Fox News (aka Fake News)

[CKFresh]

Fox News is very successful for a number of reasons:

1. They have one large audience, conservatives, who ONLY watch Fox News to get there news information. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to get their news from multiple sources. There is no single "liberal" station that all liberals watch.

2. In addition, people like me (liberal as can be) watch Fox News. I watch Bill O'Reilly every chance I get. He cracks me up. Same with Hannity. I am continually amazed at the uncompromising, extremely bias, unprofessional form of "journalism" that they display over at Fox News.

3. And finally, they are the most entertaining news station. People get bored with the facts over and over again. It is the same reason fiction books sell more than text books. People want to be entertained and see drama, the straight up news is just boring.

You know what amazes me? There are many people out there who will tell you, "Fox News is Fair and Balanced." So that means that there are actually people out there who feel Fox News is presenting both sides of the situation fairly and equally. That, my friends, is a scary thought...
It is no wonder over 60% of their viewers still think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.

I own a movie called OutFoxed (http://www.outfoxed.org/). You should check it out.

[catman]

Fresh, ridiculing a legitimate news source does no one any good at all. Are you saying that Fox lies?
Mind you, I do not watch Fox (it is available on my satellite, but I'm not sure where it is). You have more knowledge about the content than I have in any case.

[IntheNet]

I am continually amazed at the uncompromising, extremely bias, unprofessional form of "journalism" that they display over at Fox News...

Examples please of "uncompromising," "bias," and "unprofessional" or your post is simply an opinion.

[catman]

I usually watch CNN for my news, if I watch any news channel. They will at least report on the stories I find to be important. I will take their reports for what they are worth and look for more info on the net about the topics.

[CKFresh]

Are you saying that Fox lies?

No they just mislead their viewers, without blantantly lying.

Examples please of "uncompromising," "bias," and "unprofessional"

uncompromising - Fox News continually claims that the ACLU has NEVER represent or supported a Christian group. Yet when the ACLU recently defended the Phelps family (godhates***s.com) and their right to protest, Fox News never corrected it's claim, and to this day they claim the ACLU does not represent Christians.

bias - The two most prominent and "respected" personalities are Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, both of which are blantantly conservative. In addition, Brit Hume and Neil Cavuto are both blatantly conservative. Ruppert Murdock is a life long republican who contributes millions to conservative causes. Here's an assignment. Whenever there is news from the white house, watch Fox News, then read the white house official report. They will be identical. Fox News doesn't objectively report what comes from the white house, the simply repeat the words they are told to say. That's not journalism. We already have a press secretary for the president.

unprofessional - Well, Bill O'Reilly calls his guest to "shut up" quite often. Sean Hannity calls liberal guest "stupid." Is that professional journalism to you?

[DETMURDS]

Fox News is the only news that is fair and balanced. They always have dems, and various other types of left wingers on thier programs. Fox asks the questions that I would ask,...sad to say though that many tap dance all around any serious questions when asked. Rarely will you see this on CNN or any other news source with right wing republicans.

[CKFresh]

Fox News is the only news that is fair and balanced. They always have dems, and various other types of left wingers on thier programs. Fox asks the questions that I would ask,...sad to say though that many tap dance all around any serious questions when asked. Rarely will you see this on CNN or any other news source with right wing republicans.

DETMURDS, I expect comments like that from IntheNet, but come on, I expect more from you. I am willing to admit that MSNBC leans to the left. I am willing to admit that the New York Times is liberal. Please, do some research and watch Fox News objectively. Pretend to be a liberal while watching Fox News. I understand that as a conservative, Fox News is appealing to you, but I can assure you they are not fair and balanced in any way. Why do you think certain liberals won't appear on Fox News? Look at Ruppert Murdock and his history. Look at the employees of Fox News, many worked directly on the Bush campaign.

Please rethink your opinion. Its ok to like Fox News, but you are just lying to yourself if you think they are fair in anyway.

