of Christ is just so much "nonsense". Melanie continues:
On December 10, Fox News Watch host Eric Burns introduced the panel, sans Gabler. According to Burns, Gabler was "vacationing" and he was being replaced by CeCi Connolly...

"CeCi" Connolly? Is Mel's Caps Lock acting up again?
...of the ultra-conservative Washington Times.... why didn't Fox replace Gabler, even if only temporarily, with someone of Gabler's ilk instead of someone from the Fox-like Washington Times?

Connolly's work at the "ultra-conservative Washington Times" will come as a surprise to the people at the Washington Post.
Is Neil Gabler really "vacationing"? Could it be that he is being eased out for committing the ultimate sin on Fox - telling the truth?

Once again, the Kool-Aid concession is immediately swamped with customers:
  • Safe bet Gabler's gone. When your positions are largely indefensible, like their "war on" (Christmas, in Iraq, Liberalism, Hollywood "elites"... fill in the blank), and so EASY to demolish, they can ill afford to give air-time to someon [sic] as articulate as Gabler.
  • They're having a Soviet-style purge
  • Neil's has been skatin' on thin ice for a while now.
  • Gabler's been banished to the "Phantom Zone"

Unfortunately, Melanie's entire premise is, like the rest of her article, hilariously wrong. Not only was it announced on the program that Mr Gabler would be back next week, but then someone else had to go and spoil Mel's fantasy:
  • Neal is on vacation. I know, because I tried to reach him after seeing last weekend's News Watch dustup on one of the media websites and was told by a family member that he was away.

Oops. Another embarrassing error. Well, at least she spelled Neal Gabler's name right.

Oh, wait. Never mind.

posted: Mon - December 12, 2005 at 12:25 PM       j$p  send