60 mins puff piece

This topic contains 0 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Chad Moechnig 1 year, 7 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #12050

    Chad Moechnig
    Keymaster

    fight4you
    Post subject: 60 mins puff piece Post Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:51 am

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    I bet this MMa story was produced by UFC. No opposing viewpoints, no attribututions for the lack of injuries and they refer to Spike TV as a “cable network” – hiding the fact that Viacom owns BOTH CBS and SpikeTV. just like the anti bush books 60 Minutes reviewed positively over the past couple years – books published by simon and schuster, another Viacom company. That wasn’t news – it was marketing. Typical CBS News bullshit
    Last edited by fight4you on Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:59 pm
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    I found it quite refreshing. SOOOO many times, it has been so lopsided the other way. “Cage fighting (not calling it mma) is barbaric! Look at this clip where this guy is being punched a million times on the ground!” Then they cut the clip just before the ref would step in. FINALLY a news network has done a story presenting the FIGHTER/SPORT side of MMA instead. I don’t care if it IS for propaganda for the UFC. The sport DESERVES a one sided report on OUR side for once.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:56 pm

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    then UFC should pay for the one sided piece and air it as an infomercial. it was NOT an objective piece of journalism. it was one arm of Viacom promoting another arm of Viacom
    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:02 pm
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    Just like the BBC piece was not an objective form of journalism, or the CNN piece, or ANY of the local news networks in my hometown. Or a number of articles in newspapers across the country. I’m not saying it was objective, I’m saying, regardless of who or why, I appreciate that the other side, OUR side is getting out there.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:01 pm

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    how repugnant. that is the OJ Simpson attitude, which was “OJ may have stabbed those 2 to death but ‘the man’ has been down on the brothers for so long that it is about time that we get a good verdict” Man have you drunk the MMA Kool-Aid. Don’t get any more brain cells pounded out.
    Top

    BrawlerBitch
    Post subject: PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:42 pm

    Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:32 am
    Posts: 103
    I was pleasantly suprised by the show! The Art of MMA is popular and finally getting the positve recognition it deserves!

    😀
    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:41 pm
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    BrawlerBitch wrote:
    I was pleasantly suprised by the show! The Art of MMA is popular and finally getting the positve recognition it deserves!

    😀

    Exactly what I was saying. “Drunk the MMA Kool-Aid” that was good! But comparing MMA to the OJ Simpson murders? That’s a stretch…… All I’m saying is, if you are on here complaining about it being presented too far the one way, where were you the many times it was the extreme opposite way? I’m just saying, I liked it that finally a piece was done on MMA in a POSITIVE light. That just has never happened that I can remember.

    P.S I’m not on here to chuck insuslts with my keyboard fingers of death so if you can’t keep it mature, I’m done commenting on this thread.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:10 am

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    Why don’t you read what i said? I didn’t compare MMA to the OJ Simpson murders. I compared your attitude about this story to the attitude of some to that verdict. Read before you comment.

    If UFC wants to buy airtime to run an informercial, then that would be fine. CBS News and 60 Minutes are supposed to be an objective and balanced journalism source and that report was not objective, balanced or full accurate. That report was a sales piece. It was one Viacom network promoting a series on another Viacom network – AND being deceitful about it.

    This a great example of why I don’t watch 60 minutes. I can only imagine how they treat issues that I know nothing about.
    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:56 pm
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    fight4you wrote:
    CBS News and 60 Minutes are supposed to be an objective and balanced journalism source.
    True. So is BBC. So is CNN. So are the various newspapers across the country. Like I said, where were you then?
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:47 pm

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    oh, back off the kool-aid a bit. much of the earlier criticism was richly deserved. Tank Abbott? Kimo? Ballshots? Karateka vs Sumo Wreslters? What a circus! Not that the current UFC/Pride/K-1 are an oasis of class and virtue.
    Last edited by fight4you on Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

    Top

    StylistAjax
    Post subject: PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:33 pm

    Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:12 pm
    Posts: 44
    they didn’t show and female fights
    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:41 am
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    No they didn’t….but they did show AJ!!!!!
    Top

    foxylicious
    Post subject: PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:56 pm

    Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:04 pm
    Posts: 68
    warrior14 wrote:
    I found it quite refreshing. SOOOO many times, it has been so lopsided the other way. “Cage fighting (not calling it mma) is barbaric! Look at this clip where this guy is being punched a million times on the ground!” Then they cut the clip just before the ref would step in. FINALLY a news network has done a story presenting the FIGHTER/SPORT side of MMA instead. I don’t care if it IS for propaganda for the UFC. The sport DESERVES a one sided report on OUR side for once.
    I agree 100%, it was the first time I have seen MMA portrayed so positively on national television. Think about the average viewer seeing that, someone who knows nothing about MMA. I would rather they see that than the usual “barbaric” cage fight crap. Wasn’t it Bill Maher that interviewed Rich Franklin and Dana White a while back. I’m going to try to find that clip. It was ridiculous and I wanted to punch him.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:11 pm

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    So were the clips you were offended by faked? They showed what happened. The 60 minutes story was a sales tool, not a news story.
    Top

    StylistAjax
    Post subject: PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:14 pm

    Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:12 pm
    Posts: 44
    i saw it as a news story and not a sale tool.
    Top

     

    foxylicious
    Post subject: PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:50 pm

    Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:04 pm
    Posts: 68
    I never said I was offended….I said I wanted to punch him. His rant was one sided in my opinion. There was nothing objective about it. Even if the 60 Minutes “puff” were nothing but a sales pitch, at least it was positive. But I didn’t see it as a sales pitch at all, just a new perspective that’s never been ventured in to by mainstream television. 🙂
    Top

    satanico
    Post subject: PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:54 am

    Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:10 pm
    Posts: 144
    Bill O’Reilly was the idiot that interviewed Dana and Rich not Bill Maher. O’Reilly baited them with Muhammad Ali’s Parkinson’s and ancient Romans fighting lions. Franklin countered his BS pretty well but Dana didn’t know anything about the medical study O’Reilly cited or Ali’s Parkinson’s so he sounded like a dumbass.

    It is stupid to claim the 60 Minutes piece was Viacom promoting Viacom or the UFC writing a piece that featured the UFC’s main US competitor/lawsuit target IFL from FOX and Pat Militech who ripped Dana in a court deposition relating to the IFL.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:54 am

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    >> saw it as a news story and not a sale tool.<<

    then you must like your news stories biased and one sided when they are about topics you like. CBS could not find ONE opposite view? They could not identify SPIKETV as a Viacom owned network?
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:00 am

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    Bill O’Reilly is always a half-informed dumbass and anyone who appears with him should know that. Dana doesn’t admit to ANY study that does not fit into his marketing plan . The UFC is the most watched MMA event and it is seen on a Viacom network. The “sport’s” success is due to UFC on Spike, not to the IFC. 60 MINUTES did ye another PUFF PIECE for a topic that fits their agenda. Instead of usually bashing Bush, this time the 60 Minutes agenda was promoting SpikeTV’s most successful series.

    You can still see and and agree to the above and enjoy your hobby.
    “Bill O’Reilly was the idiot that interviewed Dana and Rich not Bill Maher. O’Reilly baited them with Muhammad Ali’s Parkinson’s and ancient Romans fighting lions. Franklin countered his BS pretty well but Dana didn’t know anything about the medical study O’Reilly cited or Ali’s Parkinson’s so he sounded like a dumbass.

    It is stupid to claim the 60 Minutes piece was Viacom promoting Viacom or the UFC writing a piece that featured the UFC’s main US competitor/lawsuit target IFL from FOX and Pat Militech who ripped Dana in a court deposition relating to the IFL.”
    Top

    warrior14
    Post subject: PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:40 am
    Pro Fighter

    Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:08 pm
    Posts: 94
    Location: Sioux Falls, SD
    Ok ok ok, so let’s say it WAS a one sided “puff piece.” Who really gives a crap? Most MMA fans/particpants liked it. You didn’t. Nobody really cares. It’s sort of a dumb little thing to be getting all worked up about. Regardless of what you will say on here, most MMA fans/participants appreciated it. Getting worked up about one sided news pieces? Welcome to America. There are far more important things that are talked about that are actually WORTH getting worked up about.
    Top

    fight4you
    Post subject: PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:57 am

    Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:03 pm
    Posts: 429
    u don’t have to have your mind shut off, just because someone said something nice about something you like. lay off the mma kool-aid a bit.
    Top

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 2014 Fighter Girls.  All Rights Reserved.

Fighter girls®

Fightergirls.com®

Forgot your details?