Fed up with Fox News, fight back!

July 27, 2007 4:10 AM

They distort, we reply.Fed up with Fox News? Time to fight back.
posted by grahamwell (81 comments total)

Although this is a US initiative, I believe this could be particularly effective in Europe, where Sky seems to have done a multi-channel package deal with advertisers. These advertisers, I believe, have no idea that their ads appear on Fox and no concept of the company they are keeping. Here's hoping we can make a difference.
posted by grahamwell at 4:14 AM on July 27, 2007

This will grahamwell.

Seriously though, mad props to the Republicans (and their tools) for character assassinating the Internet and any online grass root movement before the 2008 election. People who read blogs are now akin to God hating evolutionists. Too bad Fox forgets that they'll need people to read their blogs (video or otherwise) as TV goes tits up.
posted by furtive at 4:26 AM on July 27, 2007

These advertisers, I believe, have no idea that their ads appear on Fox and no concept of the company they are keeping.

They know exactly where their ads appear and exactly with whom they are dealing. Fox has its audience and those zombies respond to advertising better than any other viewers on the planet. Easily-influenced, validation-hungry, well-heeled, loyal Republican viewers/listeners give ad-based, broadcasting a very strong business model.

JetBlue better watch its ass, but Fox and Sky are unlikely to be affected by any sort of advertiser-directed protest coming from lefties.
posted by three blind mice at 4:36 AM on July 27, 2007

I love Fox news! I judge a news program by the ladies that give us the news and stories and Fox wins! the news? why worry. As Blitzer of CNN says:You're in the Situation Room. And I thought I was in my living room.
posted by Postroad at 4:39 AM on July 27, 2007

Coincidentally, I just came from their site seconds ago. I started watching the "Fox Attacks: The Environment" video, but the amount of stupid (on the part of Fox) in it caused me to black out. When I woke up, I was here.
posted by DU at 4:41 AM on July 27, 2007

Shut up, shut up! Just shut up!!
posted by RavinDave at 4:42 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

If they want to pick this fight with the progressive blogosphere, they’re going to get it.

I'm sorry, I hate Fox as much as the next man and debunking their shit is important, but when you're labelling yourself as a part of the 'progressive blogosphere' you need a good kicking. I can just imagine this guy running around wearing a red cape saying shit like 'Let’s see how he feels when a few hundred thousand of us start calling his sponsors...' Blogotron UNITE!

Web 2.0 is great and all, but perspective on reality is better.
posted by slimepuppy at 4:48 AM on July 27, 2007 [5 favorites has favorites]

Too bad Fox forgets that they'll need people to read their blogs (video or otherwise) as TV goes tits up.

This message brought to you by MetaFilter a proud MediaCorp subsidiary.

With all the Freepers and Farkers out there typing insighful dialogue like, "Glass Parking Lot!!1!" I'd say they have plenty of bloggers to keep them afloat. And should Murdock's empire begin to fade, I'm sure some well placed millions to buy out a few of the more popular blogs will fix that for him.
posted by Pollomacho at 4:49 AM on July 27, 2007

Blast Murdoch with a flamethrower, & his sons, then move on down the pecking order, one at a time, till you get to fucktards like O'Lielly at the finish. Live. On air. All stations & affiliates. Bang bang bang bang bang bang *click* *click* /throw

That's the only way to sort out this pack of petty bourgeois Goebbels-clones. Fuck the advertisers.

/slam
posted by Henry C. Mabuse at 4:50 AM on July 27, 2007

Making fun of Fox viewers is not polite.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:51 AM on July 27, 2007

Seriously though, mad props to the Republicans (and their tools) for character assassinating the Internet and any online grass root movement before the 2008 election.

Apparently, they're now going to skip the YouTube debate as well. Because, apparently, the internet has a liberal bias.

Oh, and because Giuliani's a chickenshit among chickenshits who's scared to death of being confronted by firemen.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:55 AM on July 27, 2007

When I was seven and one of the smallest, shyest kids in class, I was picked on pretty regularly by the local bullies. They were a general cross section of upper-middle class kids, the sort of boys who excelled in sports and school, confident even then that they'd be banging the homecoming queen in ten years. They'd knock me over, steal my GI Joes, and generally be jerks. So one day, on my father's advice, I stood up to them.

I stood up, yelled, and swung my little seven year old fists. For the first time, my knuckles impacted cheek. I declared that I'd tell on them, that the teacher would punish them and not let them go on the upcoming field trip. My dad said that if I just stood up for myself, the bullies would go for easier targets.

