Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 10-22-2012, 12:18 PM
Really Not All That Bright Really Not All That Bright is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 67,743
Especially since the Trayvon Martin pictures were the ones his family provided to the media rather than ones they carefully selected to make him look like a tiny harmless child.
  #102  
Old 10-22-2012, 05:39 PM
humblebumble humblebumble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 110
Yes. In the realm of journalism, it is THAT bad. Their poor attempts at journalism reaffirms my beliefs that anyone with a pretty face can be a Fox News journalist. I guess it's not that bad if you like misinformation and biases.

Edit: I found one of my favorite Fox News stunts (warning: YouTube video). The video is the Fox News take on the morning after pill.

Last edited by humblebumble; 10-22-2012 at 05:43 PM.
  #103  
Old 10-22-2012, 05:46 PM
Boyo Jim Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by humblebumble View Post
...Their poor attempts at journalism reaffirms my beliefs that anyone with a pretty face can be a Fox News journalist. ....
Far be it from me from me to defend Fox, but that's not an issue at all particular to them. Cable news is filled with women who look like they just changed careers from cheerleaders.

Also, a pretty face isn't really enough. Nice legs and a good rack are critical to news delivery.
  #104  
Old 10-22-2012, 05:51 PM
humblebumble humblebumble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
Far be it from me from me to defend Fox, but that's not an issue at all particular to them. Cable news is filled with women who look like they just changed careers from cheerleaders.

Also, a pretty face isn't really enough. Nice legs and a good rack are critical to news delivery.
Good point.

Journalism is just gone in general. What I mean is that anyone can be a journalist with blogs and such. The obvious problem with this is people have to sift through the content to find anything that isn't riddled with misinformation - a lot of it is. Far be it from me to say what is a credible news source, but I'm certain that Fox News misses that qualification by a landslide.

Edit: ...Or maybe not. This (warning: YouTube video) was interesting. This journalist doesn't like people calling her fat and does her own little rant.

Last edited by humblebumble; 10-22-2012 at 05:54 PM.
  #105  
Old 10-22-2012, 07:49 PM
dontbesojumpy dontbesojumpy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,065
late to the complaining party, but i go through a lot of this with my folks, esp lately. they are very VERY conservapub christian rights. haaard right. and every. single. time. we. talk, it's about what fox news said, and how they are the only news channel that will be unbias. they truly believe that ONLY fox news is fair, that all other sources of information are liberally biased.

they were virtually STUNNED that ABC/CBS/NBC "admitted" obama lost the first debate.

the problem i see with it is that Fox news doesn't just push an agenda, they are having an actual dangerous effect on how people think. my folks have always been conservative, but the bitter, divisive anger is new, and i can trace nearly all of it to the start of the obama election last go-round and their increased interest in Fox news...which says everything they want to hear.

nearly every bit of news my folks discuss (from fox news) is bookended by an extremely biased, fear-mongering, opinion demanding editorialization. but my folk's fail to see that aspect.

great example: yesterday we were talking about what a sad turn of events this Lance Armstrong has turned to.

my dad said he was watching them talk about it on fox news and how the anchor went into a diatribe about personally meeting Lance Armstrong at some event, after press meetings out at a restaurant or something private, and how Lance tried to start a fist fight with him, and how the anchor explained "this is how this guy was. angry, aggressive, hostile and tried to start a lot of fights with journalists all the time."

now, any truth in this "report" notwithstanding, my immediate thought was "that sure is an utterly unverifiable personal anecdote you were just fed by your news, one that has since gone to shape your opinion of this person you've never met--one you just personally verified by explaining "--and he said he wasn't the only one that happened to!"

that's not news. it's brainwashing.

it's easy to say anyone who watches this channel has poor character, is an idiot, or just wants the sweet, warm hug of bullshit to make them feel better. but i can attest personally there are middle-ground, regular americans who lack a kind of investigative personality to dig deeper into things who are being straight up brainwashed by all this fearmongering. Fox news is demanding people be angry and are widening the gap between political stances by capturing on people's fears. they harp constantly on how your freedoms are being eroded by everything you find even remotely disagreeable and pour it all into a mixture of actual shit, news, and opinion, call it fair and balance, and people buy PART A because of the caveat of PART B.

