Glass Houses…

TVNewser’s Mark Joyella writes about something Shepard Smith said yesterday in regards to what other networks did to piggy back off Peter Doocy’s Bin Laden shooter scoop…

Smith also called competing news networks “hater channels” for reporting criticism of O’Neill — some from fellow SEALS — who think O’Neill has acted inappropriately in revealing his role in the covert mission.

Hater channels? You mean hater channels like FNC which posted a story written by an FNC staffer that included Navy SEALS criticizing Mark Owen for publishing his book?

The tell-all book also has apparently upset a large population of former and current SEAL members who worry about releasing information that could compromise future missions. One Navy SEAL told Fox News, “How do we tell our guys to stay quiet when this guy won’t?” Other SEALs are expressing anger, with some going so far as to call him a “traitor.”

Those “hater channels” Shep?

Well alrighty then…

58 Responses to “Glass Houses…”

  1. Sigh. Nothing proves your Fox Cred like talking about “haters”.

  2. This is a virus that eventually infects everyone who works at FNC: First come the constant self-references to how wonderful Fox is and “what we do here”, followed by disparaging remarks about anyone who dares criticize the Bringer Of Truth. Which is bizarrely, exactly like joining a cult.

  3. As to the issue itself, the story has to be reported. What is completely unnecessary is to give this guy his own special, which then influences anyone else who’s ever taken an oath. And I guarantee that if Fox didn’t get this guy, their opinion people would be surprisingly open about that possibility.

  4. A few things:

    1) comparing a posting on foxnews.com to multiple on-air segments at the other channels is apples & oranges.

    2) CNN’s segments (I saw 2 or 3 of them) appeared to be nothing more than rebuttal’s of what Fox was going to broadcast. They were un-skeptical and seemed as though they were produced by somebody who Robert O’Neill pissed off.

    3) When Smith said that the other channels (particularly CNN) scrambled to get something out there when FNC announced their scoop, he is 100% correct. It was odd. I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it. It came across as CNN trying to discredit an upcoming story on another network just cuz it was on another network.

    To compare all that to a foxnews.com posting is silly. The web posting was not in direct response to a scoop from a rival network. It was a typical story that I imagine most networks reported.

    Unless you have something else, Spud, your comparison is apples and oranges. And, unless I’m completely missing something, it’s a posting I would expect to see at MM or ramblings from the usual suspects.

  5. ICN and TVNewser are Media Matters now? This is amusing.

  6. FNC haters or hater channels is a meme that has been around for years and surfaces on this blog on a regular basis. It usually signals the presence of a Fox News sponsored troll or someone who acts like one.

    To see Shep (one of only two FNC hosts – the other being Greta – that are usually watchable by me) use the term is a bit distressing to someone who is seeing both CNN and MSNBC make major lineup changes solely to garner demo ratings.

  7. Lonestar, if you aren’t even going to use what I wrote against me, there’s really not much for me to address here…but I’ll go through the motions anyways…

    I dug that article up in one minute on a Google search. This was not an all encompasing search of FNC…it was a “let’s stick this in the search engine and see if anything turns up” Something did. Now, obviously I would prefer video over an article, even though it was by a Fox News staffer who is still on the payroll, but I have not had the time to try and weed my way through FNC’s hard to search video archive.

    Now on to your (often non-sequitur) points…

    1) comparing a posting on foxnews.com to multiple on-air segments at the other channels is apples & oranges.

    It is and it isn’t. It is in that they are different mediums. It isn’t when you are talking about the content of the story and looking for a match. That’s all I’m interested in…the content. I don’t care what appendage of FNC it comes from because Shep did not differentiate between the two mediums when he threw out his “hater networks” remark.

    2) CNN’s segments (I saw 2 or 3 of them) appeared to be nothing more than rebuttal’s of what Fox was going to broadcast. They were un-skeptical and seemed as though they were produced by somebody who Robert O’Neill pissed off.

    Ok…but so what? That isn’t what Shep was referring to when he brought up his “hater networks” remark. Read the TVN passage I quoted. That has nothing to do with your point #2.