Instead, they made me eat General Hawk's head. Turns out GI Joe plastic is surprisingly flavorless, not like the rugged grit or saddle leather you'd expect from a Real American Hero. The more you know, I guess.

Once I passed the head, I hoped it would be over. I stood up, said I wasn't going to take it any more, and even fought back. I tattled on them, sure, and they even got detention out of it. Hawk remained headless. No replacement was forthcoming.

As you can probably guess by now, the torment did not stop there. They provoked a reaction and they liked it. Why bother to seek out new prey when they had a prime whipping boy right in front of them? I had tried to fight back, tried to draw attention to their shit, and even tried to speak in their language, violence. But despite that, nothing changed. Simply put, I was smaller and weaker than them. I did not have their allies, be they other students or teachers well aware of Who Their Dad Is. They had power and influence and I had the severed head of General Hawk doing an Al Jolson impression. I was not to be feared.

I could rant and rail and nothing, nothing would change.

I'd like to say that I enacted some fiendish revenge plot, but I didn't. Time has a way of passing bullies by, though. Their antics get older and less exciting as time goes on. Many of them move out of that phase and Grow Up. The best of them shake their heads and apologize (an act of humility that is the key to the homecoming queen's gate). The worst keep acting like bullies, forced to bigger and more ludicrous actions to get noticed.

Eventually they become the jokes themselves. Nobody regards them as a threat to much of anything, let alone gives them the respect that they once had. They wave their arms harder and shout names til they're blue in the face, desperate to be noticed, to be regarded as the threat, the influence they once were. They live for the moments when people react to them, their ears quivering, mouths suddenly wet with saliva at an "Oh, yeah?" from down the bar.

It's only by provoking a reaction that bullies, trolls, and pundits know that they're alive, that they still got it. Deny them that reaction and they fall, deep into their own limbo, until the day they wake up and realize what they are, what they have become, that they have nothing and no one to listen to them and keep them company.

Not even a headless General Hawk.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 4:55 AM on July 27, 2007 [24 favorites has favorites]

HCM: I wish to subscribe to your new cable channel.
posted by i_cola at 4:57 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

Oh yeah? When I was in the 1st grade the class bully used to steal my twinkies at lunch. Until the day my mom had the great idea of packing the inside of my twinkies with peas and black pepper.

After mean little Larry finished running in screaming circles around the playground spitting out bits of twinkie and gobs of peppery peas, he not only never bothered me again. No one did.

I signed up. I want to do any little thing I can to fight back.
posted by spitbull at 5:07 AM on July 27, 2007 [7 favorites has favorites]

How many people visit Daily Kos vs. how many watch Fox News each day? Is this really such a hopeless undertaking? (I'm responding to slimepuppy's objection.) I know Atrios sometimes posts ratings info for cable news shows and IIRC, Bill O's numbers weren't that impressive.
posted by Eyebeams at 5:08 AM on July 27, 2007

OK, at least in terms of total viewers for that channel, Fox News has pretty impressive numbers. So maybe this isn't a fair fight. I'm still signing up.
posted by Eyebeams at 5:19 AM on July 27, 2007

That link to sign up isn't working for me. I never take part in these sorts of herd-like movements, but just this once I am not too proud to become a "Fox Attacker", and now I can't...
posted by creasy boy at 5:23 AM on July 27, 2007

(BullyFilter: A friend spent 3 months on remand at HMP Wormwood Scrubs (notorious prison in west London) and was picked on after being there for a few days.

He was advised to fight back otherwise he'd end up as somebody's prison bitch so he waited until dinner and as he walked past his new nemesis he slammed him in the face with a metal water jug. The three days in solitary was worth not being picked on any more.

I think that the moral of the story is to fight back but to make sure you pick your moment. And don't end up in prison in the first place, of course.)
posted by i_cola at 5:27 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Whitehouse_v_Chafee_on_Fox.jpg
http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Fox_Foley_Label.jpg
http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Libby_not_guilty.jpg
http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/1237/Specter_Democrat_hume.jpg

Let us remember that FOX News is the organisation that successfully defended itself in court by arguing that falsifying the news isn't against the law and that therefore firing reporters for refusing to lie on-air isn't a case of wrongful firing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:32 AM on July 27, 2007 [5 favorites has favorites]

OK, the link from firedoglake is a different URL and it worked for me.
posted by creasy boy at 5:33 AM on July 27, 2007

Don't get me wrong Eyebeams, it's definitely a worthy undertaking and I think it's not completely hopeless, but the self-aggrandizing writing style of some of the contributors makes me want to associate myself with someone more rooted in reality with the ability for reasoned discourse.
posted by slimepuppy at 5:57 AM on July 27, 2007

I dunno. This site seems too...convenient.

