Congratulations Fox News on 15 Years

[Jack Springer]

Bob, you keep changing the subject . . . . again. The thing you do with almost anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Keep pushing your agenda.

Don't you have a prayer meeting to attend instead of hanging around a gay porn site?

 

[JayHawk]

Chance...on which network is the show identified by you as the most fair and balanced political talk show?

SO after you answer that then it is easy to go ahead and admit fox isn't.] fair nor is it balanced.

I wont attack you on the Haiku
But anointed one and focusing on the stumble "jew"
Makes it clear to me and you
Fair and balanced is not at fox what they do

How did the 'new' guy work out?

Jack,

The lies are well documented and occur much too often for a serious journalistic organization. That and the fact that they never bother to make corrections.

I personally think a law should be made to only identify as 'news' unbiased straight factual reporting. Any Current Events Info-tainment to include Editorial Opinion should be required to either be on another channel labelled entertainment or have two huge warning banners displayed as crawl at top and bottom identifying the information as speculation not based in factual reporting but in opinion.

I think that would effectively kill those channels because no one would really wanna watch IF they new from the outset it was bullshit.

 

[Just_Believe18]

I just can't get over how some people here watch FNC on The Daily Show and MSNBC.

Do you watch FoxSports on ESPN?

Actually, you're the one guilty of changing the subject as you have not responded to my legitimate rebuttal in regards to the facts given against Fox News from politifact.com.

 

[Kulindahr]

morals and respectable behavior AND being gay are not mutually exclusive

earth to bob

You can summarize Chance1 as an overstated haiku.

Heh.

From the above example, I thought maybe he'd been taken over by JustAPixel. Both lately are excelling at ignoring a point of comparison by pretending it was something different (with a minor in lying about what other posters have done).

 

[IokuA47]

No matter how much I may try to convince you I am bi-sexual... I am still not. Just because I talk to women, eat with women, listen to women, does not mean I am attracted to women. I may disagree with them and proceed to tell you my side of the story, and say this is why you are wrong and I am right. Then I will shut you up because I want others to believe what I have to say. I let you present your case once, while I do it a million times until it sticks.

In case you're wondering, I basically am trying to say, no matter how much Fox news says they are "fair and balanced" they are not.

 

[JayHawk]

No matter how much I may try to convince you I am bi-sexual... I am still not. Just because I talk to women, eat with women, listen to women, does not mean I am attracted to women. I may disagree with them and proceed to tell you my side of the story, and say this is why you are wrong and I am right. Then I will shut you up because I want others to believe what I have to say. I let you present your case once, while I do it a million times until it sticks.

In case you're wondering, I basically am trying to say, no matter how much Fox news says they are "fair and balanced" they are not.

Interesting approach.

I started reading that and wondered if you were looking at two threads and started typing in the wrong one... lol

I see you are a virgin. Well dont worry if you like politics and passionately arguing them you will feel freshly fucked in no time.

 

[Dolmance]

Look to outside opinions if you want a decent assessment of Fox News; to a foreign eye, the entirew channel is absurd. That anyone can call it a "news network" or in any way "journalistic" is laughable. It is a propaganda machine, owned, funded, scripted and directed by those with the money and political clout to create such an engine. Compare and contrast to the likes of the B.B.C: a publically owned and funded system whose news comes without any opinion, bias etc; where news anchors are not invited to give their opinions or express their prejudice in any way, shape or form. I'm not saying the B.B.C is perfect, of course; far from it, but in comparisson to Fox News, it is a paragon of journalistic integrity, very much like comparing a star to a sputtering L.E.D.

If ANY presenter or journalist for that organisation spouted one breath of the evolution denying, anti-science, bigoted, homophobic, theocratic nonsense that spours out of Fox News like pus from a lanced boil, they wouldn't have a job within the hour.

As for M.S.N.B.C, it's not really something that's generally watched in the U.K. We have access to it via Sky T.V., but like Fox, it is regarded as absurdly sensationalist; more like some oddly framed drama than an actual news network.

 

[Kulindahr]

^
Pretty stark comparison. Does either have any redeeming features?

 

[Jack Springer]

Do you feel the same way about CBS News and Dan Rather in regards to his made-up story about Bush in 2004?

I really doubt that you watch FNC on any regular basis. I'd guess you get your FNC info from MSNBC, blogs, and the comedy channel.

