Friday, December 31, 2010

A year of Beck in review


Home Disclaimer Contents For Glenn Beck Share This URL
One year ago this blogger had no need for a weblog. What is so important to publicly keep track of? The answer was "nothing" until one day, while channel surfing, I stumbled across Glenn Beck again, only this time he was truly unleashed (and some would argue unhinged) from having any of the constraints of working on an actual news network like he did at CNN. There I witnessed a nationalistic, arrogant and a rude interviewer, unlike anything I'd ever seen before. My response to Beck's shocking interview with a U.N. ambassador on CNN in 2008 was to write to them and proclaim that "if I wanted to watch the likes of Glenn Beck, I'd be watching Fox News." That worked out well.

Glenn Beck: Convincing Liar

motivated criticism with obvious lies

This year, finding Glenn Beck on Fox was a transforming experience. At first my response was yelling at the television: "That's a lie!" He was obviously (to me) telling lies that were components of a deceitful narrative conveyed as compelling entertainment. I kept watching; I kept yelling. This was in early April, and my wife finally had enough and yelled at me: "Stop yelling at the television and do something about it." What could I do? All I had was my education, a new computer and the Internet. Turns out, that is all I needed. The research to fact-check Mr. Beck is so easy a Neanderthal could do it. Well, that's an exaggeration, but Google and the Internet has put a world of information at our finger tips. Anyone can fact check anyone, so one question that would need to be answered is, "Why aren't more people doing this?" Indeed, Beck himself tells his viewers to check his facts, so why don't they discover what I knew before touching a keyboard? Glenn Beck lies a lot!

I naively figured that all I had to do was to prove to people who support Beck that he is lying, and he'd start losing followers, slowly at first but faster when more people came to understand how routine Beck's deceptions are. To aid with the dissemination of my fact-finding, I came up with the idea of sharing this URL (sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com) about Glenn Beck. I couldn't get this information in the hands of millions of people by myself; but with the help of other people who, like myself, could understand that Beck is routinely misleading his viewers with false claims, the word would get out and spread across the Internet. It seemed like a straight forward strategy at the time.

That Beck deceives his viewers is  incontrovertible. The single largest category of posts listed in the Contents of The Glenn Beck Review is entitled "Beck's false claims." Even though Beck has claimed that he would be fired from Fox if he made baseless claims, he has told at least 15 whoppers this year that have not gotten him dismissed by his employer. That claim was just another lie. Evidence and analysis indicates that Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox, will not fire Beck for any transgression against the truth. I have previously (and again here) challenged any supporter of Glenn Beck to find where I have something, some claim of deceit on Beck's part, wrong. If I have something wrong, I will make the correction.

I have for the most part stopped tracking his many lies. How often does one have to lie before one earns the reputation as a liar? Of the books read this year to research this man, Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of America by Dana Milbank, clearly exhibits how often Beck deceives his viewers and what kinds of lies he tells. I knew starting this Review that Beck was a liar; I didn't know that his deceptions were part of Beck's effort to create an alternative understanding of reality, a different world view that was alien to the one I grew up with. When a critic of Mr. Beck claims that Beck says things that are "completely insane," that is what he's referring to, i.e., Beck's alternative, fictional reality he creates on his various media outlets. One of the biggest challenges now is not understanding the world according to Glenn Beck; that's easy enough. The challenge that I have to yet to fully come to grips with is why in the world anyone would share Beck's fictional world view. Another challenge is to determine if Beck's lies are the result of him purposely misinforming his audience knowing full well the truth or whether he is ignorant of the facts and chose to assert a counter-factual argument anyway. Sometimes that is easy to tell; sometimes not so much. He claims below that "I never said anything I didn't believe." Either that is another lie, or Beck is clinically insane.