    3) When Smith said that the other channels (particularly CNN) scrambled to get something out there when FNC announced their scoop, he is 100% correct. It was odd. I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it. It came across as CNN trying to discredit an upcoming story on another network just cuz it was on another network.

    Also irrelevent to Shep’s “hater network” comment which specifically referenced reports that he shouldn’t have done this.

    To compare all that to a foxnews.com posting is silly. The web posting was not in direct response to a scoop from a rival network. It was a typical story that I imagine most networks reported.

    You conflating two separate distinct things is silly. You take the part of Shep’s criticism regarding other networks playing catch-up in advance, which was perfectly valid and is not something I address here at all, and lump that in with the “hater network” crack which specifically referenced “people over on the hate channel (saying) ‘he should never have done this” .

    It is this crack which I reference in this post because it is a direct 1:1 content match with the section of the FNC article I cited, with critics saying Mark Owen shouldn’t have done what he did.

  8. It’s not the people at CNN who are second guessing the appropriateness of what O’Neill has said (and is saying). It’s people outside the media including military brass and a former Navy Seal.

    [head scratch]

  9. “FNC haters or hater channels is a meme…”

    Well, there’s FNC and there’s everybody else. NBC doesn’t often take cracks at CBS and ABC doesn’t often take cracks at CNN. But all of them come after FNC constantly. FNC, to them, is the red headed step child because they’re not ideologically simpatico with the other networks. Y’all may get tummy aches when people at FNC point that out but it’s true. I imagine a big reason why you all get so butt-hurt is because you know it’s true. No other channel receives the level of vitriol that FNC does. It’s what happens when you buck the trend. They long ago threw a wrench into the liberal leaning national media and lots of people just can’t get over it. Those people – well, they’re Fox haters.

  10. “Ok…but so what? That isn’t what Shep was referring to when he brought up his “hater networks” remark. Read the TVN passage I quoted. That has nothing to do with your point #2”

    It’s pretty clear that when he was referring to “hater networks”, he was referring to the fact that once FNC broke the news of this special, the other networks sloppily jumped into to try and discredit it in advance.

  11. ^ At least, that’s what I got from it which was probably influenced by my thinking of that at the time I saw the CNN pieces.

  12. I find it hard to believe that Anderson Cooper would have friendly conservations with Peter Doocy about O’Neill and then go on television later with tactics to undermine Peter’s documentary.

    I suppose it’s possible. But it doesn’t seem likely IMO. It would be interesting to find out if Peter thinks Anderson stabbed him in the back after Peter shared stories with him about O’Neill.

  13. I think some journalists decided to take a fair look at O’Neill’s claims, plus had a discussion about the ethics of airing them. Calling them “hater channels” is just stupid, and it’s quite depressing that even Shepard Smith has finally succumbed to this Foxspeak.

  14. “Those people – well, they’re Fox haters.”

    ^^Or maybe they just don’t give a sh*t about what Fox News says or does. People or networks hating FNC is a preoccupation of FNC hosts and acolytes. I assume it’s some sort of inferiority complex or something.

    You almost never see fans of CNN, MSNBC or the MSM say they actually ‘hate’ Fox News or accuse Fox News fans of ‘hating’ their favorite networks. We make fun of the network or criticize what is said on the network but I don’t see us calling FNC fans haters. It just doesn’t happen all the much.

  15. “Hater” is a word used to dismiss any and all criticism, and it doesn’t come from any sort of intellect. That’s why it’s a shame to hear it from Shepard. He used to be better than that.

  16. Can you imagine lashing out at critics of MSNBC as ‘haters’, as if you have some vested interest in, and devotion to, the network? Or CNN? Um, no. In the normal world we have discussions about this host, that show, this story; and sometimes disagree on the details. The idea of MSNBC or CNN being defended whole cloth like a religion is simply ludicrous. For Fox Fans it’s a daily occurrence.

