# I was naive about Fox News **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2009, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896 "2009-09-21T01:12:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/81 "2009-09-21T18:38:49Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I would concede that point. There is no doubt that Fox News has a right wing slant. > > There is also no doubt in my mind that those other stations have a left wing slant. I don’t know how to quantify that other than just citing my own observations while watching the news programs. Right. Because if they aren’t blatantly right-wing like Fox ‘News’, they must be blatantly left-wing. It isn’t possible that CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. actually fairly and in a balanced way report the news, for FOX is right-wing, ipso facto, all else is left-wing. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/82 "2009-09-21T18:42:53Z")
The bottom line: When a news network creates, produces, sponsors and advertises an event whose purpose is to show a specific and far right point of view, a point of view held by minority, and then covers this event as “news”; When the same network consistently and repeatedly airs factually incorrect information that favors a far-right point of view; It is not simply a “point of view” that this news organization is operating as a political entity. That is, they are not right-leaning. They are an integral part of the political tools of one political party. That is the difference between FOX news and other networks. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/83 "2009-09-21T18:46:58Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > … That is not my _opinion_, it’s what God says in plain English in the Bible. And not badly written, either, considering its God’s second language… ---
**Author:** ![NajaNivea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NajaNivea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NajaNivea)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/84 "2009-09-21T18:57:53Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > How many times has Fixed News “mistakenly” put a “D” instead of an “R” next to the name of some disgraced politician? I probably shouldn’t ask, and _really_ shouldn’t be surprised at the answer… but… really? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/85 "2009-09-21T19:08:52Z")
There was [Mark Sanford, D-SC.](http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026) Then there was [Mark Foley, D-FL](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo_n_220377.html) ---
**Author:** ![NajaNivea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NajaNivea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NajaNivea)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/86 "2009-09-21T19:27:27Z")
/snicker I am, occasionally, surprised to find out that there are actual people who watch this channel and who think of it as “news”. Knowing you’re watching a right-wing fanwank and reveling in the self-promotional wankery is one thing, but watching it as a source for “news” is something entirely different. I forget sometimes that a significant chunk of their viewership isn’t in on the joke. My parents, for example. The water rights issue is an ugly one. I’m from a major rice-growing area in Northern California. You want to see a bunch of farmers get all het up, just bring up the topic of routing water to LA, and a few million people moving to a desert because they like the sunshine and then getting mad that they don’t have all the water they want (whether or not Southern California’s civilian water use is at the root of the issue left completely aside). ---
**Author:** ![bri1600bv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9fc29f/32.png) [@bri1600bv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bri1600bv)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/87 "2009-09-21T19:28:58Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Covering the event has merit. Pushing the event? Not so much. Going to the event and rallying the crowd so that it would look more enthusiastic and energetic has no merit. It’s a lie. > > So, it seems I was naive. I thought there were lines that people wouldn’t cross, the line between covering the news and being the news, reporting the news and inventing the news, filming a rally and rallying a rally. Yes, it was a LIE! One person motioning for the crowd to whoop it up, big deal. Fox is somewhat partisan, and other stations are somewhat partisan too. Do you think CBS would have done a late breaking (weekend before the election) on Juanita Brodderick’s rape allegations? Stations pick and choose what is “news” and what is “mainstream” and “outside the mainstream” every day. It’s opinion. It has to be. Yes, I guess you are naive. ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/88 "2009-09-21T19:37:56Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > There was [Mark Sanford, D-SC.](http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026) Then there was [Mark Foley, D-FL](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo_n_220377.html) That is bad…and probably intentional unless they make a mistake the other way every once in awhile. However, I have noticed on other news stations that when a Repub does something bad it is Repub name (R)…but when a Democrat does something wrong then nothing is there (no D). I consider this a lesser but similar crime. ---
**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:** [September 21, 2009, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/89 "2009-09-21T19:39:57Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > However, I have noticed on other news stations that when a Repub does something bad it is Repub name (R)…but when a Democrat does something wrong then nothing is there (no D). > > I consider this a lesser but similar crime. Cite for this ever happening? I hear righties make this claim a lot, but they never back it up. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/90 "2009-09-21T19:40:36Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > There was [Mark Sanford, D-SC.](http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026) Then there was [Mark Foley, D-FL](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo_n_220377.html) [Arlen Specter and Ted Stevens](http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2009/fox-news-makes-mark-sanford-a-democrat/), too. Either they missed their chance with Joe Wilson, or else they decided they like him. ---
**Author:** ![Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47c2d/32.png) [@Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/91 "2009-09-21T19:44:39Z")
> [@NajaNivea](#): > > (whether or not Southern California’s civilian water use is at the root of the issue left completely aside). If by “civilian” you mean residential, my understanding is that the amount used by homes is chump change compared to that needed for agriculture. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/92 "2009-09-21T19:50:44Z")
> [@bri1600bv](#): > > Do you think CBS would have done a late breaking (weekend before the election) on Juanita Brodderick’s rape allegations? If they had any reason at all to think there was any factuality behind it, sure. It would have been news and not a smear. But that latest in a long string of unfounded “allegations” had as much behind it as the “Clinton Chronicles” video. So why are you calling it comparable? BTW, “one person” matters when they’re acting under the control of a larger organization whose ethics are being questioned. Isn’t that true of Fox’s trumped-up ACORN story? Why isn’t it true of Fox itself? ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/93 "2009-09-21T19:52:59Z")
> [@bri1600bv](#): > > Yes, it was a LIE! One person motioning for the crowd to whoop it up, big deal. Fox is somewhat partisan, and other stations are somewhat partisan too. > > \ > > Stations pick and choose what is “news” and what is “mainstream” and “outside the mainstream” every day. It’s opinion. It has to be. Yes, I guess you are naive. If other stations are “somewhat partisan too,” what are other examples of stations actively behaving and promoting a partisan position or viewpoint as Fox routinely does? Selecting which stories are featured on air or in a paper doesn’t make the content of those stories opinion - given the limitations of airtime and print space, it’s just called prioritization. While there may be some bias in that prioritization, more often than not, it’s just the bias of what looks and sounds sensational and what isn’t (i.e. “if it bleeds, it leads”). The people who rant about the alleged and blatant bias at network/cable news and newspapers especially seem to have no idea what actually goes on at these places. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/94 "2009-09-21T19:54:58Z")
> [@NajaNivea](#): > > The water rights issue is an ugly one. I’m from a major rice-growing area in Northern California. You want to see a bunch of farmers get all het up, just bring up the topic of routing water to LA, and a few million people moving to a desert because they like the sunshine and then getting mad that they don’t have all the water they want (whether or not Southern California’s civilian water use is at the root of the issue left completely aside). Bring up the competing interests of fishermen, and the broader responsibility of the government to protect the environment, and, if you like, Jesus’ demand that we be its stewards as well as each others’, and you have a complex, nuanced story well worth an in-depth news analysis. But Fox picked a side to advocate for, one that has the deepest funding behind it (Big Time Agribusiness), and one that is most easily rabbleroused. At what point does one recognize them as just a flack shop for hire to the highest bidder, not a legitimate news organization? ---
**Author:** ![Translucent\_Daydream](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/translucent_daydream/32/16170_2.png) [@Translucent\_Daydream](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Translucent_Daydream)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/95 "2009-09-21T20:01:02Z")
FOX hasn’t got ads on this thread!!! (copied from the bottom after **ElvisL1ives** post: Where was Obama Born? The President was Born in Hawaii. Don’t Believe the Lies. Learn More! [www.FightTheSmears.com](http://www.FightTheSmears.com) ---
**Author:** ![NajaNivea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NajaNivea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NajaNivea)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/96 "2009-09-21T20:25:45Z")
> [@Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](#): > > If by “civilian” you mean residential, my understanding is that the amount used by homes is chump change compared to that needed for agriculture. By “civilian” I meant “non-agricultural”. The line of thought goes “you plunk a major city in the middle of a desert, you shouldn’t whine when you find out it’s dry”. Like I said, I’m not actually arguing that’s the cause of the water issue. The folks tearing off on that tangent are usually completely ignoring the fishing and environmental concerns. I’m just saying: if you want to see a bunch of NorCal farmers get all het up about water rights, just ask 'em how they feel about Los Angeles. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/97 "2009-09-21T20:28:10Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cite for this ever happening? I hear righties make this claim a lot, but they never back it up. I’ve seen it at least twice that I remember but cannot remember the offender. Minneapolis Star Tribune and Minneapolis TV news stations are the most likely. The two I remember because one scandal (for the Repub) came out soon after the other (for the Demo) and I remember noticing. Edit - One had to be the Tribune because I remember looking through the whole article looking for any mention of ‘Democrat’ and there was none where the other article mentioned ‘Republican’ several times. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/98 "2009-09-21T20:52:53Z")
