The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label MediaMatters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MediaMatters. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

The Showtime Series "Homeland" As A Model for National Security Policy? Only On Conservative TV

As an American,  we all know the nation has a past of rational discernment of situations that generally lead to successful strategy, if or when faced with a problem. Rational thought requires situational education and an ability to assimilate the various components of learned information focused on rational and actionable outcomes. 

Since the early 1980s (the Reagan Years) and the proliferation of Fox News as well as the convenience of AM talk radio, our illumine past has devolved into a seething witches brew of false reality.  A false reality that literally has a known charlatan carnival barker leading GOP primary polling along with a veritable nutcase serial liar running second.  

From Trump's fraudulent  scam Trump University through his literal "unpresidential" touching (50-second mark) an admirer in a recent campaign visit to Las Vegas, the Right ignores all for the false hope of a messiah. A messiah supporters hope will lead them away from years of failed GOP leadership.  

While Trump and Carson lead supportive hordes down a path as Judas Goats, other conservative operatives are reaching into the twilight imaginary zone of television for national policy.

On yesterday, AddictingInfo ran a piece with Fox News's Gretchen Carlson feeding Fox viewers a healthy dose of inane sycophancy.  The Fox host literally followed another conservative national media demagogue in postulating Obama should follow the ways of the ShowTime series Homeland in dealing with ISIS. 

You have no need to re-read the last sentence above, you read it correctly the first time. The conservative playbook this week includes national strategy and policy based on the creative works of television and movie writers.  Thus, demagogues like Gretchen and Joe Scarborough (address below) are marching to GOP lock-step dogma where its politicians cannot tread. 

Fox New's Carlson, first.  

Gretchen played a clip that basically only said “the terrorists are there for one reason only, to die for the caliphate. We need to pound them into a parking lot.” That’s pretty much it. Nothing too revolutionary there.
Here’s the transcript of part of their conversation:
GRETCHEN: You know, I don’t know if it’s scary or there’s another adjective to describe it, but Showtime has a show called Homeland. And one of their characters actually seems to sometimes know more about this war on terror and ISIS than possibly the administration. Listen to this.

(Plays clip from the TV show)

GRETCHEN: So on that show, Lieutenant Colonel, they’re talking about what needs to be done in Syria. I mean, should we be listening to Homeland?
BILL COWAN: Yeah, we probably ought to, Gretchen. I don’t watch it. I know it’s a wonderful show. But the fact of the matter is, we have rules of engagement set down by the administration that preclude us from actively and aggressively attacking ISIS thinkers, the headquarters, what have you.
Let's illustrate the extent of the dogma. Remember, the following segment aired before the last night's Fox News segment.

From the November 16 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:

JOE SCARBOROUGH: That was a scene, opening scene of Homeland for this season, which, Willie, that was on a couple of months ago. I happened to be watching it the morning after Paris and it's unbelievably telling because they do have a strategy. They can identify their enemy. They can call us out by name. They know exactly what they're going to do. They know how they're going to do it and they know that they're going to die doing it. They have focus. We have absolutely no focus. We have no strategy. We have candidates that won't even mention our enemies' name by their name. It's frightening.

WILLIE GEIST: That was dramatized but just a little bit, right? I mean it was pretty close to the truth. We had the guest on earlier who said this is an Islamic cult. And what he meant by that is they seek this end times fantasy where they draw infidels into their territory and have a war and the armageddon is upon us. That is their goal and they're following very, very old early text from Islam and that's the goal.
Even with Willie (Whatever you say Joe) Geist's attempt to explain producer use of the Homeland dialog, the matter illustrates a few points about our society. Conservatives have won the battle of electronic media to the extent millions tune-in to shows with the singular purpose of advancing US conservatism by any means necessary. They do so quite successfully (via their viewers) despite clear evidence the GOP is not the party which seeks to better life for most Americans. It is not the party that best manages the US economy; via its Trickle-down economy core. Moreover, the demagogues serve the GOP and conservative America cause well via driving the nation back via a concert commitment to social regressivism.  

The fantasy mongers also illustrate exactly why the celebrity is the pinnacle of life for Americans. There isn't a presidential candidate alive nor deceased who could have escaped overwhelming criticism for the smoochy head kissing and massaging the waist of a woman on national television. Another and better point imagine any presidential candidate who involved in legal entanglements resulting from an alleged fraudulent education program.