maybe it's unsophisticated, but my dad always mentions the fact they are the only news who claim to be fair and balanced. because of that claim, he buys some false sense of integrity on their part. and because they scream they are the ONLY honest ones, it makes him think any contradictory news, stats, or facts by any other media outlet is due to THEIR LIBERAL BIAS.

it's to the point he's actually convinced we are heading for a new civil war--and that's 100% Fox news anger-fear-mongering.
  #106  
Old 10-23-2012, 09:35 AM
Molesworth 2 Molesworth 2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontbesojumpy View Post
the problem i see with it is that Fox news doesn't just push an agenda, they are having an actual dangerous effect on how people think. my folks have always been conservative, but the bitter, divisive anger is new
I've read quite a few online stories like yours about people who just don't bother going home for Christmas or Thanksgiving because they know that the whole experience will be ruined by fierce arguments due to Fox News propaganda.

Fox News not only poisons political discourse in the US, it also drives a wedge between family members.
  #107  
Old 10-23-2012, 10:01 AM
Doughbag Doughbag is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A German in Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,137
O'Reilly is a comedy show, not a news show....... whenever I watch it, I can not stop laughing
  #108  
Old 10-23-2012, 10:38 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
People who watch Comedy Central are better informed than people who watch Fox News

Say you're a news station. If your viewers tend to be less knowledgeable about things in the news, would you say you're doing a good job presenting it?

Looking at it completely logically, you are either really bad at informing your viewers, you are really good at misinforming your viewers, or your viewers are mostly mouth-breathers.

Sure, it can be come combination of the three. But is any of them actually a good excuse?
Hate to quote myself, but while everyone is talking about perceptions of bias which cannot be reliably quantified, I really think that looking at what you can quantify needs to be addressed.

Aside from my self-quoted post above...

Quote:
A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Forbes
That was from earlier this year. During the 2010 election, another study found similar results:

Quote:
Those who watched Fox News almost daily were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (8 points more likely), most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points), the economy is getting worse (26 points), most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points), the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points), their own income taxes have gone up (14 points), the auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points), when TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points) and that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points). The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it--though by a lesser margin than those who voted Republican.

World Public Opinion
Even way back in 2003 with regard to the Iraq War, you had this study come out:

Quote:
A new study based on a series of seven US polls conducted from January through September of this year reveals that before and after the Iraq war, a majority of Americans have had significant misperceptions and these are highly related to support for the war in Iraq.

The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals' primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.

World Public Opinion
These are a few of the several surveys that show Fox News viewers are consistantly less informed about world events, science, the economy and politics than those who got their news from other sources.

So what are we to conclude? Seems to me that it's one of these only:
  1. Fox News is really bad at informing their viewers.
  2. Fox News is really good at misinforming their viewers
  3. Fox News viewers are mostly mouth-breathers.
  4. A combination of any or all of the above.
So the answer the OP " Is Fox News really all that bad?" I have to say forget about bias. Look at how informed their audience is. If a news station consistently shows that their audience doesn't know the news, how can anyone make the argument that the station is "good?"
  #109  
Old 10-23-2012, 11:04 AM
Doughbag Doughbag is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A German in Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
  1. Fox News is really bad at informing their viewers.
  2. Fox News is really good at misinforming their viewers
  3. Fox News viewers are mostly mouth-breathers.
  4. A combination of any or all of the above.
Can I have A, B, C & D, please!
  #110  
Old 10-23-2012, 11:08 AM
magellan01 magellan01 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 16,327
To respond to the OP...

There's no doubt that Fox News has a conservative bias. I think that bias is most evident in the Hannity show, which I really have no use for. O'Reilly, while conservative, does make air both sides of an issue, and I think he gets a bad rap. I used to put him in the same boat as Hannity, but he's improves immeasurably in the fair and balanced department.

