Fox won court battle that it can FALSIFY news

[motivez]

It's worth the time invested to try to enlighten people to the fact that they're being manipulated, fed distortions, lies, and probably know less about what's really going on in the world than pretty much any other news watching segment of the population.

<cue graph of people who believed distortions (which helped republicans / conservatives / neocons) about iraq and such, with fox viewers being by far the highest>

They haven't covered the Iraq war less than the other networks because they've found more interesting stories as of late ya know

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's worth the time invested to try to enlighten people to the fact that they're being manipulated, fed distortions, lies, and probably know less about what's really going on in the world than pretty much any other news watching segment of the population.

<cue graph of people who believed distortions (which helped republicans / conservatives / neocons) about iraq and such, with fox viewers being by far the highest>

They haven't covered the Iraq war less than the other networks because they've found more interesting stories as of late ya know

And where do you recommend the average Joe turn?

[P/N]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's worth the time invested to try to enlighten people to the fact that they're being manipulated, fed distortions, lies, and probably know less about what's really going on in the world than pretty much any other news watching segment of the population.

<cue graph of people who believed distortions (which helped republicans / conservatives / neocons) about iraq and such, with fox viewers being by far the highest>

They haven't covered the Iraq war less than the other networks because they've found more interesting stories as of late ya know

Every network manipulates, feed distortions, lies and doesn't know the first thing about what's really going on in the world. They are all in the same business and they all peddle in the same crap. What's funny though is watching those left of center rail on FOX News because they hold a different opinion than what FOX does. Keep up the good work, and keep fighting the pathetic fight.

[motivez]

I'd suggest people get as little of the news as possible from television, it's inadequate to form a sufficiently educated opinion on most subjects because of time constraints and attention turning to stories that aren't of national importance, like human interest things and whole days devoted to celebrity court cases..

Not to mention that so many of the shows have adopted Fox's adversarial interview style, where you listen to people shout at each other instead of having an intelligent and intellectual conversation about a subject...

The print media is still vastly superior IMO, but you still have to get it from a variety of sources and be careful of who's writing the article.. There's bias reporters working for most of the outlets.. there's one working for the AP who consistently does negative stories about Harry Reid, it's like his pet project or something.

AP, Reuters, blogs (which are genuinely doing a lot of great investigative "reporting" on stories the television and print media ignores, both the liberal and conservative sites) etc.. in combination with sites like sourcewatch and others will generally inform you far better than watching that crap on television.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by P/N

What's funny though is watching those left of center rail on FOX News because they hold a different opinion than what FOX does. Keep up the good work, and keep fighting the pathetic fight.

What's really funny is watching those right of center consistently ignore the valid points I bring up about Fox and the other networks and use this often seen tactic of chalking everything up to a simple difference of opinion, like somehow disagreeing with Fox's politics somehow validates their distortions while negating the complaints about them.

It doesn't. But it's certainly easier than admitting someone else is right.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't believe I've ever seen anyone claim that the other networks aren't biased, that'd be a new one. I think pretty much anyone rational admits that pretty much everything in life is biased to some extent, and news is certainly no different.

What has been claimed, however, at least by me, is that the "left leaning" that happens on other networks is not on the same playing field, or even in the same league as what happens on Fox.

Fox isn't even news, it's infotainment masquerading as news, like the other networks, but with far more distortions and a blatantly partisan agenda that stems from the highest levels of the network and infiltrates every single show they have on, whether business analysis or their prime time "news" lineup with Brit Hume..

Once again, people will point the finger at the one hour of blatantly liberally biased television on cable - Keith Olbermann - but he's preceeded by a former Republican Congressman and Tucker Carlson, both admitted conservatives..

On other networks, like CNN, you have people like Glenn Beck, a right wing guy who spews hate speech.. suggests Democrats caused John Roberts seizure, and so forth.. and Lou Dobbs, who has a full hour basically dedicated to how the brown man is invading white America and how bad it is for us..

The other shows just aren't nearly as partisan to the left as anything Fox has, I'd invite someone to prove they are without going to google and posting some analysis that can be disputed by any other number of google searches.

took the words out of my mouth, thanks

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I'd suggest people get as little of the news as possible from television, it's inadequate to form a sufficiently educated opinion on most subjects because of time constraints and attention turning to stories that aren't of national importance, like human interest things and whole days devoted to celebrity court cases..

Not to mention that so many of the shows have adopted Fox's adversarial interview style, where you listen to people shout at each other instead of having an intelligent and intellectual conversation about a subject...

The print media is still vastly superior IMO, but you still have to get it from a variety of sources and be careful of who's writing the article.. There's bias reporters working for most of the outlets.. there's one working for the AP who consistently does negative stories about Harry Reid, it's like his pet project or something.

AP, Reuters, blogs (which are genuinely doing a lot of great investigative "reporting" on stories the television and print media ignores, both the liberal and conservative sites) etc.. in combination with sites like sourcewatch and others will generally inform you far better than watching that crap on television.

Most people don't have the luxury of spending hours finding the 'truth' in their news.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Most people don't have the luxury of spending hours finding the 'truth' in their news.

Then those people don't have the luxury of claiming to know what they're talking about when it comes to bias in news networks.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

Then those people don't have the luxury of claiming to know what they're talking about when it comes to bias in news networks.