  17. I see people taking great joy in the various stumbles at CNN, the headlong rush to abandon their previous news cred. Of course, these people had no great love for CNN to begin with, so it surely can’t be said that they’re “disappointed” at what’s become of CNN. They’re simply happy to see that Fox has “won”, for whatever joy that brings to an individual. I view these as news-outlets, but some seem to have a deeper attachment. It’s very odd.

  18. Actually, a fox hater is someone who spends all day on twitter whining about megyn Kelly’s legs.

    “Or maybe they just don’t give a sh*t about what Fox News says or does. People or networks hating FNC is a preoccupation of FNC hosts and acolytes.”

    Do you get out much? Whether it’s random twitter guy, the White House, Brian Stelter, countless websites and blogs or all of MSNBC there’s no shortage of irrational hate out there. It’s one network yet so many people lose their sh!t on a daily basis over them. Then they get all whiney and defensive when you call them a fox hater. It’s quite funny.

  19. boo hoo i almost cried. Geez what whiners and children. grow up fox folks.

  20. Two sides of the coin.

  21. Yes, criticism of Fox News’ incessant BS constitutes “whining by haters”. No, it’s criticism of a deplorable excuse for a news channel.

  22. I’m not a fox hater, I just hate Fox News! But it’s totally rational because bleh!

  23. “Actually, a fox hater is someone who spends all day on twitter whining about megyn Kelly’s legs.”

    ^^By that criteria you and every right wing commenter here would be MSNBC and CNN haters. Do you ever read what you say here. Jeeeshhh!

  24. – Do you ever read what you say here? –
    No, they really don’t. For the last couple days, I’ve noticed how little CNN has covered the ‘Gruber’ videos. There was a bit on Jake Tapper, and something equally short this morning. I don’t think they ever mentioned Wendy Davis, when her campaign went “boom”. In the case of Gruber, I’m glad that there’s a Fox News that will cover the hell out of it, because it damn well should be. But, unlike some, I don’t view either network as deserving some sort of devotion, because that would be weird.

  25. No, Fritz, Fox Fanboy is completely oblivious to the difference in topics between those who criticize TV channels, and those who reflexively defend a specific one against all comers as if it was a religion. Then he goes on a rant about some mythical Twitter-person who “complains about Megyn’s legs all day”. None of it makes any sense, he’s just deflecting criticism of Fox News. Which is the exact thing we are talking about.

  26. I don’t care about much of anything MSNBC does. They simply don’t matter. CNN chasing airplanes and protesting in ferguson on behalf of someone who just committed robbery and assault then proceeded to attack a police officer strikes me as nucking futs. But they also employee my favorite journalist and I respect them as a whole. I don’t spend time boycotting their sponsors or being butt hurt over the color of hair worn by the ladies over there.

  27. “I don’t care about much of anything MSNBC does. They simply don’t matter.”

    Except this:

    Only just caught latter part of Matthews but it was especially delusional. Complete with “birther” talk and Tingles strange obsession about the OBama presidency somehow being erased.

    And this:

    Andrea Mitchell tells CA congressman that the fires in his state are caused by climate change. Then, apparently hears the idiocy of her statement, and sorta backtracks. Lean Forward!

    Both from the most recent Free For All. You criticize cable news channels on a cable news blog just like everybody else. Maybe I should get all bent outta shape and call you an MSNBC hater. ‘Cause that swould be totally normal..

  28. “But, unlike some, I don’t view either network as deserving some sort of devotion, because that would be weird.”

    And I don’t view either of them as evil and neither makes me sad or depressed. Cuz that would be weird.

    I like both of them. I view them as similar but coming from opposite sides of the spectrum. Weird is being in a fox hater fraternity and spending all day whining about every little thing uttered on FNC then getting upset at those who dare to defend the channel. God forbid we don’t all think Roger Ailes is the number 1 terrorist on the planet.

  29. “Weird” is responding to a thought-out comment with some drivel about “evil” and “depressed” and “terrorist”. This is not a serious conversation, so I’ll move on.

  30. “I’ve noticed how little CNN has covered the ‘Gruber’ videos. There was a bit on Jake Tapper,…”

    I saw that on Tapper. He asked Senator Inhofe after a discussion on global warming. For like 15 seconds. That was it. I couldn’t believe it. It almost seemed like the question was asked so that when Fox says, “no one other than us is covering this”, CNN can come back and say “liar, liar pants on fire…Tapper covered it”.