My tinfoil hat is making me think this website is a strawman "attack site" set-up by Fox to "defend" itself against. Why rely on legitimate lefty sites to occasionally give you good fodder when you can just create your own source of purpose-shat fodder?
posted by Thorzdad at 6:04 AM on July 27, 2007

People are always ready to boycott things they weren't interested in anyway.

If you really want to stick it to FOX, don't go see the Simpsons movie.

Or the new Wes Anderson movie.

Uh-huh. That will happen.
posted by Legomancer at 6:24 AM on July 27, 2007 [4 favorites has favorites]

The revolution against right-wing blowhards has begun. It's an inside job. I can't think of anything better to happen to Nancy Grace.
posted by boo_radley at 6:32 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

Good god, I haven't really seen FOX 'news' for more than a few seconds at a time while walking from terminal to terminal at the airport. Watching that little embedded clip-thingy really brought it home-- news channels nowadays are very, very stupid.

The people who are on that channel should be taken out and shot just for being so goddamned idiotic.
posted by koeselitz at 6:39 AM on July 27, 2007

Sounds like NewsHounds.
posted by caddis at 6:46 AM on July 27, 2007

Wow, how is this post not deleted? I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying, you know, in light of recent deletions...
posted by Deathalicious at 6:47 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

caddis: Or Media Whores Online.
posted by dhartung at 7:02 AM on July 27, 2007

Wow, how is this post not deleted? I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying, you know, in light of recent deletions...

because this post actually points to a useful website, not a news story, not a youboob video, not a blog entry, but an actual website the likes of which have been posted here since 1999.
posted by caddis at 7:09 AM on July 27, 2007

Boycotts almost never are successful; think of how well O’Reilly's boycotts went.

The advertisers know full well the kind of people who watch Fox News: either rich and well off, or relatively less well off but possibly more prone to consumerist buying tendencies.

Compare that to progressive bloggers and their readership: these are people who try to recycle old junk into new furniture, buy local whenever possible, and tend to shun corporations. These people buy most of their stuff off the internet from eBay, they know the cheapest price for anything and won't pay more than 1% over wholesale. These are people who fly JetBlue, for pete's sake! The truth is, advertisers on Fox are there because they want to be there, they want the customers that watch Fox, and they're selling the kinds of items that these people want. The only companies that wouldn't advertise on Fox are those that know that their main base of customers are the kind of people who don't watch it (I'm guessing Apple doesn't do much advertising on Fox; neither would Working Assets).

And, in the end, are you really going to give up your cereal, pain killer, or health insurance just because of some ads on TV? Most people won't.
posted by Deathalicious at 7:09 AM on July 27, 2007

Boycotts almost never are successful; think of how well O’Reilly's boycotts went.

are you kidding? the mere threat of right wing boycotts have managed to get shows canceled, news anchors fired, products taken off the market. boycotts got mcdonald's to stop using beef fat to cook their french fries, and a ton of other things have been accomplished through boycotts.

this statement is crap. it's just not true.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:21 AM on July 27, 2007

<sarcasm>Yes, because FOX news is biased in a way that most other media in America isn't.</sarcasm>
posted by blue_beetle at 7:29 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

My tinfoil hat is making me think this website is a strawman "attack site" set-up by Fox to "defend" itself against. Why rely on legitimate lefty sites to occasionally give you good fodder when you can just create your own source of purpose-shat fodder?

It's a subdomain on the website of Brave New Films, Robert "Outfoxed" Greenwald's production company. It's as legit as legit gets.

Boycotts almost never are successful; think of how well O’Reilly's boycotts went.

There's a big difference between "I want my thousands of viewers to boycott now!" and "Let's harass the shit out of FOX's advertisers every time FOX does something outrageous." One is masturbation. The other is a proven tactic which has stripped several advertisers and radio stations away from the likes of Dr. Laura and Michael Savage. Bothering the advertisers works.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:43 AM on July 27, 2007

Yes, because FOX news is biased in a way that most other media in America isn't.