Glenn Beck: Unprincipled Hypocrite

Three other conclusions developed as I continued to watch the Glenn Beck show on Fox, take notes, come upstairs to the office and do research. First and foremost among these are that Glenn Beck is a hypocrite. It's less obvious than his lies, but it becomes very clear that he is ever so willing to go against his own stated principles if he thinks it sounds like the right thing to say in a given moment. One only has to listen to Glenn Beck in a way that his loyal followers do not: critically. In his essay, "Glenn Beck and the Left-Right Confusion," published this year in At the Tea Party, renown progressive blogger, Glenn Greenwald, argues that Beck "has no core political principles or fixed, identifiable ideology."(1) Although the following is not an exhaustive list of principles Beck has proven his willingness to violate with his own words, it does render the following statement to be factual: Glenn Beck is a hypocrite about:

In his unauthorized biography, Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck and the Triumph of Ignorance, Alex Zaitchik points out that "Beck is not much of a debater and never invites smart and informed liberals onto his shows. Although he published a book called Arguing with Idiots, he is terrified of actually talking to those 'idiots' on the air." That is not just another hypocrisy; Beck cannot defend his ideas and claims! Readers familiar with this Review will recognize Zaitchik as the author of several articles reprinted here with permission of the author. One of the reasons this Review publishes other writer's articles about Mr. Beck is to demonstrate that Beck is opposed for many reasons by many people. Without question though, Zaitchik is the leading expert on Beck; and his book is highly recommended. Christopher Knight of the Los Angeles Times called the book "Horrifying...Chillingly informative." If someone wants to learn as much as possible about Beck without paying money, this Review offers extensive, documented information and analysis. However, anyone willing to spend the money should acquire this book that Beck has deemed, "Despicable, yellow journalism."

Glenn Beck: Yellow Propagandist



The next conclusion that I came to this year regarding Mr. Beck concerns how he discusses progressives. It's not that Beck is informative about the flaws of progressives past and present (sometimes he's right); Beck's assault on President Obama and progressivism is undisguised propaganda, "information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc." He doesn't dislike progressive era President Wilson; "Christian" Beck "hates Wilson." He has also proven loose with the facts about progressives in the past and present. He called progressism for American "a cancer...and it's eating our Constitution -- and it was meant to eat our Constitution." Beck is not just a propagandist, he's an habitual liar who needs to be cautioned about. Beck admits that he's not a journalist. Can't criticize him about that, but he does engage in a yellow style (inflammatory and irresponsible) of propaganda. This Review is a kind of warning, a yellow flag of caution: Beck is a yellow propagandist who has inspired one unstable individual, Byron Williams, to allegedly go on a planned, but unsuccessful killing spree to attack progressives in the Tides Foundation, a funding source for progressive groups working for social change. Beck was also part of the inspiration behind alleged cop killer, Richard "Pop" Poplaski. This relationship is detailed in The Backlash: Right-wing Radicals, High-Def Hucksters, and Paranoid Politics in the Age of Obama by Will Bunch. The central character in this backlash, according to Bunch, is Glenn Beck who started a 9-12 project. Ironically, Poplaski's birthday is 9-12-1986.(2)

Glenn Beck: America's Charlatan


It took a while to notice this, but when Glenn Beck claimed that the Constitution was held up by "faith," "hope" and "charity," it struck me like a speeding train: this guy has no idea what he's talking about. With a basic, high school level understanding of civics, everyone should know that the Constitution is upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Initially, when I asserted that Beck is a charlatan, I meant that he comes across like he knows what he's talking about, but a quick background check showed that he only took one college course, and that was on the history of religion. He's an ignorant, reactionary blowhard,(3) not a deep "thinker" as he claims and certainly not a pundit in any meaningful sense of the word.

The more I studied Glenn Beck's background and discussed him with other critics, the more I came to realize that his whole persona, his whole act, from radio to stage to books to his Fox Propaganda Channel stage, is one big show. Because he says some things that are "completely insane," things that no one sane would actually come out and say, because he's not qualified to be on what claims to be a news network,  I have come to the conclusion that Beck is primarily about getting rich entertaining millions of people gullible enough to buy into his show. This perspective is shared by both Time Magazine columnist Joe Klein who calls Beck a "telecharlatan...with a phony, professional air" and his biographer, Alex Zaitchik.

Glenn Beck: Lonesome Rhodes Meets Elmer Gantry

Pope Glenn Beck

This year Beck continued his turn away from strict, political commentary toward becoming a "freaking televangelist."(3) It was clear in the religious tone of his "Restoring Honor" rally (Honor?!? What honor?) on the Washington Mall on 8/28 and in his continued push to have his followers pray, become more religious, attend church and spout spiritual Truths. On one level, it is safe for Beck to speak of God. Who can argue about God's plan as delivered to Glenn Beck? Who is going to take issue with his claim that the geese flying over his rally site just before it began was "a miracle?"  If God gives Beck a "plan," and Beck claimed this year that he did (audio below), who is going to argue with God? That is what Beck would have his followers believe, but preachers and hucksters have been making similar claims for hundreds of years. Listen to Beck's psychologically persuasive, classic televangelism, in this "epic clip" from April of this year.


"I never said anything I didn't believe." If that's true, then Beck really is too ignorant to be a commentator on the Cartoon Network, much less a corrupt "news" channel. And that really is one of the primary points of this Review? Fox delivers ideological propaganda without much regard for the truth. Glenn Beck, if nothing else, is exhibit A, the essential cornerstone, of that truth.

Of course, on another level, this is what many of his religious followers want from him; and that works both ways. As Bob Cesca has written, " The only path to salvation, televangelists and faith healers say, is to give. Give money. Give prayers. To them. In Beck's case, he's added the political layer to the equation which, if ultimately successful, will financially benefit Beck and his peers in the wealthiest one percent." Beck certainly knows how to multiply his fortunes by increasing his flock. "Help me get this plan out." You can be sure that many people received one of Beck's books this Christmas, most likely his plan for America, Broke.

Previewing Forward

Product Details
no irony intended

Beck likes to tout his primary political influence, The 5,000 Year Leap by far-right Mormon Cleon Skousen; and he charges that his critics do not address the contents of that book, only the author. That is because Skousen was an authoritarian racist, and that automatically discredits his ideas for many including me. Besides, it is more fitting to address the ideas of Glenn Beck directly, expressed on the air, on his website, his newsletter and in his books. To that end, I recently bit the bullet and purchased multi-millionaire, Glenn Beck's most recent publication, Broke: The Plan to Restore our Trust, Truth and Treasure. Apparently this is the plan that "the Lord" gave to Beck. ("Glenn, sell more books!" It worked!) In the coming months, a chapter by chapter analysis of Broke will be embarked upon and published, when completed, on the Review as several posts.

Additionally work will continue on the still unpublished re-working of the Overton Window, a political theory of change. To be entitled "Smashing Overton's Window," it will work to establish a differentiation between freedom, an individual's bundle of rights, and privileges that are accorded to both individuals and corporations that are not persons, artificial or otherwise, and therefore have no rights, no freedoms offered by the U.S. Constitution. You won't hear Glenn Beck, America's loudest corporate shill, make that argument in 2011. If he proves me wrong, that would be news worth covering.

Glenn Beck: in "Conclusion"

There are many matters that were not covered in this year-end review of Glenn Beck. The corruption of Fox News, the purpose of Beck to Fox News owner, Rupert Murdoch, Beck's guests who have been caught lying on his show, Beck's race-baiting anti-racism and other paradoxes that describe him, and Beck's good points. That's correct; Beck has positive qualities. He tells Nazis to find another show to watch. He has called the birther idea (that Obama was born in Kenya) "dumb." His story is one of recovery from addiction and redemption. Sometimes his criticisms of the President or his Administration are spot on. He wants his followers to live better lives and be honest, even if he routinely and hypocritically lies himself. The problem is, without doing fact-checking, it is impossible to tell when Beck is accurate and when he is just spouting absurd nonsense as he is prone to do. The contents section of this Review has much more information that there wasn't time to cover in this year-end review.

Despite Beck's good points, the overall picture of Glenn Beck is one of a habitual liar, an unprincipled hypocrite and an utter fake due to his ignorance, lack of education or background in political science/theory and his infamous performances. He is a gifted and convincing propagandist and brilliant performance artist. His followers turn blind eyes toward these serious moral and educational shortcomings, or more likely, their biased (anti-government) assimilation of his claims does not allow them to understand that Glenn Beck is one of the last, if not the last person in America morally positioned or qualified to restore honor in this land. When presented with the facts covered in this year-end review, they generally dig in their heels deeper in a reaction known as backfire. The people who are open to the facts about Beck's lies and hypocrisy are those who Beck works almost continuously to reach using his loyal followers to recruit more viewers (higher ratings) and followers (who will purchase his books). This is ingenious self-promotion on Beck's part because he disguises this effort as trying to build a movement. If Beck has his way, he will move this country back toward the 19th Century on the legs of lies and sheer hypocrisy and on the backs of workers experiencing downward mobility...while laughing "all the way to the bank."

