Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #701  
Old 11-27-2014, 09:37 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
(It is not as if any Fox defenders have brought anything credible to the thread or anything remotely like factual support.)
Yeah, seriously. You'd think if FOX was paying people to spread the good word of FOX, they'd get people with better arguments.
  #702  
Old 11-27-2014, 09:42 AM
tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Yeah, seriously. You'd think if FOX was paying people to spread the good word of FOX, they'd get people with better arguments.
Only if you thought that they were getting better reporters for what they are paying them. (They are getting their money's worth from their pundits who are keeping the preferred audience stirred up just fine.)
  #703  
Old 11-27-2014, 10:57 AM
Robot Arm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 23,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny L.A. View Post
instantrimshot.com
  #704  
Old 12-04-2014, 09:26 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,373
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?
  #705  
Old 12-04-2014, 09:34 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?
Nice hypothetical you've got there. Now try to match it up with reality-show us a real world example of what you are talking about with a link to a post in this thread.
  #706  
Old 12-04-2014, 09:39 AM
What the .... ?!?! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 4,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Nice hypothetical you've got there. Now try to match it up with reality-show us a real world example of what you are talking about with a link to a post in this thread.
What are you looking for exactly?

An example of Fox reporting an earthquake and someone dismissing it?

...... or Fox reporting something and lots of Dopes dismissing it?
  #707  
Old 12-04-2014, 09:46 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by What the .... ?!?! View Post
What are you looking for exactly?

An example of Fox reporting an earthquake and someone dismissing it?

...... or Fox reporting something and lots of Dopes dismissing it?
Just pointing out that Velocity hasn't a chance in hell of arguing against the very real points people have against Fox News, which is probably why arguments against hypothetical problems have started-those are easier to "win".

Last edited by Czarcasm; 12-04-2014 at 09:47 AM.
  #708  
Old 12-04-2014, 10:51 AM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,066
Also, is an earthquake in Alaska political? So what's the point of this hypothetical? Though it wouldn't entirely surprise me if Fox descended to new depths of depravity and blamed Obama for causing it!

But one seriously cannot overestimate the incredible ability of Fox News to politicize and lie about even straightforward natural events. For example, I'm reminded of this Fox News story about why solar power, which is incontrovertibly successful in Germany, will never work in the US. It's because tree-hugger lefties apparently don't know that Germany is so incredibly sunny, whereas in comparison the US gets almost no sun. It's "factual science" like this, which permeates pretty much all Fox stories about renewable energy and climate change, that explains why Fox News viewers as a group actually know less about the world than people who watch no news at all, because instead of knowing nothing they "know" a whole bunch of things that are completely wrong. Fox News is a cesspool of lies and distortions of such contrived one-sided mendacity that it's an embarrassment and disgrace to the entire business of American media.

Last edited by wolfpup; 12-04-2014 at 10:53 AM.
  #709  
Old 12-04-2014, 07:42 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 6,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?

And I can listen to the North Korean news service to get an accurate forecast for the temperature in Pyongang. What's your point? No one is saying the Fox news never tells the truth just that its reporting on political matter are heavily biased and so should be viewed with skepticism.
  #710  
Old 12-04-2014, 07:48 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?
Let's say, hypothetically, no other news network has picked up on the story. Nothing. Not even local news where the earthquake hit. Would you continue to trust FOX? The interesting thing here is that if anyone else covered it, you'd almost always have a more reputable source. It's similar to the Natural News effect - if the most reputable source you can find for a claim is a site like Natural News, it's fair to assume that the claim is bogus. Not just because Natural News is bad, but because if the claim were real, other news networks would be very likely to pick it up.

What's more, the 6.5 magnitude earthquake leaves virtually no room for political gesturing or commentary. I have no problem accepting FOX on claims like that. It's almost every other type of claim where I will insist that you find me a source that isn't so dedicated to the exclusive well-being of the republican party.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 12-04-2014 at 07:49 PM.
  #711  
Old 12-05-2014, 07:41 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
Hey, the jobs numbers are out again this morning. Every reputable news source is reporting that 321,000 jobs were gained in November in a big banner on the top of their page. It beat expectations and is very good news.

Or as Foxnews.com is reporting it: "..........." (Benghazi is their lead story this morning. I kid you not.)

Last edited by Fiveyearlurker; 12-05-2014 at 07:42 AM.
  #712  
Old 12-05-2014, 07:49 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
They have now magnanimously added a link titled "November Jobs Report" with no indication of how good or bad the numbers are (as opposed to the notoriously liberal Wall Street Journal, who titles their lead story as "U.S. Added 321,000 Jobs for Best Year Since 1999") under the subheading of "Market News" in a font approximately 30 times smaller than the word "Benghazi" that leads the news, apparently. Usually they don't bother reporting it at all, so this is a step in the right direction.

Last edited by Fiveyearlurker; 12-05-2014 at 07:51 AM.
  #713  
Old 12-05-2014, 08:56 AM
JohnGalt's Avatar
JohnGalt is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Med city USA
Posts: 2,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Hey, the jobs numbers are out again this morning. Every reputable news source is reporting that 321,000 jobs were gained in November in a big banner on the top of their page. It beat expectations and is very good news.

Or as Foxnews.com is reporting it: "..........." (Benghazi is their lead story this morning. I kid you not.)
And the first highlighted story under Latest News is "No evidence linking Christie to bridge plot, report says" (although the story does say several witnesses did not testify and "some important questions remain unanswered" - WTF?) Interesting to see what headlines they highlight in bold; they seem to be the ones that would get their base most riled up.
  #714  
Old 12-05-2014, 09:42 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
They are having a banner morning in drummed up news trying to distract from the fact that the economy is demonstrably and dramatically improved. Now their headline is "Hillary: US should empathize with foes".

This is trying to make some sort of controversial statment of Clinton's quote:

"This is what we call smart power," Clinton said to a small audience at Georgetown. "Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one's enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view. Helping to define the problems, determine the solutions. That is what we believe in the 21st century will change -- change the prospects for peace."

Which is so uncontroversial and obvious that it doesn't even bear stating. Anything to avoid the good jobs numbers.
  #715  
Old 12-05-2014, 10:14 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
Interestingly, they have since changed that title to "SYMPATHY FOR THE ENEMY? Hillary urges US to show ‘respect’ for foes".

which changes the word she actually used "empathize" to "sympathy" which is not what she said, and is really fraudulent journalism.
  #716  
Old 12-05-2014, 10:20 AM
Pashnish Ewing is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: East Harlem, NYC
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
which changes the word she actually used "empathize" to "sympathy" which is not what she said, and is really fraudulent journalism.
No, no...didn't you see the question mark?
  #717  
Old 12-05-2014, 10:22 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashnish Ewing View Post
No, no...didn't you see the question mark?
True. I forgot about that ruse.
  #718  
Old 12-05-2014, 12:32 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,066
I had to go and look at the Fox News website myself after reading the above recent posts because it's so outrageous that it's literally hard to believe. I had just been looking at the CNN site where the lead stories were actual news, like the successful first flight of the Orion spacecraft and the continuing controversy over the police killing in New York. And this is what I saw...

It's really true. The lead story on the Fox News site, the hot breaking news of the day, is that Hillary Clinton has "sympathy" for the enemy. In case some of their readers are too stupid to understand this despite the giant headline, the key point is illustrated with a sort of pictograph: two side-by-side pictures, Hillary Clinton juxtaposed with a picture of a masked ISIS fighter carrying the ISIS flag in one hand and a submachine gun in the other. Underneath the one-sentence summary of the story are four (4) smaller headlines relating to separate stories about...... Benghazi! Really, I'm not kidding. Apparently, the other breaking news of the day!

