Showing posts with label fox news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fox news. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Article of the Day - The Dogpile Continues...

Since I'm just dogpiling on conservative media anyway...

NEW YORK POST LAWSUIT: Shocking Allegations Made By Fired Employee Sandra Guzman

The New York Post editor fired after speaking out against a cartoon depicting the author of the president's stimulus package as a dead chimpanzee has sued the paper. And as part of her complaint, Sandra Guzman levels some remarkable, embarrassing, and potentially damaging allegations.

Guzman has filed a complaint against News Corporation, the New York Post and the paper's editor in chief Col Allan in the Southern District Court of New York, alleging harassment as well as "unlawful employment practices and retaliation."

Read full article...

Monday, November 9, 2009

Perspective I Gained Today

I learned something today. There is no constitutional amendment mandating that a news outlet be credible. Truth. It is not against the First Amendment to suck at your job--even if you claim to be a news outlet.

It's been well-documented that the advent of social media and advancement of all forms of other technology have driven a vast change in the way people get their information. How do you filter out the commentary from the news? Frighteningly, most people don't.

Shocking as it may be, at the center of this controversy is Fox conservative propaganda passed off as factual News, which is attempting to block Google from using "news" content from its companies. While part of me is inclined to argue, "Who cares? They're not credible anyway," the fact of the matter is that we all should.

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm a leftist-leaning, First Amendment as a shield and a sword journalism guy. I love the free exchange of information afforded me by the Constitution. Per the (then) groundbreaking decision in Near v. Minnesota, it is in violation of said First Amendment to stop people from saying something before they've said it. This is known as prior restraint. It's a no no. Has been since 1931.

What am I missing? How does this business about Murdoch trying to block Google spiders from picking up information and disseminating through the same channels as...oh I dunno...everything else on the Internet not violate this Supreme Court decision?

Furthermore, in what context is this even smart? Google has kind of become the ubiquitous search engine, and when people want to find something, it's where they go. Microsoft and Yahoo couldn't compete, so they combined to produce Bing...and got to about 26% market share. (They're still separated out in the graphic as the rollout is still in process, but I combined the numbers.)

As I reread the article, I suppose it never does specify that this is taking place in the US, but it's the Internet. It's ubiquitous and omnipresent. I just fail to see how this works or in what context this is a good idea. Sell ads like everyone else on the Internet. You have a ready-made market segment just by virtue of your content.

Oh, and since you're in Australia, if you get an iPhone and jailbreak it, you may end up with wallpaper that's never gonna give you up and never gonna let you down.