All US media is relentlessly pro-corporate and profit-driven, because all US media is owned by corporations and operated for a profit. It's a pretty easy equation. If you want the news to not be pro-corporate and profit-driven, require all news outlets to be independant and not-for-profit. (OMGIES COMMUNAZIISM!)
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:45 AM on July 27, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]

I kind of find Fox News comforting.

It's like the Soviets used to regard their newspapers: Yes, they're full of lies, but at least you know it's all lies. With other news sources, you never know what you're getting.
posted by fungible at 8:04 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

GYOB. As much as I agree with the premise, posts that are little more than rallying cries for your pet political agenda are not what Metafilter is for.
posted by mkultra at 8:10 AM on July 27, 2007

"Bill O'Reilly said on his show last night that come this Monday [July 30] he is going to destroy DailyKos. Why? Because O'Reilly and FOX can't handle that they're no longer the only game in town. The liberal blogs pose a serious threat to FOX's monopoly on partisan news, and FOX is running scared. So they've decided to try to destroy us by quoting some of the crazies that visit our sites and leave the rare crazy comment. FOX is hoping that they can convince the public, and our sponsors, that we're akin to the Nazis and the KKK (O'Reilly actually said this) because a couple loons leave nasty quotes on our sites.

Fine, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It's time to apply the same standards to FOX and its sponsors. Just this past week, Bill O'Reilly's Web site contained threats against the life of Hillary Clinton, suggested that someone should launch a terror strike against the US Capitol building, and labeled the world's one billion Muslims as members of a cult. Forget the KKK and the Nazis, murdering a presidential candidate and assassinating 535 members of Congress sounds just like Osama bin Laden.

And who supports and enables this hateful un-American crap? Home Depot, jetBlue and scores of other American companies. Well, we're in a war on terror, and Home Depot and jetBlue need to decide whose side they're on - the side of the terrorists and the anti-religious bigots or the side of real Americans. We need to go whole hog against these companies until they stop supporting people who think the best response to Hillary is a loaded gun."*
posted by ericb at 8:10 AM on July 27, 2007

Fox Attacks: Bloggers.

"As part of his Fox Attacks series, Robert Greenwald has a new video compiling Fox News’ assault on the progressive blogosphere. The network’s hosts and guests have attacked bloggers as 'radical Internet assassins,' 'McCarthyism,' and 'conspiracy-driven.' Watch it.

posted by ericb at 8:14 AM on July 27, 2007

perspective on reality is better

but wholly missing amongst denizens of the "blogosphere".
posted by quonsar at 8:38 AM on July 27, 2007

After reading this post, I was worried about the impact it might be having on the only decent news source on TV. Then I went to check the cable news ratings.

I'm not worried anymore.
posted by tadellin at 8:47 AM on July 27, 2007

After reading this post, I was worried about the impact it might be having on the only decent news source on TV. Then I went to check the cable news ratings.

tadellin is comforted by the fact that a tactic which isn't underway yet hasn't yet harmed FOX News. This says rather a lot about tadellin.
posted by Pope Guilty at 9:06 AM on July 27, 2007

So the proper yardstick for a news organization is popularity rather than accuracy and impartiality?
posted by trondant at 9:08 AM on July 27, 2007

So the proper yardstick for a news organization is popularity rather than accuracy and impartiality?

What are you even talking about?
posted by Pope Guilty at 9:13 AM on July 27, 2007

I would do this but I have a bad case of outrage fatigue, since oh, about December 2004.
posted by PostIronyIsNotaMyth at 9:32 AM on July 27, 2007

Pope Guilty, I think trondant was responding to tadellin.
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:34 AM on July 27, 2007

How come no one is calling for a boycott of the Simpsons movie?

It's Murdock's other ventures like the Fox Network, 20th Century Fox, and Direct TV that allow him to operate Fox News without fear of taking a loss on advertising revenue.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:42 AM on July 27, 2007

*tumbleweed*
posted by quonsar at 9:56 AM on July 27, 2007

robocop is bleeding I have anecdote with results diametrically opposed to yours. Standing up IS the thing to do. But you have to it right. Confronting injustice with righteous indignation only works in the movies. Revenge, however. Revenge WORKS.

I too was skinny and bullied. In 7th grade my nickname was "super-weed." I was a spastic assemblage of licorice whips with braces, headgear, a bowl haircut and my mom dressed me.

