Are lower thirds on Chavez fair and balanced?
Steve Safran September 22nd, 2006
The Daily Show calls them “Cavutos”: lower-thirds on news that end in a question mark, usually indicating a strong hint of the channel’s belief. (Cory Bergman: Defiant Despot?) TVNewser rounds up a very funny list of the lower-thirds from Fox News’s coverage of Hugo Chavez’s visit to the U.N. Thursday. Here’s some of Brian Stelter’s timeline: 7:16pm: “Pres Chavez: Narcissistic personality disorder?”; 10:54am: “How dare Hugo Chavez blast the United States?”; 11:02am: “Should we stop buying Chavez’s gas from Citgo stations?”; 11:59am: “Chavez insults U.S.: Where is the outrage?”; 12:29pm: “Should U.S. continue to fund U.N. after applause for Chavez? All those question marks before 12:30? Won’t that spoil your lunch? Question mark journalism: this is news?
19 Comments Add your own
1. Allen | September 22nd, 2006 at 6:19 am
What? Should they have put: Is George Bush really the devil? Would that have made it ok?
2. Andonandon | September 22nd, 2006 at 6:37 am
Allen: You answered your own question, methinks.
3. Calvin Jones | September 22nd, 2006 at 7:23 am
Click on my name, check out the speech in full from youtube.
Make your mind up based on facts.
4. Zack | September 22nd, 2006 at 7:33 am
A few weeks back, The Daily Show did a bit on this exact scenario. It was hilarious.
5. Kent Brockman | September 22nd, 2006 at 7:37 am
I have to say that the “Cavutos” are pretty ingenious. And honestly, having just rewatched Chavez’s speech, I’d have a hard time not agreeing with every one of those lower-thirds, with or without question marks.
6. Z | September 22nd, 2006 at 8:21 am
Agreeing with them is fine. Broadcasting them isn’t.
7. GB | September 22nd, 2006 at 2:24 pm
“Agreeing with them is fine. Broadcasting them isn’t.” — Z
Z: Opponent of the 1st Amendment?
Z: Fascist censor wannabe?
Do you really mean to imply that the owners of FOX News don’t have a right to free speech?
8. Lex | September 22nd, 2006 at 2:47 pm
So, GB, I take it you’d be OK with a network posting something like:
George W. Bush: the devil? Or just the numbnuts who rides shotgun in the devil’s pickup truck and runs into the 7-11 to buy his cigarettes for him?
(OK, that wouldn’t fit, of course, but you get the point.)
9. discreet_chaos | September 22nd, 2006 at 3:07 pm
I didn’t know that Citgo was owned by Venezuela’s national oil company. And, how ingenious for FoxNews to follow-up this info with a Cavuto for outrage. Hmmm… It may be subtle, but should a news organization be trying to subliminally start a boycott?
10. Z | September 22nd, 2006 at 5:17 pm
GB, it’s a little thing called journalist ethics. I happen to believe in it. Sorry that you don’t.
11. Patrick | September 23rd, 2006 at 12:20 pm
What about all the lower-thirds in between those? You only listed 5 of them over a 5-hour period. Surely you’re leaving out ones that don’t strengthen your point.
12. Z | September 23rd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
The others would be irrelevant, because just doing those five was ethically wrong. There’s no “balance” to be had. If they had five more supporting Chavez as openly as they’re opposing him, then they’d have 10 that were ethically wrong.
13. Anonymous | September 23rd, 2006 at 3:51 pm
“Your Mother: A Whore?”
This is opinion, not news. FNC should rework its middle name.
14. Anonymous | September 25th, 2006 at 10:00 pm
Actual lower third from CNN:
Hunt For Bin Laden
Experts Agree: Al Qaeda leader is dead or alive
Nothing like sticking your neck out in these contentious times…
15. girls + dogs&hellip | January 24th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
lezbos fucking dildo…
girl child abuse in india…
16. biglietto aeri&hellip | January 31st, 2007 at 1:16 am
biglietto aeri…
news…
17. centaur pics photomorph&hellip | March 9th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
bdsm torture sluts…
soapy pics…
18. alcohol & paxil&hellip | March 11th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
symptoms of zoloft…
allegra d 24 hour didn’t work, allegra d worked better…
19. B | April 12th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Jouralism ethics my arse. Who cares? It is their right to broadcast the cavutos, so let ‘em; you don’t have to watch it. I can’t believe people are offended by this. Ridiculous.
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed