quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


I used to think that the Dems paid people to sit at home and do that, Bounty. I realize, now, that they do.

If you were a feckless doper who had no desire to work or take care of the four children you fathered by the age of 20, and you wanted to make sure that the gravy train didn't run off the rails, you'd feel obligated to "protect your lifestyle", too. No?



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: TallClevDom

Wasn't it Fox News that was caught paying its staffers to comment on boards? I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of candidates, political parties and wealthy people did that, but they're not calling themselves "fair and balanced".

I wouldn't be surprised if they did it either, and whats more, given the amount of anti fox news sentiment from liberals, I wouldn't fault them for doing so.

if I ran fox, I might indeed have the staff doing likewise. in that regard, its no different than what people (at least some) are doing here---correcting misinformation, countering criticisms and in some cases, outright falsehoods. put that way, why shouldn't fox do it?

and to that point, I wouldn't want the readers to know I was from fox--that clouds the conversation and takes the emphasis away from whats being said, to "well that's just because he's from fox news." its not published research or a business transaction where full disclosure is necessary from an ethical standpoint, its a public forum where what is being said needs to be critiqued on its own merits.

notice, that none of what you said speaks to the quality/veracity of the posts. a "pro-fox" comment isn't de facto pro conservative, or libertarian; it can simply be in defense of fox in general. before i say anything more than that I would want to see the actual evidence in the book, as well as fox's response to it all. short of that, your criticism of their "fair and balanced" motto doesn't work.

you'll notice the criticism about joether isn't about the "paid blogger" part so much as it as the essence of his posts. that truth doesn't matter as much as the ends of an agenda.