(I wrestled at 105lbs as a sophomore in high school. I was also 5' 9". Imagine that. This did not improve until college.)

There were several bullies who picked on us. Of all of them Tom Tricket was the worst. Mostly becuase of the level of humiliation he added to the mix. Before school, and the only time he got to school early, was so he could take shit in one of the back bathrooms. He would not flush. He was the only kid I ever knew who took a shit at school. This was part of a meticulous plan. So during lunch he, and his toadies, would drag you back into the back bathroom stall and force you head fist into his soaking pile of shit. Tom Tricket was 160lbs and had chest hair at 12. Tom Tricket was getting head from high school chicks. Tom tricket would put out a Swisher Sweet on your forehead.

Tom Tricket was pure evil.

One day I was on the monkey bars. And Tom, attracted by sounds of joy, came to impose fear. I was already hanging from the middle (old school monkey bars were four or five feet off the ground, remember) when he came under me and grabbed my legs. "Let go, Faggot!" he yelled. I wouldn't. He hung from my legs and began yanking.

"Fuck you!" I yelled down to him. I had one super power. I could climb like a monkey and could do maybe 30 pull-ups. I had a grip of steel.

Tricket began jumping up and down trying to punch me in the nuts. He couldn't quite reach. So he sent his toady, Matt, to climb up the monkey bars over the top above me. Matt spit on my hands. Then began hitting and stomping on my fingers. Both of them were screaming "Faggot!" While they did this. A crowd gathered. I clung for quite some time. But there is only so much 11 year old knuckles can take. My grip gave. As it did, Tricket still clutching my legs, whipped me into the black top face first. Then he soccer kicked me. But I couldn't feel it.

For weeks I plotted revenge. Occasionally I would run into Tricket and he would try to reinforce the terror he thought he had instilled in me. But the only thing I felt was white hot rage. Not fear.

One day I saw him ride a new 5-speed to school. Sparkly and new. I had never ditched a class before. But that day I did. And while he was at class I pulled out every spoke on his bike and pulled out the seat and tossed up on the awning of the school.

When he discovered it he went on a terror campaign trying to find out who did it. But nobody knew. I would drop notes in his locker. "Pretty bike." "Want to go on a bike ride?" and shit like that. It made him insane. His family was poor so I knew this was a big deal.

My father, too, gave me advise. But his was much different. If somebody bigger than you is bullying you? Wait until they are not paying attention and hit them with a stick. My old man was an expert in counter insurgency fighting. There was no fighting fair.

I decided I needed a weapon. I began bringing my brothers heavy aluminum T2000 tennis racket to school. It wouldn't draw suspicion from the teachers and I could keep it my locker. But I had to catch him alone. Which wasn't easy.

One day after soccer practice I saw him in the blackberry bushes making out with some girl. So I went and got my bike and racket and waited. After a while they split up. He began walking home on the side walk in back of the school. So I rode after him and circled the block coming the opposite direction.

I caught him pausing at the end of a drive way. I was turning the corner in front of him so he didn't have time to prepare. I swung the racket with one arm, edge on, right into his mouth as he was about to say "faggot". I don't think he even knew who it was. The blow tipped me over but I didn't fall. My bike crashed between my feet. He was covering his mouth and I hit him about ten more times in the back of the head, face, and back with the metal edge of the racket. I kicked and I spit. I threw gravel. I even threw my bike on him. And when he started crying I left.

I honestly don't think he ever knew who it was. I think that doubt plagued him as he never fucked with me again. At least not like before. He was still an asshole. But he didn't humiliate people with the same cocky imperviousness.
posted by tkchrist at 10:17 AM on July 27, 2007 [5 favorites has favorites]

Yeah, seriously, why would left-leaning counterculturalists boycott Fox News? Isn't that like stupidly easy? It's like, Let's all boycott US Weekly while we're at it. Because I know you're all reading US Weekly.

If you're going to boycott something (and I'm saying this from the perspective of a person in the advertising business), boycott CNN or MSNBC. The networks that are pandering to you but are failing. They, more than Fox rely on your data to get sales from advertising media buyers.

I can tell you straight up: Fox doesn't give a fuck if you boycott them. They would care if the Christian right boycotted them. They would care if senior citizens boycotted them.

