Fox News blames website for ‘poor judgment’
Cory Bergman September 28th, 2006
On Monday, we criticized FoxNews.com for not making the Bill Clinton interview video linkable and shareable. Clips of the interview were exploding in traffic on YouTube, in part due to a Drudge link, and some of the Fox News talent were even referencing the YouTube clips instead of FoxNews.com on the air. Then we learned that FoxNews.com demanded that YouTube pull the clips down. And then today, Fox News admitted it was all just a big mistake. “Our Internet division used poor judgment in asking this to be taken down,” reads a statement from Fox News. “We’re thrilled the Wallace-Clinton clip has received so many hits on YouTube.” And all the clips are back. Good grief.
17 Comments Add your own
1. Steve Safran | September 28th, 2006 at 7:31 am
We could start a whole blog dedicated to networks whose legal side issues cease and desists and then whose programming/marketing sides apologize.
This must happen once a month now.
2. SportsJunkie | September 28th, 2006 at 9:02 am
It’s mind-blowing how diametrically opposed the policies of these marketing and legal depts are in big media companies. You guys definitely called this one. I didn’t think they would see the errors of their ways so quickly, but they clearly missed an important window.
3. Charlie Sierra | September 28th, 2006 at 10:05 am
Yeah, if only the NYT and WP issued corrections and apologies as quickly as this.
4. W | September 28th, 2006 at 10:25 am
It’s not a correction, jackass - politics have nothing to do with this. This was poor strategy and shortsighted no matter if it was Fox, the NYT or anybody.
I know you only exist to put a political spin on everything - there are plenty of blogs that love that crap… you should spend more time there.
5. Anonymous | September 28th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Oooh, meeeooowww. Saucer of milk? Somebody’s quite touchy today. Me thinks W doeth protest toooooooooo much.
6. mediaburn | September 28th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
…or, perhaps it was the fact Mr. Sierra took another debate about the use of the web by major companies and turned the debate from technical to political. Tiresome.
7. Brad | September 28th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
One of the things that attracted me to this site is that it has been populated by reasonable people who share enlightened discussion, while avoiding the urge to launch into political diatribes.
I agree that there are many, many other places to argue politics, left or right or whatever. I have visited those places and generally found them quite boring. They seem to be populated by people who have little interest in sharing ideas, defying the rules of artful persuasion in the process.
Like most of you, I have my own political viewpoints, however I do not feel this is the proper forum to share them. I only hope that others will try and “reign it in” so that this great site can continue to be an oasis of intelligent and genteel discussion.
8. Steve Safran | September 28th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Brad: Over the years we have had many political shouters of all stripes come and flame the board. They are all short-lived. By far, the best strategy in dealing with them is when the LR audience first politely asks them to leave, and then simply ignores them. Soon, they fade away. What do bullies want? Attention.
It’s what Roger Waters calls “The Bravery of Being Out of Range.” When you can hide behind a mask of anonymity, you feel free to bully. How that adds credibility to your thoughts, I haven’t the slightest idea.
By engaging the off-topic political rantmeisters, you only embolden them to return and, in turn, invite others who distract from the good and positive conversation we encourage. We don’t ever want to be a place that censors for content. We want the LR Faithful to lead by example.
I, too, have no use for easy, predictable politically-charged answers. I get it - you hate liberals, he hates conservatives, blah blah blah. Boring. Let’s find solutions. Let’s debate, but not argue or knee-jerk. Somewhere along the way, classical debate got confused with Monty Python’s “Argument Sketch.” Anyone can argue. Few can debate. And even fewer can discuss calmly.
So engage the debates, ignore the arguments, and keep contributing the positive discussions.
Remember the old saying: “He who shouts the loudest has the least to say.”
9. thedetroitchannel | September 28th, 2006 at 6:18 pm
hey, at least charlie is consistent.
he’s not like that one guy that frequents this board and changes his name every other comment.
talk about tiresome!
10. Lost Remote TV Blog&hellip | October 1st, 2006 at 9:50 pm
[...] Looks like Fox News has a YouTube page called “The Blast,” which was in existence before the whole Clinton video flap. Interesting. (Thanks, Don!) [...]
11. Hairy | October 2nd, 2006 at 7:36 am
Just like fnc to pass the blame on to someone else. Anybody else think FNC outsources its website? To be successful fnc and and .com side should work together. Maybe why fnc.com isn’t a player in the online news game.
12. free porn sample movies d&hellip | January 29th, 2007 at 10:49 pm
nude 18…
jlo pussy…
13. young fantasy girls&hellip | March 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
sabre pics…
adult cilps…
14. Never News Just Blame&hellip | April 18th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
[...] Fox News blames website for ‘poor judgment’ [...]
15. how long does cialis take&hellip | May 2nd, 2007 at 4:50 pm
safety of viagra with lisinopril…
canida cheep viagra…
16. morris alex | October 20th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
The program on Islam vs Islamists was outstanding. It shoud be repeated on all tv channels.The report on why Channel 9 would not present it should be released as soon as possible.
17. Robocop | January 20th, 2008 at 6:50 am
Wow, thanks for the excellent information!
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