Fox Focus Group EXPOSED! :)

[Myerz]

Are there any other familiar faces? More than one participant would be great!

I guess we need to get a group of people together and each person pick a few faces to remember.....then watch the second video.......and see if you see the faces again.... or have we already looked?

more the better!

 

[Thanehand]

You are totally allowed to sue the news for misrepresentation...

And you'd probably lose. FOX has already been sued for misrepresentation and WON in a Florida court stating that "there's no law that says news organizations can't lie to the people."

Having the same focus group again isn't a big deal, but it does reek of intent to manipulate if they say that they're just people they pulled off the street in New Hampshire for the "forum."

 

[gb13]

P.S. - The guy in the background is totally putting the moves on that old lady next to him.

 

[Myerz]

Help me out. I've seen outlets use the same focus groups through the course of a campaign before. Has Fox claimed that these were different groups or different people? Where's the smoking gun here? I'm missing it.

What are the facts..........or to any other media outlet....where is the story?

I hate this as much as everyone else but it needs to be a blatant violation.

 

[Cali4RonPaul]

That is just sad. F U Frank!!!

 

[Grandson of Liberty]

I don't think this is a question of law, I think it's a question of ethics.

Ding-Ding! We have a winner!

For those of us living in the real world, we want the law that is applied to us to apply to others. The same reason you put earmarks in bills, and ask for your taxes back at the end of the year.

These are serious FEC and FCC violations. The reason, IMHO, that the 'Libertarian' party never got anyplace is because of people neutering it from perceived philosophical violations, many of which were red herrings.

Easiest way to neuter any movement. Tell it it can't do well or try to win. The objective is to win, so everyone is free, including our enemies.

In the "real world" as you put it, these are "alleged violations." And if you want to go the legal course, none of this will get cleared up for years to come, much too late to matter now. But certainly, ethics is something that can be challenged, perhaps even quite effectively, immediately. That's why PR folks make so much moohlah. Now it's up to us to make their lives uncomfortable.

 

[NYgs23]

The legal issues don't matter much. The point it that this is a SCANDAL that would embarrass Fux for its phony journalism. The Court of Public Opinion will condemn it!

 

[BeFranklin]

Actually I am not wrong.

The comment I quoted said, "FCC Laws" and the reason Fox won the lawsuit I referenced -- on appeal--was that the appellate court decided that "prohibitions against news distortion are merely a "policy" of the FCC" Not a Law, a policy.

Yes, your wrong too. Citing a particular case is meaningless, that is for a hearing to decide. The question at this point is if there is legal grounds to file a complaint. If there isn't, no lawyer will file one. But there clearly is legal reason to file a complaint. What will happen to that complaint is to be decided later.

Here is an article on Kucinich actually complaint.
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200801051702DOWJONESDJONLINE000413_FORTUNE5.htm

 

[BeFranklin]

The legal issues don't matter much. The point it that this is a SCANDAL that would embarrass Fux for its phony journalism. The Court of Public Opinion will condemn it!

The legal issues matter very much. They matter so much that a complaint should be filed by noon, and a press release filed later that day. The whole world should know about it.

 

[Myerz]

This is more than just getting the weather report wrong.....they are manipulating the election process here. If they could they would probably like to see the whole concept of voting go away!

There has to be a law.... if not this will be why a law is needed.

 

[Myerz]

FCC?
Does anyone know anyone in the FCC?

 

[schmeisser]

And you'd probably lose. FOX has already been sued for misrepresentation and WON in a Florida court stating that "there's no law that says news organizations can't lie to the people."

Having the same focus group again isn't a big deal, but it does reek of intent to manipulate if they say that they're just people they pulled off the street in New Hampshire for the "forum."

Please provide a scanned copy of your JD degree.

 

[NYgs23]

I mean, some people are saying "But it's legal what they're doing, so we shouldn't bother." At least that's the impression I'm getting. Maybe, maybe not but we still should humiliate them.

And, yet again, SOMEONE POST THIS ON FREEREPUBLIC AND DAILYKOS!!!

 

[BeFranklin]

In the "real world" as you put it, these are "alleged violations." And if you want to go the legal course, none of this will get cleared up for years to come, much too late to matter now. But certainly, ethics is something that can be challenged, perhaps even quite effectively, immediately. That's why PR folks make so much moohlah. Now it's up to us to make their lives uncomfortable.

If you do nothing, nothing will happen.

In the real world of people who want to live, Fox would get slapped hard tomorrow,
and all NH would be reading about it the next day. That the actually hearing or case
would be heard in the far future doesn't really matter.

 

[BeFranklin]

I mean, some people are saying "But it's legal what they're doing, so we shouldn't bother." At least that's the impression I'm getting. Maybe, maybe not but we still should humiliate them.

And, yet again, SOMEONE POST THIS ON FREEREPUBLIC AND DAILYKOS!!!

Any person from Fox or another campaign might say the same thing. Lets not neuter a perfect opportunity.

 

[Sentinelrv]

They underestimate the power of the internet!

 

[LynnB]

At the risk of spamming....Did anyone send this to factcheck.org? They keep a running list of lies the candidates tell..btw, you won't find ron paul in their list

 

[Flirple]

People, there is nothing inherently wrong with collecting the same focus group later on in the campaign season. In fact it has some advantages because it ads a "control" to the process. Unless this group was advertised as being an original group there is nothing wrong with using the same people.

What does matter are what biases (if any) influenced who choose these people in the first place.

 

[specsaregood]

Yes, your wrong too. Citing a particular case is meaningless, that is for a hearing to decide. The question at this point is if there is legal grounds to file a complaint. If there isn't, no lawyer will file one. But there clearly is legal reason to file a complaint. What will happen to that complaint is to be decided later.

Here is an article on Kucinich actually complaint.
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200801051702DOWJONESDJONLINE000413_FORTUNE5.htm

No, I do not believe I am wrong. The keyword is "fcc law" vs. "fcc policy".
This is NOT against any "fcc law", it might very well be eligible for complaint for violating "fcc policy" but that is not a LAW. Now, if the poster had said "FEC law", I probably would not have chimed in, as this is more in line with electioneering, which is not an FCC issue.

 

[RiseAgainRepublic]

The legal issues don't matter much. The point it that this is a SCANDAL that would embarrass Fux for its phony journalism. The Court of Public Opinion will condemn it!

There is no scandal here. Tracking peoples political thought and how it changes over time and why is Luntzs job. That is the point of these focus groups. There was probably a smattering of newbies and focus group "veterans" Luntzs business is to find out what kind of politics sells the best.