During this debate season, I've chosen to watch most of it on MSNBC. And, my God, talk about bias! First, they seem to make very little effort to get conservatives on. But what surprised me is the degree to which they either intentionally lie to make things seem good for Obama or the degree to which they live in a bubble and everything is automatically put through a Must-Be-Good-For-Our-Side Translator chip that's been implanted in their brains. I find it to be MUCH more hyper-partisan than Fox News. And vying for Head Partisan is that Schultz character and the smarmy, wisecracking Maddow. I guess refrigerator-head Lawrence O'Donnel is in the running, too.
  #111  
Old 10-23-2012, 11:23 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 57,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan01 View Post
During this debate season, I've chosen to watch most of it on MSNBC. And, my God, talk about bias! First, they seem to make very little effort to get conservatives on. But what surprised me is the degree to which they either intentionally lie to make things seem good for Obama or the degree to which they live in a bubble and everything is automatically put through a Must-Be-Good-For-Our-Side Translator chip that's been implanted in their brains. I find it to be MUCH more hyper-partisan than Fox News. And vying for Head Partisan is that Schultz character and the smarmy, wisecracking Maddow. I guess refrigerator-head Lawrence O'Donnel is in the running, too.
I see a lot about MSNBC's commentators, but nothing about their news.
  #112  
Old 10-23-2012, 09:20 PM
dontbesojumpy dontbesojumpy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan01 View Post
During this debate season, I've chosen to watch most of it on MSNBC. And, my God, talk about bias! First, they seem to make very little effort to get conservatives on. But what surprised me is the degree to which they either intentionally lie to make things seem good for Obama or the degree to which they live in a bubble and everything is automatically put through a Must-Be-Good-For-Our-Side Translator chip that's been implanted in their brains. I find it to be MUCH more hyper-partisan than Fox News. And vying for Head Partisan is that Schultz character and the smarmy, wisecracking Maddow. I guess refrigerator-head Lawrence O'Donnel is in the running, too.
i dont know if anyone here caught it, but Ted Koppel did a piece on Rock Center not long ago (odd seeing him on NBC). it was about the divisive nature of cable news. Ted is more of a straight-forward newsman, not a commentator, not really an editorializer (feel free to set me straight if that opinion is wrong, i'm young and missed the first part of his career).

anyway the point was how people from Fox news, like Bill O'Reily openly admit this is about money. not news, not ideology, not even conservative agenda. MONEY.

once the 24 hour news channel became a "thing," producers realized quickly they could make shows with talking heads bathering on for next to no cost. and quickly realized the profit margins. O'Reilly minced no words, he made it clear it was all about money for him. that he is often ridiculed for not being FAR ENOUGH right.

MSNBC saw how well the partisan talking-head format was working, and took the same route.

while i don't watch ANY cable tv news, i think the big 3 stay relatively neutral most of the time. but MSNBC is a toned down, leftist version of Fox news, and that was mostly a business decision. while i tend to agree with their side of the picture a little more, it's still roughly the same problem when it comes to bias. (sorry. it just is). i do think MSNBC is much less of a politically based news channel, with a more broad approach to actually informing people about real things. fox news doesn't care about hardly anything unless it's politically divisive. news? it's not news. it's angry politics.

incidentally, everyone involved w MSNBC was gagged by the higher-ups and not allowed to comment at all in Ted Koppel's piece.
  #113  
Old 10-23-2012, 09:45 PM
Euphonious Polemic Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan01 View Post
To respond to the OP...
Remember, we're talking about the NEWS, not commentary.

Care to comment on John_Stamos'_Left_Ear's excellent post #108? Why do you think Fox News viewers are consistantly less informed about world events, science, the economy and politics than those who got their news from other sources?
  #114  
Old 10-23-2012, 10:15 PM
humblebumble humblebumble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 110
I'm not sure if people watch Fox News to become more informed. I'm more inclined to believe they watch it for the hot news reporters (especially to see some cleavage). In my opinion, news reporters are not journalists. Journalists are the watchdogs of the government. Clearly, they are not watching out for anyone by reporting blatant misinformation and spreading their own conspiracies/biases.

