Katrina according to Faux News

I have confessed in other diaries that I turned to Faux News yesterday and (briefly) today, because I was interested in finding out what the Republican Party party line now is on Bush and Katrina.

I could have discovered some of what has been going on there if I had signed up for a site pass to the Salon site, because Farhad Manjoo has written an article there about the Faux coverage, and how it varies from that of some other cable news operations.  

I screwed up by posting the entire article initially. I hope that I have managed to correct that, and, if you want to read the entire article, you'll have to go to Salon and get your own site pass.

KATRINA ACCORDING TO FOX

"There are a lot of good stories out there" on the right-wing cable channel. And did we mention President Bush is pouring out relief?

By Farhad Manjoo

Sept. 3, 2005  |   "After the storm, a storm -- and I mean a storm! -- of aid!" Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto began his broadcast on Friday afternoon, as the screen flashed with images of National Guard convoys motoring in to the broken city of New Orleans, and troops doling out food and water to victims of Hurricane Katrina. To watch a few hours of Fox on Friday was to experience reassurance, some relief that things were getting better on the Gulf Coast. While the situation may have been bleak this week, Fox's anchors and reporters acknowledged, and while there still were some pockets where "law and order" -- a Fox obsession -- had not been restored, help was on the way. Or as Cavuto put it, police were "attempting to take back the city of New Orleans ... as the president of the United States takes in the damage and pours out the relief."

On other networks -- and, more important, in reality -- the president's visit to the affected areas didn't merit the same measure of optimism.

big snip

On Fox, instead of race relations, viewers were offered religion. How should victims cope with the disaster? They ought to reconnect with God, and they ought to remember that their extravagant earthly possessions are unimportant, Rick Warren, the author of "The Purpose-Driven Life," told Cavuto. "I would say play it down and pray it up," Warren said. "In other words, you know when you lose everything it forces you to redefine your life. If your view of who you are is based on all the things you've accumulated -- your car, your pool, your house, your boat -- and all of a sudden you wake up one day and those belongings are absolutely blown away, you have to redefine what your life is. If your definition of family is tied to the neighborhood you live in or the security gates you live behind or your made-over home, and suddenly that's gone, then you're going to have to rethink what your family is ... In the next few days millions of these Gulf State residents and millions of us who are watching it unfold are going to have to struggle with these questions. What is life really all about?"

Cavuto did not mention to Warren that many of the victims in this storm are not worried about having lost their cars, their boats, their pools, or their gated homes for the simple reason that they never had -- and probably never dreamed they could have -- all those things. If Fox asked any of the people stranded in the convention center what life is really about, there's a good chance food, water and shelter would have topped the list.

But Fox didn't do that. Because on Fox, as Cavuto said, "There are a lot of good stories out there."

•  Ya Can't Do This

  Lifting an entire article off another site is grounds for a copyright complaint.  You can only quote a few paragraphs or so.  You need to edit this.  I can't believe after all these warnings people still do this...

  by FLDemJax on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:46:01 PM PDT

  •  As an Attorney

    You should know better.

    by FLDemJax on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:49:20 PM PDT

    •  Wow, I can write a diary like this. LOL

      I guess the original writer at least got credit, Whoo Hoo.

      by edalex on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:52:55 PM PDT

  •  Plagerism

    The top of the quoted article says:

    By Farhad Manjoo

    What else is it that you want?

    Besides, under the Fair Use provision, as long as credit is given, the author of the blog can do whatever he pleases as far as quoting some or all of the article.

    There are more important things in life to focus on - at least, to some of us.

    You obviously have too much time on your hands.

    by ResistanceIsFutile on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:52:33 PM PDT

    •  Tell That To Kos

      Who cuts articles at the fold when they lift the entire thing.  Fair use does not include copying an entire article.  No, I don't have to much time on my hands, but I am certainly tired of crap diaries that are nothing more than plagarisms of other people's work.

      by FLDemJax on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:57:06 PM PDT

      •  FLDEM how did you squeeze in there? LOL

        My comment is directed to Resistance.

        by edalex on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:59:09 PM PDT

      •  Lawyer?

        Maybe.  Probably an ambulance chaser.

        Let's look at the law:

        § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
        Release date: 2005-08-01

        Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
        (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
        (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
        (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
        (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
        The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

        Where does it say 'not the entire article'?

        Lawyer?  In this country or Eastern Europe?

        by ResistanceIsFutile on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:13:35 PM PDT

        •  How About PP 3?

          Do you suppose using 100% of a published article constitutes fair use?

          by FLDemJax on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:16:26 PM PDT

          •  Fair Use

            Yes.  The author is given direct credit and the article is quoted for news/commentary.  If it was quoted without credit, I'd have a real problem.

            My blog is mostly just .mht stores of relevant (to me, anyway) articles, and my attorney, and the attorneys at the BBC, MSNBC and CNN (among others) agree that my use constitutes 'fair use'.  I have never been sued; I just had them contacted in advance of my starting the blog.

            Whole article/part of the article/whatever.

            What's the big deal as long as the author is credited?  I would like to have seen a link to the author's article, also, but that's just me.

            by ResistanceIsFutile on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:20:14 PM PDT

            •  This Has Been Hashed Out

              on this site and in courts a number of times, and I am surprised you get away with it, although nothing surprises me.  If reproducing a published article elsewhere from where it is originally produced doesn't hurt its marketability (and for heaven's sake, it is behind a 30 second ad), then I have no idea what does.  If a 100% copy doesn't trigger paragraph 3, then what does?

              It doesn't matter.  I have very little respect for diarists that put this little effort into their "literary," or "journalistic" product.

              by FLDemJax on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:26:20 PM PDT

          •  As an attorney.

            I believe that my 'attorney' comments were misdirected; I take it now that the original blogger is supposed to be the attorney and not the person questioning 'fair use'.  I apologize for that.  I should have known; an attorney can read US Title code and understand what it says.

            by ResistanceIsFutile on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:22:58 PM PDT

    •  I guess, however.......

      As JTML says in the diary,

      I could have discovered some of what has been going on there if I had signed up for a site pass to the Salon site, because Farhad Manjoo has written an article there about the Faux coverage, and how it varies from that of some other cable news operations.

      Key words being 'if I had signed up for the site pass.'

      by edalex on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:57:34 PM PDT

    •  Too much time on his hands?

      Sillyness.

      Kos can be sued.  The writer can be sued.

      Fair use doesn't mean "make sure the writer gets credit."

      It means use of an excerpt for the purpose of journalism or criticism.

      Using the entire article, or even most of it, falls outside Fair Use.

      Fair Use protects the entirety of the work.  That's why you can't use photos at all -- photos are treated as if they are a single word.  And you can't excerpt a single word.

      You have to use the whole photo, or nothing at all.  Using the whole photo violates Fair Use.

      Same goes for using the full article.

      Know the law.  It protects you and protects Kos.

      And it prevents old media idiots from claiming the new media folks haven't got a clue about the business they're in.

      by NoozMann on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:32:02 PM PDT

•  Faux News

  I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised that Faux presents the Republican (ie. white Christian racist male) version of the news.  Rove&Co have taken their cues directly from the greatest dictatorships of all time, plus stealing liberally from 1984.

  To them, just as to Malcom X, John Birch, Richard Nixon and the Iraqi insurgents: whatever it takes.

  BTW, has everyone now noticed Bush's new jaw tic?

  by ResistanceIsFutile on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 04:48:36 PM PDT

•  New York, 9/11. New Orleans, 8/29.

  New York, 9/11.  New Orleans, 8/29.
  Feel safer now?

  by etherapy on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 05:03:55 PM PDT