Awesome: Cenk's Fiery Debate w/ G.M. on White House vs. Fox News!

[ihavenobias]

Run time: 14:02 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfREWQYWmD4   Posted on YouTube: October 22, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: October 22, 2009 By DU Member: ihavenobias Views on DU: 4418

 
Note: This video alone is reason enough to subscribe (it's FREE) to TYT's new YouTube channel, TYT Interviews: http://www.youtube.com/user/TYTInterviews

Summary: Hot on the heels of his defending the White House's decision to call out Fox News, Cenk has a contentious debate with Glynnis MacNicol over her piece ''.

PS--- to get free TYT podcasts. Also, TYT is now on .

[yellerpup]

1. Kick!

Awesome.

[MrSlayer]

2. Not really a "Firey" debate at all.

They were both quite polite in their disagreement.

[ihavenobias]

5. I disagree. Just because they weren't rude doesn't mean it wasn't contentious.

At any rate, a great segment IMO.

[Xipe Totec]

6. +1 n/t

[ejbr]

24. +2 n/t

[Kajsa]

47. +3

n/t

[jennied]

11. Fox news has created the myth that we can't have polite disagreements.

[truedelphi]

12. Faux news and those obnoxious round table discussions

HAve "educated" the populace to the notion that debate is about SCREAMING and YELLING and DROWNING the opponents out.

And that whoever screams the loudest and whoever has the last word is the winner.

Very important to do this to us -as the things that our survival rely on - such as truly understanding GMO crops etc means that we have to learn (or maybe I should say, "unlearn") how to critically evaluate theories.

Already most people think that the "latest" or "newest" study invalidates the older study. And the idea of the ethos, that is, who DID the study, has become irrelevant.

[ihavenobias]

64. Very true about the unethical tactics.

Unfortunately they also happen to be very effective.

[OhioChick]

3. K&R n/t

[dccrossman]

4. K&R

:kick:

[depakid]

7. She's not a very adept apologist, that's for sure.

[CatWoman]

14. she's completely clueless

how many times did Cenk have to keep repeating the same thing to her?

And he wants ME to check out her site?

No f-ing way!!

I don't want that clueless woman anywhere near me.

[burning rain]

8. MSM are probably largely inclined to agree with the moderate & liberal critique...

of Fox, but they're cowardly lions, afraid of big bad Fox, and long cowed by conservative attacks.

k & r for the Turks!

[Cha]

9. Rec'd! I have to come back and see this..

off to work. Thanks for the hu.

[theFrankFactor]

10. Kick It!

JOIN US!
http://TheFrankFactor.com

[jgraz]

13. Poor Glynnis was really outclassed

I had visions of her needing to set down the phone so she could wipe off the flop sweat.

[slay]

15. Ha very nice

TYT strong as usual! Great vid. K&R.

[Enthusiast]

16. How can anyone mistake Fox

for news?

[Rhiannon12866]

17. Kudos for Cenk for addressing this... K&R!

It's long past time that somebody did... :patriot: :kick:

[wroberts189]

18. Cenk just totally demolishes her spin. KNR

On edit ... he crushed her.


Some advice for the freeper lurkers... times are changing and you need to start dealing with facts ...not big lies you heard on the radio.

[ihavenobias]

32. Some of the YouTube comments are entertaining.

Speaking of which, I'm happy to see that there was a small increase in subscribers for the new TYT Interviews channel. Still, there should be more...it's got a LONG way to go before it catches up with the main TYT channel.

[Wetzelbill]

34. If you read the comments to TYT videos

I am billthebutcher2 on them.

[wroberts189]

19. Damn .. pegged out. I have to replace my unbelievable meter again.

Thx ihavenobias

[20score]

20. Pointing out the obvious should never be off limits. K&R

[edc]

21. The American Right

is all offense. It has no defense. To defeat it you must attack, attack and keep attacking on all fronts!

[FiveGoodMen]

22. So: If Fox lied about someone in their "news" reporting, but that someone was not in office...

Would Glynnis argue that the target of their (fraudulent) report had no business speaking up and denouncing the lies?

Or is there a special rule that you can lie about the President and it doesn't count against you?

She doesn't want the "White House deciding what is news" (by saying Fox lied) but Fox can call Obama a liar -- and worse -- and magically, that doesn't count as them deciding what the President can say.

