Friday, April 29, 2011

Somebody didn't get the memo

Silly rabbit! If the password is "mired in three conflicts in the Middle East," how can this one still be "America's Third War"?

You'd like to think even Fox would adhere to the general idea that if the answer in the story is "no," the hed shouldn't be a question. But news at (ahem) some networks has a higher purpose, which is to generate opinions like this:

DO NOT SAY THE US!!!! THAT IS INCLUDING THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY!!!! WE THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION IS NOT ARMING THE CARTEL!!!!! IT IS OBAMA!!!!! GET IT STRAIGHT!!!!! REPORTER!!!!

Which is our tie-in for the day to the birf certificate. Glenn Beck is right; the thing's a distraction. It's a narrow, specific document that's really only about one person -- not the sort of thing you need to keep the populace at a boil. So here's another example from today's front page.

The labels on Fox stories are a basic framing clue: not what to think about the story, but how to think about it.* We've remarked before on Fox's amusing habit of labeling monthly economic indicators as "business" stories when they're positive and "president" stories when they're negative. The terror-watch-gun-list story, of course, is a "president" story.


That's an interesting decision, given that the president shows up exactly once in this 750-word tale, and that's 550 words in:

President Barack Obama has steered clear of politically sensitive gun-control issues.

But if you're just reading along and click on the "comment" button, who cares?

Welcome to the paradise of the Obamanation. The place really s ucks.

See? The birf certificate is pretty much off topic already.

* Go ahead and call it the second level of agenda-setting if you want.

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

Blogger The Ridger, FCD said...

Silly fev!

Libya is America's FOURTH war.

We were fighting Mexican/Colombian/drug cartels LONG before we started whatever the hell it is we're doing in Libya.

1:57 PM, April 29, 2011  
Anonymous Picky said...

Well, fev, except that gun laws story seems to me almost painfully painstaking in its impartiality. Can we not give credit?

3:43 PM, April 29, 2011  
Blogger The Ridger, FCD said...

Credit for what? Running a story that's fair but making sure that it's surrounded by all the trappings that feed the rage of people who won't read it? Why is this "fair" story headlined the way it is and slotted under "President"?

12:05 PM, April 30, 2011  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home