×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fox News Considered Suing Fox's "The Simpsons"

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the now-thats-seriously-funny dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 840

ZeDanimal writes "The Simpsons' pooh-bah Matt Groening said in an NPR interview this week that the Fox News Channel considered legal action against the show for its parody of the station's news ticker. Broadcast, of course, by Fox Entertainment, the episode that raised the ire of the "Fair and Balanced" Fox News crew was Krusty For Congress, which mocked the perceived rightward-leanings of the channel with pseudo-news items such as "Do Democrats cause cancer?" and "Oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple" scrolling across the bottom of the screen. Guess the powers-that-be learned something from the Al Franken affair... or maybe they just feared getting into a popularity contest with the likes of the inanimate carbon rod."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

840 comments

Fox rocks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358664)

I love Sean Hannity! Yeah!

I would pay my hard earned money .... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358692)

To see that Kit girl from Cold pizza toe lick another girl!!!

WooHoo!

GNAA Considers Assramming The Simpsons (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358665)

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org]?
Are you a NIGGER [tux.org]?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com]?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it. (click here to download the 280MB MPEG from BitTorrent [idge.net])

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org [slashdot.org], a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here [nero-online.org].

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird [nero-online.org] , a proud member of the GNAA

G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#GNAA________ ________S
A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
*_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
um, dolor. Nunc nec nisl. Phasellus blandit tempor augue. Donec arcu orci, adipiscing ac, interdum a, tempus nec, enim. Phasellus placerat iaculis orci. Crasa sit amet quam. Sed enim quam, porta quis, aliquet quis, hendrerit ut, sem. Etiam felis tellus, suscipit et, consequat quis, pharetra sit amet, nisl. Aenean arcu massa, lacinia in, dictum eu, pulvinar ac, orci. Mauris at diam tempor ante ullamcorper molestie. Ut dapibus eleifend ipsum. Nam dignissim.

Wow...delay.... (-1, Redundant)

FatSean (18753) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358669)

This was posted on a car discusion forum yesterday! If there is anything more nerdly than the Simpsons, I dunno what it is, and Slashdot dropped the ball!

Re:Wow...delay.... (-1)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358687)

You just demonstrated how negative "Nerdy" (which you mistyped, btw) is.
Today's youth is as intelligent as you Nerds would like to be but they just find the fun everywhere, which you can't.

The Simpsons will remain a puny TV show : nothing important, unless you consider your TV set as a mandatory piece of your miserable life.

Isn't This (-1, Redundant)

snoopyjd (665929) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358674)

Like two days old.

Re:Isn't This (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358710)

Funny, I heard the interview on NPR last weekend. You're like way behind the times.

MY GREASED YODA DOLL'S FROSTY Ps0t IS ON TEH SPOKE (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358677)

for yuo

YUO != TEH WILDCAT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358773)

Holy old news Batman! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358679)

This story has been around for the past few days. Slashdot should get with the times.

news ticker belongs to one company? (4, Funny)

seriv (698799) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358682)

The news ticker belongs to one company? They all look the same to me. Anyway what is fox doing sueing one of their best shows?
-Seriv

Re:news ticker belongs to one company? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358720)

Anyway what is fox doing sueing one of their best shows?

What is FOX doing sueing themselves???? We all know that FOX has no clue, and this just proves that further.

What's next? SCO sues UNIX intellectual property holder for copyright violation? Actually that wouldn't suprise me.

Re:news ticker belongs to one company? (1)

cuppm (691831) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358766)

Well actually I've filed for a patent for a "Electronically Generated Visual Scrolling Current Event Headline Listing Presentation Format". And I plan on going after all those infringements of my intellectual property!

It's not the ticker (5, Funny)

poptones (653660) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358792)

It's the "fake news" part. Fox has the trademark on scrolling fake news reports at the bottom of the screen.

Just watch any day of the week and see for yourself.

It's true!

Really...

Not gonna happen (0)

wud (709053) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358683)

The Simpsons, make way more money for Fox, then the news channel.