Threads about Fox News and Bush lies. Is this board in a time warp back to 2002? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2009, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/99 "2009-09-22T05:38:30Z")
> [@](#): > > **Mr. Moto** : Anytime there are lines people will cross them - even people on your side of the political aisle. This is human nature, has been for millenia, and I don’t see it miraculously changing just because someone revised an ethics handbook somewhere. No one has revised the “ethics handbook” on this issue, **Mr. Moto**. The goal of the reporter or the journalist is still to report the news as accurately as possible – not to shape it, or make it. A commentator’s job is a different, but she or he is still supposed to remain uninvolved with that which is presented for an opinion. You may be present for a war that you are reporting on or even commenting on, but you shouldn’t be actively fighting that war. (Investigative pieces are still a different category with different guidelines.) I can remember how reporters and camera men agonized during the war in Southeast Asia when monks would set themselves on fire in the streets in protest of the war. The journalists wanted to step in to try to save a life, but that would have been interfering with the story and with the monk’s rights. And so the photographs of monks burning to death in the streets kept appearing in newspapers around the world. Not everyone crosses the lines so casually as the gutless wonders at Fox News. Do you not believe in professional standards anymore? BTW, I believe that Dan Rather _did_ show unprofessional conduct at times. I switched to NBC when his ego became apparent. I don’t doubt his integrity though. > [@](#): > > **magellan01** : Until then I’m going to use my time to figure out how many dozens of people from acorn have to be found guilty of a variety of shit for some to realize that the cancer stems from the organization itself. From the organization itself rather than the people they are hiring? How many people have been found guilty so far and of what? Of these, how many were on the administrative staff? **bri1600bvi** , in speaking of the farmers protesting the lack of water, you said this: > [@](#): > > …and looked to be the same sort of people at the tea party rallies… You can always tell by what they look like, can’t you? Someone else said the farm owners got their employees to protest. Maybe some of them did. Were the people at the tea party rallies Hispanic? Were these people Hispanic? I think most of the employees in the farms in the San Joanquin Valley are Hispanic. Does it matter what they look like? > [@](#): > > Stations pick and choose what is “news” and what is “mainstream” and “outside the mainstream” every day. That is an excellent point. One of the few times that I saw the press in general actually lean to the right from the middle was after the attacks of 9-11. They seemed to swallow everything whole until the “facts” started to fall apart, our military was so poorly equipped, and money was disappearing too fast. By the time of “Mission Accomplished,” the news media knew it had been “done” by a drooling geezer. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2009, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896/100 "2009-09-22T06:18:33Z")
> [@wierdaaron](#): > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM1f5xrOfGU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM1f5xrOfGU) > > Fox News took out a full page ad saying that they were the only one covering the 9/12 “rally” and CNN’s Rick Sanchez takes them to task for it. Pretty good video. This is what I thought this thread would be about. You should watch the video, but to sum it up: Fox “News” took out a full-page ad in the Washington Post with a picture of the 9/12 Teabagger rally in Washington. At the top, in big-ass type, it says “How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?” As it turns out, all of those networks covered the story, and in fact the picture in the ad _appears to have been taken by CNN_. A producer working up the crowd? Piffle. Oh, it’s horrible journalism, but nobody with any sense accuses Fox of practicing journalism these days anyway. I’d be more surprised if it didn’t happen. The ad, on the other hand, represents a new and spectacular low for Fox, and I don’t say that lightly. They’ve plumbed such depths that it can’t be easy for them to find new lows, and yet they’ve managed. **They took out a full-page ad in one of the nation’s leading newspapers which contained, in giant type, a series of outright and easily refutable lies.** There’s just no spin you can put on that to make it anything less than mind-boggling. It’s like they’re trying to see just how much complete bullshit they can get away with. (In fact, I’d say it also represents a low for the Washington Post, for accepting the ad in the first place.) But, of course, all news networks are exactly equally corrupt, so it doesn’t really matter. I mean…I mean…Dan Rather! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-naive-about-fox-news/510896.md?page=6)