hahaha

no comment!

Poor ceeb.

The Saddam Hanged picture was still worse.

the day anna nicole died was the worst.

i actually will post at length about this in the next day or so if you'd like some insight.

she's kinda cute.

Please do.

just consider than it won't be a defense but more an explain about why businessmen are running the site the way it's run.

http://welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com/2007/02/frank-rich-where-were-you-that-summer.html

The above is one of the links in the first rude pundit story, and while overall I felt the article was good, some of the replies posted are completely insane. Can anyone make any sense of the second and third replies?

Wow. That blog is lunatic central. Holy shit.

I see someone isn't in touch with the negative energy floating around.

It would figure that a "left-wing" blog like that would be linked on Fox News. Like having that pantywaist Alan "Strawman" Colmes be Sean Hannity's liberal foil.

lulz.

My body was electrified starting in the spring of 2001 until the attack on our nation in September of that year. If my body was reacting to the negative energies prior to 9/11, why wasn't the Bush Regime also feeling it? Oh that's right. They wanted this attack and did everything in their power to make sure it happened! Pigs. I hate them.

we make our decisions based on a few things, two of them being:

importance and likelihood of major traffic.

i can tell you off the bat the least read stories on our site on any given day include iraq, afghanistan, the mideast... basically any foreign story without a good twist. iran is regularly a decent hitting story because it's normally a pretty wacky story.

100 dead across iraq just isn't a story people want to click on. 40 college students in a blast, maybe. but you overestimate americans caring.

so obviously you want to have your best hitting stories in the most visible spots if you can. teacher sex will hit better with a photo of her than as the last headline on the site. may it be a breach of moral journalism? sure. maybe.

cnn, msnbc, us... most of the sites carry all the same material, it's just presented differently. we have iraq, it's probably in headlines.

cnn and msnbc also have very different web sites in terms of presentation. keep in mind cnn can only have ONE 'top' story -- and that top story is the big picture, too. it's pretty shitty. msnbc is better. we can have 4 stories up top, with one of them being a picture. that's just a sidepoint for y'all.

feel free to ask away.

like right now, cnn is top with the tornadoes and a picture of a guy. people have been looking at tornado pictures for 24 hours now. they're forced to use that photo, though, if they want to be top with tornadoes.

we're top with a bus crash that killed four college athletes, the tornadoes are in the 2, whatever's in the 3 and we can put anna nicole's picture in the 4 spot (the picture).

if you look at cnn and see anna's about the 5th headline, it's not much different.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2007/03/ ... ox_08.html

3/8/2007
Everything You Need To Know About Fox "News" in a Single Image, Part 2:

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/60 ... 0comas.jpg

Now, the Rude Pundit ain't no fancy big city news editor for an allegedly "major" network news outlet. But he's pretty fuckin' sure that at any random second of any random day of any random time, but especially now, there's probably more important news going on somewhere in the entire goddamned world that's just a smidge more important than the lead singer of a has-been yuppie blues band being arrested on weapons charges. Not at Fox, though. It's big damn story with pictures at the top of their web page, along with surefire crowd pleasers of the freak variety: abused former conjoined twins and a coma woman waking up for a couple of days. It's not news; it's Ripley's Believe It Or Not. (Now, if the coma woman had beaten the twins during her three un-comatose days, then we'd have a story.)

Sure, all three news net websites covered the horrible fire in New York City because, well, it's a horrible fire, and local news though it may be, who can resist making everyone think of burned children? (Although Fox goes for the most exploitative headline, with "Help Me, Help Me.")

By the way, here, at the exact same time, is the top of MSNBC's home page:

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/60 ... ousing.jpg

The point here ain't that Fox "news" sucks and MSNBC's great or some such shit. It's how much contempt Fox has for the news, for its reporting and gathering, even beyond the pandering of other news outlets. Fox is not dangerous just because it's a mouthpiece for the right wing and it parrots the conservative line. It's dangerous because it seems to believe that people don't actually have a right to know, that it's responsibility is to keep its viewers ignorant and make sure the status quo is maintained and extended.

Perhaps more later.

i can't really reply to that.

can theresa?