Last edited by humblebumble; 10-23-2012 at 10:16 PM.
  #115  
Old 10-23-2012, 11:22 PM
Euphonious Polemic Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by humblebumble View Post
I'm not sure if people watch Fox News to become more informed.
I think some watch because many people enjoy being righteously angry, and many more enjoy the feeling of being "one of the few who really know what's going on". <touches side of nose with finger>
  #116  
Old 10-23-2012, 11:54 PM
Clothahump Clothahump is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeschines View Post
TL;DR: Fox News is Conservative, but all network news shows ares fundamentally Conservative, inasmuch as they subtly and unsubtly validate the status quo.

What do you think?
Your TLDR assumption is incorrect. The mainstream media is biased hard left. FOX is moderate, which puts it in the middle. The others, however, are so far left that it makes FOX look hard right if things like ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN et. al. are all you listen to.
  #117  
Old 10-24-2012, 01:39 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 27,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clothahump View Post
Your TLDR assumption is incorrect. The mainstream media is biased hard left. FOX is moderate, which puts it in the middle. The others, however, are so far left that it makes FOX look hard right if things like ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN et. al. are all you listen to.
"in the middle"?

Who is on the right then?
  #118  
Old 10-24-2012, 06:56 AM
monavis monavis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by al27052 View Post
When I used to install Uverse TV/internet/phone service, customers would often bug me while I tried to work. the solution?

1. For young people, get the internet working as fast as possible. They'll leave you alone once they have working internet.

2. For the elderly, get 1 TV working as fast as possible. Put Fox News on. Voila! You won't hear another word out of them after you put Fox News on.

Seriously. I found two elderly households out of probably 100 that DIDN'T immediately sit down and start watching Fox News as soon as I got their TV going.

It's like little kids and SpongeBob.
I am in my 80's and I think Fox News is a Joke! Very little actual News, and the word Obama is in almost every sentence. I don't personally watch it, but My husband does so I do hear a lot of the drivel.If Obama solved all the worlds problems, Fox News would probably say he was helped by Satan!
After every debate I knew ahead of time they would find fault with Obama and sing the praises of no matter who was his challenger. It seems to me if the Know It Alls with all the answers( that they think they have the solutions to), should be running for office them selves.
  #119  
Old 10-24-2012, 07:11 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clothahump View Post
Your TLDR assumption is incorrect. The mainstream media is biased hard left. FOX is moderate, which puts it in the middle. The others, however, are so far left that it makes FOX look hard right if things like ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN et. al. are all you listen to.
Even for your usual comments, this is ludicrous. You would need to create an alternative universe to present this seriously.

The U.S. tilts Right on the political spectrum by any objective standard and Fox is to the Right of the American center. Aside from the standard that if it bleeds, it leads, the mainstream media has no overwhelming bias. Aside from Fox the networks are a bit to the Left on issues such as sexual orientation, sexual politics, and race, but they are firmly in the center on issues such as foreign relations and the military, and they tilt Right in the realms of commerce.
  #120  
Old 10-24-2012, 07:29 AM
zoid's Avatar
zoid zoid is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago Il
Posts: 9,782
I think Clothahump does us a service. He demonstrates quite accurately just what the American public is up against. While the presenters on Fox may not actually believe the nonsense they spew, their audience, as evidenced by CH absolutely does believe it.

Listen to him. This is what you’re up against.
  #121  
Old 10-24-2012, 07:42 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
I am still waiting for someone who thinks Fox News is hunky dory to refute my post(s).
  #122  
Old 10-24-2012, 09:43 AM
Knorf Knorf is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
I am still waiting for someone who thinks Fox News is hunky dory to refute my post(s).
Or mine.
  #123  
Old 10-28-2012, 06:16 PM
bmasters1 bmasters1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontbesojumpy View Post
late to the complaining party, but i go through a lot of this with my folks, esp lately. they are very VERY conservapub christian rights. haaard right. and every. single. time. we. talk, it's about what fox news said, and how they are the only news channel that will be unbias. they truly believe that ONLY fox news is fair, that all other sources of information are liberally biased.

they were virtually STUNNED that ABC/CBS/NBC "admitted" obama lost the first debate.

the problem i see with it is that Fox news doesn't just push an agenda, they are having an actual dangerous effect on how people think. my folks have always been conservative, but the bitter, divisive anger is new, and i can trace nearly all of it to the start of the obama election last go-round and their increased interest in Fox news...which says everything they want to hear.