The showtime series Homeland as a guiding light to international strategy.  Is it possible conservative show producers understand the scripts for Homeland are developed to leverage false and very slanted messages that garner audience favor Vs. depictions of reality?

The answer isn't straightforward nor rational. Basically as with the television show, conservative demagogues have a singular role in delivering communication to viewers.  And, that message is in the same context as Homeland: entertain for repeat views or votes.

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Quinnipiac Yields Fox News Most Trusted; Methodology And A Testament To White High-end Baby Boomers

Image result for quinnipiac

Image result for fox news
Whenever pool results roll across our airways (TV predominantly) it pays to seek out the Sampling and Survey Methodology.

Quinnipiac commonly considered a reliable and non-conservative polling authority published survey results that warrant serious scrutiny. "Fox News Most Trusted among News Networks." The survey was apparently conducted (Survey Sampling International [SSI] ) among 1286 respondents with the following details:


73 % white


White   BlackHispanic
73% 13% 7 %


Quinnipiac indicates the survey was conducted in the scope of current Census demographic data. If my perception the methodology claim is correct, however I question the 7% Hispanic survey pool. Unless, the Other/DK/NA represent Hispanic poll respondents.

Political affiliation is a key survey demographic. The number of so-called "independents" and non-declared could include Fox News viewers who are factually conservative. It is impossible to view the data consideration of an over sampling outside the control of Quinnipiac.

Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what?

32% Republican

Republican   Democrat Independent 
32% 29%  27%



42 % over age 55

AGE IN YRS.......
18-34 35-5455+
  21% 32%  42%
126  310809

Quinnipiac reported an unweighted (N) [N=number ] of 1286.  Since I trust Quinnipiac not to report with such a discrepancy, I assume some respondents did not declare an age group.

En capsulized: 73% white over a third of respondents conservative and a respondent group skewed towards high end baby-boomers. The survey was (or is) literally a Fox News viewers dream.

Fox News most trusted (methodology)
PDF format
Sample and Methodology detail

MSNBC's Chris Hayes ran a segment last night that included a granted biased, perspective on how Fox News could yield such survey results. Notwithstanding, I stand committed to the survey as a testament to the fact most older white news viewers tune-in to Fox News and the SSI methodology should come under a bit of scrutiny.

Chris Hayes

Great points Chris, but don't forget the survey methodology, Chris!

If you would like a bit more regarding the Quinnipiac "Fox News Most Trusted", The Daily Kos offers this....


Monday, March 9, 2015

O'Reilly: Another Journalist Who Says "Not True"

More and more journalists are coming forth with credible rebuttals to Bill O'Reilly's claim of being nearby when a figure peripherally related to JFK's assassination took his own life. The Fox News chief demagogue has come under fire from many sources for claims related to alleged coverage of major news events. Sources continue to report he was not in the region of the events he claims. 

If you have not witnessed O'Reilly's newest claims related to a book "deal," have a less than one minute look and listen. Before the review, recall O'Reilly's book "Killing Lincoln was laden with misrepresentations and lies.

This is how O'Reilly hawks a book. He visits an early morning show on his network (Fox News) and hawks as if his life depended on sales of the book.

ERIC HANANOKI, Media Matters, revisited O'Reilly's false escapades earlier today. The piece is a must read. I have embed a snippet of the piece don't accept what you read below as the full story.

