FOX caught in crowd-size LIE

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Sharp-Eyed Viewers Catch Fox's 'MasterChef' Faking a Huge Crowd

By Lindsay Robertson, The Set | Thursday, June 23, 2011, 10:55 AM

On Monday's episode of Fox's Gordon Ramsay-hosted cooking competition "MasterChef," the opening scene featured a shot of a huge crowd supposedly gathering to audition for the show, with a voice-over describing the "thousands" who lined up to try out. Yesterday, an eagle-eyed Reddit user (http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/i6agq/television_sorcery/) noticed something weird about the crowd. Namely, the same people showed up multiple times in the same shot:
http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/tv/fpentblogs/600_masterchefcrowd_062311.jpg
On the one hand: ooooh, you mean TV shows are messed with by photo editors? I thought everything was real!
On the other: it's fun when the internet catches a behemoth like Fox doctoring a crowd of hopefuls for one of their reality shows. To be fair, this probably happens all the time without anyone catching on, but when you watch the video, it actually is pretty shockingly noticeable. "Why are those two ladies in orange waving in exact unison? Oh, because they're the same person":


In a comment to Entertainment Weekly (http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/06/22/masterchef-fake-crowd-shot-photo/), Fox admitted the photo was changed and says they won't use that shot anymore. It doesn't really affect anything (thousands probably did audition) but it's a fun gotcha for a show that takes itself so very seriously.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Lying about crowd sizes is becoming a habit for these slime balls, eh?

[tnedator]

Lying about crowd sizes is becoming a habit for these slime balls, eh?

I don't follow MasterChef. They've done this before? Interesting.

[Arkie]

What does food have to do with politcs? Even worse, what does a Scottish chef have to do with American politics?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

What does food have to do with politcs? Even worse, what does a Scottish chef have to do with American politics?

What do politics have to do with the Broncos? yet there's all those epicFAIL threads on the main page...

[tnedator]

What do politics have to do with the Broncos? yet there's all those epicFAIL threads on the main page...

I think the point is that LABF is trying to use something done by a production company for a cooking show, to impugn Fox, and by extension Foxnews.

It's sad, but worse, it's a prime example of what's wrong with the state of political discourse not only on the Mane, but in this country.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

I think the point is that LABF is trying to use something done by a production company for a cooking show, to impugn Fox, and by extension Foxnews.

It's sad, but worse, it's a prime example of what's wrong with the state of political discourse not only on the Mane, but in this country.

Sort of like starting a thread about a 95 year old woman who refused to go through the scanner at the airport, in order to impugn Obama?

Or how about Barry the Moron's assertion that it's Obama's fault there were Mexican soccer fans at the Rose Bowl booing the national anthem?

Or phonyboy impugning the entire Democratic party because of Weiner's weiner?

Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL

[Smiling Assassin27]

Wow, reality shows aren't accurate depictions of reality. Who knew?

[cutthemdown]

LOL LABF you are too much!

[tnedator]

Sort of like starting a thread about a 95 year old woman who refused to go through the scanner at the airport, in order to impugn Obama?

Or how about Barry the Moron's assertion that it's Obama's fault there were Mexican soccer fans at the Rose Bowl booing the national anthem?

Or phonyboy impugning the entire Democratic party because of Weiner's weiner?

Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL

You play fast and loose with the facts. Once again you are reading between the lines of what I have said, and unfortunately, they aren't my words, but a manifestation of your bias.

Your statement of "Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL" is at best disengenous and at worst bordering on a lie in terms of what I said.

Let's review, I said, "it's a prime example of what's wrong with the state of political discourse not only on the Mane, but in this country."

I did not say that the problem is only on the left. Yes, many on the left, like LABF have zero tolerance for opinions that don't mirror their own, as do many on the right.

I might have been mistaken, but I was under the impression you didn't feel beholden to support everyone touting your party's talking points and tactics, and that you felt that it's possible to have a better dialogue on these important political issues on the Mane.

I hope I hadn't judged you wrong, and that you will in fact try and be part of the solution, and not the problem.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

You play fast and loose with the facts. Once again you are reading between the lines of what I have said, and unfortunately, they aren't my words, but a manifestation of your bias.

Your statement of "Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL" is at best disengenous and at worst bordering on a lie in terms of what I said.