Go after the news sources that rely on your segment dollars. Boycott bad shows on CNN. Boycott bad PBS specials. If NPR fucks up let them know. But not Fox.
posted by Stan Chin at 10:18 AM on July 27, 2007

tkchrist -- your story brings to mind the scene in a "Christmas Story" where Ralphie having had enough of bullying flips out and wails on red-headed bully Scut Farkus.
posted by ericb at 10:26 AM on July 27, 2007

Note: Names were changes to protect the innocent.

I here this guy is a decent member of society now.
posted by tkchrist at 10:31 AM on July 27, 2007

hear.
posted by tkchrist at 10:34 AM on July 27, 2007

Stan Chin - How about if we boycott Bill O's regular advertisers?
posted by Eyebeams at 11:24 AM on July 27, 2007

The thing is, THIS IS NOT A BOYCOTT. This has nothing to do with withholding our purchases from FOX. This is harassing and bothering FOX's advertisers and hitting FOX News where it hurts: advertising dollars.

Boycotts are drive-by shootings. Stripping away advertisers? That's precision bombing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:28 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

tkchrist, as someone who was bullied constantly and severely for several years, that was damn satisfying.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:32 AM on July 27, 2007

But as I said above, Murdock could care less about the advertisers on Fox News, he can run Direct TV and Wall Street Journal ads to fill empty station breaks and he'll still be raking in millions from Simpsons swag purchased by the very same demographic that is posting in this thread.
posted by Pollomacho at 11:33 AM on July 27, 2007

I'm confused on how that isn't a boycott. I sort of get the "go after their advertisers" argument, but I think that my original post still applies in that regard.

The advertising buys for O'Reilly, Hannity and Colmes, etcetera are finely tuned to their respective audiences. If I may build an analogy, it's like if the audience for WWE RAW decided to go after the advertisers on Desperate Housewives.

They're completely different demographics. On Desperate Housewives you'll get a lot of 'female friendly' ads for Special K, while on WWE Raw you're going to get a lot of Fast Food ads. If the fans of WWE Raw decided to go after Special K, do you think Special K would be all that concerned? Wrestling fans were not buying Special K in the first place. It just doesn't do much good.

That's the gist of my view, I may be misinterpreting.
posted by Stan Chin at 11:38 AM on July 27, 2007

As I just got off the phone from yelling and threatening the job of someone who doesn't even work for me, I can totally grok your vibe, tkchrist. I would have loved to been the guy swinging the racket down on the local bully. Hell, I can close my eyes and imagine the sweet, sweet thunk of metal on head. That must have felt great.

The only downside is, I'd want the bully to know it was me who did it. Otherwise I'm still hiding, still on some level, afraid of them and their reaction, which is just the sort of behavior they desire.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 11:40 AM on July 27, 2007

They're completely different demographics. On Desperate Housewives you'll get a lot of 'female friendly' ads for Special K, while on WWE Raw you're going to get a lot of Fast Food ads. If the fans of WWE Raw decided to go after Special K, do you think Special K would be all that concerned? Wrestling fans were not buying Special K in the first place. It just doesn't do much good.

The difference is that most advertisers don't want to get calls every day demanding to know whether or not they support, as the presence of their advertising suggests, the sort of noxious stuff that gets broadcast on FOX. Imagine that every time O'Reilly or Hannity or somesuch says something racist or classist or just plain offensive, your company gets deluged with calls complaining that you're supporting it. There's always other places to spend advertising dollars, but a reputation for supporting a particular point of view is awfully hard to shake.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:44 AM on July 27, 2007

If people want to do that, I think more power to them. But it's a tremendous amount of effort before a group can get enough steam to go from 'fringe crazies' to a large enough lobby like PETA. If this movement can get going and accomplish its goals and get some PR, then hey, great! It worked for Nike sweatshops and lots of other things.

My only point is that, I think a far more easier and more effective strategy would be to go after CNN and call them out. Let them know that they're losing the last of their viewers, and that they should seriously reconsider their copycatting of Fox News. Because Fox does it so much better than CNN, and if CNN started being a real news channel they'd get a lot of money.
posted by Stan Chin at 11:56 AM on July 27, 2007

If you're going to boycott something (and I'm saying this from the perspective of a person in the advertising business), boycott CNN or MSNBC. The networks that are pandering to you but are failing.