[DETMURDS]

DETMURDS, I expect comments like that from IntheNet, but come on, I expect more from you. I am willing to admit that MSNBC leans to the left. I am willing to admit that the New York Times is liberal. Please, do some research and watch Fox News objectively. Pretend to be a liberal while watching Fox News. I understand that as a conservative, Fox News is appealing to you, but I can assure you they are not fair and balanced in any way. Why do you think certain liberals won't appear on Fox News? Look at Ruppert Murdock and his history. Look at the employees of Fox News, many worked directly on the Bush campaign.

Please rethink your opinion. Its ok to like Fox News, but you are just lying to yourself if you think they are fair in anyway.

I watch Fox News almost all day/every day. Other news channels are talking about horse crap like false global warming, and morale being bad for those fighting in the war. I want to hear what is happening, not opinions all day.

Instead of me researching my one network, (Ruppert Murdock, and Fox News history) how about you waking up and see how bias the rest of the media is. The Dems run the entertainment world, majority of the media, encourages bottom feeders a chance to complain, and raise hell,....all about nothing too!

CNN: Clinton News Network
CBS: Communist Broadcasting System
60 Minutes: Of living Hell!


Oh well,...."Clinton Happens"!

[CKFresh]

Live your life telling yourself that Fox News is fair, and you will become more ignorant. Acknowledge that you are watching talking heads for the republican party and you will become more enlightened. It's hard to find **** in the dark, I'm just trying to be your flash light.

[IntheNet]

Quick work to effectively negate your examples...

EXAMPLE ON UNCOMPROMISING: "...Yet when the ACLU recently defended the Phelps family..."

The Phelps family is not Christian nor illustrative of Christians.

EXAMPLE ON BIAS: "...both of which are blantantly conservative..."

It is not difficult to find hundreds of journalists that are "blatantly" liberal. Matter of fact, most of them are.

EXAMPLE ON UNPROFESSIONAL: "...calls his guest to "shut up" quite often..."

The New York Times routinely castigates our president and vice president with far worse but I don't see you at all upset.

[CKFresh]

The Phelps family is not Christian nor illustrative of Christians.

Well they run a Christian Church, so once again you'd be wrong.

It is not difficult to find hundreds of journalists that are "blatantly" liberal. Matter of fact, most of them are.

What does that have to do with Fox News? I am not arguing that other media sources are balanced, most are biased one way or another.

Fox News highlights their conservative hosts, and their "stars" are conservative.

Forget other media sources, because they have nothing to do with the argument. Once again, I have no dog in that fight. Argue that CNN is liberal, all you want, it doesn't make Fox News any more fair or balanced.

The New York Times routinely castigates our president and vice president with far worse but I don't see you at all upset.

Example?

(Editorials don't count of course, considering editorials can say anything they want.)

[CKFresh]

IntheNet, DETMURDS.

Do you remember when the Mark Foley scandal broke? Fox News ran the story the ENTIRE day with a "(D)" next to his name, implying he was a democrat. This wasn't for a minuet, or two, it was the entire day. Was this a typo? Maybe, but even if it was, they sure didn't rush to fix it. I think this is a very obvious example of how Fox News misleads their viewers.

Can you also explain why 60% of their viewers still believe that SADDAM HUSSEIN was behind the attacks on 9/11?

[DETMURDS]

IntheNet, DETMURDS.

Do you remember when the Mark Foley scandal broke? Fox News ran the story the ENTIRE day with a "(D)" next to his name, implying he was a democrat. This wasn't for a minuet, or two, it was the entire day. Was this a typo? Maybe, but even if it was, they sure didn't rush to fix it. I think this is a very obvious example of how Fox News misleads their viewers.

Can you also explain why 60% of their viewers still believe that SADDAM HUSSEIN was behind the attacks on 9/11?

60%? Prove it?

The Mark Foley mistake makes Fox News misleading? Is that the best you can do?

[CKFresh]

60%? Prove it?

Disprove it... I read it in a magazine, I guess we can forget that number as mark it as "unreliable" because I can not find a source on the web.

The Mark Foley mistake makes Fox News misleading? Is that the best you can do?

