# Is it ok to dismiss someone for watching FOX? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 13, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593 "2010-07-13T21:21:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593/401 "2010-07-18T17:23:08Z")
How much of Fox News Channel, as part of their daily schedule, is hard news? I’m not familiar with all of their programs so I can’t know for sure myself. Can someone familiar with the channel point out on the daily schedule what is news and what isn’t? What if they’re mixed? For instance, fox and friends will cover news stories as they pop up and talk about the day’s news - but they are all ridiculous republican party cheerleaders. They’re covering news story but blatantly spouting propoganda - do they get off the hook because their show is entertainment? What about the actual news content that’s part of the show? The counterargument seems to be “From 7:31 till 7:37am, they have a hard news segment which is not horrible, therefore they are a legitimate news channel”. What are the actual ratios here of news to propoganda, and how much overlap is there? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593/402 "2010-07-18T18:01:38Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I don’t know why I bother. But here we go. > > CBS trusted a document that was not true and for two weeks, a month before the election, held to their guns and said that Bush went AWOL from his National Guard duty during the Vietnam War. > > Okay, let’s contrast that with what FNC did. > > They repeated over and over again that Obama “palled around with terrorists” for six months. They reported over and over that his priest was a black supremacist racist. Both of those are by far worse than playing hooky thirty years ago. Palled around with terrorist. Nice spin Sarah. The terrorist activities were 30 years earlier Obama had nothing to do with any of that. They were on the same educational committees. I suppose every meeting you attend can be twisted to "palling around’. Are you responsible for all the priests in your church? I guess you support pedophiles then. Bush used his heavy connections to get out of harms way in Nam. Then stayed in Texas doing blow and boozing around. He skipped physicals and doing his duty. That is just a minor miscue I suppose. ---
**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:** [July 18, 2010, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593/403 "2010-07-18T18:27:23Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > How much of Fox News Channel, as part of their daily schedule, is hard news? I’m not familiar with all of their programs so I can’t know for sure myself. Can someone familiar with the channel point out on the daily schedule what is news and what isn’t? > **[Fox News](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Programming)** > > The Fox News Channel (FNC), commonly known as Fox News, is an American multinational conservative news and political commentary television channel and website based in New York City. It is owned by Fox News Media, which itself is owned by Fox Corporation. It is the most-watched cable news network in the U.S., and as of 2023 it generates approximately 70% of its parent company's pre-tax profit. The channel broadcasts primarily from studios at 1211 Avenue of the Americas in Midtow The channel w... > [@SenorBeef](#): > > What if they’re mixed? For instance, fox and friends will cover news stories as they pop up and talk about the day’s news - but they are all ridiculous republican party cheerleaders. They’re covering news story but blatantly spouting propoganda - do they get off the hook because their show is entertainment? What about the actual news content that’s part of the show? According to the programing list in Wikipedia, Special Report is considered hard news, but even that has an “opinion from DC” section. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > The counterargument seems to be “From 7:31 till 7:37am, they have a hard news segment which is not horrible, therefore they are a legitimate news channel”. What are the actual ratios here of news to propoganda, and how much overlap is there? About 4 to 5 hours could be called a legitimate news channel, but as long as they do not correct their egregious and misleading reporting I would not call them legitimate, they are more into the [infotainment](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infotainment)camp. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593/404 "2010-07-19T15:25:16Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Sorry, not buying that. Civil rights are supposed to apply equally to both sides. I think deep down you know that. I never said civil rights shouldn’t apply equally to everyone. I do find it very interesting that you talk about “both sides” here though, as if blacks and whites are inherently on different sides. What is relevant in these situations is the effects. The effects of an isolated incidence of New Black Panthers acting as they did, which was rapidly dealt with by the authorities, is incomparably small to the effects of white racists, backed by the state, repeatedly acting to prevent people of color from exercising the franchise. > [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > I guess you are just trying to get a rise out of me; I’m neither racist nor ignorant of history. Of course there was a terrible history, and yes the civil rights and voting rights laws were put in place to change things (with more Republicans than Democrats pushing it, by the way). But, as some have said in this thread, the end does not justify the means, good for the goose, etc. I’m not trying to get a rise out of you. I’m just telling you the impression your utterly inappropriate comparison creates. And when you talk about more Republicans than Democrats pushing it, I have to smile. There’s nothing more of a misrepresentation of history than to suggest that because in the past Republicans defended civil rights advances and Democrats opposed them the current political situation is the same. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-to-dismiss-someone-for-watching-fox/546593.md?page=20)