CBS News - "Anonymous threatens Fox over 'Occupy' coverage"

[TomCADem]

Fox News and its commentators have been working over time to demonize the 99 percent movement and OWS protestors, so it is nice that the activist community has not been taking the corporate media threats lieing down.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-20125640/anonymous-threatens-fox-over-occupy-coverage/

The hactivist group Anonymous plans to take down the Fox News Web site on November 5, according to a new video released recently by the group.

The group said it targeted the network for what it called biased news coverage of the Occupy Wall Street protests occurring in cities across the country.

The network's "continued right-wing, conservative propaganda against the occupations" is the group's catalyst for its intention of "destroying the Fox News Web site," a digitally generated voice on the video explains. "Since they will not stop belittling the occupiers, we will simply shut them down."

The group had earlier vowed to take down Facebook on November 5 as well, although there was some question about the credibility of that threat within the hacktivist group.

[monmouth]

1. I doubt that will happen, plus announcing loudly ahead of time is a

little...no words.

[DainBramaged]

4. You doubt the power of Anon?

What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

[monmouth]

11. Bwahaha, well, okay. There is that I guess...LOL (red-faced and shamed)...n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

7. Remember when Babe Ruth would step to the plate, pause, and point to the bleachers?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

2. I'm on the fence about this ...

I'm a free speech activist (and yes, I know it's not the government infringing on Fox's right).

Yet, I can't stand Fox Noise and their propaganda. I have to think about this one.

[lunatica]

3. The world is in shades of gray

We're all supposed to be torn by these things. It shouldn't be easy to takes sides without even considering the implications. I feel the same way, but then I wonder how there's any alternative to getting a message to FOX that we know what they're doing and find it far more dangerous than Anonymous shutting them down for a day or an hour. Who does more real damage?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

9. Yeah, I'd like to get a message to Fox, too.

But sometimes ends don't justify the means.

I'm just playing Devil's Advocate, I suppose.

If I have to make a choice, I guess fuck Fox.

[Cid_B]

5. Think of it this way....

If it was a physical news entity, like a newspaper...

Would you be ok with a group coming in and smashing the printing presses with baseball bats or slashing tires of delivery trucks?

The end result is the same because a group disagrees with a media outlet's message and that media outlet has to expend time and resources to deal with a criminal attack.

People get all wishy washy because they think the internet is some magical place with no real consequences.

[safeinOhio]

8. I would think it is more like

a group that disagrees with a paper, going out and buying up all of the copies so few could read them. After all, they are just visiting their web site a lot so others can't get in to read it. Not like smashing private property.

[kestrel91316]

12. Back in support of the 1%ers again.......

[Cid_B]

13. So you are ok with destroying someone's property...

... just so long as you disagree with them. Got it...

Nice ethical standards you got there...

[Boojatta]

16. If Fox relied primarily on its website to get its message out there ...

then the situation would be completely different. Thus, I don't know why you're talking about smashing the printing presses of a newspaper.

[Marr]

6. I'm not convinced the threat actually came from where these reports claim it did.

A digitally altered voice could be anyone. We've already seen a series of coordinated attempts to discredit OWS by tying it to everything from anarchists to terrorists.

[Douglas Carpenter]

10. I wonder how one can determine an authentic anonymous message from a renegade or fake one?

Since their whole point is to be completely decentralized and completey anonymous - what is authorized and what is not?

[ixion]

14. This is the running narrative they're trying to push:

The Occupy Movement is violent, even though that's a complete fabrication.

[Boojatta]

15. What does the word "violent" mean to you?

If you buy your own server and host your own website and don't bother to use a firewall or antivirus software, then will the police investigate a cyber-attack on your website? I doubt it.

On the other hand, law enforcement officers are required to investigate violent physical assaults, aren't they? They're unlikely to say, "Well, you should always wear body armor before leaving your home. Also, make sure to carry at least one visible firearm and at least one concealed firearm."

[ixion]

17. I think we can all agree what 'violent' means in this context.

And the Occupy Movement has stated specifically that its mission is a peaceful one.