Re:Not gonna happen (2, Insightful)

Acidic_Diarrhea (641390) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358951)

Of course one corporate child isn't going to sue another corporate child - that's been granted and we all understood this, Groening just likes to advance his political agenda - but where's your proof that the Simpsons as a property makes more money than Fox News? Granted, the Simpsons is a huge property that sells more than just commercial time and has many DVDs, video games, comic books, action figures, and other merchandise but Fox News is selling commercials 24 hours a day. I'd like to see a comparison. I'm not convinced it is "way more."

The Simpsons (3, Insightful)

Pingular (670773) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358685)

are always parodying things. They often parody Fox themselves, but do they sue? No. I can understand Fox News being annoyed at this, but to take such strong action as to sue them is a bit over the top. I might recommend Fox News to tell The Simpsons to get rid of all copies of the episode and to never have it shown, at the most.

Quit frothing, for God's sake... (-1, Offtopic)

Clippy (691243) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358721)

Nobody sued anyone! This is a NON STORY. This is a week old non story. But of course, this is Slashdot, home of the non story.

Spelling Error... (5, Funny)

computerme (655703) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358689)

The headline should read: "Faux News Considered Suing Fox's "The Simpsons""

Re:Spelling Error... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358723)

You're so fucking brilliant. It must have taken one hell of a visionary to conceive that piece of insight.

Take off, you vermin. Slant from the left is no better than slant from the right, and you fall into that category.

Please discontinue posting,
Thanks.

Re:Spelling Error... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358764)

AGREED!

Re:Spelling Error... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358772)

Oh, shut your freaking pie-hole.

Re:Spelling Error... (0)

Carbonite (183181) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358787)

Faux News? No one has ever thought of that! Oh wait...google returns 418,000 [google.com] hits. And there's a fauxnewschannel.com [fauxnewschannel.com]. Make fun of Fox News if you want, but at least come with some new material.

Re:Spelling Error... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358823)

I've never heard that joke, so fuck you.

Re:Spelling Error... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358939)

Why punish him because you had your head up your ass so long that you never heard the phrase 'Faus News'?

That wind whistling past your ears was last night's burrito.

Re:Spelling Error... (2, Insightful)

Wister285 (185087) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358788)

I think it's funny that people have no problem with extremely liberal news, but when you have something that is right of center it is automatically terrible. In case you didn't know, most news shows that aren't on CNBC or FOX tend to be quite liberal. Just try reading most major news papers. Note article placement too. If you can't see the bias then you shouldn't be posting stuff like this.

Re:Spelling Error... (2, Insightful)

NickV (30252) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358927)

That's not true. William Safire, the founding editor of the freaking National Review, is a frequent regular contributor to what many consider the most "liberal" paper in the country, the New York Times.

MSNBC has quite a few conservative pundits, and CNN has quite a few too. A good example of the difference between CNN and Fox News is Crossfire vs Hannity and Colmes.

CNN has smart liberals and conservatives on both sides of Crossfile (Tucker Carlson, Robert Novak on the Right) whereas Fox News has a freaking moron arguing against Sean Hannity. It's literally HANNITY vs colmes. (In fact, when the show was first pitched it was referred to internally as "Hannity vs some wimpy liberal")

Sure, some papers may lean left (like the Washington Post,) but they don't compare to the wacko right wing-ness of papers like the Washington Times.

What's the big deal? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358709)

It's perfectly cromulent for FOX to protect their trademarks. And oil slicks DO keep seals young and supple by preventing them from getting old.

NRA4Ever!

Suing themselves (4, Informative)

Octagon Most (522688) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358711)

I heard that interview and Groening said that ultimately the parent corporation decided it did not want to sue itself. They did institute a new rule that the Simpsons, or any other non-news show on Fox, could not use an onscreen information scroll lest the audience become confused and think it was actual news.

Re:Suing themselves (4, Funny)

nearlygod (641860) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358743)

Yeah, because their are so many news shows that are animated. I can understand the possible confusion.

Re:Suing themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358817)

I think it is more for when important things happen, they will run 'tickers' on the bottom so as not to tick off people who are interested in the tv show currently airing.

Re:Suing themselves (2, Insightful)

YankeeInExile (577704) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358878)

I do not think the confusion comes from the type of the show over the crawl, but that the entire idea of a lower-third crawl is to present news content that is out-of-band with regard to the program currently being aired.