The O'Reilly Factor host claimed on Fox News and in his best-selling books that he was outside the residence of Lee Harvey Oswald friend George de Mohrenschildt when he killed himself in Florida in 1977. The claim is one of several recently exposed tall tales the top-rated Fox News host has told about his reporting career. 
Edward Jay Epstein, an investigative reporter and author who taught at MIT and UCLA, wrote a March 9Newsweek piece calling O'Reilly's JFK claim "impossible," adding: "How do I know? I was the actual -- and only -- reporter interviewing de Mohrenschildt on the last day of his life in 1977." He added that he spoke with investigators and de Mohrenschildt's family members, and "From what I learned about the case, O'Reilly's story does not fit the facts." 
Hugh Aynesworth, a former bureau chief for Newsweek and the Washington Times who covered the de Mohrenschildt story, previously said "I didn't see him [O'Reilly] there. I was at the police department or that house for hours, and he just was not there." Media Matters has documented that O'Reilly's television colleagues at the time have also cast doubt that he heard the gunshot. And audio obtained by CNN and former Washington Post editor Jefferson Morley indicates O'Reilly wasn't there, as he told a congressional investigator he's "coming to Florida" in the wake of de Mohrenschildt's suicide. 
1) The Police Report Makes No Mention Of O'Reilly. Nowhere in the report is Bill O'Reilly's alleged presence mentioned. If O'Reilly had been on the scene of the suicide when it happened, this would be a puzzling omission. As Epstein notes in his piece, "It would stretch credibility to believe that a reporter as earnest as O'Reilly would flee the crime scene without reporting what he had witnessed to anyone for 35 years." 
2) The Police Report Explicitly Mentions Several People Who Didn't Hear Gunshots But Were Near The Scene. O'Reilly claims he was at the door of the residence and heard the gunshot. But the report states that people around and inside the house didn't hear the gunshot: "The shot went unheard by [maid] Mrs. Viisola, who was working in the kitchen below, as well as by [cook] Miss Romanic, who was sunning herself in the back yard; and by the gardener, Coley Wimbley, who also was at the rear of the house in the garden." 
3) The Police Report States The Residence's Maid, Cook, And Gardener Didn't See Any Strangers In Or Around The Residence. If Bill O'Reilly was at the house, no one saw him.
The report states of the house maid: "Mrs. Viisola did not see or hear anything suspicious or out of the ordinary.
Read more 

It seems Fox News has viewers in the millions who seek evening entertainment vs news related commentary. O'Reilly's quest for personal millions ($) from book sales continues to touch into novel-like fiction vs. story lines he offers as reality and delivered with veracity.

Have you purchased a copy of the O'Reilly book? No, not he copy of "Killing Lincoln" you have stored on your bookshelf, the latest book...that will go unnamed.

Friday, August 29, 2014

Fox News Guilfoyle Oozes Over Putin. Blame Fox News Management (Not Ailes's hired help and set decoration)

Can we get like Netanyahu, or like Putin in for 48 hours, you know, head of the United States?

Yes, you read the headline correctly. Now, consider the source. Think in terms of "candy"' not just "eye candy." Think far more pruriently than simple eye candy.  This is "eye-candy"....(Black, White, Latino Asian, Native American, Arabic).

The gallery that follows is purely prurient with a purpose.  After the gallery, find the name and face of the "Putin" worship.



Guilfoyle said, “Can I just make a special request in the magic lamp? Can we get like Netanyahu, or like Putin in for 48 hours, you know, head of the United States? I don’t know. I just want somebody to get in here and get it done right so that Americans don’t have to worry and wake up in the morning fearful of a group that’s murderous and horrific like ISIS.”

After accepting Gretchen Carlson publicly stated on Brian Kilmeade's radio show women were not allowed to wear pants on the Fox News sets, consider Roger Ailes admitted he hired Palin "because she is hot."

Putin as unfettered oligarch

Let's take a couple of perspectives on Putin. Celebrity Net Worth published a piece this past July that offers the reader a glimpse at Putin's past 10 years at the tip of Russian Leadership and a peep at his most humble background. 

Last April, Putin revealed both his salary and estimated net worth. Unfortunately something just didn't add up. Putin's disclosure portrayed the controversial leader as a humble man of the people with very meager, practically non-existent, income and assets. This portrayal did not sit well with many experts of Russian government and politics. These experts agree that, without question, Putin has used his last decade of absolute power and wholehearted corruption to stash away a vast personal fortune estimated at more than $70 billion. A fortune that simply does not jibe with the humble, man-of-the-people, portrait Putin paints of himself.
Vladimir Putin Glasses and Watch
Vladimir Putin – $70 Billion Fortune
So what evidence is there of Putin's secret obscene fortune? Let's start with the small stuff. Putin is known to sport a $150,000 Patek Philippe watch on most occasions and his total collection has been valued at $700,000. He also has full access to a $40 million ultra-luxury yacht that features a wine cellar, Jacuzzi, helipad and outdoor barbecue area. In terms of living accommodations, Putin has access to 20 mansions throughout the world including a lavish ski lodge and Medieval castle. The crown jewel of his property portfolio is a $1 billion palace overlooking the Black Sea that he allegedly owns through an anonymous trust. Furthermore, Putin makes frequent use of 15 Presidential helicopters and more than 40 private jets, many of which feature gold plated interiors. 
If Vladimir Putin's net worth truly sits at $70 billion, that would be enough to make him the third richest person on the planet right behind Bill Gates and Carlos Slim Helu. It would likely also represent one of the largest personal fortunes ever accumulated by a sitting President. The only other world leader who possibly looted more cash from his country was Muammar Gaddafi, who after 40 years of power stashed away a reported $200 billion in ill-gotten oil money.
There's probably never going to be a way to fully scrutinize Putin's wealth, but at the very least it's safe to assume his official declarations are not the full picture. Do you believe that Putin is worth $70 billion?
Putin's Black Sea Mansion
$1 Billion Black Sea Place
Vladimir Putin's Watch
Putin's $150,000 Patek Philippe watch.

