uh huh.... then please explain this:
http://www.worldpublicopinion....=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc
it seems that fox is either more deceptive, less competent at reporting, or their viewers are dumber. your choice.
uh huh.... then please explain this:
http://www.worldpublicopinion....=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc
it seems that fox is either more deceptive, less competent at reporting, or their viewers are dumber. your choice.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
There is no denying that Fox news are VERY HEAVILY biased towards the current administration.
They do present facts but the way they present them is like "The communist ship Titanic was sent to the bottom and we are safer for it"
They skip stories, they present half of everything and set people up constantly, they thought they could have an angle on Bill Clinton but Bill is not a newbie and when they have to discuss anything without shock questions it is generally sorted as "not view worthy" and not sent.
FOX News has nothing to do with news, it's state sponsored propaganda because while not funded by the government it suppots them and gets much in return.
It's not unlike the Venezuala state sponsored channels.
I abhore both.
They do present facts but the way they present them is like "The communist ship Titanic was sent to the bottom and we are safer for it"
They skip stories, they present half of everything and set people up constantly, they thought they could have an angle on Bill Clinton but Bill is not a newbie and when they have to discuss anything without shock questions it is generally sorted as "not view worthy" and not sent.
FOX News has nothing to do with news, it's state sponsored propaganda because while not funded by the government it suppots them and gets much in return.
It's not unlike the Venezuala state sponsored channels.
I abhore both.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
I apologize for stirring the pot, but it ticks me off to see you guys reducing the arguments down to insults. Point: You guys waste time on a forum kicking each other to the curb instead of using your high IQ's and talents to CHANGE America back into the country it should be. Perhaps that should be food for thought for you. THAT was my point. My friends were shocked at the amount of insults you guys hurl at each other. You literally degrade each other's intelligence, question people's morality, and in some instances say the guy is being bribed to post here. All utterly ridiculous.
ON TOPIC: The reason there is so much sensationalism and slants in news is simple. It is all about money. In this case advertising dollars. All of the News Channels are a farce. The version of capitalism being used in America now represents little of what the American Dream was about 30 years ago. It is all about "growth" and "how much money can we make in the short run."
To think Fox News is somehow worse than the others is ludicrous. They all are slanted which is what the original poster intended to point out, before people called him a mouthpiece for the right, an idiot, and said he was paid to post here. I give him credit though, he takes your incredibly rude insults which should get you banned for a week or two and takes it in stride. Kudos to the OP for attempting to have an intelligent debate.
ON TOPIC: The reason there is so much sensationalism and slants in news is simple. It is all about money. In this case advertising dollars. All of the News Channels are a farce. The version of capitalism being used in America now represents little of what the American Dream was about 30 years ago. It is all about "growth" and "how much money can we make in the short run."
To think Fox News is somehow worse than the others is ludicrous. They all are slanted which is what the original poster intended to point out, before people called him a mouthpiece for the right, an idiot, and said he was paid to post here. I give him credit though, he takes your incredibly rude insults which should get you banned for a week or two and takes it in stride. Kudos to the OP for attempting to have an intelligent debate.
And this is typical of this board. Insult after insult. Normally on each other. By the way JohnofSheffield I have no doubt you are a very smart man, just lacking in people skills.
I stated they had good points. By the way nice to make light of the murder of over 5 million Jews. Your a real class act...
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
You must be kidding me right?
Lets ask all the people who don't watch something what they think of it? I have a very good French Canadian friend that I chat with regularly and he has very strong opinions of Fox News as well despite the fact that he has never even watched it because Canada banned Fox News (which is the ultimate in irony from the Nanny State).
Hell, why don't we start asking Hawaiians what they think of people from Iceland. How about we ask Alaskans how they feel about the hurricane season?
Why even bother posting something from the Dailykos anyways?
If I linked something from Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, or Coulter would you take it seriously?
Sorry but most of us don't trust people who already have their answers and just need the right questions to back it up.
Ahh yes, go ahead and try to lump me into that bandwagon. I get a bit of news from everywhere TYVM I don't really have a preference.
But that said, would you take conversation seriously if someone started linking op-eds from Rush Limbaugh and such everyday?
I mean, would you really waste your time if someone said "here JPeyton, this is what Rush Limbaugh says please waste your time convincing us why it isn't right"
The only people that scare me are the zealots like you that will actually try to convince me that the DailyKos or Rush Limbaugh are really the truth speakers in the media.
Btw I love how you libs spell it "Faux" its just soo cute. Did they teach you how to do that at the Kos too? You guys really do make for wonderful lemmings.
But that said, would you take conversation seriously if someone started linking op-eds from Rush Limbaugh and such everyday?
I mean, would you really waste your time if someone said "here JPeyton, this is what Rush Limbaugh says please waste your time convincing us why it isn't right"
The only people that scare me are the zealots like you that will actually try to convince me that the DailyKos or Rush Limbaugh are really the truth speakers in the media.