Jack,

The lies are well documented and occur much too often for a serious journalistic organization. That and the fact that they never bother to make corrections.

I personally think a law should be made to only identify as 'news' unbiased straight factual reporting. Any Current Events Info-tainment to include Editorial Opinion should be required to either be on another channel labelled entertainment or have two huge warning banners displayed as crawl at top and bottom identifying the information as speculation not based in factual reporting but in opinion.

I think that would effectively kill those channels because no one would really wanna watch IF they new from the outset it was bullshit.

 

[chance1]

chance1 believes in personal freedom...even with regard to capitalization, spelling, and punctuation.

chance1 writes haiku
defending right-wing blather
every night on JUB.

i prefer post 1 to post 2

i don't defend right wing blather

i abhor demonization - and unfair demonization at that by loathesome creatures who pretend it's anything other than partisanship

more to come

 

[chance1]

Chance...on which network is the show identified by you as the most fair and balanced political talk show?

SO after you answer that then it is easy to go ahead and admit fox isn't.] fair nor is it balanced.

I wont attack you on the Haiku
But anointed one and focusing on the stumble "jew"
Makes it clear to me and you
Fair and balanced is not at fox what they do

How did the 'new' guy work out?

Jack,

The lies are well documented and occur much too often for a serious journalistic organization. That and the fact that they never bother to make corrections.

I personally think a law should be made to only identify as 'news' unbiased straight factual reporting. Any Current Events Info-tainment to include Editorial Opinion should be required to either be on another channel labelled entertainment or have two huge warning banners displayed as crawl at top and bottom identifying the information as speculation not based in factual reporting but in opinion.

I think that would effectively kill those channels because no one would really wanna watch IF they new from the outset it was bullshit.

Morning Joe on MSNBC weekday early am is by far my fav roundtable/opinion program - because i find it both informative and fun - the latter depiction is important and i think fuels much of the problems with today's news

I like meet the press although it is not appt. TV anymore - not since Tim Russert died

reliable sources on cnn i sorta like - see it at the gym sometimes

I'm not a fox lover
I think sean is the lamest of the lame
i think chris wallace does a terrific job
i think charles K is a neocon who is intelligent and well mannered - for me he has replaced pat buchanan as my right wing "go to" for listening

fox is fox
the landscape demanded a conservative tv network - or rather there was an opening - and they took it

middle americans need a "place" too not just sophisticated urbanites and ivy league douchebags i'm teasing to all u ivy leaguers out there

but u know what i mean

the "annointed one" is a sean hannity thing - don't make that a fox thing

every time an individual on fox does something ............ it's a fox thing

watch msnbc in prime - their name calling is beyond the pale - when gwb was pres and now against tea partiers

fox does NOT do that

not saying fox is good

saying the condemnation here is bullshit over the top mostly nonsense driven by non watchers who read what they read and repeat it

had coffee with the "new guy" - was good - he's an editor for a start up - interesting and cute - im casting a wide net

 

[Críostóir]

i prefer post 1 to post 2

i don't defend right wing blather

i abhor demonization - and unfair demonization at that by loathesome creatures who pretend it's anything other than partisanship

more to come

Well, I had to fit it in the syllable limit. You may not actually be a fan of Faux News, but you've been defending it (against what you view as demonization). Faux News is largely, I would submit, right-wing blather.

Some of it's positively jaw-dropping. Michelle Obama gives her husband a fist bump and the foaming Fox commenter calls is a "terrorist fist jab." They called her Obama's "baby mama," and while you could allege that the racism in that was casual and clueless a) it's still racism and b) I don't think it is either casual or clueless; I think every word they say is calculated for the effect they want.

Like when a congressman got into a sex scandal and they identified him as a Democrat when he was actually a Republican. That wasn't a mistake. That was a lie.

 

[JayHawk]

Do you feel the same way about CBS News and Dan Rather in regards to his made-up story about Bush in 2004?

I really doubt that you watch FNC on any regular basis. I'd guess you get your FNC info from MSNBC, blogs, and the comedy channel.

Yes I feel exactly the same way about CBS and Dan Rather. I consume news like fucking oxygen and have been a die hard conservative for longer than I have been an adult. As a child I watched Presidential addresses. I am interested beyond and thing I think you can grasp. A standard staple in my childhood was about 2 hours of various news at dinner, 60 minutes while watching football on sundays, even freakin CSPAN, Charlie Rose late at night. I grew up being taught from my father that the broadcasters even then would shade things to their understanding. SO I had a jaded eye for news and knew you had to consume a lot to get to the heart of the matter. That and if you identify what drives people you can usually figure out how the story went.

SO I watched FNC for YEARS until it became readily apparent they had no problem lying and then perpetuating the lies once their bullshit was called. It has been proven over and over. They are bought and paid for by the conservative machine.

The other networks have attempted to follow suit but just like right wing radio ..hate sells and people eat it up. People love to feel self righteous and indignant. They fucking love it. SO they eat up that shit like jelly belly's.

I also spend most of my military life assessing situations. To do so I use all manner of news. I have seen what is reported on activities I have conducted myself in other countries and I can tell you Americans are fed shit with a big smile BY ALL NETWORKS.

So please feel free to hold your bullshit assessment of me and my news habits. And remember to smile while you consume that shit sandwich fox is serving ya... oh feel indignant... their every word is to make you so mad you forget thought.

Enjoy

 

[JayHawk]

Well, I had to fit it in the syllable limit. You may not actually be a fan of Faux News, but you've been defending it (against what you view as demonization). Faux News is largely, I would submit, right-wing blather.

Some of it's positively jaw-dropping. Michelle Obama gives her husband a fist bump and the foaming Fox commenter calls is a "terrorist fist jab." They called her Obama's "baby mama," and while you could allege that the racism in that was casual and clueless a) it's still racism and b) I don't think it is either casual or clueless; I think every word they say is calculated for the effect they want.

Like when a congressman got into a sex scandal and they identified him as a Democrat when he was actually a Republican. That wasn't a mistake. That was a lie.

Yes sir you are spot on... it is even more demented when reporting world events. The things Americans dont know that they dont know is alarming.

 

[Críostóir]

Yes sir you are spot on... it is even more demented when reporting world events. The things Americans dont know that they dont know is alarming.

It's amazing how different even BBC is, and the UK is practically the 51st state. I try to read between the lines.

Brooke Gladstone talks about "narrative bias," which is the bias toward information that can be formed into a nice neat story with a beginning, middle, and end. Information that doesn't fit that pattern just doesn't get to us.

But Faux News is way beyond that. They're in pants-on-fire territory an appalling amount of the time. And they have contempt for their own viewers: they don't even bother to make pie charts add up to 100%.

 

[JayHawk]

It is truly phenomanol but until you dont have an angry 50% of this country who believe that trash based on their own biases then it wont change.

We need something along the lines of the yellow journalism laws passed a century ago. As I said above. The main stipulation should be that they label opinion as just the person opinion.

However the legislature is paid for by corporations and then the news corps provide the talking points that the politicians need so the politicians wont write laws protecting Americans from disinformation because that is how they got elected.

It is a never ending cycle.

Unless of course we take it back but that would be very bloody and would affect the world on a grand scale.

 

[Jack Springer]

Just Believe, I just came across this.

You and Jon Stewart are wrong - PolitiFact rated Jon Stewart's accusation as false. Fox viewers do not place at the bottom of those informed.

Time for you to retract.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

Politifact.com check of Fox News brought to you with a little humor. Would you like to retract those statements JayQueer, Justapixel and JackSpringer?

 

[JayHawk]

Did you ctaully read what you posted Jack?

They found the claim false because of the phrase not because fox doesnt rank near the bottom... they do.

Please read ones own cites so as not to embarrass yourself.

But to the precise definition Stewart agreed it wasn't and retracted.

So your argument that Fox viewers are just leading the stupid comparatively and not a lot stupid wins.

 

[Kulindahr]

Do you feel the same way about CBS News and Dan Rather in regards to his made-up story about Bush in 2004?

I despise Rather worse than O'Reilly et al, because Rather was once a solid, respectable journalist.

 

[Kulindahr]

i think charles K is a neocon who is intelligent and well mannered - for me he has replaced pat buchanan as my right wing "go to" for listening

Krauthamer is pretty solid. He's one of the few who actually qualify as a conservative. He does occasional columns for news magazines, too, and I've generally found them rational.