Putin and Civil Unrest

RUSSIA: Vladimir Putin Says Gay Nazis Are Behind Civil Unrest In Ukraine

According to Matthew Schmidt, an American expert on the region, Vladimir Putin has taken to labeling anti-Russian protesters in Ukraine as “gay Nazis.” 
The gay Nazis label was simultaneously an attempt to tie the new pro-Europe camp in Kiev to the hated German Third Reich while also taking advantage of the growing acceptance of gay marriage in the West, particularly in the United States. “Putin has said homosexuality is not our values, and that sense of tolerance of homosexuality is not part of Euroasia,” said Schmidt, who will be in Ukraine monitoring the May 25 elections that are being overseen by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

Putin as Dictator

Vladimir Putin 'sacks 18 top-ranking Russian officials'

Among those who lost their jobs were heads of the Ministry of the Interior and Federal Drug Control Service

Saturday 09 August 2014
Russian President Vladimir Putin has sacked 18 high-ranking officers from their posts, according to a Ukrainian news website.
In a purging move by the embattled world leader, heads of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Drug Control Service and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation lost their jobs. 
The dismissals, reported exclusively by Euromaidan Press, are said to have been carried out in secret. 
While no official announcement appears to have been made by Mr Putin, reporters have posted links to the Kremlin’s official website – which can be translated into English – that show a list of staff “released” from their posts.  
The move is understood to have been made on Wednesday, 6 August, but has not been reported in any of the mainstream media, either at home or abroad.  
A number of high ranking military personnel are included among the 18 named.
We realize the Right has an affinity for Russia veritable dictator. An affinity that finds images as those posted below appealing with requisite machismo and with aura of the grand outdoors man. The images also remind of George W. Bush ranch purchase prior to his 2000 run for president and the immediate sell of the ranch upon leaving office.

Ultimately, the public and pronounced affinity for Russia's dictator is mere fodder for jingoist elements of American conservatism. Fox News managers and producers are not stupid people, yet they develop broadcast themes and messages that full embodies "The Stupid."  As with any product or service producer the operational model is "Give the customer what they want."  

We offer the following gallery of "what they want." Rest assured the customers want the full measure of the person in each image.  It is an American tragedy that has only manifest with the election of Barack H., Obama as the 44th US President.  

Love of Putin aside, let's close with our lede gallery of Fox News business and operational model we call blabbering "ass candy." Ass candy mixed with far-right propaganda and utter low intellect messaging.   

Our posit is in now way an effort to demean women news hosts and reporters. Our reporting does not find similarly "leggy" host model on MSNBC, other non-cable news networks and only limited exposure on CNN. Our concern with "ass candy" news delivery is its accompanying messages. Messaging that is predominately false, misinformation and outright lies. Fox has actually moved to James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart like message editing.

Fox News producers work to feed viewers with subliminal messages and false bravado images of Putin without any regard for how he has amassed a $70 billion treasure chest and palaces across the globe in a 10 years period.

The problem far exceeds hired "legs and thighs" for delivery of commentary, the problem is the mindset of Fox News ownership and tot executives. People who foster the Fox News business model and people who so disregard common decency and journalistic professionalism while offering WWE like news and commentary. As with the WWE, Fox News broadcast personalities should be members of the screen actors guild vs an organization of journalistic accreditation or licensing.