nearly every bit of news my folks discuss (from fox news) is bookended by an extremely biased, fear-mongering, opinion demanding editorialization. but my folk's fail to see that aspect.

great example: yesterday we were talking about what a sad turn of events this Lance Armstrong has turned to.

my dad said he was watching them talk about it on fox news and how the anchor went into a diatribe about personally meeting Lance Armstrong at some event, after press meetings out at a restaurant or something private, and how Lance tried to start a fist fight with him, and how the anchor explained "this is how this guy was. angry, aggressive, hostile and tried to start a lot of fights with journalists all the time."

now, any truth in this "report" notwithstanding, my immediate thought was "that sure is an utterly unverifiable personal anecdote you were just fed by your news, one that has since gone to shape your opinion of this person you've never met--one you just personally verified by explaining "--and he said he wasn't the only one that happened to!"

that's not news. it's brainwashing.

it's easy to say anyone who watches this channel has poor character, is an idiot, or just wants the sweet, warm hug of bullshit to make them feel better. but i can attest personally there are middle-ground, regular americans who lack a kind of investigative personality to dig deeper into things who are being straight up brainwashed by all this fearmongering. Fox news is demanding people be angry and are widening the gap between political stances by capturing on people's fears. they harp constantly on how your freedoms are being eroded by everything you find even remotely disagreeable and pour it all into a mixture of actual shit, news, and opinion, call it fair and balance, and people buy PART A because of the caveat of PART B.

maybe it's unsophisticated, but my dad always mentions the fact they are the only news who claim to be fair and balanced. because of that claim, he buys some false sense of integrity on their part. and because they scream they are the ONLY honest ones, it makes him think any contradictory news, stats, or facts by any other media outlet is due to THEIR LIBERAL BIAS.

it's to the point he's actually convinced we are heading for a new civil war--and that's 100% Fox news anger-fear-mongering.
Bullseye! Right on the money! This is exactly why I don't like to watch or listen to FOX "News"!
  #124  
Old 10-29-2012, 12:57 AM
denquixote denquixote is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,578
The best that can be said of Fox News:

www.youtube.com/embed/2YypmZyXUpM
  #125  
Old 10-29-2012, 08:29 AM
Really Not All That Bright Really Not All That Bright is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 67,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
The U.S. tilts Right on the political spectrum by any objective standard and Fox is to the Right of the American center.
What "objective standard" involves the center being off-center, exactly?
  #126  
Old 10-29-2012, 09:01 AM
jayjay jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 36,838
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
The U.S. tilts Right on the political spectrum by any objective standard
Appears to, certainly, but I wonder how much of that is people being convinced that what they believe is right of center when it's not. "Communist" and "socialist" are dirty words to the vast majority of Americans, but if you were to describe left-wing/liberal policies without actually labeling them "liberal" or "Democratic", people LIKE them in large numbers. When the provisions of the ACA are described without attributing them to Obama or the Democrats (or "Obamacare" or "the ACA"), people LOVE them (with the exception of the mandate, but then people never love taxes, however necessary they are). It's only when you mention Obama or Democrats that the whole shebang become "socialism"!
  #127  
Old 11-02-2012, 08:57 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Roger Ailes Offered Bush Administration “Off the Record Help” in Private Note

Quote:
Fat asshole and Fox News president Roger Ailes just re-upped to run his network through the 2016 election, and he continues to maintain the grotesque fiction that he operates an independent news outlet and not a vital constituency in the Republican coalition. In case there was any doubt left, though—there isn’t, really—here’s a handwritten note he sent to George W. Bush’s secretary of state in 2005 offering “help off the record” any time.

Ailes sent the note, which I obtained from the State Department via the Freedom of Information Act, to Condoleezza Rice in March 2005, shortly after she was confirmed as Secretary of State in the Bush Administration. It reads in full:

Quote:
Madam Secretary:

Great first month. You handled hearing beautifully. If I can be of help off the record—just call.