    I hate to be that cynical because Tapper is the best in the business. But the non-coverage in inexcusable. There’s no doubt it would be the lead news story if it were a Republican administration. It’d dumbfounding.

  31. “This is not a serious conversation, so I’ll move on.”

    That’s how I feel about much of the anti-FNC drivel.

  32. Getting back to Shep, “hater channels” in relation to this story is ludicrous. If CNN gave a guy two nights to expose himself as the UBL shooter, Fox and the rest of the right wing would lose their damn minds. The only reason this is sailing through with only a modicum of concern is because Fox is doing it, and we don’t have an Alernative World Fox to get mad about it.

  33. Rivalry stirs interest and interest breeds audience. There’s plenty of rivalries in all successful sports, from high school to professional and probably a few even in NASCAR. Regardless of their origin, natural or fabricated, all such rivalries are exploited for the purpose of filling stadium seats with butts and all are mutually beneficial to the rival teams.

    Shep Smith was stirring the rivalry pot to create controversy and interest. May not be the journalistically professional approach, but that league disbanded years ago, anyway, and it certainly helps the funding of his pay check. It also benefits the rival teams, so no personal foul.

  34. ^ I completely disagree with this. Everybody in cable news criticizes everybody else, and that’s fine. Fox is the only one to have established a company line that their critics fit an amorphous, generalized “haters” definition. This is exactly the one that Megyn Kelly used to wiggle out of her ridiculous “Santa and Jesus are white” declaration: She claimed that Fox are “targets”, and blew it off. It’s disingenuous, and I never thought Shep would stoop to it. If he has problems with specific criticisms of the SEAL special, have at it. Generalizing entire networks as “haters” is just small.

  35. ^ We could both be correct

  36. Does CNN have a Media Matters or ummm… Johnny Dollar kind of ally anywhere? If not, maybe that’s why they’re not in the game.

  37. Insane bloggers can be quite the asset, I suppose.

  38. Fox is, of course, a “target”. Ever ask why this administration leaves notifying and/or including Fox out of certain teleconferences, etc? The rest of the so called “news” gang is just following their lead. You always pick on the leader because they ARE the leader. And Shep, saying what he said, was standing up for his employer. Which, if you are smart in any place of employment, you do. He has a platform and he used it.

    And really, Johnny Dollar is insane? Pathetic all around.

  39. Getting back to the original story, we should remember that this is a book promotion and whether O’Neill actually was the person to kill OBL is not all that important to the story.

    What happened on the raid is well known and although this book will add a few details it needed a hook to make it stand out from the many other accounts. Being the one who actually killed OBL (whether it’s true or not) is that hook.

    The thing that bothers me is that O’Neill doesn’t seem to care that by saying he is the OBL killer he not only offends present and former Seals by breaking the Navy Seal code of silence; but actually puts himself, his former seal mates, his family and friends in real danger from some homegrown domestic terrorist wanting revenge – and all to sell a few books.

    If it was CNN with the excusive story, and not Fox News, you can bet FNC would be the first one out there to complain CNN was in the wrong by promoting the book. And as Spud points out, they already did just that when the Mark Owen book came out. – and, at least, he tried to hide the real names of the seals involved.

  40. “we should remember that this is a book promotion”

    What book would that be?

    “The thing that bothers me is that O’Neill doesn’t seem to care that by saying he is the OBL killer he not only offends present and former Seals by breaking the Navy Seal code of silence”

    That code was already broken when a book was written by Bissonette. And, when the government told the story to Hollywood for a movie.

    “when the Mark Owen book came out. – and, at least, he tried to hide the real names of the seals involved.”

    Huh? When has O’Neill revealed anybody’s names?

    “Getting back to the original story, we should remember that this is a book promotion and whether O’Neill actually was the person to kill OBL is not all that important to the story.”

    He clearly stated his reasons for coming forward. And, for some reason, you’re cool with calling him a liar with no evidence to support that he’s a liar.

