UPDATED: (see bottom of post)
Ron Paul surprised many in the Iowa Straw Poll with his 9.1% showing, and it appears from the Fox News Channel graphic below that this news may be surprising to many in the Fox audience as well.
What's missing from this graphic are the candidates who came in 4th (Tom Trancredo - 1961 votes - 13.7%) and 5th (Ron Paul - 1305 votes - 9.1%).
Hat tip to Max Tower, who writes on his blog:
How can they leave out Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul? They showed 1-3, and 6-8. This is just irresponsible news reporting. America might as well give up on getting a real candidate elected. The only ones that will be covered by the media are those who have sold out.
In fairness to Fox News they may have announced Trancredo's and Paul's results in a voiceover while this graphic was on the screen. Then again, this is Fox News, and the slogan up in the top left-hand corner is an absolute misnomer. This may well have been an attempt by Fox to marginalize Paul and Trancredo -- two opposite and polar influences on conservative voters which may detract from the Fox News vision for the future. Fox's bias and spin is legendary, and getting worse.
This piggybacks nicely on reports out yesterday exposing the wikipedia 'scrubbing' done by the Fox New organization. Here, 'scrubbing' refers to the apparent changing and editing of Wikipedia entries by Fox News Channel employees which 'scrub' or improve Fox's image or detracts from Fox's competitors.
One of the Kos kids, Democrashield, explains:
In the article on Chris Wallace, a two-paragraph long reference to Media Matters for America was removedIn the article on Carl Cameron, an entire section detailing Cameron's criticism of Democrats was removed
Fox News Channel didn't stop at scrubbing Wikipedia entries about their own staff as above -- no, no -- the Fox News organization decides for its audience, remember the example above? Saves the Fox News audience from actually having to think for themselves...
An example - this creative Fox News Channel editing of Fox's competitor MSNBC's anchor Keith Olbermann Wikipedia entry:
Additionally, a line about criticism of Olbermann's perceived liberal bias goes fromSome conservatives feel that Olbermann's reporting carries a liberal bias.
To
Conservatives feel that Olbermann's reporting liberal bias.
Neat. Kind of a public service of sorts performed by Fox with these edits. 
Just tell everyone that all conservatives think that way. It's a tidy little lie, and it saves any lazy conservatives in Fox News' audience from actually having to think and decide for themselves... a process which probably causes pain accompanied by sparks and wisps of blue smoke as their tin-foil pirate hats short circuit.
In total, there appear to be 102 Wikipedia edits performed from within the Fox News organization.
Maybe it's time for Fox to update their Election 2008 slogan to
"We Decide, So You Don't Have To!"
Those tin-foil pirate hats will last a lot longer this way...
UPDATE: The BBC has traced some Wikipedia 'scrubbing' back to CIA offices. More here.
Comments (5)
You don't understand; the clever as a fox viewer immediately noted that the total only summed to around 75% and the really astute among them knew which two were missing, and why the uncontesting were included at the bottom.
It's liberals who miss the point.
=====================
1. Posted by kim | August 16, 2007 12:19 PM
Posted on August 16, 2007 12:19
Nice scrub, Kim. You have a future in broadcast lying...
2. Posted by Lee Ward | August 16, 2007 12:49 PM
Posted on August 16, 2007 12:49
All the networks are corporate shills, but Fox is decidedly the worst. When things are rotten with the powers that be (which happens to be in Republican Washington), you can always count on BS divertimenti about kids giving blowjobs in Palookaville on O'Reilly.
He calls it "looking out for The Folks". I think he's looking for a rise in our Levis.
And those mandatory American flag lapel pins (ugh!): it practically shouts "Please don't ask me about my service to the country! I'm wearing a pin!"
As for Ron Paul, it's gonna get worse. The Diebold ballotless machines still being used and promoted 6 years after its CEO promised the election to Bush in 2000, and after myriad backdoors and other vulnerabilities being exposed (and at a fricken straw poll were handcounts take less than an hour easy!) means the fixins are on the table.
We have a dual one party system IMO with approved candidates dubbed "Top Tier", via methods and operations that are supposed to reinforce public confidence in the one ("2") party system: Fox is only a part, but like RNC-Bushco, they're kinda blowing their end of it, ever bragadocious and beating their chests to unintentionally comic effect.
Remember George of the Jungle cartoons?
* WATCH OUT FOR THAT...Tree*@#%29%
3. Posted by bryanD | August 16, 2007 1:45 PM
Posted on August 16, 2007 13:45
Another good reason that I like CNN better. FOX is sometimes inept, besides any bias problems.
4. Posted by Paul Hooson | August 17, 2007 2:09 PM
Posted on August 17, 2007 14:09
Naw, you like CNN because it supports your world view better than Fox does. You can't help it, uncritical as you are.
===========================
5. Posted by kim | August 19, 2007 7:31 AM
Posted on August 19, 2007 07:31