Conservatives get nealy all their mileage by slipping a blatant double standard into the debate and then shouting incessantly so that no one can point out the discrepancy.

In any case, her analysis relies on the free-market-gone-nuts belief that everyone's spin is just as legitimate as everyone else's. That there are really no such things as actual lies. But that's wrong. There are lies.

To put it another way, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."

[Yavin4]

23. If The Naked News Were On Basic Cable, Their Ratings Would Match Fox's Ratings

Should the White House the Naked News network with equal respect just because they have ratings?

Now, there's no regulation or law that states that journalists need to be fair and balance and present accurate versions of the story, or that a news source can't have a political agenda.

However, the White House does not have to treat Fox News as a legitimate news source, no matter how large their audience is. Glynnis is under this impression that the White House must treat EVERY news source with equal respect, and in particular, Fox's ratings give them this legitimacy, and that argument is bullshit.

FYI, the Naked News is a website whereby the anchors read the news while taking off their clothes.

[ejbr]

25. So, let me understand this...

Her point is, EVEN IF Fox News is a propaganda outlet, it is up to other new organizations to challenge them, not the targets of their lies, because it is an attack on their first amendment rights if the White House criticizes their "news"? Did she complain when the Bush White House ignored MSNBC?

[Seldona]

30. Precisely.

Never mind the criticism of their falsehoods is protected speech as well. That is a hole in her logic you could drive a semi through.

[Thornleylv]

54. Exactly

Bush complained constantly about MSNBC and the "liberal" media. Cenk should have pointed that out when she said that there would have been an uproar if the last administration would have done it.

[matthewf]

26. k&r

[fascisthunter]

27. she is purposefully exaggerating beyond belief

So now, if the administration questions a network's credibility, it's considered government "control"? Nice try...

[Turborama]

37. True, but she did let slip that BecKKK lies and exagerates, too lol

@ 10 minutes.

No matter how many times Cenk tries to explain that the problem is that they are lying about being "fair and balanced" her cognitive dissonance won't let it in. The same could probably said about Faux's fans too, they probably truly believe Faux is "fair and balanced" and nothing anyone says or does will ever change that.

[ihavenobias]

66. A common response from Fox viewers is that Fox "leans right" to balance out the rest of the media.

Because as you know the rest of the media is liberally biased.

;)

[KoKo]

28. Kick

[cachukis]

29. Cenk was smooth.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

31. Oh she said nanny. Nothing wrong with Nanny she looks out for folks security and well-being amen for

Nanny. Don't eff with Nanny, um OK. In the end Nanny didn't wage war on Faux, the WH haven't waged a war with Faux they just choose not to take them serious. Unless they actually decide to be fair and balanced can't see it happening myself.

[Wetzelbill]

33. k and r.

[democracy1st]

35. K & R

[MedfordTim]

36. Already R'd, here's a K

[Turborama]

38. K&R The White House is winning this war on Faux!

If their aim was to cause open discussions about Faux's legitimacy and plant the seed of doubt in the general public's mind about them, they have succeeded.

I'd love to see Cenk go into the lions den and deliver their asses to them in person.

With regards to their viewing figures going up. I expect a lot of the people who watch it are doing so out of curiosity as to what all the fuss is about with that seed planted firmly in their minds. I'm sure when they see what's really going on there most of the new viewers realize that the White House is correct in its assertion that Faux news is a propaganda arm of the Republicon party.

Also, let's round up Faux's viewing figures and say that 3 million people watch it. That is equivalent to roughly 1% of the total population of America and just 1.25% (rough guess) of the population that are able to vote. Now, 122.5 million people voted (rounding up again) which makes just under 2.5% of voters watch Faux news. Those figures aren't troubling in the slightest, what is troubling, however, is that their disinformation spreads like a virus to other more credible networks.

---- --- ----

299,398,484 total population
225,746,457 total population over 18 years
122,394,724 total number of US citizens that voted in 2008 election
= 54% of population voted.

From: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_voted_in_the_2008_election

---- --- ----

What I would like to know is what percentage of the American population actually pay attention to any news, wherever it's coming from. I can't find recent figures and it would be interesting to do the math on that one too.

[libodem]

39. How did he stay so calm

She was frustrating the hell out of me.