    I’m not sure you got a single thing correct in your entire post.

  41. That’s the thing, Fritz. If it was any other network, they would flay it on every opinion show on Fox, not to mention digs from Jon Scott, with his perpetual concern over “other networks”. But it’s on Fox, so Ratings. That’s all that ever really matters.

  42. Oh Lord, can you imagine Jon Scott’s “critics say” concern trolling over those poor Navy SEALS put in harm’s way by a rogue SEAL and the terrible network airing his story? Then Tantaros would have her say…

  43. “What book would that be?”

    ^^Your correct LS I should have said FNC documentary and career as a motivational speaker. My apologies to all.

    “That code was already broken when a book was written by Bissonette.”
    \
    ^^I agree that Bssonette/own was also at fault. But that doesn’t excuse O’Neill.

    “And, when the government told the story to Hollywood for a movie.”

    ^^The government has no ‘code of silence’ to maintain.

    “When has O’Neill revealed anybody’s names?”

    ^^His own for one.

    “He clearly stated his reasons for coming forward. And, for some reason, you’re cool with calling him a liar with no evidence to support that he’s a liar.”

    ^^I never called him a liar, I just said his version of what happened is disputed by other seals and that it’s not really important who actually pulled the trigger that killed OBL. Claiming credit for what the team did as a whole; even if he says that’s not what he’s doing, is just unseemly.

  44. Bahaha, Oh Lawd; so now Hannity, O’Reilly, & Megyn Kelly would trash the guy that killed OBL if he had told his story to CNN? That is so incredibly awesome. Or ridiculous. But awesome nonetheless.

  45. “^^I never called him a liar, I just said his version of what happened is disputed by other seals and that it’s not really important who actually pulled the trigger that killed OBL. Claiming credit for what the team did as a whole; even if he says that’s not what he’s doing, is just unseemly.”

    I was speaking about his reasons for coming forward. Which he clearly laid out in what was a pretty touching and emotional way during the special last night…if you actually watched. You are saying he came forward to make money off of a non-existent book. When, he clearly laid out last night the reasons for coming forward. It appears that you didn’t watch the special. Either way, you’re calling him a liar.

  46. And apparently the rest of your gang didn’t watch either because neither corrected you on the book claim; they only jumped aboard the booooooo Fox train. “That’s the thing, Fritz”.

  47. Well golly, LS, it appears you corrected the book claim. Your assertion that there’s a problem because someone else didn’t do it first is silly. No one here is concerned about books; the topic is the TV special and Shep’s contention that ‘haters’ have a problem with it.

  48. Ok, Lonestar here’s your apples to apples comparison you dinged me over not having…

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ex-navy-seal-criticizes-bin-laden-shooter-for-divulging-classified-information/

  49. Spud, as I stated, I think Shep was referring to the fact that CNN rushed some stuff out there in advance of the FNC special in an attempt to discredit O’Neil and FNC. And, that they labeled it “breaking news”. That’s how it appeared to me when I saw the segments on CNN, anyway.

    I don’t have a huge problem with people criticizing a Navy SEAL for speaking out; as I mentioned in a previous post, I’ve had that argument with my neighbor, an Army Major, over the Marcus Luttrell book. But, I don’t think it applies in this situation because: a) another SEAL already wrote a book detailing the accounts; b) the WH spoke out of turn in even announcing it was the SEAL’s that conducted the raid; c) the government spilled the beans to Hollywood for a movie and d) I didn’t hear anything that hadn’t already been reported and confirmed.

    It does make me smile that FNC had the guy on that criticized O’Neil. Kinda undercuts everything the Fox haters say. 🙂

  50. Uh, yeah, the rightwing meme that the cat was already out of the bag because POTUS told us SEAL Team 6 were the badasses who popped UBL is bollocks. Was he supposed to tell us he nailed bin Laden with no explanation? I’m sure that would have gone over REAL well. Identifying specific SEALs by name is a completely different move, and not a wise one.

  51. “You are saying he came forward to make money off of a non-existent book. When, he clearly laid out last night the reasons for coming forward.

