Fox Sues Al Franken...

[headscratcher4]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46985-2003Aug11.html

Apparently, Fox has exclusive rights to the term "fair and balanced"...:rolleyes:

[gnome]

And yet another company legal department wastes money forgetting the "fair use" doctrine.

They realize, of course, that the controversy will only boost sales of Franken's book. Thank you, Fox News!
:D

[hgc]

From the article linked above...
In its fair and balanced way, Fox News refers in its suit to Franken as an "unstable" and "shrill" "C-level commentator" who is "not a well-respected voice in American politics."

The attorneys do concede that Franken "achieved some renown as a comedy writer in the 1970s when he worked for the television program 'Saturday Night Live' " but add he since "has attempted to remake himself into a political commentator" and "is neither a journalist nor a television news personality." (Note the distinction being made between "journalist" and "television news personality.") Just curious -- I'm no lawyer, but is any of this relevant to copyright infringement? Why would it be referenced in the suit?

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by hgc
From the article linked above...
Just curious -- I'm no lawyer, but is any of this relevant to copyright infringement? Why would it be referenced in the suit?

Good question.
Al Franken could be a C level commentator or an A level one, it really doesn't matter to this issue, does it?

[shanek]

"But can you print 'Fire' in a crowded theatre?" —Michael Cloud

[gnome]

I do have a problem with the article, it seems to blend factual reporting with editorial commentary, which is just the sort of thing those that cry "liberal media" are complaining about... I don't want to lend straw to their strawman, as it were...

Anyone else troubled by this?

[Michael Redman]

It's a column, which I think is pretty well understood to mean that it's an opinion piece, so I have no problem with the article from that perspective.

I do have a problem with Fox insisting that no one can describe something as "fair and balanced" without their permission. It's my fair and balanced opinion that Fox can bite me.

[headscratcher4]

Sorry, I should have identified it...the item came from the Wash Post's "Style" section (like the arts) soft news, opinion, criticism, celebrity gossip, etc. THis was not a hard news story, nor was it placed as one by the editors...in this respect, it is different than papers like the NYPost....

[Reager]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
It's a column, which I think is pretty well understood to mean that it's an opinion piece, so I have no problem with the article from that perspective.

I do have a problem with Fox insisting that no one can describe something as "fair and balanced" without their permission. It's my fair and balanced opinion that Fox can bite me.


I remember reading in interview with Franken where he was discussing his previous book, "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot." He mentioned that it seemed the concept of irony was lost on many of the right wingers who accused him of unfairly attacking Limbaugh in the title. It guess the "fair and balanced" Fox News has a problem with irony as well.

I once received a fruit basket from Roger Ailes, chairman of FNC (mistakenly btw, it was meant for someone else in my building). If you're reading this Mr. Ailes, it was a pretty sorry basket. And that's my fair and balanced opinion. :)


Mike

[renata]

CNN's take on it

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/08/12/foxnews.lawsuit.ap/index.html

Fox News Channel has sued liberal humorist Al Franken and the Penguin Group to stop them from using the phrase "fair and balanced" in the title of his upcoming book.

Filed Monday in Manhattan, the trademark infringement lawsuit seeks to force a Penguin publisher, Dutton books, to rename the book, "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." It also asks for unspecified damages.

Fox News registered "Fair & Balanced" as a trademark in 1995, the lawsuit said.

Franken's "intent is clear -- to exploit Fox News' trademark, confuse the public as to the origins of the book and, accordingly, boost sales of the book," it said.
.....


Lawyers- do they have a case?

[Cain]

A writer for Slate praises the columnist who wrote the original article in this post:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2086810/

one quote: Using her pen like a lacrosse stick, de Moraes head-smacks her self-important subjects. Entertainment and news executives are always "suits," whom she regards as preening and ridiculous liars. Covering the summer TV press tour in Los Angeles, she notes that the critics have invented "Press Tour Bingo," assigning a bingo letter to each cliché they expect the execs to mouth. When NBC entertainment chief Jeff Zucker discloses to a group of TV beat writers that a Friends cast member is getting his own show and says, "I cannot think of a bigger announcement this summer," de Moraes cheap-shots him with the aside that his comment came "48 hours after Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez announced that U.S. forces had killed the sons of Saddam Hussein." She describes CBS chairman and CEO Les Moonves as "a former actor who can actually chew scenery while his mouth is covered by duct tape." After reporting at length the MSNBC-Fox News feud over the latest bit of Geraldo Rivera battlefield grandstanding, de Moraes deadpans, "In their spare time yesterday, both news networks covered the carnage in Iraq."