If one clicks on the "sympathy for the enemy" headline, one gets an expanded story that just simply repeats the lie, which Fox pads out by getting comments about it from handy sources. Since Fox News is "fair and balanced", they sought out two unbiased sources to give a balanced perspective. One was Karl Rove, who called Clinton's comments "the wrong language". To get a balanced view from the other side, they sought out Oliver North, a Fox News host, who called her comments "irrational".

Fox News -- the gift that keeps on giving!
  #719  
Old 12-05-2014, 12:50 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,066
In the short time since I posted the above, the following changes have occurred:

On CNN, the Orion space flight story has dropped to a lower level and the lead story is now about the growing protests in New York.

On Fox News, Hillary's love for the enemy is still the lead story, but the "Sympathy for the Enemy" headline has been replaced with the cleverly worded "Empathy for the Devil" and they managed to find an even scarier ISIS picture to put beside Hillary's. The four Benghazi stories are still there.

Last edited by wolfpup; 12-05-2014 at 12:50 PM.
  #720  
Old 12-05-2014, 01:03 PM
Robot Arm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 23,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Hey, the jobs numbers are out again this morning. Every reputable news source is reporting that 321,000 jobs were gained in November in a big banner on the top of their page. It beat expectations and is very good news.

Or as Foxnews.com is reporting it: "..........." (Benghazi is their lead story this morning. I kid you not.)
This surprises me. I would have expected them to give credit for the good economy to the newly elected Republicans in the Senate.


Never mind that they haven't been sworn in and done anything yet.
  #721  
Old 12-05-2014, 01:54 PM
leahcim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robot Arm View Post
This surprises me. I would have expected them to give credit for the good economy to the newly elected Republicans in the Senate.


Never mind that they haven't been sworn in and done anything yet.
But the economy is recovering in anticipation of them doing great things. Business owners are all like, "now that congress is going to be Republican, I feel safe going ahead and hiring, knowing that that bastard Obama will be kept in check."

I recall some commentators (can't remember if they were Fox News or not) in 2008, when the economy had been going to shit for months that this all started when Obama's candidacy in the democratic primaries was announced and people had been fleeing the markets just in case this guy became the democratic candidate and then won the the election.
  #722  
Old 12-05-2014, 03:12 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by leahcim View Post
I recall some commentators (can't remember if they were Fox News or not) in 2008, when the economy had been going to shit for months that this all started when Obama's candidacy in the democratic primaries was announced and people had been fleeing the markets just in case this guy became the democratic candidate and then won the the election.
It's true. Bush was doing everything in his power to build a terrific economy but there's only so much you can do when the fearful news that a black Muslim socialist might become President throws Job Creators™ into panic and depression.

But now the opposite is happening. There is every expectation that Mittens "the Mitt" Romney will be the next President, and now that Hillary Clinton has admitted that she is a big fan of ISIS and hates America, it's pretty much a certainty. Job Creators™ are rejoicing, cranking out jobs like crazy.

I heard all about it on Fox News.
  #723  
Old 12-05-2014, 08:38 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Velocity! callander! Deeg! Literally anyone who watches FOX News! Care to defend any of this? Care to point out cases where the rest of the "mainstream media" fucked up quite this badly?

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 12-05-2014 at 08:38 PM.
  #724  
Old 12-05-2014, 08:54 PM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
{...} What's more, the 6.5 magnitude earthquake leaves virtually no room for political gesturing or commentary. {...}
Earth Quake (D) Alaska
CMC fnord!
  #725  
Old 12-05-2014, 09:03 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by crowmanyclouds View Post
Earth Quake (D) Alaska
CMC fnord!
Why isn't there a like feature on this board.
  #726  
Old 12-05-2014, 09:19 PM
Contemporary Logic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?
From an evidence-based reasoning perspective (science); If the source isn't credible then the evidence for the data is lacking. The data you gave was based on the evidence that you heard it from Fox News. It is not an ad-hominem to point out the lack of credibility Fox News has when you cite it as a source for your argument.

