namelesstavern.net

Man sells device that blocks Fox News

EMILY FREDRIX

Associated Press


It's not that Sam Kimery objects to the views expressed on Fox News. The creator of the "Fox Blocker" contends the channel is not news at all. Kimery figures he's sold about 100 of the little silver bits of metal that screw into the back of most televisions, allowing people to filter Fox News from their sets, since its August debut.

The Tulsa, Okla., resident also has received thousands of e-mails, both angry and complimentary - as well as a few death threats.

"Apparently the making of terroristic threats against those who don't share your views is a high art form among a certain core audience," said Kimery, 45.

Formerly a registered Republican, even a precinct captain, Kimery became an independent in the 1990s when he said the state party stopped taking input from its everyday members.

Kimery now contends Fox News' top-level management dictates a conservative journalistic bias, that inaccuracies are never retracted, and what winds up on the air is more opinion than news. "I might as well be reading tabloids out of the grocery store," he says. "Anything to get a rise out of the viewer and to reinforce certain retrograde notions."

A Fox spokeswoman at the station's New York headquarters said the channel's ratings speak for themselves. For the first three months of this year, Fox has been averaging 1.62 million viewers in prime-time, compared with CNN's 805,000, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Kimery's motives go deeper than preventing people from watching the channel, which he acknowledges can be done without the Blocker. But he likens his device to burning a draft card, a tangible example of disagreement.

And he's taking this message to the network's advertisers. After buying the $8.95 device online, would-be blockers are shown a letter that they can send to advertisers via the Fox Blocker site.

"The point is not to block the channel or block free speech but to raise awareness," said Kimery, who works in the tech industry.

Kimery doesn't use the device himself; his remote is programmed to only a half-dozen channels. Plus he occasionally feels the need to tune into Fox News for something "especially heinous."

Business could pick up since the blocker was alluded to in a recent episode of the ABC drama "Boston Legal." The show's original script mentioned Fox News, but ABC had the references removed.

The boisterous conversations on Fox News may be why the station is so popular, said Matthew Felling, media director for the Center for Media and Public Affairs, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media watchdog group. And despite a perception that Fox leans to the right, Felling said, that doesn't mean people who lean left should tune out.

"It's tough to engage in an argument when you're not participating in it," Felling said. "It's just one more layer in the wall that the right and the left are building in between each other."

What an idiot.

I on that device.

Fox news. A paragon of all that is right and good within todays society! All must worship at the altar of.........

WTF? I was gonna type something else but Mindia's Jesus pic was staring into my soul!

Fox news is biased tabloid garbage

I like watching Fox news actually, it's almost always on. I get to yell or talk back often and though I'm sure that's crazy, I get a kick out of it.

I did that for a while too Araby... but then I would get ill when I would think about the fact that people actually believed that shit.

Last night was crazy. I'm not sure of her name, the older blonde with the weird mouth...was interviewing a CNA, or certified nursing assistant, who worked with Terry Shaivo in 1993 and couldn't say anything more than, "He lies, he just doesn't do what he's says he's gone do, he lies, he just lies" -when asked about the husband.
It was the craziest thing I've ever seen. Who puts these people on television?? Just using them..poor people. Then I think, my god...is South Carolina the only state that has HIPAA laws, for the privacy of the patient? Former caregivers can't just go on television and talk about a patient...this is all so strange and one thing, though...about Fox. One thing Bill O'reilly said which I agreed with (like the one thing ever) was that there are far too many unanswered questions in all of this, especially on a state level.

wait, wrong thread and I'm rambling

They fucking interviewed that 'psychic' from that Crossing Over show on one of their idiot shows to get his oh-so-profound comments on Terri Shiavo's soul. That's great Fox. What's next, maybe theyll use Sylvia Brown to tell us what really happened to Nicole Simpson.

The reverse V-chip. Instead of blocking the garbage - you block the stuff that makes sense.

PERFECT!

Fox news owns

Fox news is like CNN, but a little more biased to the right, than CNN is to the left.

You have to sift through the bad and just take the underlying news.

Their Terry Schiavo coverage may be the most unbalanced news piece in the history of reporting.

I'm not watching the bullshit that is the Terry coverage honestly...

It's not all that often I skip over their coverage of something but this is definitely one of those times.

Harrison wrote:I'm not watching the bullshit that is the Terry coverage honestly...

It's not all that often I skip over their coverage of something but this is definitely one of those times.

I gave the Tsunami a day of my attention. I was saddened, but just couldn't watch it, nothing I can do but be sad for them and give a donation. For some reason though, I'm very interested in this news. I feel the need to follow it for some reason.

