# Is Fox News really all that bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 3, 2012, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625 "2012-10-03T21:14:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/281 "2013-10-18T20:36:38Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > I see. You think deliberately attempting to target children for harassment, threats, and violence is an anecdote not worth commenting on, and that defending hate groups is less than other media do. > > What hate groups have MSNBC defended? What subset of Americans does MSNBC think deserve to be deported, or are all terrorists? Are you prepared to say that no other MSM has ever done something similar to what you claim Fox has done? They’ve never photo-shopped a picture to make opponents look bad? They’ve never falsely reported a story as true that was made up by someone else? ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/282 "2013-10-18T20:40:37Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Are you prepared to say that no other MSM has ever done something similar to what you claim Fox has done? They’ve never photo-shopped a picture to make opponents look bad? They’ve never falsely reported a story as true that was made up by someone else? No other? No. I am pretty sure I directly specified I was not saying “no other” in my mention of Nancy Grace. Why do you try to get me to agree to something that I already said I disagreed with? ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/283 "2013-10-18T20:43:06Z")
Then we both agree that other MSM are biased like Fox. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/284 "2013-10-18T20:51:14Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Are you prepared to say that no other MSM has ever done something similar to what you claim Fox has done? They’ve never photo-shopped a picture to make opponents look bad? They’ve never falsely reported a story as true that was made up by someone else? Well, the thing is that when the FOX scandal appeared they were not able to produce any relevant or useful examples of other mainstream sources doing the same assholish move. I think there are example of modified images elsewhere, but not with the purposely made distortions made to the FOX images. ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/285 "2013-10-18T20:52:45Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Then we both agree that other MSM are biased like Fox. That’s not what I said either, though. “Fox did this a dozen times, MSNBC did this once, they’re both basically the same” doesn’t cut it for me. I will, however, ask proof for the two following: -That CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and whatever other media you choose as “mainstream” have ever defended an organization as vile as the ones Fox are defending. -That CNN, MSNBC, NPR, have ever photoshopped pictures of somebody else’s face to portray them in a negative light. The only thing I can think of is the Time magazine blackening of OJ Simpson. (I don’t consider the “kayaking during ankle-high flood” stuff to count, here). Because while I won’t go for the stab you seem to be aiming for, those two I HIGHLY doubt are done by anybody else. Also, I consider there to be a HUGE difference between falsely reporting a story, and falsely reporting a story that is specifically opening up a child for harassment, abuse, and violence. This is the equivalent to publishing a story put out by the KKK naming and attacking a specific person - _only targeting a child_. Decent news organizations - decent people - just wouldn’t do that. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/286 "2013-10-18T20:54:12Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Then we both agree that other MSM are biased like Fox. Again, as per your own words, you are contradicting yourself, just on the Climate change alone as you admitted; but then there is plenty of evidence on how extreme FOX is on the moon hoax, the health care issue, and the latest government shutdown. ---
**Author:** ![Uncle\_Jocko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/uncle_jocko/32/2932_2.png) [@Uncle\_Jocko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncle_Jocko)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/287 "2013-10-18T22:05:37Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Then we both agree that other MSM are biased like Fox. Even if we agree the “MSM” is biased to the left - and I refuse to totally accept that premise - wouldn’t the best response to that purportedly slanted coverage be a news organization that actually _was_ “fair and balanced” for reals? If Fox lived up to its marketing slogan, and actually reported news in an unbiased, truth-seeking fashion, they’d have my respect and would no doubt still be a successful media enterprise. Instead, it’s flat-out admitted by many that they just slant their coverage rightward (in a supposed counter to the socialistic coverage of MSNBC and CNN and ABC and … every other broadcast news outlet there is), slant it so hard that they’re basically a propaganda arm of the Republican Party. How is that a good thing? Countering what you see as lies and misrepresentations by the other side with lies and misrepresentations of your own is no way to gain respect or acknowledgement as a “balanced” news organization. It locks in a lot of viewers, naturally, because people love to hear validations of what they already believe - but you’re no better than a reflection of how biased and slanted you think the _other_ side is. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/288 "2013-10-18T22:18:10Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > That’s not what I said either, though. “Fox did this a dozen times, MSNBC did this once, they’re both basically the same” doesn’t cut it for me. > > I will, however, ask proof for the two following: > > -That CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and whatever other media you choose as “mainstream” have ever defended an organization as vile as the ones Fox are defending. > > -That CNN, MSNBC, NPR, have ever photoshopped pictures of somebody else’s face to portray them in a negative light. The only thing I can think of is the Time magazine blackening of OJ Simpson. (I don’t consider the “kayaking during ankle-high flood” stuff to count, here). IMO you’re pulling out specific examples that you know of, not remembering any incidences in your media, and calling Fox biased. Dan Rather backed a bogus report because it attacked Bush. IMO Zimmerman got shafted by the media with the stupid “white hispanic” nonsense and they way he was portrayed. You don’t think another media has had a reporter defend, say, the Muslim Brotherhood? Like I said, Fox is biased in a way that runs counter to your own beliefs. You dislike Fox for that reason. But that doesn’t make them _more_ unbiased. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/289 "2013-10-18T22:22:15Z")
> [@Uncle\_Jocko](#): > > Even if we agree the “MSM” is biased to the left - and I refuse to totally accept that premise - wouldn’t the best response to that purportedly slanted coverage be a news organization that actually _was_ “fair and balanced” for reals? If Fox lived up to its marketing slogan, and actually reported news in an unbiased, truth-seeking fashion, they’d have my respect and would no doubt still be a successful media enterprise. > > Instead, it’s flat-out admitted by many that they just slant their coverage rightward (in a supposed counter to the socialistic coverage of MSNBC and CNN and ABC and … every other broadcast news outlet there is), slant it so hard that they’re basically a propaganda arm of the Republican Party. How is that a good thing? > > Countering what you see as lies and misrepresentations by the other side with lies and misrepresentations of your own is no way to gain respect or acknowledgement as a “balanced” news organization. It locks in a lot of viewers, naturally, because people love to hear validations of what they already believe - but you’re no better than a reflection of how biased and slanted you think the _other_ side is. I mostly agree–“Fair and Balanced” is a BS marketing slogan but do we pass judgment on the other slogans? CNN calls itself (among other things) the best political team on TV. That’s also marketing BS. They’re all biased and Fox isn’t any worse than the others. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/290 "2013-10-18T22:31:01Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I am no fan of Fox, but that hardly makes your point. > The quote is from a defense attorney, (whether of one of the two boys involved is not stated), and the Fox News host immediately jumps on his claim as bullshit. For once, someone in Fox News was acting responsibly. You invite someone on your show as a guest, maybe their opinions are not necessarily the same as yours but it does reflect on you. It’s one thing for someone who is somewhat newsworthy to have repugnant views and give them a forum for them. A politician comes on and says something crazy, well, that person was there for a reason. You have someone involved with a news story on your show and everyone knows why they are there. But who the fuck was this guy? He wasn’t someone who was a part of a news story. He wasn’t a witness to something that was newsworthy. He was just a guy, their “expert” (as Jon Stewart famously said “[Who the fuck is that guy?](http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-22-2008/who-the-f--k-is-that-guy----political-experts)”). There are a hundred more qualified people to have on as a guest. So who do they choose? Some sleazy guy who says crap like this. It’s even better this way. They can have someone provide “expert analysis” yet still distance themselves as if they are above the fray. And they invite him back, [again and again](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Joseph+DiBenedetto+Fox+News&oq=Joseph+DiBenedetto+Fox+News&gs_l=youtube.12...8890.10648.0.11722.9.9.0.0.0.0.59.419.9.9.0...0.0...1ac.1.11.youtube.9VAYfggapRQ). ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/291 "2013-10-18T22:37:32Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > IMO you’re pulling out specific examples that you know of, not remembering any incidences in your media, and calling Fox biased. Dan Rather backed a bogus report because it attacked Bush. IMO Zimmerman got shafted by the media with the stupid “white hispanic” nonsense and they way he was portrayed. You don’t think another media has had a reporter defend, say, the Muslim Brotherhood? > > Like I said, Fox is biased in a way that runs counter to your own beliefs. You dislike Fox for that reason. But that doesn’t make them _more_ unbiased. “You don’t think? You don’t think?” I don’t know, why don’t you try providing some evidence that supports your position that justifies your defense of an organization that aids a hate group in their attack on children? Sure - show me some examples of news reporters defending the Muslim Brotherhood and statements of belief from the Muslim Brotherhood that put them on par with an organization that says that gay people are terrorists and specifically advocates for the deportation of all Muslims. Put up or shut up. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/292 "2013-10-18T22:37:54Z")
