<p>…what with all the “terrorist fist jab[s]” I constantly do. Fear for your lives! ;)</p>
<p>[Think</a> Progress Fox News anchor calls the Obamas’ fist pound ‘a terrorist fist jab.’](<a href=“http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/09/fox-news-anchor-calls-the-obamas-fist-pound-a-terrorist-fist-jab/]Think”>http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/09/fox-news-anchor-calls-the-obamas-fist-pound-a-terrorist-fist-jab/)</p>
<p>This kind of thing is why I generally avoid Fox News.</p>
<p>“A terrorist fist jab!?”</p>
<p>O geez, who hires these people? Why do people watch fox news?</p>
<p>Honestly, who would interpret it that way, and i had no idea that terrorists “fist jab” after completing a successful attack…</p>
<p>
I guess you didn’t read the part about “teasing” a segment. Hill was obviously trying to maintain interest in her segment as opposed to making a serious comment. Maybe viewers have a better sense of humor than you do.</p>
<p>An inelegant “teaser” to be sure. </p>
<p>My mother-in-law and I use this same gesture to suggest victory and success. </p>
<p>We picked it up amongst all the chest-thumping at my son’s hockey games. She, a 76 year old Iranian woman that cannot understand a word of English, loves hockey and never misses a game, not even televised games and goes into fits of righteous indignantion when the New Jersey Devils under perform. </p>
<p>I assume Michelle and Barack were using it in a similar fashion: “Victory!” The thumbs-up from Michelle that follows the “terrorist-hockey-handshake” is of a piece with it.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, this web site, it seems to me, wants trouble and they no how to juice their constituency into righteous paranoia and, it seems, dementia.</p>
<p>As evinced in one of the first comments highlighted from one of their “readers” referring to the woman hosting the Fox show (not a news reader) he describes her as:
What does it say about this news and opinion source that they allow comments like this to remain on their site? It is beneath disgusting. I would avoid such a site no matter their righteous anger and never cite them as a legitimate source of information and news --but perhaps I am just too much of a prude. </p>
<p>.</p>
<p>RS–Nothing in the segment at all connected with the “terrorist fist jab” "teaser’. So, how exactly was it supposed to be humorous?</p>
<p>If a teaser ran, “Sen. McCain–wifebeater?” then made no reference to where that came from in the following segment, would that be haha funny, too? (My answer: no.) But it sure would get people to watch the segment, wouldn’t it–guess that would justify it?</p>
<p>
If you ever watched Ms. Hill you would know that she frequently makes “outrageous” statements with a gigantic smile. She knows what she’s saying is outrageous, the viewer knows what she is saying is outrageous and not to be believed as true. Ms. Hill is presenting news in the form of entertainment much the way the people at Good Morning America present entertainment with a little news mixed in. </p>
<p>You so-called experts on Fox news rarely seem to watch it, but you have no problem reading left-wing blogs and assuming everything stated in these blogs is an accurate depiction of Fox news. Try watching Fox news for an extended period of time before you start criticizing it.</p>
<p>Note that this was an intro to a “body language expert”. This should be a giant tip-off to the clueless that what was to follow was not to be construed as “news”. </p>
<p>I agree with razor and woodwork in finding it a bit ironic to be citing sources like thinkprogress and media matters when complaining about the news quality of Fox.</p>
<p>I am not a bloggo-regular, left or right. I’m not interested in their commentary. The remark either was or was not made, regardless of where it was reported. And no one seems to be arguing that it was not made.</p>
<p>RS–I like your message–don’t expect Fox News to be reporting “news”. Got it! :)</p>
<p>
Cute. Very clever. </p>
<p>The New York Times publishes cartoons and reports on the latest styles, and thus you must think it does not report news. Good thinking on your part.</p>
<p>It’s not just left-wing bloggers that are talking about this. This morning, FL conservative Joe Scarborough played the tease on his show and called FOX out on it. Even he saw it as outrageous. </p>
<p>Do you really think that if the fist pounder had been John McCain, E.D. Hill would have used the terrorist reference in her tease?</p>
