What is Digg?105 Comments
- mal1964, on 11/16/2007, -4/+45And digg is plotting to put Ron Paul in.
- flink405, on 11/16/2007, -6/+39And CNN (Clinton News Network) is working to put Hillary in the White House.
Last night´s debate showed that Wolf Blitzer is planning to be Press Secretary in the Bill & Hill White House.... - ChristPissed, on 11/16/2007, -17/+42The FCC needs revoke FAUX News broadcasting license, permanently. This type of criminality is not in the public interest.
- freejimmypage, on 11/16/2007, -3/+20Are we living through the slow process of a government slipping into fascism? Isn’t the storyline of Animal Farm playing out right in front of our eyes? Isn’t this report an indication of the extent to which we are under control and won’t it really be proof if the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge that?
"Common to all definitions [of Totalitarianism] is the attempt to mobilize entire populations in support of the official state ideology, and the intolerance of activities which are not directed towards the goals of the state, entailing repression or state control of business, labour unions, churches or political parties. Totalitarian regimes or movements maintain themselves in political power by means of secret police, propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, personality cult, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, single-party state, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror tactics."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism
It’s hard to even realize the transformation since it occurs slowly over many generations. All forms of mass media (besides some independent sources found on the web) are now owned by a few of the country's wealthiest people and corporations. The Federal Government acts as a means to funnel them money through endless forms of hidden and overt taxation. - catalysis, on 11/16/2007, -4/+21Yes, thats the answer. Total government control over media. /sarcasm
- phlanx, on 11/16/2007, -6/+20Short answer.
Yes, they are. - masterm1nd, on 11/16/2007, -1/+10Is it the people, or the largest mob?
- chrisatwork, on 11/16/2007, -4/+12I hope it works
- masonreloaded, on 11/16/2007, -3/+10Don't know if I buy the vast conspiracy angle, but Hannity has definitely been biased towards Giuliani more than the other candidates on his radio show - giving him a free ride on abortion and other topics that the right-wing would normally be all over a candidate for.
(I dont watch Hannity's Fox show, but find him an entertaining listen - despite disagreeing with him >80% of the time) - ganymede2010, on 11/16/2007, -3/+10Rupert Murdoch has held fundraisers for Hillary Clinton. Her coronation is inevitable.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics ...
burried as inaccurate. - inactive, on 11/16/2007, -0/+6I thought it was odd for them to let her explain her last debate performance. It came across as confrontational when I first saw it.
I watched the first 30 minutes again when it came on the second time (why, I don't know) and it appeared to be a setup to clear her name. - MikeFallopian, on 11/16/2007, -1/+7Yes, let's have the Congress enact a law to control what the media is allowed to say... oh wait...
- Inflammo, on 11/16/2007, -1/+6So, the government should take control of the media and what they are allowed to say? Thats idiotic. Just because you don't agree with Fox doesn't mean their right to broadcast should be taken.
- saunders45, on 11/16/2007, -9/+14Rawstory = FoxNews. They both are extremely slanted news sources.
- badqat, on 11/16/2007, -4/+9If anything, Fox seems to be leaning towards putting Hillary in the White House, which should make raw sewage followers happy.
- Shawn4168, on 11/16/2007, -0/+4I disagree...they had Pat Robertson on Hannity and Colmes last week, and they were both giving Pat a pretty rough time for announcing his support for Giuliani.
- MikeFallopian, on 11/16/2007, -0/+4Now you've done it. Digg loves it some rawstory.com
- diespectra, on 11/16/2007, -0/+4Yes.
- masterm1nd, on 11/16/2007, -2/+6Very true. It's sad that people can't see ***** when it smells like them. The only minor differences being a television network has slightly higher standards it has to live up to in order to not get banned/bankrupt. I would count rawstory worse, but it does has a right wing counter site somewhere. As does fox have a left wing counter network somewhere (or a bunch of little tiny ones)...
- spyd3rweb, on 11/16/2007, -1/+4Rupert Murdoch is financing the Hillary campaign
- synthpop, on 11/16/2007, -1/+4Giuliani had this reply: "Fox News 9/11 presidency 9/11 in no way 9/11 terrorists 9/11 Iran 9/11 terror"
- Crosshare, on 11/16/2007, -0/+3Burying your comment as inaccurate, as the scale shows Lieberman as very liberal. They guy is a wolf in sheep's clothing pure and simple.
- spankaccount, on 11/17/2007, -0/+3CNN gets caught planting questions at a democratic debate TODAY and THIS makes it to the front page?
- l00s3r, on 11/16/2007, -0/+3Take what license?
- winmywii, on 11/16/2007, -8/+11Maybe you should check again.
- seraph582, on 11/16/2007, -2/+5http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bia ...
'nuff said - Seidoger, on 11/16/2007, -0/+3So the republican candidate has an easy to beat opponent?
- Shawn4168, on 11/16/2007, -1/+4So you're saying that the Digg community is representative of the US population, and the people that own a news station aren't?
- sifuchar, on 11/16/2007, -1/+4FALSE. UCLA (a place most would consider left-of-center) did a study and found Fox News to be tied for the most balanced. Sorry to disappoint you. Here's the link again (as posted above by seraph582).
http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bia ...
The truth only lies in the middle if both views are equidistant from it. - 2TallTxn, on 11/16/2007, -1/+3Since when did the FCC issue licenses for cable?
- testbenchdude, on 11/16/2007, -2/+4Uh... DUH. Not only is he the GOP's only viable candidate, but FOX (and more importantly, Mr. Murdoch) caters to spreading their own special breed of FUD. Giuliani's a perfect fit what with his constant 9/11 stumping.
Side note. Take a look at the Presidential Debate Schedule here: http://www.youdecide2008.com/2007/06/13/full-2008- ...
Notice anything absent from FOX's lineup? Now I like CNN only marginally more than I like FOX, but come on, it's no secret where their party affiliation lies, in fact it's shamingly, alarmingly, blatantly obvious. I agree with ChristPissed's sentiment. Fair and Balanced? That's almost grounds for a class-action consumer fraud case, if you ask me. - badqat, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2Uh, Alan Colmes is a lib. Geraldo is a lib. That's two right there...compared to CNN's one (Glenn Beck) and MSNBC's one (Carlson Tucker).
- Crosshare, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2Whether on not they want to admit it, the right wing think tank would rather have Hillary win the presidency, if the GOP candidate cannot. That way, after her term is up, they can polarize the country even more and point fingers and say "see, see, this is what the democrats are like". Hillary doesn't represent my views, but somehow she's being pushed as the best left wing candidate by the MSM. The truth is, 80% of the county agrees on more things than they disagree on, but you wouldn't ever tell that by watching the news. It's red state vs blue state.
- Delphium226, on 11/18/2007, -0/+2so sayeth a shill
- Takalth, on 11/16/2007, -1/+3Sorry, but what makes people think that any news source will ever be unbiased. News sources are run by humans, and humans have agendas (whether good or bad). Even a news source run by a noble-minded person who genuinely wants nothing more than to provide the truth will still prefer to spend their air time (or web space, or whatever) on stories that favor the views of the owners whenever presented with a choice.
You want news, get a variety of sources with a variety of biases and keep your BS sensors turned to high. You'll still probably believe a false story now and then, but you can be reasonably well-informed.
(note: Digg supplies a variety of sources but not a variety of biases. If you don't believe me, show me the last time a pro-bush or anti-global warming article hit the front page). - SolitaireRose, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2Fox News is not a broadcast organization. The FCC has no authority over them. I am all for making sure that there is some sort of control over station ownership, but Cable is not over the public airwaves, so the same controls don't make sense.
- londubh, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but Rupert Murdoch's mum is 100.
- Charlotte_Web, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2Wow, four anti-Fox commentators, one guy defending Fox. Talk about stacking the deck!
Dan Abrams put SO... MUCH... DRAMA... INTO... EVERY... WORD... !
The whole clip was a joke. Is MSNBC the new Comedy Central?
Oh, and Judith Regan is well-versed in public relations and manipulating the media. Don't tell me you've got evidence. SHOW ME the evidence and let me judge for myself.
If you were a public figure, and you had "evidence" that, in reality, didn't amount to much, how would you play it? Maybe you'd just plant the story and let the anti's talk it up, hoping that the story would become larger than the evidence. - inactive, on 11/17/2007, -1/+3CNN plants questions for Hillary Clinton. Katie Curic cries on camera when Kerry loses. CBS runs a fake story about Bush during an election. But no, they would never try to help a candidate win.
- inactive, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2Great, if there's anything a politician struggling to be taken seriously loves it's racist dooche bags loudly shouting their praise. Why dont you help out AND STOP HELPING.
What do you do for an encore, get NAMBLA to endorse him? - mcosmi, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2this story is total *****. media is controlled by the left...and one news org(fox) actually reports news without a left spin and all of a sudden they're involved in a conspiracy?? *****, just because they dont pander to hillary clinton and see her for what she is(a lying *****) does not mean they're breaking the law. This story is *****. How about they talk about the fact that CNN planted questions at the last democratic debate...but NOOOO..they would never.
- Richandler, on 11/16/2007, -1/+3Dan Abrams is like one of the top dogs at MSNBC. He decided to give himself a show and not report news but just go after Fox.
- bffoley, on 11/16/2007, -1/+3He's held fundraisers because he knows her winning the primaries will ensure republicans will rush to the polls to vote against her.
- cramtod, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1"RawSewage". Wow, your mom must be proud.
Do you have anything to back up your disparaging remarks? Nothing? Thought so. - masterm1nd, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1Or it is evidence that hannity != GOP or fox; hannity = hannity. Or that maybe because hannity has another issue or two prioritized ahead of abortion?
- masterm1nd, on 11/16/2007, -2/+3That would piss me off more than sHillary being the president.
- Fedaykin311, on 11/16/2007, -2/+3That's just evidence that the GOP doesn't actually care about abortion but rather the political influence that it can get them.
- freejimmypage, on 12/04/2007, -0/+1No, how about Ron Paul!
Time to take back America... - RollFizzlebeef, on 11/16/2007, -6/+7Hannity loves Giuliani, who's best friends with Roger Ailes, the head of FOX News -- which makes Sean Hannity the biggest boss brown-noser since Dwight Schrute.
- charles1123, on 11/17/2007, -1/+2News Sources are CFR globalist shills. They have as much truth as a late night infomercial. FOX, ABC,CBS,NBC,PBS,CNN are all helping to perpetuate a fiction! They have no honor! The are nothing but spout of BS. There just upset that we have them pegged! Giuliani is a criminal. His own firefighters know he had a hand in 9/11. Are you gonna call your your own firefighters liars Rudy? The corrupt low-life politicians and their supportive media counterparts need to answer for their crimes! Any American politician that supports a globalist agenda should be impeached now!!!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 102 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is