Those people don't, they're just your average American watching the news. It's YOU that throws a fit about FNC and the people that watch it.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't watch much television news, so I'm not sure where "their normal liberal spin on the news" comes from, sounds like a baseless assertion really...

Originally Posted by motivez

Then those people don't have the luxury of claiming to know what they're talking about when it comes to bias in news networks.

Doesn't this seem a bit contradictory? I don't watch much televised news either. But if I put on Fox right now and sit for 15 minutes watching their news programs I really don't typically see any more "institutional bias" than I would if I were watching CNN.

[motivez]

Oh, they don't? Okay.

I think "throwing a fit" is a pretty sad characterization of a discussion about the legitimacy and fairness of Fox, but I suppose it's to be expected.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Doesn't this seem a bit contradictory? I don't watch much televised news either. But if I put on Fox right now and sit for 15 minutes watching their news programs I really don't typically see any more "institutional bias" than I would if I were watching CNN.

When you don't want to see something, chances you aren't going to see it. Considering your political leanings and disdain for the Democrats, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to think what they were doing is somehow fair and lacking in more bias.

It's not contradictory at all, when you get your news from a variety of sources instead of placing all your faith in one network like so many who defend Fox do, you can certainly more easily see the blatant bias than someone who has actually come to believe they're 'fair and balanced' and are only offering some kind of 'counter' to the vast left wing conspiracy that is other news outlets.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

Oh, they don't? Okay.

I think "throwing a fit" is a pretty sad characterization of a discussion about the legitimacy and fairness of Fox, but I suppose it's to be expected.

Hmm, multiple threads and posts on an almost daily basis about how much FNC 'sucks'. We have a smilie that tells Fox to 'fuck off'.

Yeah, someone is getting rubbed the wrong way, and doesn't like it. Throwing a fit aptly describes what you people do in here complaining and crying about FNC.

[motivez]

"you people"

If you don't like the subject, I have an idea, stop participating.

Once again though, the often used tactic is showing up instead of debating any of the valid points that have been made. Thanks for proving my point.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

"you people"

If you don't like the subject, I have an idea, stop participating.

Once again though, the often used tactic is showing up instead of debating any of the valid points that have been made. Thanks for proving my point.

I like the subject

I've debated the points

One of my points is, you spend way too much time worrying about something so petty!

[motivez]

I'm glad you're so concerned about how I allocate my free time, but I think discussing an effort to distort the news, the purposeful manipulation of people into believing blatant falsehoods that can undoubtedly have an effect on whether the country takes action, like, oh, I don't know, rushing (without adequate planning) into a fictional country we'll call Ehroq, which could potentially wind up in a decade+ long civil war, costing trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives is worth a bit of time discussing, especially on a forum for political discussion of all places.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

When you don't want to see something, chances you aren't going to see it. Considering your political leanings and disdain for the Democrats, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to think what they were doing is somehow fair and lacking in bias.

It's not contradictory at all, when you get your news from a variety of sources instead of placing all your faith in one network like so many who defend Fox do, you can certainly more easily see the blatant bias than someone who has actually come to believe they're 'fair and balanced' and are only offering some kind of 'counter' to the vast left wing conspiracy that is other news outlets.

Wouldn't the reverse be true? That due to your political bias CNN doesn't appear to biased because you "don't want to see something?"

I enjoy getting my news from the internet because I can quickly read many articles on the same story. I actually like google news and yahoo news. My first hit is always google news though even though they lack the story content and easy to find AP articles (which I prefer). The reason I read Google News is because I can click for similar articles fairly easily and find hundreds of articles on the same subject and can read from liberal sources as well as more conservative sources to form my own opinions.

The problem is that when I do this, the conservative arguments rarely end up in AP and never make it to the news. The fact that Fox News is at least willing to go against the status quo and give the details to a story that the other half of the country wants to hear doesn't make them extreme.

I see what you're saying now. It seemed the argument was almost that not watching televised news made someone more of an authority on televised news bias. I agree with most of what you're saying, so my post isn't really in full disagreement. I just think it's a bit overly harsh towards Fox News viewers. A large percentage of America watches Fox News and it seems the argument is that people who watch Fox News are at the very least closed-minded. I think most people who watch Fox News are just conservative and they actually want to hear their side of the story presented and perhaps even defended from time to time when watching the news rather than constantly attacked.

You put on the news nowadays and half of it is advocating universal healthcare and the rest is negativity towards the GOP, Iraq, etc and finally a sensationalized piece about global warming before closing. Obviously this is an extreme exaggeration, but the premise is true. And a lot of people in America don't want to waste their time every night sitting and watching the same Democratic talking points rammed down their throats when they realize there is another option. It may not be the best option, but for a lot of people it beats the alternative.

I really don't watch the news much on TV at all. And when I do I generally watch C-Span (if that can even be called the news) or local ABC news. But I do occasionally put on CNN and Fox and MSNBC just to see what they're up to. The most I've ever really seen of O'Rielly or Hannity is commercial break to commercial break. I've watched more Hardball than anything else when it comes to opinion shows. And even then I've never seen a full episode. I'm not big on the opinion shows.

[Thorgrim]

The extent of Americans’ misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.

http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03..._Oct03_rpt.pdf