[Mercutio]

I always thought Fox's use of the phrase "fair and balanced" was itself a parody. Along with "we report, you decide." Do they mean to say that they believe themselves to be serious about this?


...And I always thought they were the subtle, satirical spinoff from comedy central. Sorta "the daily show" without a "laugh" sign.

[Brown]

Latest reports say that Franken is laughing at the lawsuit.

Franken might consider asking the court for sanctions in this matter. More likely, Fox will eventually "settle" the suit and tacitily claim victory without discussing the exact terms of the settlement.

[renata]

Of course, FOX could not do anything more to help sales of his book and make themselves a laughingstock. If I was suspicious, I would think they were in cahoots!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030813/ap_on_en_tv/publishing_franken_lawsuit_6

Al Franken, the humorist being sued by Fox News Channel for use of the phrase "fair and balanced," said Tuesday he doesn't mind the legal action.
....

Franken also thanked Fox "for all the publicity." As of Tuesday night, "Lies" had reached No. 4 on the bestseller list of Amazon.com, one ranking ahead of the latest Harry Potter book.

In its court papers, Fox described the author and liberal commentator as "neither a journalist nor a television news personality. He is not a well-respected voice in American politics; rather, he appears to be shrill and unstable. His views lack any serious depth or insight."

Fox alleged that Franken was "either intoxicated or deranged" when he attacked the network and conservative host Bill O'Reilly at an April press correspondents dinner. The lawsuit also says that Franken has been described as "increasingly unfunny."

"As far as the personal attacks go," Franken responded, "when I read `intoxicated or deranged' and `shrill and unstable' in their complaint, I thought for a moment I was a Fox commentator.

....

[Regnad Kcin]

"As far as the personal attacks go," Franken responded, "when I read `intoxicated or deranged' and `shrill and unstable' in their complaint, I thought for a moment I was a Fox commentator.":roll:

[headscratcher4]

Clearly, this is an important strategic move by Fox to benefit some of their comentators...the next time one of them opines negatively on frivolous law suits, they will have at least one dramatic example at which they may point....

[Sundog]

Why am I not surprised that Fox has no idea what is appropriate to say in a legal document?

This should be fun. More humiliation for O'Reilly? Count me in.

[Aoidoi]

...And I always thought they were the subtle, satirical spinoff from comedy central. Sorta "the daily show" without a "laugh" sign.Actually, there isn't a laugh sign on the Daily Show. They tell you on the way in to only laugh when you find something funny (though they do tell you to laugh loud so the microphones pick it up). That's why you regularly see jokes that fall flat and John making recoveries.

I do seem to recall John Stewart making a comment about Fox being the other fake news organization, or some such. I find it difficult to disagree with him. Somehow, despite never actually having a live feed from a news event The Daily Show manages better coverage than most news programs. :D

[Upchurch]

So, I take it that no one on this board considers Fox a trustworthy news source?

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Upchurch
So, I take it that no one on this board considers Fox a trustworthy news source?

I think it's kind of like pro wrestling. At some point, even its most vocal adherents have to admit it's all rigged.

[hammegk]

Originally posted by Upchurch
So, I take it that no one on this board considers Fox a trustworthy news source?
Umm. What do you consider to be a trustworthy news source?

Franken? Moore? ???

[Brown]

Originally posted by Sundog
Why am I not surprised that Fox has no idea what is appropriate to say in a legal document? This is no minor point. The quoted parts of the pleadings are inappropriate and undignified. They do not "sound" like proper pleadings. Why do you suppose the pleadings were drafted that way?

Here's one possible answer: Legal pleadings carry with them some protection against lawsuits. You can say pretty much anything you want about someone in a legal pleading, and the person that you insult ordinarily can't successfully sue you. (There are rare exceptions.)

Franken may have insulted Fox, but if so, he did it without trying to hide. Fox now insults Franken, but Fox prefers to hide.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Brown

Here's one possible answer: Legal pleadings carry with them some protection against lawsuits. You can say pretty much anything you want about someone in a legal pleading, and the person that you insult ordinarily can't successfully sue you. (There are rare exceptions.)