[autorank]

40. k*r Rokken - confrontation with the truth is the ultimte strategy! n/t

[NikolaC]

41. K&R n/t

[WillyT]

42. Big K & R !!!

:kick:

[lonestarnot]

43. Love THIS! Cenk rocks!

Thanks IHNB!

[spiritual_gunfighter]

44. K&R Bigtime!!!

As Cenk would say "Glynnis brought the weak sauce".

[Celtic Merlin]

45. Glynnis presents half-baked ideas and clay-footed positions.

Her biggest concerns seem to be that not enough people are bitching about the WH telling Foxed-up Nooz that they're partisan hacks (which they are) and that there'd have been greater upraor had Bush tried this. Well, Bush DID do this in a backdoor way. Remember when they were yanking WH Press passes of reporters they didn't like? Remember how they froze out some legit news operations because they didn't like the coverage they received? Bush did it. He just did it in a less open way.

This woman is FAIL.

Celtic Merlin
Carlinist

[Kajsa]

46. Here's the telltale question from her,

"Do you want the government to be deciding what news channels are fair?"
( the underlined portion is a dead giveaway that you are dealing with a staunch conservative)

Do I want my government calling out a phony " news channel" for obsessive deception
and lies?

Hell Yes!!

" We are having two conversations here"

Yes Glynnis, there are two conversations here.

Cenk is presenting facts and good points while you are defending fiction,
disguised as "news".

K & R

:kick:

[Hamlette]

48. Cenk missed the point, as usual.

Her blog post was entitled "Why isn't the MSM complaining about WH attacks on Fox?"

Her position was, according to her post (which is why he did the segment) the MSM should push back AGAINST the WH attacks on Fox.

Yet, her argument during the segment was the MSM should be the one attacking FOX! Huh? He post didn't say "Why does the MSM treat Fox like a legitimate news source. She said the WH should treat Fox like a legitimate news source and it is the responsibility of the MSM to say Fox is lying.

Cenk didn't even recognize that what she said on the clip was very different from her piece.

THE VERY ISSUE HERE is why, when GM tried to defend her position, she seemed to change it? And if she didn't change her position, how does she reconcile what she said on the show with what she wrote earlier?

AND Cenk should have said, if/since the MSM will NOT push back against Fox, is the WH required to keep quiet about it?

The whole reason the WH pushed back against Fox was NOT what Fox did/said. It was because the NYT and the WaPo and other "legitimate" news sources started saying bs things like "we goofed because we missed this big story the Fox covered and we should have covered and we didn't. We are horrible and Fox is the only fair and balanced news source out there." (The Fox stories in question were bs stories like Acorn.

So, what she should have said, and what Cenk should have held her feet to the fire about, was "Why does the MSM treat Fox like a legitimate news source and get let around by its collective noses?"

This is why I never click on Cenk stories. Whoever posts them here hypes them as having something interesting to say when he is just not at all good. One time in a couple dozen I get pulled in by the op headline and am always amazed at how shallow these programs are.

[CherylK]

49. LOL!!!

:eyes: :puke: :rofl: :spray: :dunce: :crazy:

Let us know when you take Cenk's place since you know so much better than him!

[Hamlette]

51. I don't want to take his place. Do you not agree he allowed her to change her position?

Her piece said the MSM should push back against the WH for calling out Fox.

On the show she said the MSM should push back against Fox but sadly they will not/do not.

That close to 180 degrees and Cenk allowed her to get away with it.

Just sayin'.

[jgraz]

56. And we'll have to leave it there

Don't watch MSM interviews that much, huh?

[Hamlette]

65. expect those on our side to be better and point out the inconsistencies (lies) of the other side n/t

[Thornleylv]

50. MSM

Bush complained about the "liberal" MSM OVER AND OVER why is this so different?


:kick:

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

52. Thanks IHNB...You gotta love Cenk.

He is a very good interviewer.

Kick!

[ihavenobias]

53. Agreed. BTW, he has a brand new piece from HuffPo I posted...

[rAVES]

55. didnt Hugo shut down a station for aiding an attempted Coup d'état?

pretty sure a station be shut down in the US if the same thing happened

[krkaufman]

57. Not in total agreement

Thanks for posting the vid to the community, 'cause it's certainly worthwhile; but I wasn't completely satisfied with it -- to the degree that I zipped-off an email (to what I think is his address) after watching it, the other day.