Stan Chin:
This statement is 100% confused, and seems to indicate that you are neither a leftist, a liberal, or a progressive (whatever the "you" is referring to up there), and that further, you haven't spent even 5 minutes trying to watch CNN or MSNBC. No leftist could assume that CNN or MSNBC has any interesting in pandering to them (I assume that is what you must mean by "you," in this context). And no viewer of CNN or MSNBC could seriously think those stations were trying. They are both working double-time to run right*, to catch up to FOX.

There is no anti-FOX cable network. Period. There is absolutely zero representation of a left-biased "news" outlet to counter-balance FOX (and neither FOX nor the hypothetical, non-existant anti-FOX are [or would be] acceptable news outlets).

* Run right from something like the usual faux-center, corporate-interest bias of cable news, NOT run right from the left.
posted by teece at 12:14 PM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

The more I think about it, the more I believe that the world would be a better place if we got rid of all the 24 hour news networks.

They spend most of their time airing filler, that people come to believe is actually important (what's Paris Hilton doing today?) and they use their agendas to push or withhold stories that don't fit into their political ideology. Fox is the worst, but they are all pretty bad.

The worst part is that their pundits are given all sorts of credibility. As if their positions should be given any more weight because they are a more capable bully. What has O'Reilly done that makes his opinions so well valued by so many?

And how is it, that with all his personal scandals, he has managed to continue to be somehow seen as a person in a position to opine on morality?
posted by quin at 12:15 PM on July 27, 2007

...that's why I said "Pandering to you but are failing".... auuuuugh I'm going for a walk.
posted by Stan Chin at 12:20 PM on July 27, 2007

fuck'n bloggers
posted by joelf at 12:32 PM on July 27, 2007

that's why I said "Pandering to you but are failing"

Stan Chin: I read what you said. They aren't "pandering and failing" at CNN and MSNBC. They aren't trying to pander to the left at all. There is a significant difference.

I'm a partisan but moderate leftist. I can guarantee you they do not try to pander to me or my ilk even a tiny bit. Actually, they try to run from that as fast as they can: CNN and MSNBC will consciously avoid above-the-board, no-brainer stories when reality has a left-leaning bias, in order to avoid the scary tongue lashings of Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, O'Reilly, et al. They get the dreadful tongue lashings any way, but hey, I didn't say they were smart.

So your statement about pandering really makes no sense. It's like saying I'm trying to be a doctor and failing: I've never made any attempt to be a doctor. CNN and MSNBC have never made any attempt to pander to the left, so they can't be failing at it.

Boycotting CNN and MSNBC for what FOX does would be, well, silly, too.

It would seem logical that CNN and MSNBC might be better places for a leftists boycott, but that is false balance. CNN and MSNBC are in no way natural places for leftists, any more than FOX is. Leftist don't have a natural place on the cable dial. Hell, intelligent people of any kind, left, right or center, don't have a natural place on the cable dial. The whole lot of cable news (and network, too) is pathetic.

But that seems to have fuck-all to do with trying to scare some advertisers on FOX over their support of a dishonest, Republican propaganda outfit called FOX News. (I doubt it will be successful, precisely for reasons you state, but that doesn't make your idea about pandering any more logical).

And boycotting The Simpsons movie and any advertiser on shows on the FOX channel would be a much, much, much better idea.
posted by teece at 12:58 PM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

<homer>Robocop, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try.</homer>
posted by oncogenesis at 1:03 PM on July 27, 2007

tkchrist... your story sounds a little too perfect. I'm gonna have to call... maybe not shenanigans yet, but doubt at least.
posted by JHarris at 1:07 PM on July 27, 2007

Labeling Specter a Dem is surprising. In the sense of HTF do they get away with that after doing it with Foley sort of surprising - not that they did it at all surprising.
+ what Pope Guilty sed - it’s ok for them to lie, legally. Well worth taking the time to shove their faces in it. Don’t know if this is the best method, but still...
posted by Smedleyman at 1:12 PM on July 27, 2007

Things To Be Afraid of, In Descending Order of Scariness:

Gang of loitering clowns with herpes
Mistletoe kisses from Aunt with moustache
A clown
Rabid dogs
Creamed corn
Herpes
Gang of loitering teens
Hangnails
Progressive blogosphere's wrath
Hostess Twinkies past their best before date
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:26 PM on July 27, 2007

In related news ...

White House gives talking points to right-wing bloggers.