Oh goodie! Some both-sides-are-bad (but Fox ain’t so bad) fan boys are here! Maybe they can answer on the post I made some time ago that went ignored. Here, let me repeat myself: [People who watch Comedy Central are better informed than people who watch Fox News](http://thinkprogress.org/default/2007/04/16/11946/daily-show-fox-knowledge/) 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? > [@](#): > > 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](http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/) That was from earlier this year. During the 2010 election, another study found similar results: > [@](#): > > 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](http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php) Even way back in 2003 with regard to the Iraq War, you had this study come out: > [@](#): > > 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](http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php) These are [a few of the several surveys](http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/22/374434/fox-news-viewers-misinformed-study-jon-stewart/) 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: [LIST=A] [li]Fox News is really bad at informing their viewers.[/li][li]Fox News is really good at misinforming their viewers[/li][li]Fox News viewers are mostly mouth-breathers.[/li][li]A combination of any or all of the above.[/li][/LIST] 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?” ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/293 "2013-10-18T23:13:09Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > 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?” They have the hottest women. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/294 "2013-10-18T23:21:13Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > They’re all biased and Fox isn’t any worse than the others. This has been shown to be false time and time again. ---
**Author:** ![Aquadementia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aquadementia/32/555_2.png) [@Aquadementia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aquadementia)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/295 "2013-10-18T23:33:24Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I mostly agree–“Fair and Balanced” is a BS marketing slogan but do we pass judgment on the other slogans? CNN calls itself (among other things) the best political team on TV. That’s also marketing BS. > > They’re all biased and Fox isn’t any worse than the others. CNN doesn’t have the same Orwellian sense of humor. They don’t have one guy writing about sports on their web site and call that the best political team on tv. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/296 "2013-10-18T23:53:37Z")
Yes, MSNBC is just as bad as Fox. Every time Fox did a story about what Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers said 30 years ago, MSNBC would counter with something Bush or Cheney said that day. Completely equivalent. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2013, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/297 "2013-10-19T01:19:00Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > You invite someone on your show as a guest, maybe their opinions are not necessarily the same as yours but it does reflect on you. Meh. Any news outlet has a handful of “go to” people for getting “expert opinions” in a field. Given the topic, the response of the lawyer seems more than a bit odd. He might have provided decent, (or even Right-leaning) perspectives on multiple previous occasions and wound up surprising the Fox employee with his claim, this time. I am hardly an expert on “experts,” but the one time I was interviewed on TV, the interviewer had no idea what I was going to say and simply asked questions. There was neither a vetting process nor a preparatory interview. Beyond that, what point do you think they were trying to make with the interview as it actually played out? “_Look! Even we Fox people can recognize stupid, nasty ideas when we hear them!_”? Had the lawyer’s victim-bashing been allowed to stand, I could see a case that the Fox station was trying to use a third party to slip in some nasty comments with plausible deniability. However, with the way the interviewer responded, the worst case scenario that I could see would be some sort of stealth attack on defense lawyers where that idiot was held up as an example of “typical” defense tactics. Do we have any evidence that that occurred? And if it did, it still did not amount to Fox condemning the victim, even in an underhanded way. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2013, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/298 "2013-10-19T01:28:22Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Yes, MSNBC is just as bad as Fox. Every time Fox did a story about what Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers said 30 years ago, MSNBC would counter with something Bush or Cheney said that day. Completely equivalent. Are you serious? Without knowing the accuracy and content of those stories there’s absolutely no proof from your example that they’re equivalent - or did I just get whooshed? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/299 "2013-10-19T02:15:34Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > Are you serious? > Without knowing the accuracy and content of those stories there’s absolutely no proof from your example that they’re equivalent - or did I just get whooshed? You just got whooshed. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2013, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/300 "2013-10-19T02:58:25Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > This has been shown to be false time and time again. I’ll respond to just this one. Please, show me a cite of an independent study. The only one I’ve seen is the one that GIGO posted but it was limited to just AGW. I posted cites to two independent studies that show Fox to be less biased. I have no stake in this; I don’t watch Fox nor do I care about it in particular. My #1 news source is NPR. I’m only putting up a fight here because, when looking into this because of an argument with a friend, the only studies I found that weren’t just a list of anecdotes were the ones I listed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=16)