"Mistake?" Are you kidding? The ENTIRE DAY he had a (D) next to his name. A mistake would be 5 minuets of a (D) next to his name. That wasn't the case. Either they are idiots who can't get anything right, or they are blatantly misleading their viewers, you tell me which one. I don't think they are idiots...

[DETMURDS]

Disprove it... I read it in a magazine, I guess we can forget that number as mark it as "unreliable" because I can not find a source on the web.



"Mistake?" Are you kidding? The ENTIRE DAY he had a (D) next to his name. A mistake would be 5 minuets of a (D) next to his name. That wasn't the case. Either they are idiots who can't get anything right, or they are blatantly misleading their viewers, you tell me which one. I don't think they are idiots...


I wouldn't consider "High Times" magazine as a legit source!:lol:

[CKFresh]

I can hardly consider "High Times" magazine as a legit source!:lol:

LOL, I haven't heard of that magazine since high school. :lol:

That's a funny organization. I like the fact that they try to be actual journalists, as if anyone would take them seriously... They actually had an article a couple of years ago titled, "Who REALLY killed MLK?" :lol: HighTimes cracked the case of Martin Luther King... priceless...

I put Fox News one level above High Times, but just one level :D

[DETMURDS]

LOL, I haven't heard of that magazine since high school. :lol:

That's a funny organization. I like the fact that they try to be actual journalists, as if anyone would take them seriously... They actually had an article a couple of years ago titled, "Who REALLY killed MLK?" :lol: HighTimes cracked the case of Martin Luther King... priceless...

I put Fox News one level above High Times, but just one level :D

I knew you would like that one!:lol: Just one level,..c'mon buddy?:lol:

[CKFresh]

I knew you would like that one!:lol: Just one level,..c'mon buddy?:lol:

Well, you have to on drugs to believe either one :lol:

Just kiddin', Fox News can be enjoyable when sober...

[buckeyefan78]

O'Reilly vs. Geraldo...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h1qGdv9lWQ

[catman]

No comparison. O'Reilly wins, hands down. Geraldo was decent until he started believing he was and decided to stop doing investigative reporting. Now, he just does "fluff" pieces that make him look good.

[Montrovant]

What the hell were they talking about? The fight loses some of it's fun when I don't know :P

I'm not going to say anything about Rivera, but does O'Reilly do 'investigative reporting'? I thought he was mostly an editorial kind of guy.

[IntheNet]

No comparison. O'Reilly wins, hands down. Geraldo was decent until he started believing he was and decided to stop doing investigative reporting.


I agree; Bill won this discussion since he let Geraldo rant than answered him directly, slightly more calmly, point by point! What I don't understand about geraldo is how he turn a blind eye to illegal aliens. I know he is Hispanic but still... the guilt here is pretty clear! There is a sizable population in this nation quite wiling to let illegal aliens rape and kill at will before raising a finger to do anything. That's just wrong!

[Montrovant]

I agree; Bill won this discussion since he let Geraldo rant than answered him directly, slightly more calmly, point by point! What I don't understand about geraldo is how he turn a blind eye to illegal aliens. I know he is Hispanic but still... the guilt here is pretty clear! There is a sizable population in this nation quite wiling to let illegal aliens rape and kill at will before raising a finger to do anything. That's just wrong!

I'm not sure O'Reilly was at all calmer in this :)

And wtf, raping and killing? Who's ok with that?

[IntheNet]

And wtf, raping and killing? Who's ok with that?

In my opinion, it seems you are not familiar with this case and the illegal alien Bill was talking about. You might also wish to research the mayor of the city concerned, which seems to shield illegal aliens (based on past performance and case files). Nobody is "ok" with raping and killing, that is why Bill wants more proactive steps in this regard. Geraldo was the one giving a pass to illegals who are not prosecuted.

[Montrovant]

You're right, I'm not familiar with the case, I did actually ask what they were talking about :)

You said 'There is a sizable population in this nation quite wiling to let illegal aliens rape and kill at will before raising a finger to do anything.' That's the statement I was wondering about.

