Fox Sues Al Franken...

headscratcher4 · 12th August 2003, 05:54 AM

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

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

gnome · 12th August 2003, 06:01 AM

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!

hgc · 12th August 2003, 06:05 AM

From the article linked above...

Quote:

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. · 12th August 2003, 07:27 AM

Quote:

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 · 12th August 2003, 09:07 AM

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

gnome · 12th August 2003, 10:10 AM

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 · 12th August 2003, 10:18 AM

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 · 12th August 2003, 11:08 AM

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 · 12th August 2003, 11:11 AM

Quote:

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 · 12th August 2003, 11:11 AM

CNN's take on it

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/book....ap/index.html

Quote:

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 · 12th August 2003, 11:18 AM

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

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

one quote:

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 · 12th August 2003, 12:17 PM

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 · 12th August 2003, 09:27 PM

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 · 13th August 2003, 01:12 AM

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?tmp...nken_lawsuit_6

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 06:33 AM

Quote:

"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."

headscratcher4 · 13th August 2003, 07:16 AM

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 · 13th August 2003, 07:38 AM

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 · 13th August 2003, 07:46 AM

Quote:

...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.

Upchurch · 13th August 2003, 07:51 AM

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

Sundog · 13th August 2003, 07:53 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 08:01 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 08:08 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 08:19 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 08:21 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 10:00 AM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 11:03 AM

Quote:

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.

Valley_girl · 13th August 2003, 11:37 AM

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 · 13th August 2003, 11:43 AM

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 · 13th August 2003, 12:23 PM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 12:25 PM

Quote:

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.

ShowMe · 13th August 2003, 12:39 PM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 02:06 PM

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 · 13th August 2003, 02:50 PM

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

Solitaire · 13th August 2003, 02:51 PM

Quote:

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...

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 04:13 PM

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.

13th August 2003, 06:41 PM

Quote:

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 · 13th August 2003, 08:54 PM

Quote:

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?

The Central Scrutinizer · 13th August 2003, 08:56 PM

I just ordered it.

Sorry Bill.

subgenius · 14th August 2003, 01:15 AM

Quote:

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 · 14th August 2003, 01:41 AM

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"

12th August 2003, 05:54 AM	#1
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Fox Sues Al Franken... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Aug11.html Apparently, Fox has exclusive rights to the term "fair and balanced"...
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

12th August 2003, 06:01 AM	#2
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	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!
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	__________________

12th August 2003, 07:27 AM	#4
Mike B. Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,186	Quote: 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?
Mike B. Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,186

12th August 2003, 09:07 AM	#5
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	"But can you print 'Fire' in a crowded theatre?" —Michael Cloud
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

12th August 2003, 10:10 AM	#6
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	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?
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	__________________

12th August 2003, 06:05 AM	#3
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,985	From the article linked above... Quote: 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?

12th August 2003, 10:18 AM	#7
Michael Redman Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3,063	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.
	__________________ The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain

12th August 2003, 11:08 AM	#8
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	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....
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

12th August 2003, 11:11 AM	#9
Reager Muse Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New York, NY Posts: 655	Quote: 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

12th August 2003, 11:11 AM	#10
renata Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 3,334	CNN's take on it http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/book....ap/index.html Quote: 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?
renata Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 3,334	__________________ The 2006 Skepchick Calendar Smart is sexy. Who is this renata person?... the local nutcase?- GP 2/15/05

12th August 2003, 11:18 AM	#11
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,931	A writer for Slate praises the columnist who wrote the original article in this post: http://slate.msn.com/id/2086810/ one quote: 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."
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

12th August 2003, 12:17 PM	#12
Mercutio Shakespeare's Sock Puppet Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Live Free Or Die Posts: 16,325	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.
	__________________ "But to see her was to love her Love but her, and love forever."

12th August 2003, 09:27 PM	#13
Brown Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 12,145	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.
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

13th August 2003, 01:12 AM	#14
renata Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 3,334	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?tmp...nken_lawsuit_6 Quote: 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. ....
renata Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 3,334	__________________ The 2006 Skepchick Calendar Smart is sexy. Who is this renata person?... the local nutcase?- GP 2/15/05

13th August 2003, 06:33 AM	#15
Regnad Kcin Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The ol' Same place Posts: 6,201	Quote: "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."
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

13th August 2003, 07:16 AM	#16
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	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....
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

13th August 2003, 07:38 AM	#17
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	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.
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	__________________ I come not to bring peace, but a sword. -- Jesus H. Christ

13th August 2003, 07:46 AM	#18
Aoidoi Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,417	Quote: ...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.
Aoidoi Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,417	__________________ "The priests used to say that faith can move mountains, and nobody believed them. Today the scientists say that they can level mountains, and nobody doubts them." - Joseph Campbell We cannot defend freedom abroad by abandoning it at home. —Edward R. Murrow

13th August 2003, 07:51 AM	#19
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,422	So, I take it that no one on this board considers Fox a trustworthy news source?

13th August 2003, 07:53 AM	#20
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	Quote: 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.
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	__________________ I come not to bring peace, but a sword. -- Jesus H. Christ

13th August 2003, 08:01 AM	#21
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422	Quote: 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? ???
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422

13th August 2003, 08:08 AM	#22
Brown Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 12,145	Quote: 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.
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

13th August 2003, 08:19 AM	#23
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	Quote: 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.
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	__________________ I come not to bring peace, but a sword. -- Jesus H. Christ

13th August 2003, 08:21 AM	#24
Reager Muse Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New York, NY Posts: 655	Quote: 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

13th August 2003, 10:00 AM	#25
c0rbin Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,806	Quote: 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.
c0rbin Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,806	__________________ By convention there is color, By convention sweetness, By convention bitterness, But in reality there are atoms and space. --Democritus (c. 400 BCE)

13th August 2003, 11:03 AM	#26
Marc Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,165	Quote: 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.
Marc Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,165	__________________ So many cults, not enough comets. A child of 5 could understand this! Quick, someone fetch a child of 5! "Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy." Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia

13th August 2003, 11:37 AM	#27
Valley_girl New Blood Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Montana Posts: 22	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? :-)
	__________________ Sorry doesn't put the finger back on, does it?

13th August 2003, 11:43 AM	#28
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,865	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

13th August 2003, 12:23 PM	#29
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,422	Quote: 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.

13th August 2003, 12:25 PM	#30
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	Quote: 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.
Sundog Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,071	__________________ I come not to bring peace, but a sword. -- Jesus H. Christ

13th August 2003, 12:39 PM	#31
ShowMe Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,201	Quote: 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.
ShowMe Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,201	__________________ "One wonders how one augur may pass another in the street without laughing." -Marcus Porcius Cato, 2nd Century B.C. referring to the fortune tellers of his time "I could tell you that it is because I don't want The Language Award to appear too cliqueish. But I won't. 'Cause you're not one of the cool people." - Tricky

13th August 2003, 02:06 PM	#32
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,422	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."

13th August 2003, 02:50 PM	#33
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,985	Comedy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. And it in no way precludes maliciousness.

13th August 2003, 02:51 PM	#34
Solitaire Neoclinus blanchardi Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Johnson City, Tennessee Posts: 1,735	Quote: 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... Quote: 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.
	__________________ GENERATION ∞: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

13th August 2003, 04:13 PM	#35
Aoidoi Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,417	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.
Aoidoi Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,417	__________________ "The priests used to say that faith can move mountains, and nobody believed them. Today the scientists say that they can level mountains, and nobody doubts them." - Joseph Campbell We cannot defend freedom abroad by abandoning it at home. —Edward R. Murrow