Let's review, I said, "it's a prime example of what's wrong with the state of political discourse not only on the Mane, but in this country."

I did not say that the problem is only on the left. Yes, many on the left, like LABF have zero tolerance for opinions that don't mirror their own, as do many on the right.

I might have been mistaken, but I was under the impression you didn't feel beholden to support everyone touting your party's talking points and tactics, and that you felt that it's possible to have a better dialogue on these important political issues on the Mane.

I hope I hadn't judged you wrong, and that you will in fact try and be part of the solution, and not the problem.

The problem, tnedator, is that you don't call out both sides when this happens. Instead, you go along with the right wing crowd, continue to call out Obama, on a topic that is in essence no different than the one LABF created here.

It's fine that you want better discourse. So do I. It begins with calling out hypocrisy on BOTH sides, not just one.

:welcome:

Cheers.

[tnedator]

The problem, tnedator, is that you don't call out both sides when this happens. Instead, you go along with the right wing crowd, continue to call out Obama, on a topic that is in essence no different than the one LABF created here.

It's fine that you want better discourse. So do I. It begins with calling out hypocrisy on BOTH sides, not just one.

:welcome:

Cheers.

Did you not send me rep for this post (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3207715#post3207715) after I pointed out that that eipicsocial guy twisted Stephanopolous' comment to Bachman?

I am conservative, there is no denying that. I do my very best to not be a part of the lying, deceit and name calling that the zealots on both sides feel is necessary to make their points.

Am I more likely to point out the deceit and lies on the left? Yep, it's human nature. I'm guilty. However, unlike some, I DO point out the ridiculousness from the right.

That said, does that really give you license to distort (being kind) what I say? I think not.

I think you're a smart guy, even though I think you are wrong on many positions (as you think about me), but how about at least YOU and I try and have an HONEST debate, and dispense with the deceit and fabrication, like when you said "Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL" which had nothing to do with what I said.

Are you game?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Did you not send me rep for this post (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=3207715#post3207715) after I pointed out that that eipicsocial guy twisted Stephanopolous' comment to Bachman?

I am conservative, there is no denying that. I do my very best to not be a part of the lying, deceit and name calling that the zealots on both sides feel is necessary to make their points.

Am I more likely to point out the deceit and lies on the left? Yep, it's human nature. I'm guilty. However, unlike some, I DO point out the ridiculousness from the right.

That said, does that really give you license to distort (being kind) what I say? I think not.

I think you're a smart guy, even though I think you are wrong on many positions (as you think about me), but how about at least YOU and I try and have an HONEST debate, and dispense with the deceit and fabrication, like when you said "Gee, you're right. This never happens from the right. LOL" which had nothing to do with what I said.

Are you game?

Yep, I'm in.

LABF, it's pretty disingenuous to compare a reality show on the Fox network to Fox News just because of the parent company. I doubt Roger Ailes had anything to do with the video editing. In this case, anyway.

Better?

[tnedator]

Yep, I'm in.

LABF, it's pretty disingenuous to compare a reality show on the Fox network to Fox News just because of the parent company. I doubt Roger Ailes had anything to do with the video editing. In this case, anyway.

Better?

Yes, but I don't even care if you call LABF out, just don't accuse me of doing something I didn't do or lump me in with the right wing zealots... ;)

That said, I'm all for calling out both sides when they are full of **** and twisting things.

****, I need a drink, and live in a ****ing dry county!!

[cutthemdown]

FOX is a biased group of righties who push the right agenda. There I said it are the liberals happy. Oh but wait, MSNBC, CNN, CBS all super liberal and do the exact opposite.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

FOX is a biased group of righties who push the right agenda. There I said it are the liberals happy. Oh but wait, MSNBC, CNN, CBS all super liberal and do the exact opposite.

MSNBC, yes. No question.

CNN? Not really. Still more of a straight news organization than MSNBC or Faux.

CBS? Oh please. Why, because Dan Rather (who doesn't work there anymore) did a poorly sourced story on Bush's service record? Pfft.

A major difference is that in several independent studies, Faux viewers have been shown to know the fewest facts of any viewers of any channels. Oddly enough, they are also the most sure that they know the most.

I guess their facts are just different. Must be it.

[tnedator]

MSNBC, yes. No question.

CNN? Not really. Still more of a straight news organization than MSNBC or Faux.

CBS? Oh please. Why, because Dan Rather (who doesn't work there anymore) did a poorly sourced story on Bush's service record? Pfft.

A major difference is that in several independent studies, Faux viewers have been shown to know the fewest facts of any viewers of any channels. Oddly enough, they are also the most sure that they know the most.

I guess their facts are just different. Must be it.

First, you are furthering inflammatory speak with silly names like "Faux".

Second, CNN is far from a straight news organization. Only people on the left make that claim about CNN or the networks. I don't have time now, but there are countless examples of clear bias in their reporting -- typically related to covering only one side of a story or the 'reporter' editorializing while reporting or during an interview (as Foxnews is guilty of from the conservative position).

Third, look at those studies in detail. There are other studies that have shown Fox viewers to be far and away the most informed. Other studies that have found Fox viewers misinformed were flawed, as they were based on the liberal views of the group that conducted the survey, such as whether or not man is creating global warming and other questions which are at minimum open for debate as to the "correct" answer.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

I will look forward to seeing your examples, as well as seeing "proof" that the studies in question were the problem, not the viewers of Faux News.

I call it Faux News because that's what it is: Fake news. Not real news. It's editorial, with news attached. The other networks may well have editorial attached to news, but they're primarily news programming.

30 minutes a day, Faux spends on ACTUAL NEWS PROGRAMMING. 23.5 hours a day, it's editorial under a news banner.

[tnedator]

I will look forward to seeing your examples, as well as seeing "proof" that the studies in question were the problem, not the viewers of Faux News.

I call it Faux News because that's what it is: Fake news. Not real news. It's editorial, with news attached. The other networks may well have editorial attached to news, but they're primarily news programming.

30 minutes a day, Faux spends on ACTUAL NEWS PROGRAMMING. 23.5 hours a day, it's editorial under a news banner.

First, you brought up Foxnews viewers being misinformed, therefore it is incumbent upon YOU to provide proof -- the studies showing such. Just like you wanted someone else to provide the "racist" cartoons. Can't have it both ways.

Second, you are simply being inflammatory, and clearly partisan. There is no way you can claim that about Fox, but say a network with Joy Beyhar (sp?) is straight news.

Third, I watch Foxnews regularly, and your 23.5 hour remark is simply made up with zero basis in truth. They run their evening commentary shows twice (west coast), which is six hours, along with Beck twice and Red Eye. So, if you believe that Greta is right wing (which is crazy), along with Hannity (far right) and whatever the hell the old senile guy is, then at best that's 9 hours a day of pure commentary/opinion stuff, which clearly leans right to far right depending on the show (with Greta being all over the place).

The rest of the time is mostly straight news reporting separated by interviews. It is very rare that they do interviews of people from only one side, meaning they will have a Republican and Democrat on at the same time, or on two consecutive segments talking about the same thing (in cases where the guest, like say former press secretary Gibbs wouldn't be interested in a back and forth segment).

Now, there is no doubt that the interviewers are often guilty of steering interviews based on their conservative bias, and some times editorialize with their questions JUST LIKE the reporters/interviewers on CNN and the networks do, but with a liberal bias (have you watched Meet the Press lately and looked at objectively?).

Anyway, your claim is baseless, but I still took the effort to try and break it down and explain that while there is clearly conservative bias (quite heavy in some of the evening shows), it is nothing like what you claim.

Politifact would give you a "pants on fire" for that statement.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Sorry, but you lost at "if you think Greta Van Sustren is right wing, you're crazy." She's juuuuuuuust this side of Ann Coulter's Adam's Apple.

As for the studies, the onus is on you. There are several studies, which you say have been debunked. Show me where they've been debunked. You clearly know about the studies. Now let's see where they've been debunked.

[cutthemdown]

MSNBC, yes. No question.

CNN? Not really. Still more of a straight news organization than MSNBC or Faux.

CBS? Oh please. Why, because Dan Rather (who doesn't work there anymore) did a poorly sourced story on Bush's service record? Pfft.

A major difference is that in several independent studies, Faux viewers have been shown to know the fewest facts of any viewers of any channels. Oddly enough, they are also the most sure that they know the most.

I guess their facts are just different. Must be it.

No if you answer yes to the question IS THE ECONOMY IMPROVING you get marked down as misinformed. If you answer No to any global warming question you get labeled uninformed. If you answer a baby is a life when it has a heartbeat you get labeled uninformed. The liberals don't get to decide those issues which is what those polls do.

[DomCasual]

Are we really starting threads, criticizing Fox NEWS for something FOX NETWORK did?

Really?

Fox NETWORK did once did a show called Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire, where they had some imbecile pretend to be rich. I don't think Fox NETWORK pretends to be a bastion of all that is good and true.

NBC just did a show where it pretended Meatloaf had the ability to be a business mogul. MSNBC is a bunch of frauds, apparently.

Seriously, I can understand criticisms of Fox News. I personally don't choose to watch it. But this? Seriously?

[cutthemdown]

really the % on those informed not informed polls are close, its the few questions liberals come up with that skew it. Sure they point to economy growing some as a fact you can't say economy getting worst. But a question like is the country still in recession can be subjective because some people dont believe the govt numbers on growth, unemployment and inflation.

[tnedator]

Sorry, but you lost at "if you think Greta Van Sustren is right wing, you're crazy." She's juuuuuuuust this side of Ann Coulter's Adam's Apple.

As for the studies, the onus is on you. There are several studies, which you say have been debunked. Show me where they've been debunked. You clearly know about the studies. Now let's see where they've been debunked.

Damn tablet, posted a relatively detailed response and the browser crashes and I lose it. Bopped back to the PC for this reply.

First, that statement about Greta is ridiculous. There is no other word for it.

Second, you brought up the fact that Foxnews viewers are misinformed, but refuse to back it up. That either means that you don't know how to back it up, because it's something you've seen on the liberal news (CNN, MSNBC, or the networks), read on a liberal blog or on here or you afraid that if you post it, that I will poke holes in it as a biased study. Either way it's sad that in another thread you call out a poster for not posting details to back up one of his claims, but you do the exact same thing.

You talk about wanting to have more open, honest dialogue, rather than party line talking points and bomb throwing, but your actions speak much louder than your hollow words right now.

[tnedator]

No if you answer yes to the question IS THE ECONOMY IMPROVING you get marked down as misinformed. If you answer No to any global warming question you get labeled uninformed. If you answer a baby is a life when it has a heartbeat you get labeled uninformed. The liberals don't get to decide those issues which is what those polls do.

Another classic was whether or not the recently passed health care law will increase the deficit. If you said yes, as many/most Foxnews viewers said, you are "misinformed", even though anyone that's at all familiar with the legislation knows that the doc fix was left out, the double counted the $500 billion medicare cut, and included the nationalization of the student loan program (for lack of a better definition) to get a 'deficit reduction' on paper.

Even with that, the CBO was only able to score it deficit reducing based on the 'assumptions' by the very people that wrote the bill about the cost savings that would appear.

Yet, if you said that the health care bill wouldn't decrease the deficit, you were "misinformed".

But, hey, the Daily Kos and CNN ran headlines saying Foxnews viewers are misinformed, so it must be true.

I get so sick of people blindly following not only the party's talking points, but those put out by the far left and right fringe of the parties. Sad.

[barryr]

Only Obama´s undying loverbirds, including some around here, actually believe and state the economy is ok and doing well.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

FOX is a biased group of righties who push the right agenda.

Wow - a conservative got the point of the thread.

I'm impressed.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Here you go, T! Happy reading!

You'll notice that, yes, some of the answers have a partisan tilt. Things like "Will the stimulus increase the deficit?" Of course it will. But things like "Do most scientists agree that climate change isn't happening?" Well, no. No they don't. Fox viewers insisted that most scientists agree that climate change isn't happening. I'll go ahead and bold the bits that are simply factually incorrect for you. I'd hate to think you couldn't see where I backed up my claim.

(Dec. 17) -- Fair and balanced ... and factually incorrect?

A newly released study out of the University of Maryland (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=) concludes that viewers of the Fox News Channel were "significantly more likely" to believe a host of factually incorrect information than viewers who watched other television news organizations.

Fox is by no means the only media outlet guilty of spreading what the study considers misniformation, but the channel's viewers were found to believe incorrect views on matters of established fact in much higher percentages than those peple who got their news of the world elsewhere.

Those who watched Fox News during the 2010 election cycle were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that ...