From what little I DO know about this, I agree that the person should have been at least jailed if not deported prior to this. On the other hand, I don't know enough about it to know if it's an immigration issue or just an issue of lack of prosecution for drunk driving (I believe that the driver had done it a number of times before?).

Either way, it was fun to watch :P

[DETMURDS]

And the left thinks Fox is biased!

Fox News Producer Canned for Cheering on McCain
May 9, 2008 - 12:45 ET

Theres reports this morning that a Fox News production assistant was fired for cheering on John McCain when she got close enough to the Arizona senator during the Time 100 Gala.:

Insiders indicate that the assistant, identified as Jennifer Locke, was on assignment with a camera crew to cover the entertainment angle of the event. When Sen. John McCain walked by, the assistant said, "I voted for you in the primary, you're going to win."

[...]

A Fox News insider called it "journalistically unacceptable." An FNC spokesperson would not comment on the personnel matter but did confirm Locke is no longer with the company, where she'd worked for a couple of years.

Of course that is journalistically unacceptable, as much if not more so than the Obamania that ostensibly objective journalists at other networks have expressed.

Reports also noted that Sen. McCain chided Ms. Locke that she's "not supposed to reveal that" she's a fan of McCain's. Perhaps Sen. Obama can borrow from the Arizona Republican the next time liberal reporters are laying palm branches at his feet.

[DETMURDS]

So I will take it as that nobody has any objections to my previous post? CNN and MSNBC is dirty,...FOX is not!:thumbsup2:

[Richard the Lionheart]

Television sucks.

[Anthony]

But how do you like FOX's latest little gimmick - referring to Obama by his initials, "BHO" (and to Hillary by hers, "HRC" - as if this disguises their true purpose)?

[CKFresh]

Here you go DET...

Ruppert Murdock admits to manipulating the American people:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0K2pLo8JV5Y

[Richard the Lionheart]

I've got news for all of you: you can't turn on the Disney Channel without being manipulated. Television is a device of manipulation--that is its sole purpose.

[DETMURDS]

I've got news for all of you: you can't turn on the Disney Channel without being manipulated. Television is a device of manipulation--that is its sole purpose.


True, that is why most,..not all of it is horrible.

[Anthony]

Another "nice try" by Fox News that missed the mark, at least with me anyway: Bill O'Reilly's blatant smear job on Dr. Boyce Watkins of Syracuse University.

O'Reilly claims to be a former high-school teacher. To which I respond: Either sociology was not among the subjects he taught, or if it was, his students got short-changed big time.

Members of an embattled minority have to hang together, or they will surely hang separately, so to speak - hence, some degree of peer pressure is brought to bear on those who dissent from the group's adopted strategy for getting ahead in the larger society. If Juan Williams is so over-sensitive and emotionally immature that his feelings were hurt by the moniker Dr. Watkins directed his way, then Williams should (four-letter acronym popular on message boards deleted). Or, if you can't stand the heat - such as it is - stay out of the kitchen (ironically, Juan Williams reminds me of a certain SU alumnus: Donovan McNabb).

And not for nothing, but look at what happened to the Tories - and even many who tried to remain neutral - during the American Revolution: They were tarred and feathered, and sometimes far worse, by the patriots whose deeds we celebrate every year on the 4th of July - a fact conveniently omitted in middle-school civics classes.

[DETMURDS]

Another "nice try" by Fox News that missed the mark, at least with me anyway: Bill O'Reilly's blatant smear job on Dr. Boyce Watkins of Syracuse University.

O'Reilly claims to be a former high-school teacher. To which I respond: Either sociology was not among the subjects he taught, or if it was, his students got short-changed big time.

Members of an embattled minority have to hang together, or they will surely hang separately, so to speak - hence, some degree of peer pressure is brought to bear on those who dissent from the group's adopted strategy for getting ahead in the larger society. If Juan Williams is so over-sensitive and emotionally immature that his feelings were hurt by the moniker Dr. Watkins directed his way, then Williams should (four-letter acronym popular on message boards deleted). Or, if you can't stand the heat - such as it is - stay out of the kitchen (ironically, Juan Williams reminds me of a certain SU alumnus: Donovan McNabb).

And not for nothing, but look at what happened to the Tories - and even many who tried to remain neutral - during the American Revolution: They were tarred and feathered, and sometimes far worse, by the patriots whose deeds we celebrate every year on the 4th of July - a fact conveniently omitted in middle-school civics classes.

I watched it, and didn't see any issues???:confused:

On the other hand,..read this media bias: Trumpeting the “major endorsement” from John Edwards for Barack Obama, the day after Obama was trounced by 40 points in West Virginia all three broadcast network evening newscasts led Wednesday night with the “dramatic” announcement of the “political prize” that gives Obama a “major boost.” Katie Couric returned at the end of the 6:30 PM EST CBS Evening News feed to reiterate “our top story tonight” as she effused over live video of Edwards speaking at the rally: “John Edwards endorses Barack Obama, saying he's one man who knows in his heart that it's time to create one America, not two.”

ABC was so excited that its 6:30 PM feed of World News went live at about 6:40 PM to Grand Rapids, Michigan for 90 seconds of Obama introducing Edwards, compete with a Bruce Spingsteen song as Edwards bounded on stage. Gibson then acknowledged:

Timed for maximum exposure, timed to coincide with the evening newscasts, timed to give Barack Obama a needed boost after his bad defeat yesterday in West Virginia. George Stephanopoulos, this is the kind of publicity that you can't buy.

Indeed, no need to pay for it when ABC News is eager to give it to you for free.

[Anthony]

The Boyce Watkins-Juan Williams dustup was the lead story on Wednesday's O'Reilly Factor.

It was also discussed earlier this week (either Monday or Tuesday) and also once before, a couple of months ago.

For further information on what this is all about, this link (http://mopspopsplace.wordpress.com/2007/09/28/juan-williams-a-happy-negro) essentially sums it up.

[CKFresh]

Anthony, can you be more specific on what happened?

[buckeyefan78]

I've got news for all of you: you can't turn on the Disney Channel without being manipulated. Television is a device of manipulation--that is its sole purpose.

WRONG

Ever hear of TV dinners?

http://gothamist.com/attachments/food_laren/tvdinner.jpg

Damn fool...:rolleyes:

:P

[Richard the Lionheart]

Okay, correction, besides offering an escape from pesky family members and spouses, television's sole purpose is to manipulate its audience. :lol:

[Anthony]

Anthony, can you be more specific on what happened?


Did you read the article I linked to? That pretty much tells the story, such as it is (and no, I don't believe it's the same James Jett who was a wide receiver for the Raiders, and I wished had been with the Eagles instead).

[CKFresh]

Thanks Anthony. Got it

[philabramoff]

1. They have one large audience, conservatives, who ONLY watch Fox News to get there news information. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to get their news from multiple sources. There is no single "liberal" station that all liberals watch.


:lol:

That's because Liberals have so many left-wing stations to choose
from!!! Geez, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, etc. etc. etc....

Dang, CK, you cracked me up on that one. :lol::lol::lol:

Couldn't help calling you out on this one. :P

[DETMURDS]

Fox News is very successful for a number of reasons:

1. They have one large audience, conservatives, who ONLY watch Fox News to get there news information. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to get their news from multiple sources. There is no single "liberal" station that all liberals watch.

2. In addition, people like me (liberal as can be) watch Fox News. I watch Bill O'Reilly every chance I get. He cracks me up. Same with Hannity. I am continually amazed at the uncompromising, extremely bias, unprofessional form of "journalism" that they display over at Fox News.

3. And finally, they are the most entertaining news station. People get bored with the facts over and over again. It is the same reason fiction books sell more than text books. People want to be entertained and see drama, the straight up news is just boring.

You know what amazes me? There are many people out there who will tell you, "Fox News is Fair and Balanced." So that means that there are actually people out there who feel Fox News is presenting both sides of the situation fairly and equally. That, my friends, is a scary thought...
It is no wonder over 60% of their viewers still think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.

I own a movie called OutFoxed (http://www.outfoxed.org/). You should check it out.

Ahhh, shut up!