# Fox News Channel is not biased **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 20, 2005, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089 "2005-06-20T18:14:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/81 "2005-06-21T16:34:07Z")
Hey, **Shodan**. Is Fox News biased or isn’t. Why won’t you just answer the question? What’s with all the dodging and angling? It’s a very simple question about what _you_ believe, not about what anyone else believes. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/82 "2005-06-21T16:45:36Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Hey, **Shodan**. Is Fox News biased or isn’t. Why won’t you just answer the question? What’s with all the dodging and angling? It’s a very simple question about what _you_ believe, not about what anyone else believes. Ummmm. He did: > [@Shodan](#): > > PS - In answer to your original question, yes. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/83 "2005-06-21T16:52:22Z")
> [@Sophistry and Illusion](#): > > I’m going to have to disagree with that. If Fox News is peddling itself as a news source, it has an obligation to be objective. And it advertises and promotes itself as an objective news source. I suppose you could say that as a private business they have no obligation to be honest either. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/84 "2005-06-21T16:54:09Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Ummmm. He did: Oops. Missed it. Sorry, **Shodan**. ---
**Author:** ![js\_africanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@js\_africanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/js_africanus)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/85 "2005-06-21T17:01:26Z")
Here is an attempt to create an objective measure of media bias. Before anyone spouts off about how impossible that is, read it. It is a newer version than the one I originally read, so caveat lector: in the copy I read the authors used Congress’s political leaning as the measure of where the political midpoint is, rather than using the midpoint of the scale measuring political leanings. In that regard, the conclusions of the paper were a huge non-sequitor. Regardless, the method is interesting and insightful, and the results are worth looking at. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/86 "2005-06-21T17:20:58Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Well, if you answered my original question that Yes, Fox News is biased, why are you asking me if I believe it too and based on what evidence? If there is enough evidence out there to convince even you that Fox News is biased, wouldn’t it stand to reason that I would agree, for many of the same reasons (in addition to all the ones stated in this thread). Other than celebrating the wonderful meeting of the minds we share on this one issue, why would you ask that? Because, as must be obvious, I am setting you up. Now I have gotten you to say that you think Fox News is biased. My immediate response is, cite? You can mention statements from insiders at Fox News. You will then be required to justify why you believe them, and not insiders at CBS and elsewhere who say that other media are biased, but to the left. Or you can mention studies showing comments from opinion journalists at Fox are more often coming from the right. And then you can be asked why such examples establish right-wing bias at Fox, but not left-wing bias in the rest of the media. And so on. What I am trying to do (and what I assume **Bricker** is trying to do in his OP) is establish what you consider unassailable evidence of bias. That standard can then be applied to the rest of the media. So let’s see the evidence. Bring forth your proof that Fox is biased to the right. We can then apply the same rhetorical devices to this proof as is applied so freely to evidence of bias to the left, and see if any stands up. And, if you please, let’s not try to change the topic to “first you prove that the rest of the media is left-wing”. First we need a consistent standard of proof. Let’s see you do that with Fox. We can go on from there. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/87 "2005-06-21T17:23:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Because, as must be obvious, I am setting you up. We’re all staggered. If **Hamlet** does what he should and points you to the information posted above about Fox viewers being significantly misinformed, what will you say to that? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/88 "2005-06-21T17:30:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Because, as must be obvious, I am setting you up. > > Now I have gotten you to say that you think Fox News is biased. My immediate response is, cite? > > You can mention statements from insiders at Fox News. You will then be required to justify why you believe them, and not insiders at CBS and elsewhere who say that other media are biased, but to the left. Or you can mention studies showing comments from opinion journalists at Fox are more often coming from the right. And then you can be asked why such examples establish right-wing bias at Fox, but not left-wing bias in the rest of the media. And so on. > > What I am trying to do (and what I assume **Bricker** is trying to do in his OP) is establish what you consider unassailable evidence of bias. That standard can then be applied to the rest of the media. > > So let’s see the evidence. Bring forth your proof that Fox is biased to the right. We can then apply the same rhetorical devices to this proof as is applied so freely to evidence of bias to the left, and see if any stands up. > > And, if you please, let’s not try to change the topic to “first you prove that the rest of the media is left-wing”. First we need a consistent standard of proof. Let’s see you do that with Fox. We can go on from there. > > Regards, > Shodan And hence, my problem with this entire idiotic thread. Both you and Bricker know that Fox News is biased. But rather than dealing with the stance of whether or not NPR is biased and the evidence supporting that stance, a new thread is started with an assertion that the poster doesn’t even believe. I wish there was a name for such an action … Feel free to play these little games. They’re not interesting. They’re not honest. If you can’t make your point in the NPR thread and provide evidence there, it’s silly to start a new thread. Personally, I think it’s incredibly stupid to do so when there is an entire thread devoted to the real issue you are discussing, but, as they say, there isn’t a rule against being stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/89 "2005-06-21T17:30:20Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > We can then apply the same rhetorical devices to this proof as is applied so freely to evidence of bias to the left, and see if any stands up. Yup. Just what I thought the [del]little barking pugs[/del] pubs would say, as I pointed out in post 18. They refuse to believe good point are made in past threads, but instead, rhetorical tricks. They think every thing that contradicts the republican way of life is wrongheaded. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/90 "2005-06-21T17:32:15Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > We’re all staggered. If **Hamlet** does what he should and points you to the information posted above about Fox viewers being significantly misinformed, what will you say to that? If there was a real issue of whether Fox News is biased or whether it’s viewers are misinformed, I’d have done it. Personally, I see no reason to further prove something that neither Bricker nor Shodan actually believe. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/91 "2005-06-21T17:35:22Z")
make that _disprove_ something that neither Bricker nor Shodan actually believe. ---
**Author:** ![js\_africanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@js\_africanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/js_africanus)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/92 "2005-06-21T17:45:09Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > If there was a real issue of whether Fox News is biased… > [@](#): > > Rankings based on distance from center: > > 1 Jim Leher News Hour > . > . > . > 5 Fox News’ Special Report with Brit Hume > . > . > . > 20 Wall Street Journal Granted the proxy they use misses a lot of important information. Yet the analysis should be considered in the context of the debate. And this is from a guy (i.e., me) who hates Fox “News”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/93 "2005-06-21T17:56:38Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > And hence, my problem with this entire idiotic thread. Both you and Bricker know that Fox News is biased. But rather than dealing with the stance of whether or not NPR is biased and the evidence supporting that stance, a new thread is started with an assertion that the poster doesn’t even believe. I wish there was a name for such an action … We are dealing with it. This thread is an attempt to set the ground rules for the NPR debate. And to make some effort to ensure that the goal posts don’t get moved every time the debate switches from left-wing to right-wing bias. The fact that you aren’t willing to be upfront about your standards of evidence gives valuable information as well. > [@Hamlet](#): > > If you can’t make your point in the NPR thread and provide evidence there, it’s silly to start a new thread. That’s exactly the point - what do you consider “evidence”? And why do you accept it in some instances, and not in others? > [@Hamlet](#): > > Personally, I think it’s incredibly stupid to do so when there is an entire thread devoted to the real issue you are discussing, but, as they say, there isn’t a rule against being stupid. However, there are rules against calling another Doper stupid, and accusations of trolling, albeit disguised. Again, the fact that this is apparently the best you can do tells us volumes about the strength of your position and your arguments. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/94 "2005-06-21T18:02:20Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > However, there are rules against calling another Doper stupid, and accusations of trolling, albeit disguised. Do you find it hard to read? He was saying " I think it’s incredibly stupid to do so" The “do so” was the action of starting a new thread. That doesn’t involving calling another person stupid, just their actions. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/95 "2005-06-21T18:09:24Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > We are dealing with it. This thread is an attempt to set the ground rules for the NPR debate. And to make some effort to ensure that the goal posts don’t get moved every time the debate switches from left-wing to right-wing bias. > > The fact that you aren’t willing to be upfront about your standards of evidence gives valuable information as well. > > That’s exactly the point - what do you consider “evidence”? And why do you accept it in some instances, and not in others? Seeing as how I haven’t taken a stand either way in the NPR thread or one here only when asked, should have told you something too. But you’d rather use cheap shots, idiotic non-sequitors, and intimations about the baseless conclusions you want to draw. I see your “debating” tactics haven’t changes since the last time I was in the unfortunate position of having to deal with you. > [@Shodan](#): > > However, there are rules against calling another Doper stupid, and accusations of trolling, albeit disguised. **Bricker** is not stupid. Starting this thread (or jumping on the bandwagon) is stupid. See the difference? > [@Shodan](#): > > Again, the fact that this is apparently the best you can do tells us volumes about the strength of your position and your arguments. > > Regards, > Shodan And, again, I haven’t even taken a position or made any arguments on whether or not NPR is biased. That’s utterly beside my point regarding your and Bricker’s conduct in this thread. Which, by the by, has gone from stupid to pathetic. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/96 "2005-06-21T18:14:52Z")
> [@Sophistry and Illusion](#): > > If Fox News is peddling itself as a news source, it has an obligation to be objective. But, um . . . why? > [@](#): > > People form opinions and make political decisions on the basis of information they receive from the news media. And I don’t buy this as an answer. People form their opinions on lots of bases–many of them quite silly. > [@](#): > > Journalists have moral obligations. Again, why? ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/97 "2005-06-21T18:26:23Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Just what I thought the [del]little barking pugs[/del] pubs would say, as I pointed out in post 18. **Moderator’s Note:** Yes, the lineout is neat; no, it isn’t a magical rules circumventer. So cool it. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/98 "2005-06-21T18:31:49Z")
> [@Uncommon Sense](#): > > Fox news is biased. **Bricker** is not disputing that. He wants to get to use the same arguments to defend the calls of Fox’s bias from those that defend the alleged non-bias of NPR. This train of thought is why I’m here. I want to know exactly what sort of arguments he is talking about. Does he feel he was treated unfairly in the other thread? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/99 "2005-06-21T18:32:27Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > **Moderator’s Note:** Yes, the lineout is neat; no, it isn’t a magical rules circumventer. I never thought it was. I just figured there is not such a large leap between calling republicans “Pubs”, and calling them “pugs”, as in that kind of small dog. I am not calling any one person anything non-allowed, just a group, and even that I have a problem seeing your point, but none the less… > [@](#): > > So cool it. I will indeed cool it. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089/100 "2005-06-21T18:35:17Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Nonsense - MediaMatters is obviously a liberal organization, complaining that Fox is not biased as far off center as they are. > > Regards, > Shodan **Shodan** , have you read the information contained in the cite before you dismissed it off hand? When you offered a cite you believed showed liberal bias, I at least took the time to read it and ask questions about it. Maybe you should do the same. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-news-channel-is-not-biased/309089.md?page=6)