It's still evidence that there was an earthquake, and to completely dismiss it as false because it came from Fox News isn't reasonable, but that isn't something most critics of Fox News do. Fox is known for filtering data and ,only sometimes, misrepresenting data. If you heard there was an earthquake in Alaska on Fox News it's probably true. The details about how Obama is mishandling the crisis are what you should be more skeptical about.
  #727  
Old 12-05-2014, 10:31 PM
Jragon's Avatar
Jragon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 10,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by leahcim View Post
But the economy is recovering in anticipation of them doing great things. Business owners are all like, "now that congress is going to be Republican, I feel safe going ahead and hiring, knowing that that bastard Obama will be kept in check."

I recall some commentators (can't remember if they were Fox News or not) in 2008, when the economy had been going to shit for months that this all started when Obama's candidacy in the democratic primaries was announced and people had been fleeing the markets just in case this guy became the democratic candidate and then won the the election.
My ex's dad went to a gun store when Obama was sworn in to stock up on ammo, because obviously Obama was going to take the guns away.

The gun store was extremely busy and almost sold out of all its ammo, and a large portion of their actual firearms too. He took this as evidence that it was happening already.

Now I often wonder if gun store owners secretly vote D on their tickets.

Last edited by Jragon; 12-05-2014 at 10:32 PM.
  #728  
Old 12-08-2014, 04:18 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.
Who did that, exactly?
  #729  
Old 12-08-2014, 08:13 AM
Revtim is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 20,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jragon View Post
My ex's dad went to a gun store when Obama was sworn in to stock up on ammo, because obviously Obama was going to take the guns away.

The gun store was extremely busy and almost sold out of all its ammo, and a large portion of their actual firearms too. He took this as evidence that it was happening already.

Now I often wonder if gun store owners secretly vote D on their tickets.
I remember the exact same shit when Clinton was elected. Wouldn't surprise me if it happened with Carter too.
  #730  
Old 12-08-2014, 09:43 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there were a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska, and Fox News reported it. If you told someone, "Hey, there was a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska this morning," and they asked, "Where you hear that from?," you responded, "Fox News," and they snorted, "You believe FOX NEWS? Seriously?", that would be attacking the source, not the data.

What if it were true - that there had been a 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Alaska?
That sort of thing I think you can believe FOX. Of course if someone told me such a thing I'd immediately check other sources to learn more about the event. FOX would no more lie about that then they would lie about who won the World Series or other factual and undeniable stories.
  #731  
Old 12-08-2014, 10:40 AM
callander is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 267
[QUOTE=Budget Player Cadet;17953797]Velocity! callander! Deeg! Literally anyone who watches FOX News! Care to defend any of this? Care to point out cases where the rest of the "mainstream media" fucked up quite this badly?[/

If you read the very first comment I made, I said yes Fox is that bad as are other networks. I think that they are both guilty of crap broadcasting and bias.

Be well
Callander

Last edited by callander; 12-08-2014 at 10:43 AM.
  #732  
Old 12-08-2014, 10:47 AM
callander is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 267
Neither FOX or CNN are my cup of tea. I gave up taking either seriously years ago if you must know.
  #733  
Old 12-08-2014, 10:58 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Velocity! callander! Deeg! Literally anyone who watches FOX News! Care to defend any of this? Care to point out cases where the rest of the "mainstream media" fucked up quite this badly?
If you read the very first comment I made, I said yes Fox is that bad as are other networks. I think that they are both guilty of crap broadcasting and bias.

Be well
Callander
Yes, and I'm saying "do you have examples that show that the other networks are even on the same level as this?" Honestly, this is like pointing to a few little flaws on RationalWiki and saying "Conservapedia is bad, as are other wikis like RationalWiki".
  #734  
Old 12-08-2014, 10:58 AM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Dismissing something out of hand because it's from Fox News is a form of ad hominem.
You seem consistently concerned with things that aren't happening.
  #735  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:01 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
[QUOTE=callander;17959120]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Velocity! callander! Deeg! Literally anyone who watches FOX News! Care to defend any of this? Care to point out cases where the rest of the "mainstream media" fucked up quite this badly?[/

If you read the very first comment I made, I said yes Fox is that bad as are other networks. I think that they are both guilty of crap broadcasting and bias.

Be well
Callander
Can you back up what you think with hard evidence? Others in this thread have.
  #736  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:04 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
Neither FOX or CNN are my cup of tea. I gave up taking either seriously years ago if you must know.
So if this were a thread saying the same thing about CNN, you'd be making the same type of posts defending it?
  #737  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:23 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
Neither FOX or CNN are my cup of tea. I gave up taking either seriously years ago if you must know.
CNN reports the job numbers whether they are good or bad. Because they are a news organization, and the monthly jobs numbers are big news. Foxnews only reports the job numbers when they are bad, because they are a disinformation organization, and reporting the jobs numbers when they are good would go against their chosen narrative.

I've shown the above statements to be accurate over the past few months in the course of this thread, with confirmation by others in this thread.

Can you find one similar example for CNN or MSNBC?
  #738  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:34 AM
callander is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 267
[QUOTE=Czarcasm;17959200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
Can you back up what you think with hard evidence? Others in this thread have.
That is lovely that others have. Are you telling me that if I don't have an hour to devote to your request, I should not post?
  #739  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:37 AM
callander is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
So if this were a thread saying the same thing about CNN, you'd be making the same type of posts defending it?
I will say it again, they are both off, who is more biased or reports nonsense more isn't the issue.
  #740  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:42 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,735
The truth is that at any given moment, you can go to foxnews.com and the lead story is likely to be something against the Democrats. Don't believe me? Right now, their lead story (Copy/paste title):

"'VIOLENCE AND DEATH':
Outrage, fear of terror hits over Dem
release of CIA interrogations report"

The "outrage" and "fear" are coming from a single GOP politician. This is not a real story.
  #741  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:46 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
I will say it again, they are both off, who is more biased or reports nonsense more isn't the issue.
It is one of the main issues of this thread that you refuse to address.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 12-08-2014 at 11:47 AM.
  #742  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:48 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,530
[QUOTE=callander;17959326]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post

That is lovely that others have. Are you telling me that if I don't have an hour to devote to your request, I should not post?
I say the words that I post. If I posted anything that sounded like that show it to me, please.
  #743  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:56 AM
callander is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 267
I am not interested in giving rebuke, those are not your words rather the tone, in which I hear you.

Have a nice day.

Be well
Callander
  #744  
Old 12-08-2014, 01:18 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
I will say it again, they are both off, who is more biased or reports nonsense more isn't the issue.
I'd say it matters quite a lot, because most of the people who watch FOX and are aware of their misdeeds tend to excuse it with "Oh, the rest of the liberal media is just as bad" or "It's not more biased than MSNBC or CNN". Two statements which are blatantly false.

Or, to put it another way, picture it like this. CNN is your politically-informed teenage nephew. He's politically active, up to date on the news, and while he occasionally gets a story or two wrong, it rarely amounts to much and he's quick to correct himself when called on it. FOX is your racist uncle. He's not really interested in politics - just furthering an agenda. The stories he tells are all pointed in one direction and usually wrong.

When talking about where to get your news, you probably wouldn't want to rely on either. But if you had to call someone out on doing something wrong, you probably wouldn't call out your nephew about mislabeling a terror attack when your uncle is in the room talking about how blacks have lower IQs.

But here's the important thing to note. No news organization is perfect. None of them. The BBC, the Guardian, and the NYT are great, and NPR (while having a slightly odd scope) is definitely on the right track, but none of them are perfect. They all have their bad apples, and they all have made mistakes. But when talking about where to get your news, judging news organizations by the standard of "perfect or not perfect" leaves you with nowhere to turn. The point of this thread is to point out that when going to news sources, you're better off in every situation turning to virtually any other mainstream source other than FOX. Their actions are completely indefensible, and consistently and considerably worse than any other network. Which makes your defense of them... Bizarre, to say the least. The claim that CNN in particular is as bad... I wish you'd come back and defend that, because I'm pretty sure you're wrong, and I'd like for you to understand that.

This kind of defense of FOX is part of the reason it's so hard to make political progress. This political centrism, this reactionary "oh, both sides do it, so everyone's equally bad".

No.

Stop.

Back up.

You're wrong.

They don't.

They're not.

FOX News is the only noteworthy mainstream news network that aims at a republican audience, and they are consistently and considerably worse than anything else on the air (unless you get Russia Today... Christ these guys are awful). I wonder if that has anything to say about the state of the modern American political divide.
  #745  
Old 12-08-2014, 02:11 PM
Lamar Mundane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,932
[QUOTE=callander;17959326]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post

That is lovely that others have. Are you telling me that if I don't have an hour to devote to your request, I should not post?
The fact that you say it would take an hour of research to compose a response is a tacit admission that you don't have any idea if what you are saying is true. If you knew it to be true, you'd know of examples that back up your assertion.
  #746  
Old 12-08-2014, 02:56 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamar Mundane View Post
The fact that you say it would take an hour of research to compose a response is a tacit admission that you don't have any idea if what you are saying is true. If you knew it to be true, you'd know of examples that back up your assertion.
I don't know if that's completely fair, he might half remember it, and need time to look into where to find the citations.

I don't think that's the case, but if I'm gonna try to refute something, I spend some time looking into it.
  #747  
Old 12-08-2014, 03:15 PM
Johnny L.A. is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 61,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
That is lovely that others have. Are you telling me that if I don't have an hour to devote to your request, I should not post?
You make a claim, you have to back it up with evidence. Them's the rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
I will say it again, they are both off, who is more biased or reports nonsense more isn't the issue.
Have you read much of this thread?

It's been pointed out several times in this thread that 'Both sides do it!' is not a valid argument. It's been pointed out that FOX News lies 49% of the time -- seven times more than CNN. So you can't use that argument if you want anyone to take you seriously. It's like saying, 'Mr. X stole $20 from a tip jar, so he should get the same punishment as Mr. Y, who robbed a bank of $50,000 at gunpoint.'
  #748  
Old 12-08-2014, 04:10 PM
Lamar Mundane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobohan View Post
I don't know if that's completely fair, he might half remember it, and need time to look into where to find the citations.

I don't think that's the case, but if I'm gonna try to refute something, I spend some time looking into it.
If he thinks he might have heard something once, then he doesn't know that every media outlet does the same thing Fox does. If he knew, he'd know. "I thought I heard something once" is not knowledge.
  #749  
Old 12-08-2014, 04:15 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamar Mundane View Post
If he thinks he might have heard something once, then he doesn't know that every media outlet does the same thing Fox does. If he knew, he'd know. "I thought I heard something once" is not knowledge.
It's close enough for FOX News.
  #750  
Old 12-08-2014, 07:07 PM
tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,912

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by callander View Post
That is ldovely that others have. Are you telling me that if I don't have an hour to devote to your request, I should not post?
This is the debate forum, not the opinion forum.

If you have nothing to bring to the discussion but your unsubstantiated opinion, then I am telling you to refrain from posting in this thread. Your constant repetition of your claim with no supporting evidence is not appropriate. Your deliberate refusal to support your claim while continuing to repeat it is beginning to look like trolling.

You do not have to spend an entire hour seeking a citation to support your claim. You also have the option of not repeating your opinion when you are unwilling to back it up.

[ /Moderating ]
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 12:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017