Being filtered through a perspective is not the same as propaganda, though; and unfortunately Fox News is a propaganda network.
Look at the Gulf oil spill. First they were fear-mongering about the government getting involved. As soon as the wind shifted, they hammered Obama for not getting involved sooner. As the President was locked away concentrating on fixing the physical problem, they hammered him for not "feeling the pain" of the people. When Obama came out and started indulging those self-centered retards with constant reassurance, they hammered him for playing image games. When he secured a fund of $20 billion, they cried "Socialism!"
They fear-mongered about the spending of government money, then they hammered him for "interfering with business" when he billed BP.
You can't have
every option being the wrong option, but that's what Fox News turns every option that Democrats take into. Do nothing, it's wrong. Do something, it's still wrong -- doesn't matter what it was that you did.
Fox News relies on their audience being stupid -- just processing each sentence emotionally and not connecting anything into a coherent picture. This allows them to fear-monger with a free hand.
Fox News is not a news network. It's 1% fact and 99% how something about it is the Democrats' fault.
The only time you get actual news is the rare occasion there's a breaking news event. The difference is remarkable because it takes them a few minutes to work out a political spin. In that short span you actually get
news -- what they report is no different from CNN.
If you'll notice, Fox News stays away from pushing individual agendas and instead pushes for absolute political power. Other than, "Repeal Obamacare," there's just lip service to a few other things, and then absolute nothingness as to what they'll do with power. So a few years of fear mongering and people are ready to give Fox News carte blanche over the policies of the nation?
And it is Fox News who would be in power. The Republican party moved in and made it their home, and in doing so made a huge mistake. By setting it up as the official Republican outlet, any candidate without Fox News' approval would be back in the dark ages for campaigning, and the outlets remaining to him would be constantly attacked by Fox News and marginalized as "biased." And Fox News has its Tea Party candidates with which to threaten any Republican who doesn't play ball. (The Tea Party was made by Fox News. A year ago it was nothing. But Fox News spouting, "Tea Party, Tea Party, Tea Party," 24/7 gave it the appearance of a legitimate party [false reasoning: "If it wasn't legitimate, it wouldn't be worth talking about. Somebody is constantly talking about it, therefore it must be legitimate], which strengthened when legitimate news organizations reported on Fox News reporting on it (damned egotistical idiots probably thought their analysis that it was marginal and undefined would be the final word on things) (
and to this day the mainstream media is still taking Fox News talking points as news in itself. "Teach the controversy," was a scheme of Creationists to put religion back in the classroom; Fox News apparently took that and turned it into, "Find a topic and pretend there's a legitimate controversy," and now the mainstream media is at, "Report the controversy that Fox News created." Jesus Effing Christ.
Doesn't anybody spend time with psychopaths anymore? You can't properly deal with the amoral (like Fox News) without knowing the full range of tools available to them, illuminating the deficiencies of the standard response toolset. They're off the grid, you can't treat them as though they're on it. Thinking that you can treat the antisocial as pro-social because your superior intellect will alert you to any trickery will just get you pwned though a route of manipulation your premise of "pro-social" wouldn't allow them to even consider, but they took anyway.)
That's Fox News.
Anyway, I think any network ACTUALLY taking the route of simply filtering news with a conservative perspective would be a complete failure. It would fall apart on differing religious interpretations. "Democrats are bad," is big tent -- filtering to that would appeal to the egos of pretty much every conservative.
"Women shouldn't be in politics because it goes against the Bible," I think would tend to be a bit more problematic.
That's just the problem you run into when all of your social beliefs are based on the flights of fancy of ancient goat herders.
Also, "toeing the line."
Facebook
Twitter