A truly strange strategy, if true. Franken is fully equipped with the most powerful weapon against tyrants: laughter. He has already counterattacked brilliantly.

Plus, the net result of their "legal flaming" seems to be that Franken will sell a whole lot more books. D'oh.

[Reager]

Originally posted by hammegk

Umm. What do you consider to be a trustworthy news source?

Franken? Moore? ???

Franken and Moore don't proclaim themselves to be "trustworthy news sources." They make no bones about their ideologies. Fox, on the other hand, is like the preacher who holds himself up as the paragon of virtue...and is then caught cheating on his wife and absconding with church funds.

Mike

[c0rbin]

What do you consider to be a trustworthy news source?

More than one source is more trust-worthy than any single source.

That's why good journalists go for corraboration (sp?) as opposed to opinion people who shoot from their hips.

Want news? Sekk journalists. Want slant? Seek the above-named actors.

[Marc]

Originally posted by hammegk

Umm. What do you consider to be a trustworthy news source?

Franken? Moore? ???
Acutally I find the Daily Show to be a better source of trustworthy news. :D

[Valley_girl]

Fox News is beyond idiotic. I just sent the following email to that moron O'Reilly:

Bill -

I am sitting here in my office chair which was previously off-balance and a dark maroon color. This color did not go with the rest of my fair-colored office. Fortunately, it's been fixed and re-upholstered, so it's now "fair and balanced".

I usually go to the gym at lunch. I work out on the stationary bikes that are not used for the spinning classes. You could say that I work out in the "no spin zone" .

I guess I had better sign off now, I have to write a report for work. It is referred to as a written exercise, or "W.E.". Does it seem fair that I must, on such short notice, write this "W.E." report? You decide.

When do I get my lawsuit? :-)

[daredelvis]

I love what the NY Times has to say about it...

"...Fox's complaint sounds like a collection of things Mr. O'Reilly wishes he'd remembered to say at their last encounter."

Daredelvis

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by hammegk

Umm. What do you consider to be a trustworthy news source? There is no one news source that is 100% trustworthy. However, on the sliding scale of such things, I personally consider MSNBC, CNN, and even PBS to more trustworthy than FOX and exceptionally more trustworthy than Bill O'Rilley. Although, admitedly, O'Rilley isn't a news source even though he claims to be.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Valley_girl
It is referred to as a written exercise, or "W.E.". Does it seem fair that I must, on such short notice, write this "W.E." report? You decide.


:clap:

[ShowMe]

Originally posted by mfeldman


Franken and Moore don't proclaim themselves to be "trustworthy news sources." They make no bones about their ideologies. Fox, on the other hand, is like the preacher who holds himself up as the paragon of virtue...and is then caught cheating on his wife and absconding with church funds.

Mike

I like O'Reilly....but the boy needs to lighten up a tad. If he back into a wall his rear end would suck out a brick. I mean, Franken got him (O'reilly stated that one of the rag news shows he worked on won a Peabody award when it turned out to be a different award....and won *after* O'Reilly worked there).

Franken is occasionally funny, but it's usually painful to watch him. When he is funny, he's very funny.

Moore, on the other hand, makes "documentaries" where the truth is twisted or non-existent. While Mr. Moore may not stand up and scream that he is a trustworthy news source there is supposed to be an implied trust-worthiness to a documentary.

[Upchurch]

I caught part of O'Rilley's show today and he seemed quite irate about the Franken situation. (That is, of course, a vast understatement.)

O'Rilley claims that when he (O'Rilley) does a spoof or parody it is done with the intent of light hearted ribbing and not meant to malicious. What Franken did, claims O'Rilley, had no comedic value and was done with the sole intent of being malicious.

As I'm driving down the road listening to this, I'm thinking, "Al Franklen is a comedy writer. He's been writing comedy and parodies for shows like SNL for years and years. How could they not consider this legitimate satire?"

And then I remembered. This was coming from "The No Spin (Except O'Rilley's) Zone."

[hgc]

Comedy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. And it in no way precludes maliciousness.

[Solitaire]

Originally posted by Aoidoi
I do seem to recall John Stewart making a comment about
Fox being the other fake news organization, or some such.

Um, no, I think it was... (http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_stewart.html)

STEWART: No, there's no question. There is... in your mind...
look, you know they always talk about the news wants to be
objective. Leaving FOX NEWS out of it because that's sort of a
different animal. And, by the way, a very entertaining animal.
I enjoy watching FOX NEWS and I think every country should
have their own Al-Jazeera.

[Aoidoi]

Er, that wasn't the line I was thinking of. It was a throwaway line in one of his opening segments, I think. Something along the lines of "We, being the only fake news organization out there, other than Fox News, of course..." Though I freely admit I might be totally misremembering it. :)

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Brown
This is no minor point. The quoted parts of the pleadings are inappropriate and undignified. They do not "sound" like proper pleadings. Why do you suppose the pleadings were drafted that way?

Here's one possible answer: Legal pleadings carry with them some protection against lawsuits. You can say pretty much anything you want about someone in a legal pleading, and the person that you insult ordinarily can't successfully sue you. (There are rare exceptions.)

Franken may have insulted Fox, but if so, he did it without trying to hide. Fox now insults Franken, but Fox prefers to hide.

I was thinking the same thing, a mixture of "preaching to the jury" and planting seeds for future misdirection in the future. I can see someone saying "Franken was intoxicated or deranged. It says so in official court documents."

It reminds me of my initial thought when I read the pleadings in the Paula Jones case. There is a discription of Clinton, umm, "handling" himself. I thought, "Man, things are going wrong for you when there is an official court document describing you playing with yourself."

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In its fair and balanced way, Fox News refers in its suit to Franken as an "unstable" and "shrill" "C-level commentator" who is "not a well-respected voice in American politics."

Why haven't they hired him yet? :D

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I just ordered it.

Sorry Bill.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Brown
This is no minor point. The quoted parts of the pleadings are inappropriate and undignified. They do not "sound" like proper pleadings. Why do you suppose the pleadings were drafted that way?

Here's one possible answer: Legal pleadings carry with them some protection against lawsuits. You can say pretty much anything you want about someone in a legal pleading, and the person that you insult ordinarily can't successfully sue you. (There are rare exceptions.)

Franken may have insulted Fox, but if so, he did it without trying to hide. Fox now insults Franken, but Fox prefers to hide.
Oooh, that's pithy. And so true.

[7th sextile]

Aoidoi:you may be recalling when The Daily Show won
an award and Mr. Stewart said something to the effect of
"Well-we do fake news,so there's not much competition-
just us and Fox"

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by Valley_girl
Fox News is beyond idiotic. I just sent the following email to that moron O'Reilly:

Bill -

I am sitting here in my office chair which was previously off-balance and a dark maroon color. This color did not go with the rest of my fair-colored office. Fortunately, it's been fixed and re-upholstered, so it's now "fair and balanced".

I usually go to the gym at lunch. I work out on the stationary bikes that are not used for the spinning classes. You could say that I work out in the "no spin zone" .

I guess I had better sign off now, I have to write a report for work. It is referred to as a written exercise, or "W.E.". Does it seem fair that I must, on such short notice, write this "W.E." report? You decide.

When do I get my lawsuit? :-)

Now that's funny. :roll:

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by hgc
Comedy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. And it in no way precludes maliciousness. No more mailicious than O'Rilley, IMHO.

Sorry, the "legitamite satire" line was probably prompted by a previous conversation I've had about Ann Coulter's more outlandish statements (i.e. pretty much everything she writes) being satire, which I didn't get at all.

[The Bad Astronomer]

What I find most amusing about this (and the field from which to pick is rife) is that they go to all this trouble about the title, but don't have anything to say about Bill O'Reilly's picture being on the cover of a book called "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them".

[Jude]

I didn't read the whole post or the news story, so I apologize if it's been mentioned already. But what I found hilarious about this whole Fox News vs. Al Franken situation is how Al's book was doing miserably sales-wise until Fox News decided to sue. The publicity made sales skyrocket. I'll have to remember to piss Fox News off if I ever decide to write a book!