Re:Suing themselves (5, Funny)

Blondie-Wan (559212) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358918)

Yeah, because their are so many news shows that are animated. I can understand the possible confusion.

Well, in fairness, we are talking about Fox News viewers.

Re:Suing themselves (1)

mgs1000 (583340) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358802)

The rule has probably been instituted because Fox runs so many damned advertisements on the bottom of the screens during the shows.

Re:Suing themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358836)

...could not use an onscreen information scroll lest the audience become confused and think it was actual news.

Indeed, my first reaction when I first saw it was "Wow, that anchor looks awfully yellow. Does he have jaundis?"

This is news why? (2, Funny)

Rombuu (22914) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358716)

I don't get it. Fox doesn't sue someone and its news.

How about a list of everyone they haven't sued?

Damn, must be a slow news day.

Re:This is news why? (1)

homebrewmike (709361) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358916)

This is getting modded up? Come on, people - read the article on Yahoo news.

It's news because it demonstrates that Fox News really is a paranoid organization.

ahem... (4, Funny)

isfuglen (714922) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358717)

"Now Fox has a new rule that we can't do those little fake news crawls on the bottom of the screen in a cartoon because it might confuse the viewers into thinking it's real news," he said.

I'm at a loss for words here. I really am.

Re:ahem... (1)

togofspookware (464119) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358781)

It's too bad. That was one of the funniest episodes I remember seeing. Does this mean that that episode'll never get shown again, or that there just won't be any more with that 'feature'? Maybe the other stations'll still show it...

Re:ahem... (4, Insightful)

MrLint (519792) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358794)

Well lets think about this quote for a second. If we assume that Fox news is actually concerned that its viewers will confused a cartoon like the simpsons for a real news broadcast , it really says hat FNC thinks their viewers are in fact incredibly stupid. Particularly if you look at what went by on the news ticker .Who other than a fox news viewer would think those headlines were real?

PS - i wore my asbestos underwear today.

Re:ahem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358903)

Eh? They overlay those news/ad tickers over whatever program is showing. It can be any program, cartoon or not. So you could still mistake it as being a real news ticker. Granted, the content of the news ticker is another matter...

Re:ahem... (4, Funny)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358910)

"it really says hat FNC thinks their viewers are in fact incredibly stupid."

Either that, or that it is hard to distinguish Fox News, from cartoon news.

Re:ahem... (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358803)

>I'm at a loss for words here. I really am.

It's an American show, and this is a culture where you need to say `this is sarcasm/satire` otherwise people say `that's not true!`.

Re:ahem... (2, Funny)

wo1verin3 (473094) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358904)

>> because it might confuse the viewers into
>> thinking it's real news

You mean like the way Fox News tries to confuse the viewerr in to thinking it is real news?

Re:ahem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358913)

I don't even confuse the FOx news news ticker with real news.

Look where we are headed (3, Insightful)

Doesn't_Comment_Code (692510) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358725)

This illustrates the level to which our legal system has sunk. A TV Show considers suing another TV Show.

From my knowledge of the founding fathers and our legal system as it was meant to be: private citizens are given rights. They can bring suits in court or have suits brought against them to preserve public order. Television shows, and more generally, companies are not, I repeat, NOT citizens!

Play God with THIS, motherfucker! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358758)

You're so fucking brilliant. It must have taken one hell of a visionary to conceive that piece of insight.

Take off you vermin. Slant from the left is no better than slant from the right, and you fall into that category.

Please discontinue posting,
Thanks.

Re:Play God with THIS, motherfucker! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358851)

Again, shut your freaking pie-hole, moron.

Re:Look where we are headed (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358777)

This illustrates the level to which our legal system has sunk. A TV Show considers suing another TV Show.

Well, that could be quite valid... but in this case its more: A company sues itself!

I guess Fox'd win the case easily :) I wonder if they'd have to pay themselves damages.

Re:Look where we are headed (5, Funny)

Doesn't_Comment_Code (692510) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358906)

I guess Fox'd win the case easily :) I wonder if they'd have to pay themselves damages.

Fox income = damages - lawyer fees
Fox loss = damages

Fox net gain = - lawyer fees

That's one hell of a business strategy.

Re:Look where we are headed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358911)

From my knowledge of the founding fathers and our legal system as it was meant to be: private citizens are given rights. They can bring suits in court or have suits brought against them to preserve public order. Television shows, and more generally, companies are not, I repeat, NOT citizens!


Clearly your knowledge is faulty.

Obligitory Simpson's ref. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358726)

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. -- Shakespeare

Ummm... (1)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358905)

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. -- Shakespeare"

...wouldn't that make it a Shakespeare reference?

Suing Peter to satisfy Paul. (1)

_Sambo (153114) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358732)

This is great! The Simpsons consistently slams its own network. Now the other parts of the least impressive network on earth are angy. Waaaa i'm going to sue you for your "Too close to reality" sarcasm. Waaaaa.
I do find it funny that FOX has to use lawsuits to work together as a company.

Some of the actual lines in that episode (5, Informative)

axolotl_farmer (465996) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358742)

...ripped from alt.fan.simpsons

Pointless news crawls up 37 percent

Do democrats cause cancer? Find out more at foxnews.com

Rupert Murdoch: terrific dancer

Dow down 5000 points

Study: 92 percent of democrats are gay

JFK posthumously joins republican party

Oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple

Dan Quayle: awesome

Ashcroft declares breast of chicken sandwich "obscene".

Hillary Clinton embarrasses self ???

Bible says Jesus favored capital-gains cut.

Only dorks watch CNN.

Jimmy Carter: old, weak & useless.

Brad Pitt + Albert Einstein = Dick Cheney.

Re:Some of the actual lines in that episode (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358874)

Do democrats cause cancer? Find out more at foxnews.com
Rupert Murdoch: terrific dancer
Only dorks watch CNN.


If they left these three out, there wouldn't have been a problem. It was plenty funny to spoof foxnews, and obvious by context, but you don't need to hit us over the head with it. Oh, right, modern Simpsons.

Learn what? (1)

k98sven (324383) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358744)

Guess the powers-that-be learned something from the Al Franken affair... or maybe they just feared getting into a popularity contest with the likes of the inanimate carbon rod.

You don't think Murdoch just told them that he didn't like sueing himself?

I really don't think Murdoch cares what Fox News thinks, or that the Simpsons parodize him..
He's making money off both of them, rememnber?

geez (1)

jeffy124 (453342) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358746)

i heard about this when it appeared on fark. one of the stranger things was that they (Fox News) dont want The Simpsons to use the crawler at the bottom at all, fearing confusion. I ask you: How dense does somebody have to be to confuse a cartoon show against a live person cable television news network?

Re:geez (1)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358864)

Yes, it is a sad day when American citizens cannot distinguish between cartoon news and real news. I guess Fox News is worried about confusion in their audience base? Maybe O'Reilly should do a "Give me a break" segement.

Re:geez (1)

stull13 (693912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358915)

How dense does somebody have to be to confuse a cartoon show against a live person cable television news network?

Are you kidding me? Think 'War of the Worlds' with a potential audience of at least a few million more people!!! I'm not defending what is obviously a ploy to limit potential parodies of sister network Fox News, but I cannot sit idly by while someone questions the stupidity of the masses!

Re:geez (1)

big_O_of_n! (712136) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358925)

Do you know how many people broke their TV sets trying to kill the cockroach that crawls across the screen in the Orkin commercial?

But seriously, a lot of stations will run a news crawl during regular programming when something big happens. You'd still have to be a little dense to think those were real news items, but remember, this is the nation that made hits out of "Kangaroo Jack" and "Daddy Day Care."

Parody is a democratic right (2, Insightful)

Hackie_Chan (678203) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358750)

Everybody should know, as we live in a democratic society:
Doing a parody is a given right in democracy.

I do not, however, know if this Simpson episode broke copyright laws. Anyone helpful enough to explain?

Re:Parody is a democratic right (2, Informative)

Doesn't_Comment_Code (692510) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358798)

I haven't seen this particular episode, so I can't make a judgement on how realistic the news ticker looked. But in order to be legal parody, the mock version has to be significantly different enough so that an average person would know that it was a parody and not confuse it with the original.

Re:Parody is a democratic right (1)

arkanes (521690) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358917)

If Fox would quit running it's goddamn commercials over all it's own shows there wouldn't be any confusion.

Re:Parody is a democratic right (1)

EinarH (583836) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358953)

Maybe that is a part of the problem; that someone getting their news from Fox would actually belive that "Do Democrats cause cancer?" was a real news crawl...

Re:Parody is a democratic right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358829)

Parody is a right established by over 200 years of case law, through the fair use doctrine. You have every right to parody copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder.

Re:Parody is a democratic right (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358844)

What are you talking about? What have rights or laws got to do with it? This is a civil matter. If it broke a law it would be a criminal case.

Re:Parody is a democratic right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358859)

"Doing a parody is a given right in democracy"

First, if you live in a 'democracy', you are not in the United States. We're a republic here.

Second, being a 'democracy' gives nobody rights to anything.

Someone needs to go back to school...

What is everything coming to. (2, Funny)

nberardi (199555) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358763)

What is everything comming to the Fox company is sueing another Fox company. What is next Microsoft Office sueing Microsoft Windows for including "notepad" in the Windows software. I mean come on the Simpsons make fun of everybody, I think if Fox News starts going down the road of the RIAA, we are going to loose one of the better news channels.

Re:What is everything coming to. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358837)

> I think if Fox News starts going down the road of the RIAA, we are going to loose one of the better news channels.

Mod parent funny +5!!!

It comes down to the books (1)

pimpinmonk (238443) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358769)

I would not be surprised if The Simpsons' importance as a piece of identity and cash cow for Fox will make this lawsuit trivial. They might settle or something, but I highly doubt they would do anything to harm the show. Especially compared to if it was some no-name show that nobody watches.

And that's politics :-)

Whom shall we trust? (5, Informative)

YankeeInExile (577704) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358791)

This conversation has been going on over in alt.tv.simpsons [alt.tv.simpsons] for a few days now. And the succulent nutmeat is: Apart from class-clown Matt Groening saying so on an NPR interview, there is, as yet, no evidence brought to light that any lawsuit was considered, or forthcoming.

I would not accuse Matt of lying, but perhaps of saying something that is not exactly true for comedic value.

While I cannot imagine Fox filing suit against themselves (as entertaining as Fox v. Fox would be to see on the docket), it is not unimaginable that they might file against Film Roman.

Re:Whom shall we trust? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358883)

HERE HERE!

stupid trademark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358796)

Trademarks are not normally given for merely descriptive things.

If you sell cars, you can't trademark "cars", but you could trademark "Joe Smith's Fine Cars".

You can't trademark "Blue Cars", even if your cars are blue.

"Fair and Balanced" is descriptive - Fox claims that their news coverage is fair and balanced. The only way to get a trademark on "Fair and Balanced" is if there is no descriptive relation.

I.E. Only if the news coverage is NOT fair and balanced could they trademark the phrase "Fair and Balanced"

Or maybe that's the point :)

woot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358804)

I love it when the simpsons does that. and well i hate fox cause they are pro bush/right .. since well bush's cousin or some shit owns fox.

Preemptive strike? (1)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358805)

This sounds a lot like Fox News doing a preemptive strike. If FN let this go, then if someone else wanted to imitate their ticker, then they'd have a much harder time gettting the other company to back down if it is shown that they allowed someone else to do it unhindered (the two Fox's are related, but I don't think they're the same corp. entity?)

Re:Preemptive strike? (2, Insightful)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358945)

OMG tickers! Somebody MIGHT STEAL our futaristic tikker tehcnology ! SUE SUE

Looks like they've finally had enough (1, Informative)

hookedup (630460) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358814)

Simpsons have been mocking FOX for years...

Here [google.com] is "Fox Bashing List v1.7"

Ob.Simpsons.quote (0, Redundant)

thatguywhoiam (524290) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358819)

Someone posted this on Fark, I thought it was funny.