Warm Regards,

Roger
So there you have it. (Here is the full note and Rice’s response, which was basically a form letter.) For the Bush White House, “help” from the nation’s most watched cable news outlet was just a phone call away. Off the record help. Help that no one needs to know about, and that presumably wouldn’t penetrate to the traditional adversarial relationship an ostensible news outlet maintains with the government it covers.

It goes without saying, but: Please just imagine for a moment how Fox News would cover the publication of a private note from the editor of the New York Times to an Obama Administration official offering “help off the record.”

Gawker
Any of the Fox News supporters care to defend this?

Last edited by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear; 11-02-2012 at 08:58 AM.
  #128  
Old 11-02-2012, 09:11 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 57,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
Any of the Fox News supporters care to defend this?
1. He meant help as in helping her paint her living room or kitchen.
2. He would have sent that same missive out to a Democratic appointee also-he's just a patriotic guy.
3. They do it toooo!
  #129  
Old 11-02-2012, 10:24 AM
Really Not All That Bright Really Not All That Bright is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 67,743
4. He was talking about Condi's budding music career.
  #130  
Old 11-02-2012, 03:25 PM
John DiFool's Avatar
John DiFool John DiFool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 18,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
Any of the Fox News supporters care to defend this?
*chirp* *chirp* *chirp*
  #131  
Old 11-02-2012, 03:43 PM
drewtwo99 drewtwo99 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 8,757
I agree that not only is Fox News biased, it really is the propoganda arm of the Republican party.

If it weren't for Shep Smith and Chris Wallace, I'd say nuke it from orbit.

It's blatantly obvious that the GOP IS Fox News. It's not that they just work together or are sympathetic to the GOP, they are an essential part of it.

This is really what separates it from MSNBC and any other "liberally biased" media.
  #132  
Old 11-03-2012, 04:57 AM
Passion of the Shrubber Passion of the Shrubber is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 22
I'm really enjoying this discussion and it's very timely for me, considering the upcoming election and all of the disinformation Fox is putting out regarding Benghazi etc. I belong to another webboard Bagism.com and yes, it is a Beatles/John Lennon-related site primarily, or used to be until the Foxtards took over. I have tried to do everything I can to reason with these people, showed them facts, tried to help them be a little more critical about which information they accept, but they'll just have none of it. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Anyone ever have luck getting through to a Foxtard at all? If so, any pointers? Or, should I just forget it and have some fun with it instead?

Last edited by Passion of the Shrubber; 11-03-2012 at 04:59 AM. Reason: spelling
  #133  
Old 11-20-2012, 05:58 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Fox News really is all that bad...

...For Science in particular.
Quote:
Is News Corp. Failing Science? (.pdf)
© 2012 Union of Concerned Scientists

UCS’s analysis finds that:

• Over a recent six-month period, 93 percent of Fox News Channel’s representations of climate science were misleading (37 out of 40 instances).

UCS’s examination finds that the misleading citations include broad dismissals of human-caused climate change, disparaging comments about individual scientists, rejections of climate science as a body of knowledge, and cherry picking of data. Fox News Channel citations also included several discussions in which misleading claims dominated accurate ones. Furthermore, much of this coverage denigrated climate science by either promoting distrust in scientists and scientific institutions or placing acceptance of climate change in an ideological, rather than fact-based,
context.
  #134  
Old 11-23-2012, 10:34 AM
chargerrich chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeschines View Post
Fox News is Conservative, but all network news shows ares fundamentally Conservative, inasmuch as they subtly and unsubtly validate the status quo.
I think on a purely fundamental level, this is wholly inaccurate. Most media outside of radio is heavily liberal so perhaps when you see Fox being more conservative - which they are - swimming in a pool that is almost 100% more liberal, it seems out of place.

As someone who is more moderate than anything else, I prefer CNN mainly because I like their "style and presentation" better than Fox.
  #135  
Old 11-23-2012, 10:37 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I think on a purely fundamental level, this is wholly inaccurate. Most media outside of radio is heavily liberal so perhaps when you see Fox being more conservative - which they are - swimming in a pool that is almost 100% more liberal, it seems out of place.
This is false and dumb.
  #136  
Old 11-23-2012, 11:06 AM
chargerrich chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,049
I do find it a bit hypocritical that hardcore liberals will go borderline violent about how "right" Fox is, show their hatred for clear conservatives like Hannity and O'Reilly but wont concede that hosts like Maddow and Olberman are JUST as bad in the other direction.