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jude
I didn't read the whole post or the news story, so I apologize if it's been mentioned already. But what I found hilarious about this whole Fox News vs. Al Franken situation is how Al's book was doing miserably sales-wise until Fox News decided to sue. The publicity made sales skyrocket. I'll have to remember to piss Fox News off if I ever decide to write a book!
It is not too surprising that sales are poor, since the book is not due to be released until September 22. There are a few authors (like J. K. Rowling and H. R. Clinton) who do well in advance sales, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

I am a BIG fan of Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot so I will certainly buy Liars..., but I admit, I would have not known about its imminent release without Fox (and these boards). Thanks, guys.

[Sundog]

It's the Al Franken decade, starring him, Al Franken.

[headscratcher4]

Selected Gems From the Fox News Complaint Against Franken:

… Fox News [Network], the owner and operator of the world famous Fox News Channel ("FNC"), is the owner of a federal trademark registration in the mark "Fair & Balanced". Fox News has used the mark "Fair & Balanced", sometimes depicted as "Fair and Balanced", (the "Trademark") to distinguish and brand FNC's distinctive method of newsgathering and reporting since its well-publicized launch in October 1996. "Fair & Balanced" has been a registered trademark of Fox News since December 22, 1998. Fox News has made continuous use of the Trademark since 1996, and the mark has become a signature slogan of FNC.
Fox News employs a variety of on-air news personalities to give FNC its distinctive, number-one rated position in the national cable news marketplace. Prominent among those news personalities is Bill O'Reilly ("O'Reilly"), who is the host of cable television news's number-one rated program "The O'Reilly Factor." ...

Penguin, through its imprint, EP Dutton ("Dutton"), plans to publish "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," written by Franken (the "Book"), on September 22, 2003... The preliminary cover of the Book (the "Preliminary Cover"), which is on display, among other places, in advertisements for the Internet sale of advance copies of the Book and on defendant Franken's official web site, prominently features Fox News' trademark "Fair and Balanced" as well as a photograph of O'Reilly in what appears to be the FNC television studio...

Defendants' intent in using the Trademark in this unauthorized fashion is clear -- they seek to exploit Fox News' trademark, confuse the public as to the origin of the book, and accordingly, boost sales of the Book. This behavior constitutes willful trademark infringement...

Moreover, since Franken's reputation as a politicial commentator is not of the same caliber as the stellar reputations of FNC's on-air talent, any association between Franken and Fox News is likely to blur or tarnish Fox News' distinctive mark...
FNC was launched in October 1996. From the time of its launch until the present, FNC has been dedicated to presenting news in what it believes to be an unbiased fashion, eschewing ideological or political affiliation and allowing the viewer to reach his or her own conclusions about the news. FNC was created as a specific alternative to what its founders perceived as a liberal bias in the American media...

FNC's balanced approach to reporting the news has become extremely popular and FNC is now the most watched 24-hour news network in the nation... Indeed, during the 2003 war in Iraq, FNC was the most watched cable news source for up-to-the-minute news. According to "Advertising Age" magazine, FNC is "the biggest cable winner" and its "grip on the crown seems even tighter now." ...

Currently, "The O'Reilly Factor" is the most popular program on FNC. "The O'Reilly Factor" bills itself as a "No Spin Zone" and the goal of the program is to present the audience with the straight facts while allowing the audience to reach its own conclusions about the news...

O'Reilly himself has become a national celebrity and one of America's most trusted sources of news and information. He is inextricably linked with Fox News and the "Fair and Balanced" trademark in the minds of the viewing public...
To reflect its unique approach to the reporting of news, FNC adopted the slogan "Fair and Balanced," along with the phrase "We Report, You Decide" at the time of the network's inception...

On April 23, 1997, Fox News applied to the United States Patent and Trademark Office for a trademark in the phrase "Fair & Balanced" for "entertainment services in the nature of production and distribution of television news programs." On December 22, 1998, Fox News' trademark in "Fair & Balanced" was registered on the PTO's Principal Register. Since then, Fox News has also obtained a registration on the Principal Register in "Fair. Balanced. Unafraid." in connection with neckties.
Since 1997, Fox News has expended $61 million and thousands of hours in promoting and advertising its brand, including the "Fair and Balanced" mark. These marketing efforts have global reach...

In addition, Fox News has developed merchandise for sale that includes the "Fair and Balanced" logo... [a] Fox News mug contains the phrase "Balance is Important in News and Hot Coffee." There is also a "Fair and Balanced" necktie available for sale on the Fox News web site in a number of colors...
Defendants use of the Trademark in the Book is likely to cause confusion among the public about whether Fox News has authorized or endorsed the Book...

