« Jacob Weisberg v. Fox News | Main | Gingrich's presidential posturing »

October 26, 2009


Maybe FOX news does not support sedition, but they certainly support (advertise for, exaggerate claims about the crowd size of, and the list goes on...) the Tea Part movement, which unequivocally has elements that DO support sedition.

Further, when on-air personalities are insinuating that the administration is sponsoring FEMA "re-education" camps, trying to brainwash our children, tougher on FOX than on Islamic Jihadists etc etc., that could drive some unhinged people to "incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority". Simply see some of the recent spats of violence nationwide perpetrated by far-right citizens (see: Vonn-Brunn, James)

So if allowing on-air personalities to repeat outrageous claims that lead to "incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority" is not sedition, then what is Brendan?

I know you take pride in being fair and balanced unlike Faux news, but sometimes you need to take off your neutral-tinted glasses and see the world for what it actually is.

Joe Klein's examples of "sedition" are remarkably feeble: "stories bloated far beyond their actual importance--ACORN's corruption, Van Jones's radical past." That's it?

Most of Klein's column is just free-floating invective. By comparison, when some conservatives unfairly accused liberals of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, at least their accusations usally had a basis. There was some specific public comment that allegedly aided and comforted the enemy.

Scott, the tea parties oppose further growth in the size of government and oppose tax increases. That's normal politics.

The idea that Obama was treating Fox News like one of America's enemies is hardly far-out. E.g., Jay Leno joked that Obama had agreed to commit an additional 40,000 troops to help fight Fox News. See

I'd agree with the above comment, that repeatedly and aggressively pushing the idea that the US government is illegitimate (Obama isn't a US citizen, can't constitutionally be president, etc) and fabricating a pattern of civil rights abuses by the government can without too much hyperbole be called inciting their viewers to insurrection against the government. They aren't coming right out and saying we should overthrow the government, they're just telling us bow bad and illegitimate the government is and that we should all be very scared and angry.

More to the point though, even just off the top of my head that isn't the closest they've come to proving Klein right. For example:


I'm pretty sure war gaming out the coming (and explicitly validated) military coup has at the very least got to be borderline seditious.

Predicting what a distopian future might look like is the theme of innumerable science fiction books and movies. E.g., The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood.

Like Scott above, Daniel Chituc sees common, normal presentations as sedition when Fox News does them.

"The idea that Obama was treating Fox News like one of America's enemies is hardly far-out." Actually it is, no matter a single joke from some talk-show host.
It's also pretty "far-out" to suggest some sort of equivalency between the expectations of the content of a supposed news channel and the expectations of the content of a FICTION novel.

The comments to this entry are closed.