The Austin American-Statesman has published a list of PolitiFact Texas articles that drew the most reader interest in 2010. Number Five on the list is a piece early in the year about Fox News co-anchor Gretchen Carlson telling viewers that the Texas State Board of Education was considering the removal of Christmas and the Constitution from social studies textbooks. PolitiFact rated that claim as a Pants on Fire lie. And it was.
TFN Insider reported about the grossly inaccurate and biased coverage Fox News gave to the state board’s debate over new social studies curriculum standards. In fact, Fox’s coverage was so riddled with mistruths that the Texas Education Agency — headed by an appointee of Republican Gov. Rick Perry — issued a sharply worded press release criticizing the network’s “reporting.” The so-called “fair and balanced” network even aired a graphic labeling Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller a “textbook troublemaker.”
Truth is, Fox News practically became an active participant — and propaganda tool — in right-wing efforts to politicize classrooms very early in the social studies debate. In July 2009, two of the network’s “news” personalities reported essentially as fact a laundry list of distortions about how school textbooks cover topics ranging from Christianity to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Far-right pressure groups used those absurd charges to raise money and skew the social studies debate in Texas.
So we thought it was worth reminding TFN Insider readers that independent sources like PolitiFact are also showing how Fox News has misled viewers, helping activists on the far right hijack the public school curriculum to promote a divisive political agenda. TFN’s Just Educate campaign is working to protect classrooms from political agendas by reforming the State Board of Education. Please help by joining that campaign today.
Fox News eventually will fail due to their lack of credibility. Even the people that watch them know it’s just all partisan hooey.
A statistical analysis of the population of who gives a flip about any particular politically sensitive subject assumes that a normal distribution occurs which places two thirds of the population as normal (one standard deviation plus and minus over the mean value). That places one sixth that doesn’t give a damn, and one sixth that is consumed by it. Within that sixth one of five (Pareto’s Law) does anything about it, with both sides being represented therein.
By definition, those who get things done, politically, have to be extreme activists, all sides considered. That runs out to be one or two percent of any given population.
Democracy is a participatory process, those who participate get the process.
Using the terms “extremist” is meanisngless, as only extremists get their point made. Add violence, and the number of effectives gets even smaller with impact far beyond any expected results by the normal population at large. The damage that the Anachists of a century ago in assasinating monarchs is a monarchist system is still rumbling. Mumbai is a scary update of the sensitivity of society at large to small numbers of the ultra violent.
Two Observations:
1) I was disappointed to learn that CNN anchor John Roberts is going to work for FOX News. He is going to marry CNN personality Kyra Phillips, who has had extensive police SWAT training and other similarly unusual experiences.
2) Why has TFN started using the term “far right pressure group”? It has become en vogue of late. Is that original or did you pick it up at some media strategy seminar, meeting, etc. You know. “All right. Here is the media strategy for 2011. We want to achieve _____. The key terms that will help us to best do this in the public mind are: blah, blah, blah, blah, and far right pressure group.” It is beginning to sound something like “fair and balanced.” What do you call all the tires from the right sides of vehicles when you stack them together in a single room? Answer: A far right pressure group. With a good heart, I would kindly suggest that TFN might strive for more original and colorful language to describe its opposition. I bet Robin Williams could come up with some original terms. Give him a call.
If the Liberty Foundation is a “far right pressure group,” does that mean TFN is a “left wing deflation group”?
I have a (expletive deleted) hard time coming up with a (expletive deleted) name or (expletive deleted) description for the (expletive deleted) groups and (expletive deleted) institutions like (expletive deleted) Liberty (expletive deleted) Foundation or (expletive deleted) Fox (expletive deleted) News that can accurately describe just how (expletive deleted) disgusting, (expletive deleted) intolerant, and (expletive deleted) atavistic they are.
Know what I (expletive deleted) mean?
And that especially includes that (expletive deleted) (expletive deleted) Gretchen Carlson.
How about “Far right fountains of ignorance”?