    ^^No I’m saying that he’s ALSO promoting the FNC doc and by extension his motivational speaking business.

    “It appears that you didn’t watch the special.

    ^^You’re right I didn’t watch the doc and I wouldn’t if it were on MSNBC either. Like 9/11 the subject has been written about and documented to death.

    “Either way, you’re calling him a liar.”

    ^^No, he can have more than one motive for making the claim he’s making. In the end he’s going to make money from his story no matter what he says his motive is or how moving it is.

    I’m happy he was part of the team the killed OBL and thank him for his service. But it’s a fact that as well as the glory he gets for telling his story; he will have to live with any bad things occur as a result.

  52. I think Shep was referring to the fact that CNN rushed some stuff out there in advance of the FNC special in an attempt to discredit O’Neil and FNC. And, that they labeled it “breaking news”.

    He was definitely referring to that the first time he brought it up…the second time he brought it up he wasn’t. And it’s the second time that I’m talking about.

  53. Let’s not forget that the Obama administration leaked all kinds of stuff about the Bin Laden raid. They needed to make themselves look good through all of this and there is no getting around this.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/05/pentagon-cia-white-house-opened-up-to-hollywood-on-124293.html

    http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/12/11/339426/panetta-revealed-secret-bin-laden-info/

  54. Cool. Thanks for the responses Spud. Either way, it’s amusing that Shep, of all people, is being attacked for defending his network. He’s the one person at FNC whom non-FNC fans, or “haters” as some call them, don’t hate (or don’t dislike)!

  55. “I’m happy he was part of the team the killed OBL and thank him for his service. But it’s a fact that as well as the glory he gets for telling his story; he will have to live with any bad things occur as a result.”

    And, on this we agree…🙂

  56. Was he supposed to tell us he nailed bin Laden with no explanation?

    It used to be that the term “Special Forces” was used to explain a clandestine op and, for the inevitable questions that would follow, “I’m sorry, that’s classified information and I’m sure you understand” or “The White House will not be disclosing this information so I’ll refer you to the Department of Defence and you can see if they’ll answer.” Once in a while there’s already an abundance of signs pointing to something being a Seal op, so if I was the one confirming that info I’d likely have answered, “Yes, the president ordered an operation and it was carried out by Seal Team 8 and that’s all you’re getting out of me on this detail. Next question.”

    That the White House and/or some other team member had already spilled some beans is irrelevant. Seals are supposed to keep their mouths shut. POTUS, VPOTUS, and (sometimes) SecDef can authorise release of classified military information without legal consequence. For everybody else it’s a crime. Ironically, had the details of the kill not been blabbed it’s quite likely that the president’s stature as a strong leader would be much higher and more universal.

  57. Ironically, had the details of the kill not been blabbed it’s quite likely that the president’s stature as a strong leader would be much higher and more universal.

    Except for the minor problem that he would have been hounded in perpetuity about making the whole thing up to make himself look good, which was why the missile strike was not considered: The Admin knew an obliterated compound would leave no trace of a kill we could call “we got UBL”. It’s all fine and good now to complain that Obama gave too much detail of the mission, but hindsight is easy. At the time he had just recently come off an endless drumbeat for a damn birth certificate which the man had to actually present to the nation so conspiracy loons would (hopefully) get over it.

    There’s another layer to this which I’ve never seen discussed. The entire nation watched the second plane enter the second tower; then watched New Yorkers fall from those towers; then watched those towers crumble to the ground, obliterating people into a mist. The country deserved more than “we got him, that’s all you get”. We needed to see in our mind’s eye those helicopters landing; the dog; the firefight; and finally Usama bin Laden shot between the eyes. It was owed to us.

  58. Except for the minor problem that..
    Nonsense. There’s a multitude of ways to handle that without blabbing away operational details. We’re owed an un-compromised ability to do something like this again when it’s needed.

    President 44 could have called President 43. “George, I need you to see something and then I need a favour.” I have no doubt whatsoever that George W Bush would have answered, “Yes, Mr. President.”

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: