Congratulations Fox News on 15 Years

[Centexfarmer]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpChNJbILZM&feature=related[/ame]

We Report You Decide.

 

[palemale]

Palemale, my point is that there was not a news organization to point out the pros and cons of the Great Society. Most people at the time got their news from their local newspaper, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News - if they had a TV. Plain and simple point -- people were not informed, if they had been informed the Great Society would likely not have been implemented and many people's lives would have been much better.

Were you around in 1965? There were far more newspapers then than there are now. Network and local news was much better and more credible than now. Wasn't mostly murders and celebrity gossip. They actually did investigative journalism. The American public was much better informed than they are now.

Fox's reporting during the Health Care Reform debate was abysmal. For example, they constantly reported the "death panel" lie as fact. How is misinforming the public a good thing?

 

[Centexfarmer]

Were you around in 1965? There were far more newspapers then than there are now. Network and local news was much better and more credible than now. Wasn't mostly murders and celebrity gossip. They actually did investigative journalism. The American public was much better informed than they are now.

Fox's reporting during the Health Care Reform debate was abysmal. For example, they constantly reported the "death panel" lie as fact. How is misinforming the public a good thing?

Quoted for TRUTH!

See also:

Low Information Voter

The High Cost of Low Information

Low Information Voters

The Low-Information Voter: All They Know Is That They're Angry & Its All Obamas Fault

FOX NEWS and Talk Radio has reduced journalism, political debate, science, and an educated electorate into a Monty Python sketch:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g[/ame]

 

[chance1]

Love it

Fox viewers are "low information" - so I guess the implication is their vote/opinion doesn't count

so we have

rich vs. poor
smart vs. dumb

what else?

really advancing the convo boys

i will reiterate

fox is no worse and in fact is not worse
than MSNBC

i guess the response is

"they just do it ........... smarter in a more informed way"

the hypocrisy is oozing out of this thread

 

[BrianPGH]

Love it

Fox viewers are "low information" - so I guess the implication is their vote/opinion doesn't count

Oh no, their votes count. The question is, are their votes fully informed?

 

[chance1]

Oh no, their votes count. The question is, are their votes fully informed?

don't know

maybe some people know what they know - or what they think they know - that's life

it doesn't make a more affluent liberal voter more ................

it doesn't really matter

1 person
1 vote

1 person's vote is not more equal than another

which is the implication of this line of back/forth IMO

 

[palemale]

Love it

Fox viewers are "low information" - so I guess the implication is their vote/opinion doesn't count

so we have

rich vs. poor
smart vs. dumb

what else?

really advancing the convo boys

i will reiterate

fox is no worse and in fact is not worse
than MSNBC

i guess the response is

"they just do it ........... smarter in a more informed way"

the hypocrisy is oozing out of this thread

Come on, now, Chance. You're analytical are more developed than this knee-jerk reaction.

The problem we have now is that our democracy is under threat because voters are very misinformed, illiterate about current events and easily manipulated. This isn't a problem that is limited to Republican voters or Fox News viewers, it's just that the problem is most severe in that group. Surely you agree with the proposition that a healthy democracy requires an informed public.

 

[Kulindahr]

Kuli, quoting two biased blogs is not very good defense of your opinion.

If you google CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, etc. you find similar blogs.

This is hardly a defense .... thought you were better than that Kuli.

1. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

2. Are you asserting that all the sources in the thread I referenced are false?

3. Unless you have some evidence that the blogs are lying, you're trying to defame the truth by smearing.

 

[Kulindahr]

Palemale, my point is that there was not a news organization to point out the pros and cons of the Great Society. Most people at the time got their news from their local newspaper, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News - if they had a TV. Plain and simple point -- people were not informed, if they had been informed the Great Society would likely not have been implemented and many people's lives would have been much better.

Fox news lies.

They went to court and got a judge to affirm that they can lie.

Having no news sources at all is better than having a source that lies to its audience.

 

[CowboyBob]

Fox news lies.

They went to court and got a judge to affirm that they can lie.

Having no news sources at all is better than having a source that lies to its audience.

Yes. And what I find so amazing are the mindless sheep who believe Fox is fair and balanced. Just because that's their slogan doesn't mean it's true.

They want to believe the lies Fox spews, so they go with them.

 

[Kulindahr]

Love it

Fox viewers are "low information" - so I guess the implication is their vote/opinion doesn't count

so we have

rich vs. poor
smart vs. dumb

what else?

really advancing the convo boys

i will reiterate

fox is no worse and in fact is not worse
than MSNBC

i guess the response is

"they just do it ........... smarter in a more informed way"

the hypocrisy is oozing out of this thread

Are you paying attention here?

I have never seen an instance on MSNBC where the host says "Shut up!" or "Cut his mike".

And I don't recall MSNBC going to court to argue for the right to lie.

I do recall retractions and corrections by MSNBC people when they've made an error, notably Rachel Maddow.

 

[Kulindahr]

1 person
1 vote

1 person's vote is not more equal than another

which is the implication of this line of back/forth IMO

If that was the argument, half this thread wouldn't make sense. The reason truth in news is important is precisely because the votes are equal.

But a vote case on the basis of lies is dangerous for liberty -- and THAT is the problem. If our course is being decided by people who happily suck up lies as the truth, we're already in trouble. If those people succeed in electing people who believe lies as truth, we're in deep trouble.

All it takes is a brief review of the Republicans in the House of Representatives to see that we're in deep trouble.

 

[Kulindahr]

The problem we have now is that our democracy is under threat because voters are very misinformed, illiterate about current events and easily manipulated. This isn't a problem that is limited to Republican voters or Fox News viewers, it's just that the problem is most severe in that group. Surely you agree with the proposition that a healthy democracy requires an informed public.

Yes. Just because people are pointing out the deficiencies of one side does not mean they're defending the other.

 

[rareboy]

Fox news lies.

They went to court and got a judge to affirm that they can lie.

Having no news sources at all is better than having a source that lies to its audience.

^ This.

Fox News destroyed one of the cornerstones of journalism.

 

[chance1]

Are you paying attention here?

I have never seen an instance on MSNBC where the host says "Shut up!" or "Cut his mike".

And I don't recall MSNBC going to court to argue for the right to lie.

I do recall retractions and corrections by MSNBC people when they've made an error, notably Rachel Maddow.

are you paying attention? do you watch either channel?

msnbc doesn't have bad experiences with conservatives on their channel - as none are invited on to chat

MONOLOGUE is what happens in primetime or 2 guests who head nod

your experience is based on shit posted here - snippets carefully collected - not on an ongoing watch/learn

so i don't know what to say other than you're apparently not capable of forming a fair opinion

sorta like the diss on fox news viewers - uninformed

 

[chance1]

Come on, now, Chance. You're analytical are more developed than this knee-jerk reaction.

The problem we have now is that our democracy is under threat because voters are very misinformed, illiterate about current events and easily manipulated. This isn't a problem that is limited to Republican voters or Fox News viewers, it's just that the problem is most severe in that group. Surely you agree with the proposition that a healthy democracy requires an informed public.

I appreciate the "analytical" reference that is tantamount to a big wet kiss (which i like)

knee jerk is how most of this thread comes off

it feels like the majority here feel that fox viewers because they watch primarily fox or all fox are ......... less worthy

fox viewers are idiots, etc.

i totally agree that an informed voter can make the best decision - which is the best result for our country

my only point is that a conservative pt of view is not ruining america and given that all the others lean to varying degrees left ............ what is the issue?

the issue is that fox is successful

that fox dominates the cable news landscape

that fox news has figured out how to get ratings

I agree that much of it is blech - fox and friends is lame - hannity is lame

but ed schultz is less lame than hannity? why because he's pro union lame?

bottom line is people have a right to watch/do what they want

and right now and for a long while fox has been that thing for many

and this board hates that - because they hate Fox's POV

and i don't know the answer on how to make john/mary q public better informed

having coffee with a new guy in 90 minutes - wish me luck

 

[palemale]

I appreciate the "analytical" reference that is tantamount to a big wet kiss (which i like)

knee jerk is how most of this thread comes off

it feels like the majority here feel that fox viewers because they watch primarily fox or all fox are ......... less worthy

fox viewers are idiots, etc.

i totally agree that an informed voter can make the best decision - which is the best result for our country

my only point is that a conservative pt of view is not ruining america and given that all the others lean to varying degrees left ............ what is the issue?

the issue is that fox is successful

that fox dominates the cable news landscape

that fox news has figured out how to get ratings

I agree that much of it is blech - fox and friends is lame - hannity is lame

but ed schultz is less lame than hannity? why because he's pro union lame?

bottom line is people have a right to watch/do what they want

and right now and for a long while fox has been that thing for many

and this board hates that - because they hate Fox's POV

and i don't know the answer on how to make john/mary q public better informed

having coffee with a new guy in 90 minutes - wish me luck

You are conflating different arguments. No one is arguing that people should be prevented from watching Fox News, or that Fox News should be off the air, or that Fox viewers shouldn't be allowed to vote.

It is a fact, though, that studies and polls consistently show that Fox News viewers are the most ill informed voters. That's a big problem. Just as Fox News criticizes politicians and others with whom they disagree, others criticize Fox News (and other media outlets). In the study that CowboyBob cited, those who got their news from the mainstream media were not particularly well informed, either.

Just because Fox News does well in the ratings doesn't change the fact that they are a shitty purveyor of news. I'll bet my co-op that Jersey Shore has a lot more viewers than Masterpiece Theater, that doesn't make viewing Jersey Shore a particularly good use of one's time. The problem with network news is that it is so ratings driven. All of the broadcast media does a terrible job of informing the voter. MSNBC just is the best of a bad crop.

 

[Centexfarmer]

I appreciate the "analytical" reference that is tantamount to a big wet kiss (which i like)

knee jerk is how most of this thread comes off

it feels like the majority here feel that fox viewers because they watch primarily fox or all fox are ......... less worthy

fox viewers are idiots, etc.

i totally agree that an informed voter can make the best decision - which is the best result for our country

my only point is that a conservative pt of view is not ruining america and given that all the others lean to varying degrees left ............ what is the issue?

From a "historical perspective?"

There wasn't a clearly divided "left vs right" prior to Fox News.

The "conservatives" will say that they 'never had a voice in the media until FOX NEWS came along.'

Fact check?

They never had the LOUDEST voice until after Reagan and Bush41 gutted the Fairness Doctrine.

What was that exactly?

The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented

You've even argued yourself that FOX NEWS is "fair and balanced" because they 'have liberals on their shows.'

Not the same thing.

Anymore than Queer as Folk is an accurate representation of being Gay in Pittsburgh.

There are falsehoods, if not deliberately embedded then intentionally glossed over to present a false narrative.

In a nutshell that's the problem.

I can pull out statistics and polls proving how the viewers of FOX NEWS and MSNBC both have it wrong, and how our collective news media and "journalists" have suffered, and as a result the American Electorate have suffered because of it.

You and I both know, or should at least recognize that this thread isn't a discussion of the merits or failers of the Media or the Fourth Branch of Government.

It's about rubbing one out for FOX NEWS being on the air for 15 years, and all of the bullshit that isn't worth celebrating in the long and short of things.

the issue is that fox is successful

that fox dominates the cable news landscape

that fox news has figured out how to get ratings

And that other more respectable news organizations have kicked respectable and investigative journalism to the curb chasing after those same ratings.

"Follow the money trail."

FOX NEWS is leading the way. "If it bleeds it leads."

Where does that leave the rest of us?

Where does that leave an informed American Electorate.

That use to be a time when "Journalists" took their integrity, and their responsibility as journalists seriously.

FOX NEWS under Rupert Murdoch's ownership, and with Roger Ailes at the helm decided to introduce "tabloid journalism" into our national landscape/discourse.

I agree that much of it is blech - fox and friends is lame - hannity is lame

but ed schultz is less lame than hannity? why because he's pro union lame?

No.

Because they're nothing more than a 'counter response' to concept that has little or no real value every day American's lives.

bottom line is people have a right to watch/do what they want

and right now and for a long while fox has been that thing for many

and this board hates that - because they hate Fox's POV

The use of the word "hate" is even a little over-dramatic for you their Buddy.

I thought you weren't in to "dramas" that much.

and i don't know the answer on how to make john/mary q public better informed

We could start by stop feeding them bullshit, and then stop calling each other names because we're not eating the same bullshit that we think others should be eating.

Just call bullshit, bullshit, and be careful that neither of us step in it.

having coffee with a new guy in 90 minutes - wish me luck

Just coffee?

If you're not back in a couple of hours, pics or it didn't happen.

 

[maxpowr9]

it feels like the majority here feel that fox viewers because they watch primarily fox or all fox are ......... less worthy

fox viewers are idiots, etc.

i totally agree that an informed voter can make the best decision - which is the best result for our country

Chance we just had this fucking conversation on the previous page. If someone only gets their information from one or two sources they are a low-informed voter. If they only watch fox news to get their information, in a sense, they are stupid. The same can be said about people who just watch MSNBC. I don't think they are less worthy as an American (everybody gets 1 vote unless they magically disappear) but intelligence wise, they are.

If you wrote a research paper for a class and only sited 1 or 2 sources, I find it hard that the professor would give you high marks on it.

P.S. I snickered at your usage of "idiot". The word is derived from the Greek word idiote as "one who does not partake in government"

 

[Jack Springer]

Centex, moveon.org as a credible source.





I'm not sure what you point is.

Would I expect Bernie Sanders to like FNC .. .. .. no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w39FnpuMRfo&feature=player_embedded&list=PLDB8BCEA10E03FBF6

Could anyone tell the difference between "news" and "opinion" out of that?