<p>Well, the only cartoons the Times prints are editorial ones–they are commentary, and I’d be a little surprised if the point of one was to label any candidate a terrorist.</p>
<p>As far as style, sports, or other sections, they are different kinds of news, clearly labeled in different kinds of sections.</p>
<p>Gratuitous suggestive commentary in the middle of a “news” item doesn’t seem quite the same thing.</p>
<p>
It is pretty hard for a TV broadcast to have separate sections the way newspaper do. If you watched the segment with Hill, it would be obviously it was about pop culture. Other than the teaser, it was about how to be cool when you communicate. It also showed President Bush giving a chest bump to a military school graduate because that is what the student wanted. No rational person could construe this as "straight news. </p>
<p>The reason Fox News is so successful is that in many respects it is similar to a newspaper. Just as a newspaper has sections dealing with national news, opinion, sports, style, cartoons etc., Fox News covers a range of different stories and interests. The reason CNN is so boring is that it only provides “one section of the newspaper” – the national news section.</p>
<p>What surprises me is that so much has been made of that fist-bump. I’ve seen it performed so often that it failed to register as anything news-worthy. I must be living in a different universe from journalists. The body language expert seemed to me clueless. Yes, that fist-bump was a personal message between the Obamas, but it was not a secret code like what she and her husband had. As I said, it is pretty common. In my days, people would say:“Right on!”</p>
<p>The butt-pat got my attention more than the fist bump!</p>
<p>Marite–That notice of something so ordinary surprised me, too. From all sides, I saw commentary on it, and I’m just wondering what about it is mention-worthy. Seems, if not universal, at least so common that it woudn’t need "explaining’ or “interpreting,” tongue-in-cheek or not.</p>
<p>RS–I guess I think TV, whether Fox, CNN, whatever, is a poor way to get news. The linear-ness of it makes me nuts–here’s the story, now it’s gone, here’s the next. I prefer either print or online to be able to follow all the details, ramifications, interpretations, counter-interrpetations, related stories, indepth analysis, etc etc, at my pace, to my satisfaction. I think also the linear-ness of TV news leads to this kind of questioning, kind of a “huh–why’d she say that?” followed by, “too bad, on to the next story–if the phrase sticks in your head, well, shrug, no proof we meant it to.”</p>
<p>
I have to confess to a similar preference. I subscribed to three newspapers. I read Google News all the time. </p>
<p>In addition, I watch CNN mostly for the international stories although some of their correspondents have clearly anti-American bias. I watch Fox News for the opinion debates. However, I only watch MS NBC if there’s nothing else on television. MSNBC is truly the most boring news network of all time.</p>
<p>What is interesting is how few people under the age of 65 or so watch the nightly news ABC, CBS, NBC broadcasts. I stopped watching them long ago because they had so many fluff pieces.</p>
<p>It was perfect, natural, hip and everything cool.</p>
<p>It was very NOW.</p>
<p>If I were involved in the Obama campaign I would find the coverage of this crisp move a godsend. #1 with a bullet. Maybe they do.</p>
<p>If it was the Fox Lady’s intention to take a shot at Obama, she shot herself in the foot. But even more importantly; that the liberal blogesphere and others cannot see this as great coverage is even more evidence that they would prefer to lead with their chin looking for a punch then to land there own zinger. </p>
<p>The media sells and is forever going for the trailer and teaser. </p>
<p>Curiously, to my mind, it is the NYT that has opened the door to sensationalizing the quirks and idiosyncrasies of the candidates. That was a suprise. I didn’t expect it to such a degree.</p>
<p>"Apparently, I’m a Terrorist </p>
<p>…what with all the “terrorist fist jab[s]” I constantly do. Fear for your lives!"</p>
<p>And yur a forEigner, too! Where is Homeland Security now that we need 'em?</p>
<p>I think calling it a “terrorist fist jab” was a miscalculation if it was intended to be a shot at Obama. Now, if they had called it a “Black Power Salute”…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then it would have rightly been labeled pure paranoia.</p>