I personally cannot stand any of the above, I'll take Colbert and Stewart please
  #137  
Old 11-23-2012, 11:10 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I do find it a bit hypocritical that hardcore liberals will go borderline violent about how "right" Fox is, show their hatred for clear conservatives like Hannity and O'Reilly but wont concede that hosts like Maddow and Olberman are JUST as bad in the other direction.
Except that you didn't say one person on MSNBC and one person currently unemployed. You said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
Most media outside of radio is heavily liberal.
This may come as a shock to you, but those two people are NOT "most media."
  #138  
Old 11-23-2012, 11:18 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 57,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I do find it a bit hypocritical that hardcore liberals will go borderline violent about how "right" Fox is, show their hatred for clear conservatives like Hannity and O'Reilly but wont concede that hosts like Maddow and Olberman are JUST as bad in the other direction.

I personally cannot stand any of the above, I'll take Colbert and Stewart please
As has been stated here so many times it defies description: It isn't the conservatism of the above-named persons that is being protested-it is the lies, inaccuracies and deceptions that spring from their lips on a regular basis.
  #139  
Old 11-23-2012, 02:47 PM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySinclair View Post
I don't see how anybody could watch Fox and say it's not biased. It's obviously biased, but that wouldn't be so bad if

a) they didn't claim they were fair and balanced, and

b) they didn't make shit up, or persist in reporting false stuff long after they know it's false.

MSNBC is NOT the same. They may be as biased to the left as Fox is to the right, but they don't claim to be fair and balanced, and they don't make shit up.

Disclaimer: I only watch the big guns, i.e. Matthews and Maddow on MSNBC, and O'Reilly and Hannity on Fox. I guess it's possible that Shep Smith may be less biased than Al Sharpton.
Jon Stewart - Fox's bullshit mountain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIrAEp8-Ft0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxVGw...eature=related


My favorite Faux News bit was their showing "riots" in Madison Wisconsin in February 2011. The "riots" had green palm trees in the background.

First, there were never any riots during the January - April 2011 protests in Madison. During that entire time, about 30 people were arrested for what would be called riotous behavior. - That's fewer than the usual number arrested on a single football Saturday.

Second, the only green vegetation on Capitol Square in Madison are evergreen trees. There are no palm trees nor any other kind of leafy green trees.

(BTW, During the biggest weekend protest, there were three bus loads of counter-protest folks from around Wisconsin bused-in by the Koch Brothers.)

Colbert saw the same thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrHvx51aUr4
  #140  
Old 11-23-2012, 03:15 PM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,307
More YouTube clips on Faux News.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=...ture=endscreen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nL7oW...feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rqdtZlec0s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT4rrkNFcyg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IETQJ...feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h172e...eature=related


Just search Fox News lies.

BTW, MSNBC is not innocent of slanted editing, but the extent is so much less and out and out factual misstatements are rare and usually corrected later. Faux just shuts up when they've been called to account.
  #141  
Old 11-23-2012, 04:18 PM
Modern Master Modern Master is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 228
The only news source I can truly trust is NPR News. All the other news sources either have a liberal or conservative agenda. It's not journalism anymore; it's a business. It's all about how can we keep our target audience and how we can get them to buy products via VNR's. VNRs are great because they take up time, are cheap to make and advertise products under the guise of a news report.
  #142  
Old 11-23-2012, 04:25 PM
Gerald II Gerald II is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 400
Yeah FOX News is really that bad. People already cited their bad practices. The commentators come off as not having very good critical thinking skills.

MSNBC is biased as well, but I think it hurts FOX more that they have less competent commentators like Sean Hannity, and Sarah Palin.

I wouldn't mind the bias because every commentator has their own view point but it seems like you have cable news being some organized entity for a political party and putting out the most sensationalistic personalities they can to get people into a furor.
  #143  
Old 11-23-2012, 04:33 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modern Master View Post
All the other news sources either have a liberal or conservative agenda.
I love Rachel Maddow. Her show is the only news show that I TiVo. I realize she has a liberal bias.

But I watch her religiously because I trust her with the facts. She usually offers verifiable things and in the rare event she reports something that is inaccurate, she will correct it at the soonest opportunity. Whenever she introduces a guest who is there to comment on a specific story, her first question to the guest is "Is there anything I got wrong with that?"

Michael Moore tells me what I want to hear a lot of times. I don't trust him nearly as much even though his "agenda" usually runs alongside my own.

(I know his medium is different but I cannot think of a Liberal commentator on cable news who is as cavalier with the facts as Moore and Fox News can be.)

Fox News are liars and this is proven. Fox News viewers are more likely to be uninformed or misinformed about the news they are watching and this is proven.

I hate Fox News not because they are Conservative. I hate them because they lie. And their lies make a decent percentage of the American population dumber because of it.

On a board where ignorance is the enemy, Fox News should be Enemy #1 because they are not just ignorant, they drag down a sizable part of the country into ignorance with them.
  #144  
Old 11-23-2012, 04:47 PM
Gerald II Gerald II is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 400
I don't trust Rachel Maddow. I enjoy watching her show but I won't watch it as a source for news, only to see how "the left" views a current event, or just to see how she personally views something so as to be exposed to another viewpoint.


Now, I remember CBS breaking the story, I think in 2011. I ignored it but later another forum I frequent posted a Daily Show clip about it. I started looking into it and it seemed like there was some major incompetence involved. I hadn't come across FOX News coverage of it yet, nor Darrel Issa's conspiracy theory.

She perpetuated the idea that it was a program started under Bush, which it wasn't Operation Wide Receiver was a similar program but was done in cooperation with the Mexican government. Operation Fast Furious was the same but NOT doe in cooperation with the Mexican government, among other things. She also did a timeline of how the Fast and Furious story got started by a right wing blogger, and FOX News but made no mention of CBS being the ones to break the actual story.

I don't believe FOX News or the right wing claims that it was some vast conspiracy by Obama to increase gun violence on the border in order to take away gun rights. But I don't believe it's a story that should be ignored either.

Last edited by Gerald II; 11-23-2012 at 04:51 PM.
  #145  
Old 11-23-2012, 04:57 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerald II View Post
I don't trust Rachel Maddow.
You have evidence for not trusting her? Share, please.
  #146  
Old 11-23-2012, 05:09 PM
Gerald II Gerald II is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 400
I just did. In her commentary on Fast and Furious she didn't mention CBS breaking the story and she incorrectly said Fast and Furious was a program carried over from the Bush era, which it wasn't.
  #147  
Old 11-23-2012, 05:13 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
I would like a cite.
  #148  
Old 11-23-2012, 05:15 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 14,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modern Master View Post
It's not journalism anymore; it's a business.
Since when? Since about 1791? The "fourth estate" has always been a business. They make their money from advertisers, that is how they can broadcast in the clear or sell you a paper for only 50¢. Any time a story veers into the territory of compromising an advertiser (or underwriter), it gets carefully massaged to avoid offense, unless the source feels that it is safe to lose that revenue source. Hence, the "liberal bias" is illusory when it comes to the really important stuff. This holds for all commercial news sources. The first amendment protects journalists from reprisal by the government, but not from industry (of which the media is a part).
  #149  
Old 11-23-2012, 05:30 PM
Gerald II Gerald II is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 400
December 7th 2011 CBS news story

Wiki article on gun walking scandal

Rachel Maddow first commenting on Fast and Furious

I can't find the original forum thread where the CBS story I originally came across was at, but after googling it, I think that may be the same story. I'll come back later to verify if that was the same article.

Last edited by Gerald II; 11-23-2012 at 05:32 PM.
  #150  
Old 11-23-2012, 06:06 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,465
What does Rachel Maddow have to do with CBS News?
I don't see Rachel Maddow on that Wiki page; what relevance is there?
Can you tell me the falsehood(s) in that 15 minute clip?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017