August 12, 2003

Fair and Balanced

Matthew Yglesias's weblog is fair and balanced:

Matthew Yglesias: Fair And Balanced II:

If you've got a blog, please consider adding a "fair and balanced" tag somewhere in recognition of Rupert Murdoch's out of control litigiousness (tort reform, anyone?). You also should consider buying the book.

Posted by DeLong at August 12, 2003 12:37 PM | TrackBack

Comments

NYTimes -

"Al Franken is neither a journalist nor a television news personality," according to the complaint. "He is not a well-respected voice in American politics; rather, he appears to be shrill and unstable. His views lack any serious depth or insight."

Finally, Paul Krugman has al ally in shrillness. Am I being sufficently fair and balanced?

Posted by: F&B jd on August 12, 2003 01:11 PM

Yes - and Rudy Murdoch's "news" service protects itself in a FairAndBalanced way.

Posted by: SZ on August 12, 2003 01:16 PM

Brad DeLong

Just when I was getting used to you being unfair and unbalanced you want to change? Oh dear.

Posted by: anne on August 12, 2003 01:20 PM

Fox News is suing over "Fair and Balanced"? They should feel lucky that the FCC does not sue them for false advertising as they are anything but "fair and balanced" or "real journalism". But wait, the FCC answers to the Bush White House. Never mind.

Posted by: Hal McClure on August 12, 2003 02:07 PM

Fox News is suing over "Fair and Balanced"? They should feel lucky that the FCC does not sue them for false advertising as they are anything but "fair and balanced" or "real journalism". But wait, the FCC answers to the Bush White House. Never mind.

Posted by: Hal McClure on August 12, 2003 02:10 PM

If Franken has any sense he'll play up this suit for all he's worth, the way Jay Ward did when Durward Kerby threatened to sue him over his use of the Kurward Derby as a gimmick on "Rocky & Bullwinkle.

Posted by: Bruce Moomaw on August 12, 2003 03:43 PM

Bruce:

I agree. This Fox News suit can serve only two purposes. More book sales for Al Franken. And more coverage on the real news networks as to what a total fraud Fox "News" really is. Old Ailes and Murdoch have make a stupid mistake here.

Posted by: Hal McClure on August 12, 2003 04:47 PM

Anyone know about the legal issues involved? My impression is that the Fox is clearly in the wrong here.

What's funny about the Right is that they like to preach about America's litigiousness, then sue like crazy themselves.

Posted by: Stephen J Fromm on August 13, 2003 06:41 AM

Anyone know about the legal issues involved? My impression is that the Fox is clearly in the wrong here.

What's funny about the Right is that they like to preach about America's litigiousness, then sue like crazy themselves.

Posted by: Stephen J Fromm on August 13, 2003 06:46 AM

According to Amazon, their advance orders for Franken's book have exploded fiftyfold since this story broke, making it their current bestseller. This was not the smartest thing Fox has ever done. Of course, it was also not the dumbest thing Fox has ever done...

Posted by: Bruce Moomaw on August 13, 2003 07:55 AM

It'd be more accurate if FOX billed themselves as "Fair NAND Balanced", but only geeks would understand it.

Posted by: Jon H on August 13, 2003 10:16 AM

"Fair NAND Balanced" means not both fair and balanced. How would you say "neither fair nor balanced" using only the NAND operator?

I get ((Fair NAND Fair) NAND (Balanced NAND Balanced)) NAND ((Fair NAND Fair) NAND (Balanced NAND Balanced))

Posted by: Joe Willingham on August 13, 2003 12:34 PM

Al Franken's response to the lawsuit is partly at http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/arts/AP-Publishing-Franken-Lawsuit.html

I am reminded of Warner Brothers trying to sue the Marx Brothers for using the word "Casablanca" in "A Night in Casablanca". Groucho responded that he would countersue Warner for using the term "Brothers" since the Marx Brothers were brothers earlier :)

Posted by: Reuben on August 13, 2003 09:23 PM
Post a comment