jzappa
Three interconnected essentials of human function are the appetitive, spirited, and rational elements. When each of them demonstrate their characteristics, then one is well controlled, and one benefits from synchronization. Just as a well-ordered state is a just state, someone who enjoys harmony among his three basic elements is a perfectly just, morally good, person. Disharmonious persons cannot be truly happy.Anything but harmony amongst these rudiments therefore leads to one not truly being happy. For anyone who seems fair and balanced on the outside but actually is unfair and biased on the inside, the appetitive and spirited elements have become overbearing. One has lost rational control of their actions. Injustice is a party among these elements, their interfering with and disturbing each other's functions.For Murdoch and the FOX News people, the appetitive element wins out, leading to the accumulation of greater wealth, pleasure, and power. But when the appetitive exceeds its limit, no longer managed rationally, these people may have overabundant amounts of money, luxury, clout, and privilege, yet with the pressures of the immoral things they do for them. Their appetitive have conquered their rational, evidenced by their lifestyles that suffer internal imbalance. They are not happy, albeit they enjoy relative freedom from legal prosecution.Some of them have spirited rudiments fulfilling their appetitive rather than rational. They're most obstinate in on-air confrontations and actually love those moments. The spirited element is a cause for stubbornness and spite, increasing their own inconsistency. One only lies to oneself to deny that Bill O'Reilly fills his head with false information. O'Reilly bears a strained spirited element.Because Fox is dishonest and biased among other things, none of them can be as happy as an actual journalist. You know, people who actually report the news. However, none of the FOX News people seem unhappy. This is because each one inside has a differing sense of happiness and a narrow conception of infighting. FOX News is astonishingly calculatedly insincere. Notice their phrasing pattern: "Some people say" rather than "officials say," what real journalists are trained to say. FOX "Liberals" are centrists, weaker speakers and less attractive than the Conservatives, who are always cleancut, outspoken. They buckle defensively, appearing to generally agree with the intractable Conservatives.Murdoch inherited a newspaper before his first magazine, first TV station, first record label, second TV station, first politician, airline, publishing house, cable channel and ultimately in the'80s, MetroMedia. Murdoch, who adored Reagan and the Republican Congress, ordered MetroMedia to up and adjourn their newscast and air a party-lined homage to Reagan airing at the RNC. Murdoch subsequently complained about coverage of race issues, AIDS, and the Kennedys. MetroMedia argues that it has 0 news value. Murdoch overpowers, not even allowing them to cut it down. Roger Ailes, campaign strategist for Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Sr., is appointed CEO & Chairman, announcing they "aspire to be premier journalists and restore objectivity where they find it lacking."FOX is in constant attack mode during Clinton's final term. The first person to call to say George W. Bush has been elected President of the United States is James Ellis, the man in charge of the FOX News election analysis division, where people crunch the polls. He is also Bush's first cousin. Around 2am, new data comes in from all over Florida showing that the numbers are too close to call a clear winner. Ellis calls it a clear win for George W. Bush. FOX then interrupts its ongoing election coverage to announce this. Within minutes, ABC, NBC, and CBS follow, not having time to clear that data. Weeks later when suspicions are at a boiling point, Ailes issues an apology.Richard Clarke states at a 9/11 Commission hearing that the government, including himself, has failed, asking understanding and forgiveness. FOX muds his name, calling him a Liberal flip-flopper just out to sell his book. All of Murdoch's 175 newspapers editorialize in favor of the Iraq War.Malicious, insensitive and all in all unforgivable monster O'Reilly has on his show Jeremy Glick, a young man whose father died on 9/11 who organized an anti-war petition. Glick prepares by taping each show and timing the amount of time it takes before O'Reilly cuts off his guests, infuriating O'Reilly with his competence and finally cuts his mike and cuts to commercial, threatens him, and execs encourage Glick to leave the building promptly because if O'Reilly sees him in the hallway, "he may end up in jail for assault." The next day, O'Reilly makes Glick out as a monster who claimed Bush planned 9/11. Months later, O'Reilly revisits this, claiming that that's not only "looney" but "defamation."What makes Outfoxed a competent documentary is its refusal to go on its word. Stock footage after stock footage pinpoints the blatant slant, the almost laughable level of preposterous untruthfulness and delusional superiority. It is difficult to build a solid argument against this documentary.
Stephen Alfieri
For anyone who has cable, and is therefore exposed to the Fox network, there really is no need to view this movie. Anything that you may want to know about Fox can be learned by watching any of the shows on this channel for a week."Outfoxed" is a well made documentary that offers an alternative perspective to how Rupert Murdoch and the rest of "the boys" at Fox view the media and it's role. Journalists expect a news network to be objective, and report on what's happening without providing a slanted view of the news. Rupert Murdoch believes that the media should act as advocate for a cause, or idea, or a man (in this case George Bush).I'm willing to bet that anyone who sees this film will not "convert to the other side". I don't think that there are going to be too many people who see this film, who will not already have decided whether or not they agree that Fox is "Fair and Balanced"But despite the well intentions of the film makers, there is ultimately nothing new that is offered as fresh perspective, in this film. 6 out of 10