... most economists estimate the stimulus (http://www.aolnews.com/2010/11/24/stimulus-provided-large-jobs-boost-cbo-report-concludes/) caused job losses (12 points more likely). - Not true. Most economists agree that the job losses would have been much worse if not for the stimulus.

... most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points more likely). Of course it will.

... the economy is getting worse (26 points more likely). Meh, it's not really getting worse. The recovery has slowed, but things aren't getting worse as the Republicans (and Fox) like to trumpet.

... most scientists do not agree that climate change (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/15/fox-news-climate-change-email) is occurring (30 points more likely). WRONG. Straight up wrong. Most scientists agree that climate change IS occurring, and the ones who dissent? Yeah, they've been shown to be on the dole (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/thinktanks-take-oil-money-and-use-it-to-fund-climate-deniers-1891747.html) from right wing think tanks. What a surprise.

... the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points more likely). WRONG. Holy ****, that's wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.

... their own income taxes have gone up (14 points). WRONG! Again!

... the auto bailout (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/16/good-news-on-gm-and-the-auto-bailout-but-will-americans-care/) only occurred under Obama (13 points). Just 10000000% factually incorrect. No bias here based on politics, just Fox LYING to its viewers.

... when TARP came up for a vote, most Republicans opposed it (12 points). Go ahead and look at the voting record. Enjoy what you find.

... it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (http://www.aolnews.com/2010/10/18/obama-on-mythbusters-top-5-presidential-myths-in-need-of-bust/) (31 points). BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, Oh birthers. Never change.

The study found that it wasn't just Republican Fox viewers who were swayed to believe the less-than-accurate information. Democratic viewers of the channel also more likely to believe those things, too. Bolded because it shows that it's NOT a partisan bias, but really what Fox is putting on the air that is leading these folks (like you) astray.

Surge Desk's calls to the Fox News Channel for comment on the study were not returned.

There have been other studies that have found the same. I suppose I can spend more of my work day looking them up and posting them if necessary, but I'm going to be in the field for most of the day. Apologies if I can't respond right away.

[tnedator]

Ok, this is a start. Thanks for making the effort to substantiate your claim. I am heading to work (late actually), so don't have time to address it in detail right now, but in the mean time, it might be good for you to take a look at Politifacts take on this and their assessment that Stewart's claim was wrong and why. There are many reasons, including the misleading nature of their questions ("the majority of economists...") and the wide degree of viewership that Foxnews has compared to other "media outlets."

Enjoy: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

[alkemical]

If ads can give people false memories....what does it say about other programming also?

[barryr]

Funny how the left likes to go after Fox for being "biased" yet unike with Fox, choose to never spend the time going through eah day´s programs on the major networks and other slanted left type of outlets. Of course even if they did, they´d quickly come to the conclusion they are fair and balanced.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Funny how the left likes to go after Fox for being "biased" yet unike with Fox, choose to never spend the time going through eah day´s programs on the major networks and other slanted left type of outlets. Of course even if they did, they´d quickly come to the conclusion they are fair and balanced.

Please. Stop. Talking.

You're not smart enough to post on any topic, let alone media bias.

[barryr]

Please. Stop. Talking.

You're not smart enough to post on any topic, let alone media bias.

LOL, look who is talking? You need help to type in words for a simple google search LOL

[Garcia Bronco]

I've noticed this from most major "news" outlets.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

LOL, look who is talking? You need help to type in words for a simple google search LOL

Pretty brave card for you to play, Mr. "I make statements without ever backing them up."

Keep up the ****ty work, you flaming pile of retard.

[barryr]

Pretty brave card for you to play, Mr. "I make statements without ever backing them up."

Keep up the ****ty work, you flaming pile of retard.

Here´s help: find whatever search engine, you know, a program that helps you find whatever you need on the net. And then type in a word or phrase you are looking for. And then with your little mouse, you know the thing that helps move your cursor, clink search or..hold onto your hat, you can even hit return or-gasp, even the enter key. And then look at all the wonderful sites that come up. Wow, it sure is hard I know, but now, let´s give you an even harder challenge. Try to locate your rear with both hands. Can you do it? I don´t know. Hopefully you have some free hours to try. Taking bets how long it takes you. :clown:

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Here´s help: find whatever search engine, you know, a program that helps you find whatever you need on the net. And then type in a word or phrase you are looking for. And then with your little mouse, you know the thing that helps move your cursor, clink search or..hold onto your hat, you can even hit return or-gasp, even the enter key. And then look at all the wonderful sites that come up. Wow, it sure is hard I know, but now, let´s give you an even harder challenge. Try to locate your rear with both hands. Can you do it? I don´t know. Hopefully you have some free hours to try. Taking bets how long it takes you. :clown:

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.

[barryr]

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.

Did you do the search like I suggested? Oops, that´s right, you don´t know how. How sad.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Did you do the search like I suggested? Oops, that´s right, you don´t know how. How sad.

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.

[barryr]

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.

The same search engine can be used to find all of Obama´s accomplishments.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

The same search engine can be used to find all of Obama´s accomplishments.

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.

[cutthemdown]

Let us know when you've found those awful racist comics about Condoleeza Rice.



Well this one was pretty bad and upset women's organizations all over.

[cutthemdown]

I mean cmon Orton you agree that was pretty bad right?

[Tombstone RJ]

Sharp-Eyed Viewers Catch Fox's 'MasterChef' Faking a Huge Crowd

By Lindsay Robertson, The Set | Thursday, June 23, 2011, 10:55 AM

On Monday's episode of Fox's Gordon Ramsay-hosted cooking competition "MasterChef," the opening scene featured a shot of a huge crowd supposedly gathering to audition for the show, with a voice-over describing the "thousands" who lined up to try out. Yesterday, an eagle-eyed Reddit user (http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/i6agq/television_sorcery/) noticed something weird about the crowd. Namely, the same people showed up multiple times in the same shot:
http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/tv/fpentblogs/600_masterchefcrowd_062311.jpg
On the one hand: ooooh, you mean TV shows are messed with by photo editors? I thought everything was real!
On the other: it's fun when the internet catches a behemoth like Fox doctoring a crowd of hopefuls for one of their reality shows. To be fair, this probably happens all the time without anyone catching on, but when you watch the video, it actually is pretty shockingly noticeable. "Why are those two ladies in orange waving in exact unison? Oh, because they're the same person":


In a comment to Entertainment Weekly (http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/06/22/masterchef-fake-crowd-shot-photo/), Fox admitted the photo was changed and says they won't use that shot anymore. It doesn't really affect anything (thousands probably did audition) but it's a fun gotcha for a show that takes itself so very seriously.

who watch's this crap anyway? who cares?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

I mean cmon Orton you agree that was pretty bad right?

Meh. I guess. I don't think it's racist, not in the slightest. I could see how a women's organization might take issue with it, though.

[cutthemdown]

Meh. I guess. I don't think it's racist, not in the slightest. I could see how a women's organization might take issue with it, though.

Well the lips are really blown up, and the storyline suggests she was sort of an Uncle Tom doing Bush's dirty work etc etc. I don't have a problem with any of it but I do think that often the word racism comes out on people that don't deserve it, on both sides. I do think that the black civil rights movement has lost a ton of ammo because of the fact Racism is sort of the boy who cries wolf. Often there is no real racism, maybe just some stereotypes, or lack of tact.

You can at least agree that cartoons like that are all the real racists need to say hey look everyone makes fun of black people. Can't we at least agree at least once lol. I'm not even saying its a big deal. Really offensive cartoons is sort of an American tradition, especially in politics. Hell I don't even subscribe to the kids are off limits when it comes to these guys. Better make sure your family is tight and in order before you run for President.

[cutthemdown]

Also I want to say I think Condi is an impressive woman, black or white. Well spoken, smart, and plays the piano at a really high level. Obviously Bush was her boss so she had to sort of tow the line for him.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Well the lips are really blown up, and the storyline suggests she was sort of an Uncle Tom doing Bush's dirty work etc etc. I don't have a problem with any of it but I do think that often the word racism comes out on people that don't deserve it, on both sides. I do think that the black civil rights movement has lost a ton of ammo because of the fact Racism is sort of the boy who cries wolf. Often there is no real racism, maybe just some stereotypes, or lack of tact.

You can at least agree that cartoons like that are all the real racists need to say hey look everyone makes fun of black people. Can't we at least agree at least once lol. I'm not even saying its a big deal. Really offensive cartoons is sort of an American tradition, especially in politics. Hell I don't even subscribe to the kids are off limits when it comes to these guys.

