Godwin’s Law

Ted Turner is the poster boy for the media variant of Godwin’s Law. He just can’t resist comparing Rupert Murdoch and Fox to Hitler.

Update: Assuming FOX = Hitler, we might as well continue the analogy.

Al Jazeera – Goebbels
CBS – Franz Ferdinand

…and many more at Rant Wraith

Another Journalist Ensnared In Government Contract Hunt
Capitol Hill Memogate Update
  • bullwinkle

    Would that make Jane Fonda like a cross between Typhoid Mary and Mata Hari?

  • The amusing part is that if Rupert Murdoch truly were Hitler, CNN’s Eason Jordan would send him bribes to get “access” to his propaganda for broadcast.

  • julie

    Fox News quickly shot back through a spokesperson, “Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network, and now his mind. We wish him well.”

    http://www.nationalledger.com/scribe/archives/2005/01/ted_turner_fox.shtml

    Sorry, I’m linked challenged.

  • julie

    Can I be Ulrike Meinhof? Please! Please! Please!

  • I believe the rule of thumb in debate is that the first one to use a compare their opponent to Nazis loses automatically and forfeit’s any future rematch.

  • -S-

    Since this meme has appeared before (d’oh), I saved notes from yesterday to write about this later today, this being that the left is bandying about the denigration of “Nazi” without regard for what the term actually means.

    Either it indicates that the general adult population today never received any actual informaiton in their educations as to what the German Socialist Party was, or, they’re just insisting on the “opposites are” method of being insane and still circulating in the public.

    I think Ted Turner is understandable by that (^^), but that doesn’t explain this thing that’s now taking place among the general liberal community, misrepresenting some they don’t agree with as being “Nazi” in theme.

    BECAUSE, the ACTUAL Nazis — the German Socialist Party — was born out of LIBERALISM. It was a socialist ideology gone insane, but centered in and created by SOCIALISTS for to enforce socialism. The very history of that Party, and the Nazis who resulted from that Party, describes nearly to a mirror image the contemporary liberal, determined socialist ideology that is at work today, and that INCLUDES Ted Turner and people like him who use media to “enforce” a dictatorial socialist ideology.

    Thus, Turner’s upset here as with others like him and that is that FOX News dares to not towe the party line of liberalism. If anyone’s embodying the German Socialist Party today and the Nazis that originated from that, it is liberalism, not conservatism.

    Read the history of the area that gave rise to that party in Germany and how it was enabled and by whom and you can place contemporary liberals’ and their methods right in there, with ease. The Nazis were not — not in any way — “conservatives” nor was their political party even remotely approaching a conservative ideology.

    Another thing and that is their motivational references, the Nazis, was occultism. Even Jane Fonda, who says she is now a ‘born again Christian,” says that Ted Turner “needs to be saved.”

    Turner’s comments are like the cat that ate the canary, trying to mumble that it was the OTHER cat who ate the canary, no, it’s the DOG. Yeah, it’s DOGS, they did it, all DOGS EAT CANARIES, CATS don’t, yeah, that’s it.

    Every time I hear/read that “Nazi” tag by routinely liberals, it’s the same thing…they are more like actual Nazis and are doing the very same thing that Nazis did, and that is trying to convince everyone else that someone else is the bad guy.

  • The right-wing blogosphere = the Hitler youth, then

  • -S-

    ~DS~: I just looked over your website but had a hard time moving past your statement that “(you) endorse Daily Kos…”

    I mean, is that a joke? A really complicated, difficult to grasp joke? I sure hope so, man, because, otherwise, Kos and the average Kos readers just proved your theory, this thread. Actually, that’s a good thing.

  • -S-

    No, DOn Myers, the LEFTwing blogosphere = the Hitler youth, at least, is most similar to that/them/those in theory and ideology, not to forget behaviors.

    By preventing knowledge about the German National Socialist Party, the rebound and awful effect appears to have taken place and that is, by misinformation, lack of information, the actual awfulness of the socialist-gone-to-extremes that the Nazis epitomized has now begun again and it is through contemporary liberal zeal.

    Read up on what history about those times you can and what you’ll find is that the LIBERAL SOCIALISTS in Europe fostered the German Socialist Party. Hitler was a socialist. A liberal socialist gone insane, although I conclude that the insanity happened first.

  • -S-

    Hitler despised “organized religion” and demanded that the state, the party, become the source for establishing what the citizen should believe in and how and why. That’s socialism. That’s where liberalism heads when there are no counters to socialism.

    Hitler was an occultist. The National Sociialist Party was a socialist movement based in the occult that raised ‘the state’ to a level of adulation, which again, is socialism.

  • -S-

    And, like, for instance, JOHN KERRY, who likes to flaunt that he “was raised a Catholic,” so did Hitler also say about his own youth, as to Christianity.

    But, Hitler was an occultist. My conclusion also about Kerry, by the way.

  • Donny, you better start taking something for that irony deficiency.

  • Rod Stanton

    Ter should take his daddy’s money and buy another sail boat. At least he was a good sail boat captain.

  • Journalists petition FCC to challenge Fox-13 license renewalAlexis Muellner 1/3/05
    Link

    Two TV journalists have challenged the broadcast license renewal of WTVT Fox-13 asserting it deliberately broadcast false and distorted news reports. Reporters Jane Akre and Steve Wilson filed the petition Monday against the Tampa station, a unit of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Television conglomerate.
    In 1998, the two filed a civil court lawsuit seeking employee protections under the state Whistleblower Act that resulted in a $425,000 jury award to Akre. That verdict was overturned in 2003 when an appellate court accepted Fox’s defense that since it is not technically against any law, rule or regulation for a broadcaster to distort the news, the journalists were never entitled to employee protections as whistleblowers in the first place.

  • But Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman from Florida who now hosts MSNBC’s nightly “Scarborough Country,” says the challenge for conservative hosts will be to prove “that we’re more than just the Pravda of the right.” He adds, “I think that’s going to be difficult for some people. I honestly don’t know what Sean Hannity is going to be able to talk about. If you’ve been reading off the Republican National Committee’s talking points like he has for the past four years, it’s going to be hard to be critical of the status quo.”

    Right-Wing Wins Take Wind Out of Talk-Show HostsBy Paul Farhi
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, November 17, 2004; Page C01
    Link

  • “The Fox News Channel is not perceived as pure news, because it really is no different than talk radio,” says Jon Mandel, co-chief executive of Mediacom U.S., a media-buying company. WSJ, 5/20/04

  • O’Reilly thinks those left of center can’t get the job done on the air. That’s not a knock on their ideology, he says, but a comment on the liberal tendency toward inclusiveness and reflectiveness — both deadly qualities in a medium that talk-show producer Randall Bloomquist describes as “the World Wrestling Federation with ideas.”“Conservative people tend to see the world in black and white terms, good and evil,” says O’Reilly in an interview. “Liberals see grays. In any talk format, you have to pound home a strong point of view. If you’re not providing controversy and excitement, people won’t listen, or watch.”
    Talk Radio, Top Volume On the Right; Bill O’Reilly’s Debut Points Up The Dearth of Liberal Voices; [FINAL Edition]
    Paul Farhi. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2002. pg. C.01

  • “The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.”

    Henry Wallace, NYT, April 9, 1944

  • Steve J.

    Bark bark bark bark bark bark bark.

  • – Heres another tangible aspect to add to the mix…Theres a very good reason why the Marxist/Socialists hate the Fascist/Socialists… Very simply they are in direct compition for the hearts and minds of the electorate with the same ideological/political end game… Hitler vs. Stalin, France vs Germany…. Spain vs practically everybody…. etc etc… by equating Bush and the Admin to Nazi’s they stir the same old hate filled ideas, while deftly ignoring that both ideologies are defunct non-workable Socialistic BS….

    – Its amusing to watch various talking moonbat heads from the rats nest of liberal MSM bemoaning the mere existance of a single conservative countermanding voice on the airwaves/cable… The AssHats are painting themselves as not only radical ideologs, but unhinged, bigoted, and intolerant to the extreme….

    – If what passes for the Democratic party these days doesn’t get back to true Democratic ideals they may soon fade into history as a non-viable conglomerate…..

  • Its amusing to watch various talking moonbat heads from the rats nest of liberal MSM bemoaning the mere existance of a single conservative countermanding voice on the airwaves/cable… The AssHats are painting themselves as not only radical ideologs, but unhinged, bigoted, and intolerant to the extreme….

    Ya know what else is funny? Listening to pre-Enlightenment type blather on about the so-called liberal media, when even a cursury glance at either the content or ownership thereof show a clear conservative bias. Once the know-nothings get a talking point they clamp down on it like a pit bull on a postman’s leg, and no amount of logic, discourse, or content reviews by the Columbia Journalism Review or the Annenberg Project will dislodge them.

    If what passes for the Democratic party these days doesn’t get back to true Democratic ideals they may soon fade into history as a non-viable conglomerate…..

    Why worry? The Democratic and Republician parties are nearly indistingishable from each other. Both of them are servants of the corporate elite (y’know, the people who own the mainstream media) and both exist to maintain the economic status quo—meaning the rich get richer at the expense of the poor.

  • – Ahhh its the ole “class warfare” meme…. If you can’t preach in a positive tone (nothing to bring to the party….devoid of any positive helpful idea’s) then drive a wedge through the electorate and maybe you can gain some traction that way….

    – Don – no matter how much you may wish it was otherwise or how hard you try, you’re just blowing smoke trying to float the old socialist “utopian” ideals….At this very moment Euro block countries are sitting scratching their heads wondering where oh where are all those wonderful payoffs they were promised by the leftist “progressives”, even as they watch their flat or flagging economies tank, and the poor get even poorer, with fewer and fewer working middle class available to feed the public dole or support all those unworkable governmental health and welfare givaway plans…

    – Take it down the hall to the countries that still have a large part of their electorate un-educated….maybe it will play there …. Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk….

  • Big Bang Hunter: ” Ahhh its the ole “class warfare” meme”

    “I would not have voted for [President Bush’s] tax cut, based on what I know. . There is no doubt that the people at the top who need a tax break the least will get the most benefit. . . Too often presidents do things that don’t end up helping the people they should be helping, and their staffs won’t tell them their actions stink on ice.”
    Former senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) [Washington Post, 6/29/04]

  • Steve J.

    Bark bark bark bark bark bark bark.

  • -S-

    Ah, the old multiple-personality zombie.

  • I’M WITH TED TURNER:
    LET’S DECENTRALIZE ENTERTAINMENT IN AMERICA
    By Dwight Adair

    Ted Turner has railed for decades about the negative impact centralization and giant mergers have had on the media, especially the news media. He spoke eloquently about this in the July/August 2004 issue of Washington Monthly in his article “My Beef with Big Media” He, and many producers like myself, believe that overly strident, profit-seeking corporations, with their blindly zealous attention to their bottom lines, are the primary force that is homogenizing American media and public knowledge into a frightening, potentially dangerous, unenlightened glob. For the average citizen, getting the news or being entertained by mainstream broadcasting is now primarily a function of being spoon-fed by major corporations, rather than exercising a choice from a truly diverse set of content sources. Often I feel we are being told what is news and what is entertainment by global conglomerates whose primary focus is not deciphering the differences between the two, but in implementing mass thought patterns, like FEAR, that serve specific political and/or marketing plans. These greedy corporations, often protected by government policies put in place through their highly paid lobbyists, have not only created a severe lack of programming diversity, but are a serious detriment to American innovation and entrepreneurship.

    But rather than whining with many of my fellow professionals about what Big Brother is doing, and shrugging my shoulders at how impossible it is to deal with the studios, networks and cable television gatekeepers owned by these global conglomerates, myself and others have decided to do something about it. Many of us, instead, are dropping out of this mess and turning on—to acquiring, producing, and distributing entertainment digitally, globally, on the Internet. This is the true future of decentralization of media and entertainment.

    Oh, sure, I know what may of you are thinking—the many promises of the Internet have long since popped with the big economic bubble bust of a few years ago. And, yes, most of those greedy, V.C. driven promises were solutions in search of problems, delusions based on a belief in the big “I” of Internet, without regard for what was actually technologically possible and truly culturally or personally desired.

    But that was then and now is now, folks. And if I have to convince you that full motion, quality video is not only possible but now readily available on the Internet, for professional producers of quality programming, then you are either buying the self serving delusions that the studios, networks and cable entities are serving up to you, or you are ignoring or ignorant of the pornography video market’s dominance of “adult” entertainment on the Internet, or you simply haven’t explored or considered the digital distribution possibilities that are currently available on the Internet and the wide acceptance of broadband, not only in America, but around the world.

    What this all means is that professional producers of non-porn, compelling, broadcast quality entertainment have an alternative to butting their heads against the gatekeepers of network and cable television, Hollywood, and DVD distributors. One can acquire, produce, and distribute libraries of broadcast quality entertainment from a bank of servers, using present and emerging Internet distribution methods that entirely bypass these gatekeepers and deliver quality news or entertainment into your living room over your television today.

    And that’s what myself and others are doing right now. We’re ready to launch the next American and global entertainment production and distribution paradigm, just like Ted Turner did when he created CNN. And if Ted Turner is still the renegade I believe him to be, I’m looking for him to assist me in making this happen. Yes, we need his capital.
    Yes, we need his clout. But mostly, we need his spirit, his brain trust to pitch in on our vision of going bravely into this new world.

    We will be rolling out our new paradigm for entertainment distribution on the Internet in the immediate months ahead. We are not creating something that is on its way and we’re getting there first, with the best content and distribution to your new television set, portable video device, laptop, and desktop computer. Are we the only ones coming to decentralize entertainment and news, liberate diversity, and create free choice for the minds and emotions of the average citizen? Certainly not. But we are the vanguard.

    If you think for a moment that I’m kidding about the freedom of choice you are about to have in what you watch, when you watch it, and where, and the vital place the Internet plays in this development, ask yourself this: What has happened in the music industry?
    First primarily illegally, and now legally via Ipods and other MP3 devices, music acquisition, production, and distribution has changed in a revolutionary way and the music industry has had no choice but to scramble to catch up and try and make some sense (money) out of the revolution. The music industry was decentralized, and the major gatekeepers and advertisers and conglomerate owners of audio had to abandon old practices and paradigms and accept that it’s a brave new world, change or die.

    The very same thing, this decentralization, of acquisition, production and distribution, is happening to the visual industry, to the video industry. Hollywood is burying its head in the sand, saying it’s never going to happen, saying it takes too long to download a full length feature film, saying no one wants to watch entertainment on a tiny screen on their telephone, laptop or desktop sitting at their desk, they’re saying people only truly want to watch a big screen in a movie theatre or big plasma screen from their living room couches. They’re saying streaming video will never allow the same quality as their DVD’s and HDTV presentations of movies shot on 35mm film. They’re saying the video files are too big, they’re saying nobody can entertain like Hollywood, they’re saying only their blockbuster event pictures aimed at the global markets can truly be satisfying for the average American citizen looking for entertainment.

    The truth of the matter is that they’re saying all this because they are at present a legacy industry, reliant upon trillions of dollars of production and exhibition/distribution technologies, and trillions of dollars of advertising and business paradigms that would have to radically change if they ever admitted that this brave new world is upon them. So, of course, they find every reason under the sun to try to convince us it’s all hype, it’s all far into the distant future, it’s just a dream in an Internet geek’s eye, and laugh together as only the fat cats can.

    Well, I’m not an Internet geek. I’ve been in film and television as a producer/director for over thirty years and I have directed prime time network dramatic television and produced movies-of-the-week and a documentary series and am a member in good standing in the Directors Guild of America. And to those in management in our industry that are saying all those things about how the present centralized way of acquiring, producing and distributing entertainment is not going to change soon I have but one thing to say: “BUNK”

    Oh, some of what they say is true; the part about streaming video on the Internet not providing the same quality as their methods of distribution, for instance, is certainly true. But what they are ignorant of and/or don’t want you to know is that the future of distribution of video on the Internet is not going to be streaming, anyway.

    The point they miss is that hard drive storage space is getting larger and larger in smaller and smaller cases, and that what is ahead is rapid downloading of entertainment on hungry, wireless portable hard drives that load up whenever it’s in a wireless environment (or when you’re asleep) and the entertainment is then transferred to your big plasma screen, surround-sound living room theatre through digital firewire and—BINGO you’ve got the movie you want, from the comfort of your couch, at DVD quality. And if you happen to get this movie from an Internet site that has producers like myself that know what American broadcast standards are, who pride themselves in producing quality entertainment with professional storytelling talents, using experienced, professional crews, and you like the subject matter and have a great time watching the compelling entertainment presented—do you really care about from whence it originates? Do you really care that it wasn’t produced by one of media conglomerates? I think not.

    This is the decentralization that is coming. When certain pioneering professionals in the film and video industries begin acquiring, producing and distributing entertainment themselves, without having to contend with the traditional broadcast television gatekeepers and advertising-driven moguls. When certain Internet domains, in effect, become their own networks, offering video-on-demand, per-view or subscription, disseminating entertainment fare to the multitude of niches that mainstream television can never justify to its giant corporate advertisers.

    We are, presently, in the DVD recording bridge era between the present and this brave new future. Just go to your local high tech department store. A friendly sales person will show you DVR’s in the television department, where more and more people every day are recording their favorite entertainment and then playing it back later, at a more convenient time, zapping out the commercials and not paying any attention to what network it aired on originally. Imagine a few months down the road when these same people look at the falling prices of large hard drives in small boxes and say to themselves, “Why mess with these round pieces of brittle plastic when I can download the same material onto my hard drive, store it, play it back when I want to, still zapping the commercials, and perhaps decide then to save it to a DVD, if I want a physical copy for my archive?”

    Is this frightening to the film, video and television industries? You bet it is. Will
    Peer-to- peer sharing of digital entertainment media, “piracy” as the centralized media owners call it, become rampant? It’s already started and, yes, it will become rampant. Is this good for the industry I love? No, not in the short term. It is inevitable? Yes, unless the movie and television industry decides to be proactive and do something about it. Will they? They probably will not. They will probably have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the brave new world. Does this make my colleagues and me happy? No, I’m not happy about it at all. A lot of us will get hurt in the short term.

    But we’re not just going to sit around and wither with the centralized media giants, either.
    There is tremendous opportunity between where we are now and when the media giants finally make their move onto the Internet, when they will do their best, as the music industry has, to make it their next mode of distribution. There are extremely creative and lucrative business models which some of us will create that will embrace and take advantage of the decentralization of media and entertainment, models that do not entail having to have the deep pockets of Hollywood or the television networks. There are models that see decentralization as the beginning of a new era of diversity, openness, and global commerce heretofore unknown. These are in some ways very simple models, but elegant in their simplicity, lucrative in their inventiveness.

    And these are the things that we want to speak with you about, Mr. Turner. We want to assist you in finishing the article you wrote last year that ended in the sentence “big media may again be on the wrong side of history–and up against a country unwilling to lose its independents.” We want to speak with you about embracing the decentralization of the brave new world beyond the traditional realms in which you have been such a heroic and pioneering giant. We want your advice, your backbone, and your vision. Together, we all can look at what Hollywood and mainstream broadcast television sees as the apocalypse and instead, see a revolution of independence, a birth of the new media. What just may emerge is the beginning of niche-rich entertainment, uniquely produced for diverse viewers by professionals with freedom.