This is the scroll from that episode of the Simpsons, and the thing that Fox thinks will confuse their viewers. What they fail to realize is that this kind of viewer is already watching Fox.

pointless news crawls up 37 percent ... do Democrats cause cancer? find out at FoxNews.com ... Rupert Murdoch: terrific dancer ... DOW down 5000 points ... study: 92 percent of Democrats are gay ... JFK posthumously joins Republican Party ... oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple ... Dan Quayle:: Awesome ... Ashcroft declares breast of chicken sandwich "OBSCENE" ... Hillary Clinton embarrases self, Nation ... Bible says Jesus favoured Capital-Gainss Cut ... stay tuned for HANNITY AND IDIOT ... only dorks watch CNN ... Jimmy Carter: old, wrinkly, useless ... Brad Pitt + Albert Einstein = Dick Cheney ... risgt wing of chicken [cuts off here]

What you don't understand is that the lawsuit ... (2, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358820)

was over copyright infringement. All of those crawls were actual Fox News crawls that just hadn't been used yet. Because they are Fair and Balanced(tm), they are not bound by "journalistic" concerns about timeliness, relevancy or facts. They write their news(tm) days, weeks, months in advance, just waiting for the right moment to announce it. Obviously, someone from the The Simpsons snuck in and pilfered valuable Fox News content.

Fox Obviously Thinks Highly of their Viewership (2, Interesting)

quantax (12175) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358861)

Well, this should put to rest what Fox thinks of their viewership:

"Now Fox has a new rule that we can't do those little fake news crawls on the bottom of the screen in a cartoon because it might confuse the viewers into thinking it's real news," he said.

Yes because "Oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple..." is very believable and I can't believe all those dirty environmentalists have been lying to us! Oh, and JFK really DID join the replicans after death.

Facts are Fox Evening news is a joke, and when I had the (dis)pleasure of watching it once at a friends, I seriously thought it was a parody of news since it was so distasteful and circus-like. I honestly see these parody-tickers as an IMPROVEMENT to their otherwise shitty, imcomplete, skewed news.

creator still peaced off at corepirate nazis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358865)

you don't bulleave it? because they .controlled you so?

Wait, this is rediculous... (1)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358867)

Stations make fun of themselves all the time, and their affiliates. Saturday Night Live constantly makes fun of NBC (as well as other channels), and Letterman is KNOWN for his CBS cracks. Remember Fox's first hit Married With Children? Every other episode they had a Fox crack.

This is rediculous from every perspective. I am a fan of both the Simpsons and Fox News, and found that particular episode to be quiet comical and laughed by ass off the entire time. It plays to the democratic claims that Fox News is right-biased. Anyone with any brains can see it's an exaggeration, just as 99.999999% of the things on the Simpsons are. It's all over the top, that's what made the Simpsons so popular for so long.

Re:Wait, this is rediculous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7358941)

You are right. Fox news told me that those damn left-wing commies will say anything to slander the last bastion of traditional bitter American values.

Longest running sitcom? (1)

beezly (197427) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358880)

This article doesn't mention it, but a few [newstribune.com] other sites reckon that The Simpsons is to become the longest running sit-com in the world from 2005. Sadly, that crown is held by the BBC's "Last Of The Summer Wine" (1973-2003 still being filmed, 225 episodes). Although, I doubt LOTSW would ever have much political material in it!

The complaint: (2, Funny)

pmz (462998) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358897)


People are finding "The Simpsons" to be a more reliable news source. Apparently, the only people who actually watch Fox News are convalescents who can't reach the remote control (whoever left the TV on should be punished severely).

I can see the trial now... (1)

thoolihan (611712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358907)

Fox:"25% of viewer thought the headlines were true"

Groening:"oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that."

-t

It's not a percieved bias (5, Informative)

GOD_ALMIGHTY (17678) | more than 10 years ago | (#7358942)

Fox News crew was Krusty For Congress, which mocked the perceived rightward-leanings of the channel with pseudo-news items such as "Do Democrats cause cancer?" and "Oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple" scrolling across the bottom of the screen.

It's not percieved, the proof is here [poynter.org]. This is a former producer for Fox's News Watch media show giving the dirt on how the bias comes down from Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes everyday in an email nicknamed "The Memo".

Expect to see more info as "The Memo" starts getting leaked. Fox is truly biased, the proof is in information like this. For more analysis, including a rebuttal from Fox, check this [nyu.edu] out. You might also want to read this commentary [clickability.com] over at Editor & Publisher deconstructing Fox's spin on the latest "liberal media" salvo they fired.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...