12-year-old girl and her aunt censored by FOX News

im ukranian and trust me on the russian head tv channel(perviy kanal) it is clear that georgia started the war americans blame russians mostly due to the classic russia-america rivalry

I agree the presenter here was uncomfortable with the way this interview went. He clearly thought it was simply going to be a heart rendering story. His attempted interruptions sounded uneasy.

I find it incredible that all reports in the West I have read have been about how the Evil Russian's invaded peaceloving Georgia. I always thought our media had freedom of speach, but this is clearly not the case or they would have reported how three hours after agreeing with Russia to end hostilities, Georgia aggressivly invaded South Ossettia, why Russia had to reposond and how their actions were swift and controlled the situation in a very quick timeframe, thus reducing futher casualties. They would even report how after Georgia agreed to a ceasfire, continued more attacks.

Russia are happy they won this conflict, but know they completely lost the was with the West's media.

I don't mean any disrespect whatsoever, Gamedime; I'm just making sure that you understand my point of view. If you really are 49 years old as your profile says, then your definition of 'explosive language' is probably far different from mine. I use capital letters to emphasize major points because I cannot write in italics on my iPhone, not to be forcibly persuasive.

You just keep referring to the wrong type of censorship. In a media class I took in college we studied roughly 10 different types of censorship, and the one I describe here, commercial censorship, was the one that always stuck out the most in my mind. That's the type of censorship, along with military censorship, that the media use most in this country. I apologize for not being more specific in the title, but I've tried to explain the specific brand of censorship to which I am referring; and still you seem to disregard it every time.

The reason that I capitalized certain parts of my comment were so you wouldn't misunderstand, but clearly you've done just that. You also twisted my words - I never said he didn't 'openly agree'; I said he dismissed it altogether & changed the subject. That is very different from disagreeing, & is extremely irresponsible journalism.

I never called for him to 'openly agree' with these people, I'm commenting on FOX's commercial censorship policy in which they only show one side of the story.

Also, your argument is very weak. There certainly is no way for the guy to know how credible or legitimate these people are, but he immediately decides that they're without merit because they are in favor of Russia.

This is a classic example of commercial censorship; the type of censorship in which information is withheld because it contrasts with the views of the respective news entity.

Please edit your run-on sentences and typos before you post. Thanks.

Just so I understand, you criticize FOX and call them censors when your point of view is give MORE than enough time and no other alternate point of view is even offered? You chose the word censor and say that the newscaster is not being objective because he does not openly agree with the point of view being presented? Newscasters in this position have no idea to the credibility or legitimacy of such a person in this kind of interview. They never meet this person and they are not even in the same building as they are. It would be far more irresponsible if the newscaster stopped the show, offend the girl a 30 min. segment and then openly agreed with her position without additional investigation.

Don’t get me wrong here. I am not a fan of the newscaster or FOX news and for all I know the Russia point of view might be the correct or “fair” one. Simply using explosive language to push a point only makes your view look weak.

Well, "Gamedime" I was referring to the fact that the host is clearly unhappy with the girl's response to his question about the bombs; and then proceeds to ignore it and immediately change the subject. Then after the 'interview' he acts as though it never happened and dismisses it as a 'gray area' during war.

What I'm referring to is the absurd COMMERCIAL CENSORSHIP that is becoming more and more common in American news media. I haven't heard anything from the Russian point of view, or the OSSETIAN point of view - which, you would think, ought to be the most important one. Neither FOX nor CNN have been reporting objectively on this conflict, and it's quite sickening to watch.

Journalistic objectivity is quite unfashionable these days.

By the way, listing your CV on a video website does not give you credibility - anybody can do that. I accept your point of view & that you have your own opinion, but I'm clearly being very honest.

WOW – what a misleading title you chose for your video clip. Do you even know the meaning of the word censorship? These people were given plenty of time to tell their story and give their point of view. They were even brought back after the break to continue with their story. Having worked in corporate communications and PR for over twenty years I have worked with FOX, & CNN as well as ABC, NBC and CBS. I know how the media works and what they do if they want to shut you down or censor you. There is NO censorship here. In fact, FOX give these people plenty of time to tell their story. You my friend are simply a provocateur who is looking for sympathy for your point of view. Try being HONEST and see if that works for you. Although honesty is probably something you are not very familiar with.

Saakashvili has gone crazy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0n_2KvDjVc