I just don't see that cartoon as racist. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, it's the same in my mind as making Obama's ears big, highlighting Bush II's trademark squint, Hilary's teeth and hair, Bill's big, red nose. You take a noticeable feature of the person, then accentuate it like a caricature.

http://www.funnyphotos.net.au/images/obama-political-funnies-before-you-go-walkin-on-wa1.jpg

http://webhost.bridgew.edu/jhayesboh/graphics/bush-oil.jpg

http://www.blackcommentator.com/302/302_images/302_cartoon_obama_and_hillary_duet_small_over.gif

http://www.politicallore.com/images/Cartoons/Bill%20Clinton%20Comic.jpg

Better make sure your family is tight and in order before you run for President.

For real.

[cutthemdown]

I agree ORTON none of that is racism. You know me I have a high threshold for that stuff. I want to save racism for the guy who beats someone because of his races, who denies him a loan, who says he cant get an education, or denies him work etc etc. It's not about black jokes, white jokes, offensive language, saying the ****er, saying honkey, saying wetback, or making Obamas ears big etc etc. I agree 100% I only posted that cartoon because you asked which ones he is talking about. I agree though a cartoon can't be racist, only in poor taste. Only people can be racists.

[cutthemdown]

Just recently though they have the police in NY shooting the chimp looking Obama and the left went crazy Orton. Where were you on that issue? Be honest. By being honst with yourself you can grow as a human. Not saying I don't have a long ways to go, i do.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Just recently though they have the police in NY shooting the chimp looking Obama and the left went crazy Orton. Where were you on that issue? Be honest. By being honst with yourself you can grow as a human. Not saying I don't have a long ways to go, i do.

I am not sure (or don't remember) what you're talking about. Can you refresh me?

[cutthemdown]

this one?

[cutthemdown]

Either offensive cartoons that push the limit are ok, or they aren't, IMO you can't pick and choose based on your ideology or what amount of offensiveness you will tolerate. Someone else has a different threshold. Not a lot offends me, so I wouldn't want to say that none of these cartoons are offensive. I only argue they aren't racist.

[barryr]

Whether one wants to debate what is racist or not to their own thinking is fine, but you
can´t convince me if Rice happened to be champion on the left, that the liberals would not have been in hysterics about it and continued to do so until someone got fired. Let´s also face the reality that the only reason Rice isn´t more highly regarded and talked about ad nauseum considering all of her accomplishments is the liberals decided she belongs to the "wrong" party long ago. She just isn´t "black" enough according to their usual labeling everybody.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

this one?

The monkey is supposed to represent Obama?

Did he write the bill?

Or were they saying it was so bad it was written by a monkey?

I've honestly never seen that comic before.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Whether one wants to debate what is racist or not to their own thinking is fine, but you
can´t convince me if Rice happened to be champion on the left, that the liberals would not have been in hysterics about it and continued to do so until someone got fired. Let´s also face the reality that the only reason Rice isn´t more highly regarded and talked about ad nauseum considering all of her accomplishments is the liberals decided she belongs to the "wrong" party long ago. She just isn´t "black" enough according to their usual labeling everybody.

Riiiiight. Has nothing to do with the fact that she worked for the most incompetent administration in US history.

I actually have a great deal of respect for Dr. Rice. However, I don't agree with how she carried water for an inept administration. Some of the reasoning behind some of their moves was just downright bogus.

[cutthemdown]

The monkey is supposed to represent Obama?

Did he write the bill?

Or were they saying it was so bad it was written by a monkey?

I've honestly never seen that comic before.

You know what I don't know for sure lol. Can't believe you don't remember that it was a HUGE deal when it come out. I think the monkey is supposed to be the Healthcare Bill, but a lot of people said hey whites use monkeys to make fun of blacks and they ran with it. Really surprised you don't remember that cartoon.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

You know what I don't know for sure lol. Can't believe you don't remember that it was a HUGE deal when it come out. I think the monkey is supposed to be the Healthcare Bill, but a lot of people said hey whites use monkeys to make fun of blacks and they ran with it. Really surprised you don't remember that cartoon.

Yeah, I really don't. I don't read newspapers for the cartoons, though. :afro:

I remember there being a big deal made about a New Yorker cover... but I can't for the life of me remember what the big deal was.

[Odysseus]

What do politics have to do with the Broncos? yet there's all those epicFAIL threads on the main page...

werd