I thought Cenk either missed or let slide far too many points, and seemed to engage in contradiction, rather than effective debate/argument. (see: Python, Monty)

My thoughts, emailed...

1) The White House isn't telling anyone to "go after" Fox News; the White House is simply doing exactly what Glynnis, herself, was advocating: stating their view that other actual news organizations should not be treating Fox News as news, and shouldn't be blindly following Fox News' lead on what the relevant stories are.

2) Ms. MacNicol repeatedly tried to state the White House is mischaracterizing Fox News, and that Fox News *should* be considered a news organization because it employs journalists, and one can point to examples of employees who are not tainted with Fox News' typical bias. However, the judgment is not absolute; if the RNC had employed Walter Cronkite, rest his soul, during his latter years, that would not have made the RNC a news organization.

3) Fox News didn't just have a producer whipping-up the crowd during the 9/12 events. Fox News initiated, and actively promoted the events; and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they funded the events in some way.

4) The phrase you're looking for to describe Fox News is "political operation." Especially w/ the advent of the 9/12 events, Fox News has jumped well into the realm of political operation. Again, the characterization isn't dependent on the personnel, but on the overarching actions and motivations of the organization.

[SharksBreath]

58. Her site looks like a Fox Sister site.

They have Beck and Hannity right on the front page.

[SharksBreath]

59. She's a typical Republican

When presented with facts she changes the question.

She keeps asking if you want a Government that goes after a news organization.


Cenk is saying. What news organization. It's not news.

She agrees that most of the time they aren't so it kinds of makes her point meaningless.

[Lena inRI]

60. Hey hey, ho ho. . .

. . .way to go, Cenk Uygur!

Cenk is a gentleman and a scholar and RIGHT!

That Glynnis was SPLITTING HAIRS to use some kind of attack against Obama for indefensible FOX FAKE journalism.

If ratings are the only leg she stands on to prove her point that FOX is an acceptable news organization and not just conservative commentary, those ratings are meaningless in light of easily contrived viewing measurements.

It's not a quantitative but QUALITATIVE argument.

And Team Obama should be even more forceful with their push-back against FOX FAKE FRAMING OF THE ISSUES.

RIGHT ON, CENK AND TEAM OBAMA!

:fistbump: :applause: :fistbump: :applause: :fistbump:

[robo50]

61. This woman is an idiot...

She's trying to make a point, and each time she tries, with her nasalated voice, she refuses to address the lies that Fox tells.

Her web page shows Fox idiots, and no real journalists.

She wants real journalists from other media to fight Fox?? She's an idiot!

[Crunchy Frog]

62. What kinds of things did Nixon and Reagan used to say about the media?

I honestly don't reacall, but it seems like they expressed some sorts of opinions, probably more harshly than anything Obama has expressed.

[JDPriestly]

63. Ultimately, the consumers must decide.

Remember, every time you view Fox News, you are in a sense voting for it.

I am disgusted to see how many times cuts from Fox News programs are posted on DU. Why? Because if people are posting Fox News cuts on DU, they are watching Fox News. They are voting for Fox News.

Stop watching Fox News if you don't like it. That is the first step toward changing Fox News' programming.

Fox News will continue with the vicious programming they have as long as people watch. Stop watching. Stop talking about Fox News. Ignore it. It is a media company. Their purpose is to communicate to the public, to stir things up, to get attention. Stop giving Fox News attention.

[PDJane]

67. I don't watch Fox.

In fact, I don't watch CNN either. I do watch specific shows from MSNBC online...notably Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann. I do watch C-Span, and do catch Amy Goodman on line.

I sometimes watch the clips here, but I find as I get more pain, I have less patience even for that. I suspect the you-tube clips are a different thing than watching the programmes though.

[pleah]

68. Very good interview.

[Ramulux]

69. Decent Interview

This was good only if you needed reassurance that Cenk is an intellectual heavyweight. This woman was completely shut down on every point she tried to make, and then seemed unable to understand what Cenk is saying because she kept repeating the same points that he already rebutted. I also fucking hate it when people get their their bullshit shoved down their throat and then just go "oh well, i guess we agree to disagree". So lame. I cant believe this girl is in charge of a fairly big website.