Although generally opposed to reactionaries, this Review is not primarily political. The Glenn Beck Review serves as a warning, a cautionary e-pamphlet, a public service to fellow Americans. Readers, who want to get involved with a movement for small government, would be better served by following an honest and consistently principled reactionary (libertarian) like Congressman Ron Paul. The ambitious Glenn Beck is a dishonest hypocrite using his popularity to gain more fame and greater fortune, just as he's been planning since he first auditioned for a contest to become a DJ as a teenager. The job he holds as "commentator" is just another form of corruption. With his horrific lies that would get a program host fired on any other network besides Rupert Murdoch's Fox Propaganda Channel, Glenn Beck's millions of followers are living proof that President Lincoln was insightful when he asserted that "You can fool some of the people all of the time." Sadly, 150 years of public education has not changed that sad reality.
Before more people start buying Beck's fictional propaganda, 
get involved
Post a comment
All non-spam comments approved
Free speech is practiced here
------------------------------------------------------
Please get involved for 10 minutes
Share this URL with your friends
http://sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com
Thank you


1) At the Tea Party: The Wing Nuts, Whack Jobs and Witey-Whiteness of the New Republican Right...and Why We Should Take it Seriously, Laura Flanders (ed), OR Books, New York, 2010, p. 242.
2) The Backlash: Right-Wing Radicals, High-Def Hucksters, and Paranoid Politics in the Age of Obama, Will Bunch, Harper Collins, New York, 2010, p. 276.
3) True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society, Farhad Manjoo, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2008, p. 146.
4) Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of America, Dana Milbank, Doubleday, New York, 2010, p. 21.

Corruption is...Part III: Beck and Murdoch – the Terrible Two


Home Disclaimer Contents For Glenn Beck Share This URL
The following article is part III of III from guest author, Paul WestlakeHe  is a 23-year media veteran with a professional background in film, video and multimedia production, video journalism, sports journalism, music composition, advertising, and political communications. He currently teaches performance and production at a broadcasting school in New York and consults on a wide variety of media-related projects, from developing educational DVDs to pitching clients to networks for interview programs. Paul has a BA in Liberal Arts from The New School, a Broadcasting Certificate from the Connecticut School of Broadcasting, and a Teacher License endorsed by the NY State Education Dept. Paul is the blogger behind Journo Watch and a frequent commenter on the Mediaite news media blog. The purpose of this essay is to provide a better understanding of the context that allows Glenn Beck to engage in his manipulative propaganda.


P. Westlake

Beck and Murdoch – The Terrible Two

Rupert Murdoch is losing money with Glenn Beck. Let me say that again. Rupert Murdoch is losing money with Glenn Beck. According to Angelo Carusone, founder of StopBeck.com, 141 companies refuse to allow their ads to run on Glenn Beck’s Fox News program. The NY Times places that number at 302. And that’s just in the United States. His block of airtime on Fox News International in the United Kingdom has run commercial-free for nearly nine months. An analysis and accompanying article by Jim Edwards (former AdWeek Managing Editor) for CBS BNET this past July revealed that only 12 of 27 ad slots were actually used for fully-paid commercials during Beck’s program, including one by Nestle that the company says was aired in that slot by mistake. Edwards’ analysis makes the assumption that Beck’s remarks about president Obama being a racist “with a deep-seated hatred for white people” is at the root of the ad drought. While there can be no doubt that the remarks made an impact, it is more likely the sustained efforts of people like Mr. Carusone that have been the decisive factor. Either way, the important truth is that Beck is a money-loser for Fox News, Newscorp and Rupert Murdoch.

 

Even though Beck spends most of his time at a chalk board, his show is not cheap to produce or air. It takes a full team of full-time staffers, so-called researchers, and whole ranks of technicians to pump Glenn Beck out to the masses. And the satellite fees alone would be a prohibitive factor to his airing in the UK by any other sensible television operation. The only business reason to send his show across the pond is if the advertising revenue exceeds the cost of transmission, or if another program that would run in its place would constitute a net negative on the bottom line. Neither of those conditions is true without advertisers on Beck’s program. No matter what was produced in his place, any other program would make more money because it would garner the sponsors Beck can no longer acquire. You could run static pictures of puppies in hats for a full hour and make more money than Glenn Beck. Why does Murdoch, a business tycoon, put up with a financial loss? That Rupert Murdoch is willing to lose money, and not just a little money but a fortune, on airing Glenn Beck every day, is where the rubber of corruption meets the road.

People the world over have come to terms with the way Wall Street works. Many of us don’t like it, but we get it. CEOs and their officers have a fiduciary responsibility, codified in law, mandating that they do everything in their power within the limits of the law to maximize profits for their shareholders, including the occasional cut corners and greased palms.(1) We know how it works, and as long as nobody is getting seriously hurt in the process, we accept it. That’s life – nothing personal, it’s just business. So then, how do we explain one of the most successful media moguls of our era making such obviously counter-productive business decisions? How can a man who openly prides himself on pursuing profit above all other things consistently fail to make the obvious business decision of replacing Glenn Beck’s show with something that can actually turn a profit? Leave aside the gross marketplace distortions caused by horizontal integration (the reason Teddy Roosevelt was a trust-buster in the first place) that enables Murdoch to lose money on his pet projects, from Glenn Beck to the Wall Street Journal, and consider that this is not a manifestation of John D. Rockefeller. John D, who once saidcompetition is a sin,” went out of his way to eliminate any and all competitors, using some seriously unethical and even violent tactics, so he could control as much of a market sector as possible and raise prices without worrying about losing customers. But in John D’s case, he was trying to create a monopoly. Criminal and immoral? You bet. But did it lack business savvy? No way. There’s a Rockefeller Center in New York City for a reason.

Murdoch is not like John D. As we have already explored in the first two parts of this piece, Fox News uses the rest of the so-called “lamestream media” as a foil for their own propaganda. Fox News’ brand of advocacy “journalism” depends on having detractors to maintain its underdog status and prop up the credibility of the very concepts of “fair and balanced.” Without CBS and NBC, Fox wouldn’t be half what it is today. So the last thing Rupert Murdoch really wants is a monopoly on the airwaves. Without his detractors, he has no crosses to bear, and without crosses to bear, “fair and balanced” loses its luster. It is precisely because “fair and balanced” is sold as being thrown in the teeth of the grinding “liberal” media machine that it has purchase with the Fox News audience in the first place. If that “liberal” machine were to disappear as a result of Fox’s success, Fox would lose its appeal as an underdog and could rapidly lose its very reason for being. Fox needs the audience it has. They cannot remake themselves and garner a new demographic, they cannot stop feeding the red meat that makes their viewers hopping mad, they cannot at any time relent in their paranoid attacks on all things “other,” all for fear of losing their loyal audience.

There are two ways to make money in this world – honestly and dishonestly. In America, that translates to one of two conditions – with or without lobbyists on Capitol Hill. (Guess which is which.) But lobbyists can only go so far. Politicians need cover for enacting policies that very obviously benefit a select few at the expense of our entire economy and way of life, and media consolidation has been at the vanguard of those efforts for decades. There is a case to be made that the vast majority of the mainstream media is actually biased in favor of corporate priorities, but I won’t make it here. The larger point is simply that controlling the messaging systems helps control the policy. It doesn’t always work but it’s better than not having any control at all, at least from the perspective of a person trying to make money dishonestly. But when legitimate journalists can’t be controlled enough to squelch important news or prevent an investigation that would reveal immoral and possibly criminal activities, there is another method that can be employed to stop the bad news – attack the messenger. But the problem with attacking the messenger yourself is that everyone expects it. It’s like Roger Clemens attacking the guy who gave him steroids – nobody is either surprised or convinced. So when ABC or CNN or NPR comes out with a story that doesn’t bode well for the inter-connected and deeply incestuous corporate elite, who you gonna call? Fox busters!

The recent revelations about the US Chamber of Commerce and it’s multitude of tentacles in every pie, from anonymous political ad campaigns to influence peddling in foreign lands, should serve as plenty of evidence that the global corporate community is very much in cahoots with itself and any power player they can bring into the fold. Let there be no doubt that Murdoch (and his puppet, Ailes) are on the speed dials of many CEO cell phones. When an entire day, or week, of programming is devoted to “debunking” some story being reported on other outlets, that’s the direct result of one of those phone calls. Think of it as a football game. The running back (corporate elite) has the ball, and he’s about to be tackled by a linebacker (mainstream news story), when an offensive lineman (Fox News anchor) grabs the linebacker from behind and holds him back. In football, that’s called “holding,” and it’s a penalty (10 yards from the spot of the foul). Now, imagine the refs are the American people and we just blew the whistle for the holding call. In steps Glenn Beck with the challenge flag.


Beck is there to make the most outrageous claims imaginable. Beck is a self-described rodeo clown with a background in totally irreverent “morning zoo” radio. What better person to ask to make the outrage of the day than a person who is fearless, obnoxious, and totally ignorant? Savvy and intelligent, yes. But also deeply ignorant and uneducated. And it this lack of context that enables Beck to fire up his passion for things he doesn’t understand in any depth. Yes, he knows how to put the words together, and he has kind of a picture of what he’s trying to say, but his constant contradictions make it clear that he’s parroting someone else. His prep work every day begins with reading someone’s email and then figuring out how to work the day’s propaganda into his planned media culture shtick. And this is what makes all the money he costs Rupert Murdoch worth it. He is a genius at turning the corporate outrage of the day into a populist paean to culture. You can’t teach that. He has it naturally as part of his background as a fake (you don’t get a morning zoo job without being a good fake). And all the money Beck costs Murdoch comes back multifold in the form of deals, advertising, cross-promotes, joint ventures, and, perhaps even, all kinds of kickbacks, which is unproven but probably wouldn’t be too hard to find should anyone ever care to dig it up.

For thirty years, the corporate elite have conspired to remake the global economy in their image. There is information all over the web that can edify the reader on that point. While Lloyd Blankfein may be the chairman of that board, Murdoch is its press secretary. Murdoch serves the function of propagandist in chief to his cabal of corporate pals, and he’s outsourced the job to Glenn Beck. One of the best analogies I’ve ever encountered to describe this phenomenon was shared with me by Glenn Beck Review but comes from the comment section on Mediaite
Here’s the big picture about Rupert Murdoch. He is a modern day Joseph Goebbels, the charismatic propagandist who created and controlled all the media in the buildup to Hitler’s takeover of Germany and who inspired and brainwashed the German people to think they could take over the world. Goebbel’s contribution to media lore was the creation of the “Big Lie”. If you keep making preposterous statements people will eventually buy into the lies and distortions of truth. The British rejection of Murdoch is understandable in that they sense that Murdoch already has enough power in Britain and giving him more control would only continue to debase their culture. Murdoch already owns a number of newspapers and cable outlets and Brits have access on cable and the Internet to such Fox personalities as O’Reilly, Hannity and Beck, and definitely don’t want these cynical, lying, pandering characters to be on mainstream television in Britain. The BBC and the commercial TV companies in England are light years ahead of mainstream TV companies in this country in responsibly serving the public. It’s like the National Health System in Britain which despite the propaganda barrage here is supported by over 90% of people in Britain. Many Americans have been easily taken in by Murdoch and the cynics in his employ. It’s not all Americans, but mostly white, disaffected and semi-educated people bitter about the social and economic changes that we’re undergoing who watch Fox. Murdoch’s lust for more power and his subservience to our more backward corporative elements that will eventually bring about his downfall, and I applaud the British people for their commonsense in rejecting Murdoch’s reach for more power and control of their media.”
~~ ganymede December 28, 2010 at 3:23 pm

Beck, and by extension, Murdoch, make the world safe for the corrupt. That’s the role they play. It’s not an add-on. It’s not a side-effect. It’s in the job description. The outrages of Beck pile on higher and higher for a reason – they make the slightly lesser outrages on the remainder of Fox "News" seem even less outrageous. Beck makes it safe for other mainstream outlets to squelch liberal stories and promote corporate goals, because next to Beck, they look reasonable. Beck is the statistical outlier that must always be in order to allow the margins of acceptable business practice to expand ever-deeper into the very fabric of our lives. While Beck spews the outrageous and nonsensical lies about "socialist" Obama turning America into a fascist/Communist state, Murdoch’s pals in the corporate elite use their lobbyists to accrue ever-more power and influence over our economies and lives. And while the courtiers (American people) are busy having a food fight with the court jester (Beck), the merchant prince (corporate elite) is slipping out the back with all the King’s gold (our tax dollars). It is the very cornerstone of corruption that is at the foundation of the entire Murdoch enterprise. Beck is now that cornerstone, and cannot be dislodged, by anyone, least of all Murdoch. His very existence depends on it, and his corruption is incomplete without it. Corruption is… the job.

Corruption is… Part I: “We Report, You Decide”



Corruption is...Part II: "Fair and Balanced"


Get involved
Post a comment
All non-spam comments approved
Free speech is practiced here
------------------------------------------------------
Please get involved for 10 minutes
Share this URL with your friends
http://sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com
Thank you
1)  Domestic examples follow:
Mortgage Kickbacks:
Government Corruption:
Foreign Bribery:

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Corruption is...Part II: "Fair and Balanced"


Home Disclaimer Contents For Glenn Beck Share This URL
The following article is part II of III from guest author, Paul Westlake. He  is a 23-year media veteran with a professional background in film, video and multimedia production, video journalism, sports journalism, music composition, advertising, and political communications. He currently teaches performance and production at a broadcasting school in New York and consults on a wide variety of media-related projects, from developing educational DVDs to pitching clients to networks for interview programs. Paul has a BA in Liberal Arts from The New School, a Broadcasting Certificate from the Connecticut School of Broadcasting, and a Teacher License endorsed by the NY State Education Dept.  Paul is the blogger behind Journo Watch, where this piece was also published, and a frequent commenter on the Mediaite news media blog. The purpose of this essay is to provide a better understanding of the context that allows Glenn Beck to engage in his manipulative propaganda.


P. Westlake
Corruption is ... Part II: "Fair and Balanced"




“Fair and balanced” implies that all news stories have partisan ramifications and that reports that don’t end in political stalemate are inherently “unfair” and “biased,” a fallacy to begin with. But “fair and balanced” takes that ill logic to its illogical extreme by directly implying that all other news outlets are “unfair” and “biased” by virtue of not being Fox News. The obvious truth is that “fair and balanced” is Orwellian-speak that the bigwigs use to mask the extreme right-wing bias on Fox News. The less obvious truth is that Fox News’ refusal to accept their place within the mainstream – or as they say, “lamestream” – media turns “fair and balanced” into a challenge from a perpetual underdog that is designed to defang journalism itself. “Fair and balanced” is not a feel-good slogan about bringing justice to the airwaves, it’s a corruption of the very definition of truth and an attack on the integrity of freedom of the press.
Say what you will about “advocacy journalism” in general, pretending to be an objective news outlet while actually advocating for any political ideology is false advertising and an abuse of the faith placed in the press by virtue of their constitutional right to report non-fiction (see “We Report, You Decide”). But the use of a phrase like “fair and balanced” cuts deeper than merely covering up bias. It changes the very nature of reporting itself. How many stories about the victims of Bernie Madoff can be “fair and balanced?” How many stories about hurricane victims rotting in a drowned city can be “fair and balanced?” How many stories about union employees getting drunk on the job can be “fair and balanced?” And nobody can even imagine that last story actually being fair and balanced on Fox News, or at least suggest as much with a straight face.
Do unions tell car company executives what kind of cars they can build? Or do the executives tell the unions what to build? Either way you slice it, that very principlemust apply somewhere in the equation. If all journalists report stories with a liberal slant only, then Fox News stands out because those “liberal” staffers must be following orders to be “fair and balanced,” i.e., not liberal as they normally would be. But if Fox doesn’t dictate editorial policy to its staff, then it cannot be possible that all journalists report from a liberal slant only, since Fox News journalists are allegedly “fair and balanced.” And if it’s not true that all journalists only report liberal stories, then the consistent liberal bias Fox News allegedly perceives on other news outlets must be a product of orders from some imaginary liberal overlords of some kind, because their bosses are uniformly conservative. Which of those scenarios makes the most sense? Neither, right?
Because reality is that everyone has a boss in the media, until you get to the very top of the food chain, and when you run out of people who report to other people, you’re looking at corporate elites across the board. The people who set the tone, establish the editorial policy, place the midnight phone call that squelches an embarrassing story, and whisper the subtle intonations that people in favor of Medicare-for-all shouldn’t get all that much air time, are the corporate oligarchs who own and run the top media empires in America.

“Unlike other networks,” says Mr. O’Reilly, “we’re not rooting for anyone.” “Only one network is fair and balanced,” says the disembodied voice of authority with the same inflection as an announcer at a wrestling match. This isn’t an appeal to trust in the credibility of the reporting, it’s a trailer for a political thriller. And their constant claims of bias in the non-Fox news media, coupled with the “fair and balanced” slogan/accusation, is yet another of the many ways Fox commits journalistic sabotage. Fox News has unapologetically given money to conservative causes, nakedly promoted the Tea Party movement, and cut away from political events that make conservative ideology look bad. There can be no mistaking the right-wing bias evident on Fox News among people who aren’t blinded by partisan rage or dependent on corporate largess. “Fair and balanced” isn’t for those people. It isn’t designed as a marketing tool to draw new audience in. It’s designed to be a rationalization for the loyal audience they already have and a Pavlovian response that can be used to deflect criticism… or drive critics insane before they can win the argument.



It takes a tremendous amount of faith, or the innocence of a child, to believe in a corporate slogan, like “you’re in good hands” or “the ultimate driving machine” or “made from the best stuff on Earth” or “15 minutes can save you 15% or more on car insurance.” Most of the time, American consumers are skeptical of corporate slogans and their hyperbolic promises (“Red Bull gives you wings”) but Fox loyalists actually spout a corporate slogan as though it, in itself, is proof of the veracity of the content on the channel. Can anyone imagine championing McDonalds with the words, “but they love to see you smile – why would they lie?” Can anyone imagine trying to convince another person that Snapple products really are made out of the best stuff on Earth? Can anyone imagine trying to suggest that the Chevy Silverado really is “like a rock” or that either Sprint or Verizon is truly the “nation’s most reliable network?” Of course not. But many of those same skeptics throw their skepticism aside when it comes to “fair and balanced.” It is the only corporate slogan on Earth that is actually regurgitated by some people for the purpose of identifying the one thing everyone already knows about the brand – the slogan. No other slogan is taken so seriously, not even Nike’s mostly innocuous “just do it,” which is easily converted into joke material by the infirm.




The surest sign that propaganda is working is when people start repeating it verbatim as though it were an established fact. “Fair and balanced” is exactly that kind of propaganda – short and sweet, and tuned to the ear of the loyalist. And all of this would still be true if Fox never told a single lie, never once blurred the lines between news and opinion. Even if they were completely straight as a truth-telling news organization, the slogan constitutes a corruption of the relationship between the press and the public. We’ve all been told the phrase at one time or another, “nobody ever said life was fair.” And real journalists understand that and go after it, because injustice is the red meat of the news business. But Fox pretends life can be fair, butonly on Fox. So while they sell a fantasy of fairness in their slogan, they simultaneously dismiss its existence everywhere else. And while this is a common marketing technique in advertising circles, it’s always based on hyperbole and rarely taken seriously by consumers. Everyone knows that the contents inside the box never look half as good as the picture on the front.


When people are assaulted by propaganda and choose to believe something else anyway, that’s called “audience agency.” We, as our own independent “agents,” make our own decisions despite the influence of media. Advertisers know this and do everything they can to convert audience agency into sales – like the Pepsi Challengeor the lifetime supply of coasters everyone received in the mail in the form of AOL install discs. “Fair and balanced” is designed to squash audience agency – don’t believe anything you hear anywhere but Fox because they’re the only ones telling truth. Nobody would believe a stranger who walked into a bar and said “I know the truth and nobody else does.” Nobody. So what does it tell us about an audience that does believe essentially that same statement coming out of Fox News? Audience agency demands skepticism in the face of self-appointed righteousness, and “fair and balanced” separates those with agency from those without. The slogan is the demographic – those who tune in and believe in the slogan will believe anything else Fox says because they already took the first, and most difficult, leap of faith when they chose to believe a corporate slogan. So the next time someone says to you “Fox News is fair and balanced,” a good retort might be, “and Red Bull gives you wings.”

Update, 6/09/13: The following is an example of Westlake's claim from Neil Cavuto who is supposed to be one of the straight news hosts on Fox:

Get involved
Post a comment
All non-spam comments approved
Free speech is practiced here
------------------------------------------------------
Please get involved for 10 minutes
Share this URL with your friends
http://sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com
Thank you