"Seeking 'to promote its message on the subject of executive privilege,' the White House held a conference call with conservative bloggers this morning where they sought to 'familiarize the blogosphere with the legal and political arguments on which the administration will rely' to respond to contempt citations from Congress in the U.S. attorneys probe."

posted by ericb at 1:35 PM on July 27, 2007

Hostess Twinkies past their best before date


I call bullshit. These don't exist. It's not 2400 AD yet.
posted by mephron at 1:37 PM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

I’ve had some problems with bullies myself. I remember just after I got out of jail I broke parole and stole some silverware from this bishop. But he wound up forgiving me and gave me the silverware. Well, I turned my life around, changed my name and became a wealthy businessman. I even became mayor of this small town, but there was this cop who just wouldn’t let up. He even busted this other guy to draw me out, but I had this little girl I had adopted and I had to take care of her so I couldn’t really do the time. So I told everyone who I was then split to this convent where they hid me until my daughter grew up. But as I said, this cop was a big bully and wouldn’t let it go. Meanwhile my daughter’s boyfriend is a revolutionary and I’m trying to keep him out of trouble when the cop gets involved. There’s this running street battle going on and the students the kid is in with are pretty tough (they’re a gang of loitering clowns with herpes) and they want to kill the cop, but I told them to let the guy go. Meanwhile the kid gets hit and I’ve got to get him back to his family. But there’s this damned cop again still trying to bust me on this parole beef. So I ask him to cut me some slack to get the kid home and he did. I guess he felt bad because he was being such a dick and I didn’t let the kids kill him when I had the chance.
Now that I think about it, I never saw him again.

Or am I thinking of something else?
posted by Smedleyman at 1:47 PM on July 27, 2007

No -- Smedleyman -- I think you got it right.
posted by ericb at 1:59 PM on July 27, 2007

tkchrist... your story sounds a little too perfect. I'm gonna have to call... maybe not shenanigans yet, but doubt at least.

What do you want? Blood stains on a T2000 racket so you can send it to CSI Bellingham for DNA testing?

Perfection being the source of doubt... huh. Never been accused of being too perfect. Can't really win for losing on that one.

Yes I have told this story many, many, times. Though not on Mefi. Your thinking of the "dropping the chair on a kid" story. If you hear it before somebody stole it from me. And I suspect that person would be Kevin from Nush fish camp in Alaska. He is always stealing my best stories. KEVIN! KNOCK IT OFF!
posted by tkchrist at 3:41 PM on July 27, 2007

"Fed up with Fox News?"

Not really. I respond to Fox News by ignoring it. So should you.

Unless you like being lied to. That's your prerogative. Watching Fox News and then reporting on their lies? That still means you're watching, which means advertisers think they can get you with their commercials, which means Fox News still makes money from your participation.

I don't watch Fox Television. Neither should you. When you watch, you're only encouraging their behavior.

Try it. Stop subjecting your senses to all things Fox. It's better than detoxing your body of all carbonated beverages and processed sugars.

This goes for The Simpsons Movie too. I cannot believe people are falling for this. At least the South Park boys made a movie that at the time they couldn't do on TV (and the stuff at the end with Cartman going shock crazy looked really super rad on the big screen). All The Simpsons Movie is, is a long television episode. Big Deal. What a blatant ripoff.
posted by ZachsMind at 4:36 PM on July 27, 2007

The only downside is, I'd want the bully to know it was me who did it. Otherwise I'm still hiding, still on some level, afraid of them and their reaction, which is just the sort of behavior they desire.

I understand the impulse. But in childhood discretion is the better part of valor when your the under sized victim. Especially if there is big pool of victims. Always keeps the bully wondering which one. My only worry was there would be reprisals on the innocent. I was hoping if that happened I could get a bunch of us to swarm him in PE.
posted by tkchrist at 5:45 PM on July 27, 2007

Lowe's pulls advertising from The O'Reilly Factor.

Looks like it works.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:41 PM on July 27, 2007

I need some stuff for home repair today. I guess it will be Lowe's for me.
posted by caddis at 5:37 AM on July 28, 2007

What a fucking bunch of douche bags. Seriously. The blogosphere is like "the Ku Klux Klan and Nazi Party". Well hell guys--I think it's time to yank out the burning crosses and dust off our copies of Mein Kampf.
posted by hadjiboy at 7:32 AM on July 28, 2007

Home Depot dumps O'Reilly: "We will not... advertise on the Bill O’Reilly show"
posted by ericb at 11:45 AM on July 31, 2007

Bill O'Reilly's own "accountability moment".
posted by ericb at 11:47 AM on July 31, 2007