CNN is not news. CNN is biased, filtered, opinion. Nothing more. Fox News delivers unbiased news, truthfulness, and accurate conveyance of facts.

lol

I choose NPR.

CNN is not news. CNN is biased, filtered, opinion. Nothing more. Fox News delivers unbiased news, truthfulness, and accurate conveyance of facts.

Do you honestly actually believe that???


I don't think there is really ANY new service that's completely unbiased, all are run by people who have some sort of opinion, and that taints them all to a certain degree


But if you honestly believe FOX news is the paragon of the truth...

Yes, Fox News is the most truthful of any news reporting station or news commentary program I've ever watched, including CNN, CNN Headline "News"(lol), CSPAN, ABC, CBS, NBC, BBC, ZDF & SAM (From Germany).

Mindia only believes that because Fox tailors it's editorializing and wording of stories when it does actually attempt to report news in ways that fit his pre-existing prejudices. It's just that simple. You listen to something that consistently tells you what you want to hear, and that panders to your world view, and you're incredibly narrow-minded and prejudiced (like Mindia), and when other news outlets DON'T do that, you're going to go with the one that reinforces what you already believe. Meanwhile, those with an IQ higher than their shoe size, (unlike Mindia) or those with an open mind (again unlike Mindia), realize the truth lies somewhere in the middle, study several sources, and find the truth by balancing out all the sources.

For those curious about the quality of Fox "news", I merely have to point to the study done that showed that those who got their information primarily from Fox scored significantly lower on a test regarding what was really going on in the world than those who got their news from any other source. (this included misconceptions such as "Saddam was directly responsible for 9/11", etc.)

-Arlos

Arlos, do you not agree that CNN and the NY Times does the same thing Fox does? They tailor there posts.

And yet you never complain, or see any fault.. Could it be because they 'tailer' it to your opinion?

I don't complain about it because I know to take what I read with a grain of salt and compare it to other reports, knowing truth lies somewhere in the middle. Most major news agencies at least attempt impartiality, even if they do lean one way or the other; Fox, however, makes no attempt whatsoever. As a result, even if one's only news source was CNN, you'd be getting a better picture on the actual events than you would if you solely watched Fox news.

You could accuse me of being like Mindia on this if I'd been in here frothing at the mouth and raving about how CNN is the ONLY trustworthy news source, the rest are all shit, and never should be believed, etc.

-Arlos

You are more dangerous than Mindia. Mindia is an overt zealout.

You are covert, zealous, and not frothing at the mouth which makes your rhetoric more believable.

You two are still opposite sides of an identical coin in the end, however. He punches straight Religious Right. You punch straight far liberal left.

One thing you're wrong in that comparison, at the very least, is this: Mindia is completely and utterly close-minded, he has his world view and refuses to let it be altered by something as paltry as the facts. I, on the other hand, am more than willing to hear arguments on issues, and if someone has a compelling, logically constructed argument, with valid support, I am quite willing to alter my opinion as a result, at least once I've independently checked their facts. (which is only reasonable, I think.)

Yes, I have my own opinions, beliefs, etc., just like anyone else does. But at least when I argue issues based on those beliefs, I attempt to logically construct them, and provide some sort of basis for the premises I use to support my conclusion. That's HUGELY different than Mindia-esque "It's like that because I believe it to be that way!" Also, as I've said before, I don't exist solely on the left. My personal opinions/beliefs don't neatly pigeonhole into any individual group's.

For example, I was a supporter of the first gulf war, which the far left was rabidly opposed to, and I am a big supporter of us having attacked Afghanistan post-9/11, though I greatly dis-approve of how it was conducted, and most especially what's happened with it after the war. I'm also a supporter of teacher/school accountability, and actually flunking kids who don't pass, though NCLB is a bad law, if for no other reason than it lets individual parents opt out of the required tests, and if enough do so, it can mean the school fails. For example, the Palo Alto schools, historically in the top 1/2 of 1% in performance in the entire State of California, recently got put on the NCLB "failing" list because enough parents opted to not have their children take the test, meaning the school failed to meet the artificial goal of 95% compliance.

Yes, I know I've rambled on ad infinitum.

-Arlos

All I read was "blah blah blah I'm not a sheep, look I wear wolf ears sometimes"

Your level of reading comprehention and scholastic achievement have been thoroughly explored on this board already. So, it surprises me not at all that you'd fail to comprehend posts when people who actually bothered to learn in school are discussing issues.

-Arlos

If you dont like what is on TV you really dont need a special filter just change the channel