VOTING RECAP > If 9/11 Victims Were Hacked, Would Fox News Be Finished?
SodaHead Analysis
2011/07/21 21:12:52
Phone hacking?
We thought that only happened in John Grisham novels, or old episodes of "Hawaii 5-0."
Who would have thought that such a quaint spying technique would be the possible undoing of one of the richest and most powerful men alive? With accusations flying that Rupert Murdoch's tabloid The News of the World is responsible for hacking everyone from celebrities to murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, reporters have begun theorizing that if it comes to light that 9/11 victims were involved in the scandal it would be curtains for Murdoch's Fox News as well. SodaHead voted passionately on this possibility, and here's how the results currently stand:
NO WAY will that bring down Fox News.
It's not even close: Only 29% of you think that Fox News would be decimated by a 9/11-related hacking revelation. Seventeen percent remain unsure, while a whopping 54% feel confident the media giant could weather the storm.
Let's take a closer look at some other compelling stats:
• It's perhaps unsurprising that 86% of Conservatives and 89% of very conservative voters think Fox News would remain unscathed. What's intriguing is that Liberals don't seem to feel as strongly in the opposite direction: only 42% of Liberal and 50% of very liberal voters think that a 9/11 hack would destroy Murdoch's American stronghold. So either Liberals aren't giving much credence to the allegations, or they simply believe Murdoch to be the indestructible evil genius they've always known he was.
• Women aged 13-17 voted "No Way" a mere 29% of the time, a distant second from the next closest age range to vote similarly (18-24 year old men, 57%). Are young girls simply so pure of heart that they can't conceive of such a heinous act going unpunished? This demands further investigation.
• Great Britain isn't feeling too confident in Rupert these days: a hefty 44% of British voters voted "Fox News wouldn't survive the scandal" as opposed to 28% in the U.S.
Perhaps when you witness the demise of a 168-year-old newspaper seemingly overnight it's not too difficult to imagine a 14-year-old television network dropping off the face of the Earth.
Judging by your written opinions, one topic voters continue to debate is Fox News' legitimacy as a news organization. What do you think, SodaHead? Is it a beacon of truth or a den of deception? We reported, now we'll let you decide...
We thought that only happened in John Grisham novels, or old episodes of "Hawaii 5-0."
Who would have thought that such a quaint spying technique would be the possible undoing of one of the richest and most powerful men alive? With accusations flying that Rupert Murdoch's tabloid The News of the World is responsible for hacking everyone from celebrities to murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, reporters have begun theorizing that if it comes to light that 9/11 victims were involved in the scandal it would be curtains for Murdoch's Fox News as well. SodaHead voted passionately on this possibility, and here's how the results currently stand:
NO WAY will that bring down Fox News.
It's not even close: Only 29% of you think that Fox News would be decimated by a 9/11-related hacking revelation. Seventeen percent remain unsure, while a whopping 54% feel confident the media giant could weather the storm.
Let's take a closer look at some other compelling stats:
• It's perhaps unsurprising that 86% of Conservatives and 89% of very conservative voters think Fox News would remain unscathed. What's intriguing is that Liberals don't seem to feel as strongly in the opposite direction: only 42% of Liberal and 50% of very liberal voters think that a 9/11 hack would destroy Murdoch's American stronghold. So either Liberals aren't giving much credence to the allegations, or they simply believe Murdoch to be the indestructible evil genius they've always known he was.
• Women aged 13-17 voted "No Way" a mere 29% of the time, a distant second from the next closest age range to vote similarly (18-24 year old men, 57%). Are young girls simply so pure of heart that they can't conceive of such a heinous act going unpunished? This demands further investigation.
• Great Britain isn't feeling too confident in Rupert these days: a hefty 44% of British voters voted "Fox News wouldn't survive the scandal" as opposed to 28% in the U.S.
Perhaps when you witness the demise of a 168-year-old newspaper seemingly overnight it's not too difficult to imagine a 14-year-old television network dropping off the face of the Earth.
Judging by your written opinions, one topic voters continue to debate is Fox News' legitimacy as a news organization. What do you think, SodaHead? Is it a beacon of truth or a den of deception? We reported, now we'll let you decide...
But I believe someone would pick up where they left off.
This was my answer to the first poll.
Yes, Fox News wouldn't survive the scandal
Fallout Add
+2
But to think someone would not try to pickup where Fox left off
is asinine. Someone will be hunting for the Fox ratings, and it's
easy to get them if you sell yourself to the far right as
Fair and Balanced.
you have to love the hypocrisy of conservatives. they say the media is run by the left, but look they actually get caught in the most illegal action committed by a news outlet ever and they still blame the left. disgusting. faux news is horrible and murdoch is a scum bag. anyone who watches it shows how little integrity they have.
A few rotten apples in a major News Conglomerate took illegal and despicable actions. They have been fired and are being prosecuted, as well they should.
The News Of The World, like so many newspapers around the world, was operation in the red and would have been closed anyway.
When I was in High School, New York had 9 daily newspapers. Today it has 2, one a tabloid. Hundreds of newspapers have closed this century alone. News of the World is just one of them.
Would you rather have things like this hidden?
Edit: Ah well... all I did was ask a few questions and was blocked...
Yet another Right Winger bows out when simply asked to provide factual basis for his statements.
"The outlandish stories about Barack Hussein Obama are simply false: he wasn’t born outside the United States (the tabloid “proof” has been debunked as a crude forgery); he has never been a Muslim (he was raised by an atheist and became a practicing Christian in his 20s); his policies are not “socialist” (he explicitly rejected advice to nationalize the banks and wants the government out of General Motors and Chrysler as quickly as possible); he is not a “warmonger” (he promised in 2008 to withdraw from Iraq and escalate in Afghanistan and has done so); he is neither a c...
"The outlandish stories about Barack Hussein Obama are simply false: he wasn’t born outside the United States (the tabloid “proof” has been debunked as a crude forgery); he has never been a Muslim (he was raised by an atheist and became a practicing Christian in his 20s); his policies are not “socialist” (he explicitly rejected advice to nationalize the banks and wants the government out of General Motors and Chrysler as quickly as possible); he is not a “warmonger” (he promised in 2008 to withdraw from Iraq and escalate in Afghanistan and has done so); he is neither a coddler of terrorists (he has already ordered the killing of more “high value” Qaeda targets in 18 months than his predecessor did in eight years), nor a coddler of Wall Street (his financial-reform package, while watered down, was the most vigorous since the New Deal), nor an enemy of American business (he and the Chamber of Commerce favor tax credits for small business that were stymied by the GOP to deprive him of a victory). And that’s just the short list of lies" [1].
2. Conservative Pundits Dominate: According to Newsweek [2], conservative pundits are America’s most influential political figures. Rush Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and O’Rielly are on top, with audiences in the millions. As leading pundits, their information comes from a variety of sources, some of which are propaganda outlets more than legitimate journalism. They are just the tip of the disinformation iceberg. As a result, according to a recent University of Maryland study, Fox News viewers are the most uninformed [3]. Fox News serves as a portal between the real world and Right-Wing Fantasyland.
3. Conservative Disinformation Network: Some pundits present disinformation supplied by faux journalists conducting faux opposition research with faux evidence, such as so-called “Accuracy in Media” (AIM) [26]. Pundits may then “frame” their targets with this bogus evidence, accusing them of imaginary offenses (e.g. “death panels”), even though their “evidence” has not been verified by journalistic standards. Although such trickery has always been part of politics, 20th century police states (e.g. Nazi Germany and the USSR) provided a lasting template for future strategic deception [4]. Soviet KGB “active measures” planners refined the process, which is alive and well today in the Conservative Disinformation Network (CDN).
4. Today’s Conservative Disinformation Network (CDN): Disinformation is the recognized enemy of legitimate research, including journalism and intelligence analysis. Disinformation is a strategic deception tool designed to deceive analysis [4]. Some intelligence officers have been trained in “Deception Analysis” by the C.I.A. Unfortunately, civilians rarely enjoy such protection. They are virtually clay in the hands of CDN propaganda specialists, who create alternate realities virtually at will [5]. The CDN demonstrates the extraordinary leverage now possible when Internet-based disinformation campaigns subvert legitimate journalism.
- http://kaleokualoha2878577.ne...