Indeed, as Franken admitted during [a recent Los Angeles book expo], the "Fair and Balanced" trademark was, in fact, used on the preliminary cover of the Book for the express intention of capitalizing on FNC's reputation...

Franken has recently been described as a "C-level political commentator" who is "increasingly unfunny." Franken has physically accosted Fox News personalities in the past, and was reported to have appeared either intoxicated or deranged as he flew into a rage near a table of Fox News personalities at a press correspondents' dinner in April 2003. Franken is neither a journalist nor a television news personality. He is not a well-respected voice in American politics; rather, he appears to be shrill and unstable. His views lack any serious depth or insight. Franken is commonly perceived as having to trade off of the name recognition of others in order to make money. One commentator has referred to Franken as a "parasite" for attempting to trade off of Fox News' brand and O'Reilly's fame in the Preliminary Cover of his Book...

As a result of Defendants' actions, Fox News is irreparably harmed...

(source: Salon Online Magazine)

[Brown]

I just checked Amazon.com. Guess what the number one seller is right now?


It's him, Al Franken.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by headscratcher4
Defendants use of the Trademark in the Book is likely to cause confusion among the public about whether Fox News has authorized or endorsed the Book...

Yeah. A FOX viewer that picks up a Franken book talking about the "lying right" thinks it has something to do with FOX News isn't confused, that viewer is ...... of course, "Bullworth" was on F/X this afternoon. That killed my clever irony quota for this week.

One commentator has referred to Franken as a "parasite" for attempting to trade off of Fox News' brand and O'Reilly's fame in the Preliminary Cover of his Book... I wonder which one. (I really do)

As a result of Defendants' actions, Fox News is irreparably harmed...

Most likely true.

[Sundog]

Does anyone else think this downright Orwellian?

Fox co-opts the phrase "Fair and balanced" as a description for what they do (in true newspeak fashion), precisely counter to the English meaning of the words, and then attempts to use force to control the phrase's use?

It's called The Big Lie.

I'm ordering Al's book today.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by The Bad Astronomer
What I find most amusing about this (and the field from which to pick is rife) is that they go to all this trouble about the title, but don't have anything to say about Bill O'Reilly's picture being on the cover of a book called "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them".

I thought you couldn't sue for libel in the US if it was true.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


I thought you couldn't sue for libel in the US if it was true.

You can sue. Truth is an affirmative defense that has to be shown by the defendant. Such a suit would open the door for Franken's lawyers to use the court to point out O'Reilly's lies. To do so they would be afforded discovery, of course, which means depositions and document requests. Total circus and the effective end of any privacy O'Reilly ever had.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Suddenly


You can sue. Truth is an affirmative defense that has to be shown by the defendant. Such a suit would open the door for Franken's lawyers to use the court to point out O'Reilly's lies.

The Oscar Wilde Lesson. :eek:

[headscratcher4]

From Joe Conason's column in Salon....

Aug. 15, 2003 | Fair, balanced, and all-American
In case you don't already know, Aug. 15 has been declared Fair and Balanced Day by freedom-loving bloggers everywhere, in response to the morally unfair and mentally unbalanced nuisance lawsuit brought by Fox News against Al Franken and his publisher. (Even the Wall Street Journal editorial page, print edition, is mocking Rupert Murdoch's lackeys for behaving like fools. Well argued, Mr. Gigot.) Among the scores of F-and-B Day entries on the Web, my favorite so far is Neal Pollack's tale of a passionate blackout encounter with a certain weepy, litigious blowhard. Nitpicker dissects Bill O'Reilly's hilarious defense of the lawsuit that he apparently engineered, much to Franken's profit. And it wouldn't be F-and-B Day without the other Roger Ailes ("More Fair and Balanced Than That Other Motherf-----"). Celebrate the occasion and consult the expanding collection of entries compiled by Blah3, and be patient while the page loads. America is the land of free speech, Bill: Love it or leave it.

[subgenius]

What did you expect from those liberals at the Wall Street Journal?
And its good to know the North Koreans aren't lacking for skin cream and beauty products. Can do wonders for a lack of food in the diet.