Who Benefits? Fox or Dean?
Yesterday I talked about my email from Howard Dean, which was basically a solicitation for donations to the DNC. One of the parts of the letter that I didn't mention was this:
The future of our party, and of our country, depends on the ability of Democrats to get a strong national security message out in all 50 states this year. Donate to make it happen and watch President Clinton fight back now:
Surprise surprise. The DNC has turned the Clinton Smackdown into its version of the PBS tote bag. I mentioned to Hubster on the way to the grocery store yesterday afternoon that I thought it was not the best idea the DNC had, what with copies of the video available all over the internet. Then we started talking about something else.
So this morning I see via Sharon Cobb that the video has been pulled from YouTube. Sharon has this to say:
I suspect R. Murdock will ignore fair usage and charge an arm and a leg for use of this footage. He's up to something. I've never seen Fox remove a tape from YouTube.
Is Fox News the sinister one here? Claiming the right to something they own? There are a lot of blogs that have exploited fair use to its limits and beyond, by constantly posting whole texts of interviews and other blog posts. And YouTube clips without further comment. Fox was claiming their property.
And then of course, there's this. The DNC can't charge for content it doesn't own, but the form is set up in such a way as to get the big money donation and then give you a fine-point link to ThinkProgress' hosting of the video.
Sorry, Sharon. To me it looks like the number one party looking to profit from this video is the DNC, NOT Fox News. And even if Fox News did want to profit from it, it's their property and their right.
posted by Kat Coble @ 8:57 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
I think what's questionable about Fox pulling the clip from YouTube isn't whether or not Fox profits from it. It's that they don't want people to see it. The fact that they choose to pull this clip while others are left up is idicative of their agenda.
As for the DNC using a video clip they think will energize their base as a political fundraiser, I don't really see where that is a big deal. That's largely the point of political ads in general. By the way, I was able to access the video from the DNC page without donating any money.
Any Simpsons fan will tell you that Fox has pulled countless things from YouTube. They (Fox) are the most zealous about guarding their rights.
Honestly, Dolphin, it's not a conspiracy to hide the brilliance of Clinton from the masses.
As for being able to watch the vid without donating, I know. That's why I said this:
he DNC can't charge for content it doesn't own, but the form is set up in such a way as to get the big money donation and then give you a fine-point link to ThinkProgress' hosting of the video.
Hi Kat,
Good piece and observation. I just linked your piece.
I usually check your site during the night, but didn't see this piece until you brought it to my attention. Thanks for the heads up.
Who hasn't seen this piece 100 times already? Besides, it doesn't make Clinton look good. He looks like a spoiled child screaming at someone who asked him a simple question. It's also filled with lies. Surprise. Surprise.
Post a Comment
<< Home