Btw I love how you libs spell it "Faux" its just soo cute. Did they teach you how to do that at the Kos too? You guys really do make for wonderful lemmings.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Nice straw man. You might want to try actually reading the link. It has nothing to do with people's perceptions of Fox. It does have to do with scientific analyis demonstrating people who rely of Fox for news are disproportionately misinformed compared to people who rely on other new sources.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
What you mean to say is that someone created a POLL/survey and then made editorial comments about it. I would sure like to see the "scientific" portion of the POLL but I won't be holding my breath for it. They didn't list all the questions or they should have included more questions because the ones they listed in the article are debatable depending on the context. There were links to AQ and Iraq - just not neccesarily a working relationship type link. You see, it's all about context and this poll fails miserably as most polls/surveys do that have an agenda.
One of the great fallacies of right-wingers - equating their liars with an assumption that the 'other side' is the same.
Dailykos bends over backwards for accuracy compared to the right-wing pundits.
They make mistakes, they are not immune to 'bias', but there's a big difference.
That leads to the next fallacy though, that when a few errors are found on dailykos, that 'proves' it's the same as the right-wing pundits.
You know, when the flat earth crowd can equate their side with the round world side, the win. It's not really a 'draw'.
And when the righties can pretend the huge lies of their ideology are just a 'counterpart' to the accuracies of the left, a 'draw' is really a win for them.
The price for the rights' draws/wins is evident in the increasing concentration of wealth at the top, the increasing empire of the US.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
No Cad, I said what I meant to say. Had you bothered to check the link, you would find it includes links to the actual survey as well as the full, in-depth report. Conrary to your allegations, it does include all the questions and provides full context for them, clearly demonstrating they weren't so ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations as you claim. The poll is fine; it's your agenda and your attempt to attack that "fail miserably".
The FACT remains people who reported Fox as their primary news source were more likely to be misinformed that those who get their news elsewhere.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Yes, I did miss the actual questionaire - my bad. However it does not change the survey or my opinon about it. Regardless of what I think of the survey and the way other agenda driven surveys are done - the fact that people here are trying to use it against FOX is funny. So now FOX is responsible for what their viewers believe? Can you show that FOX fed them factually false information? Isn't that what this thread is about?
I'd also like to note that I don't give a rats ass about FOX but I find it hilarious to see people use whatever they can to bash them.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
Oh like when your first post in this thread stated this:
"you're arrogant, sheltered, self-centered, egotistic, elitist views get frowned on by the "common man"
Must have no mirrors in your house.. :roll:
So are any of these things something that ABC and NBC are not doing?
Not reporting things occurs all the time. Selectively picking what you want to report on, is what the networks have done for years. It is just like some interview or some news even or some speech. The supposed journalist will interview someone for 2 hrs and then show a few snippits of what they said and call it journalism.
Not reporting things occurs all the time. Selectively picking what you want to report on, is what the networks have done for years. It is just like some interview or some news even or some speech. The supposed journalist will interview someone for 2 hrs and then show a few snippits of what they said and call it journalism.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
HA!
one particular segment I saw on Fox news..
I remember eating at a local sub shop and they had Fox on the television. A banner crossed the screen at the bottom and it stated something along these lines:
80% of sex offenders caught are illegal immigrants
I was like...WTF!?!? NO WAY!!
as I listened more closely to the segment that they were reporting on, it was about some police group. I dont remember if it was a federal or local group, out in some border state...probably Texas. Anyway, this group goes after illegal sex offenders only...its their main focus. So the banner was actually reporting on the specific arrests performed by this police group only...
certainly caught my attention though.
one particular segment I saw on Fox news..
I remember eating at a local sub shop and they had Fox on the television. A banner crossed the screen at the bottom and it stated something along these lines:
80% of sex offenders caught are illegal immigrants
I was like...WTF!?!? NO WAY!!
as I listened more closely to the segment that they were reporting on, it was about some police group. I dont remember if it was a federal or local group, out in some border state...probably Texas. Anyway, this group goes after illegal sex offenders only...its their main focus. So the banner was actually reporting on the specific arrests performed by this police group only...
certainly caught my attention though.
Dude, you should take that act on the road.
That's seriously the funniest thing I've heard in awhile.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Naturally. It's not just that you reject the survey because you don't like its findings (though that would be reason enough for you), it's that you can find no basis to refute it factually, so you wave your hands and sniff about "agenda driven surveys" being invalid, or at least meaningless. You offer no evidence the survey was agenda-driven of course, let alone that its alleged agenda was to discredit Fox. Instead you just pronounce it so, as if that means anything.
I sort of agree with you here. While it's true the survey shows people who rely on Fox for their news tend to be disproportionately misinformed, that really doesn't establish cause and effect. Without further research, we cannot determine whether Fox News generates ignorance, or whether ignorant people simply prefer Fox. It's sort of a chicken-and-egg question. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle, that it's synergy that brings the two together in mutual bliss.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter