Fox News, NOT Faux news
- Thread starter conntom
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Posts
- 22,256
- Media
- 213
- Likes
- 32,276
- Points
- 618
- Location
- Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Remember the story on FOX NEWS about the "Terrorist Fist Bump" between the President and his wife? Fair and Balanced my ass.
B_VinylBoy
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Posts
- 10,363
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 70
- Points
- 123
- Location
- Boston, MA / New York, NY
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Jon Stewart is a comedian. He's no representative or mouthpiece of the "liberal agenda" despite the fears and concerns of our Conservative brethren. The fact that he had one statement countered by Politifact doesn't change his overall message which is pointing out the endless incompetence that plagues our nation's news cycle. Many people would not "hate on Fox" if there wasn't a staggering amount of evidence that shows the network has gotten the facts wrong on many stories.
If this is a victory, then the bar for achievement is set lower than anyone could ever expect.
This is such character degrading nonsense that it doesn't even deserve a response beyond the period that ends this sentence.
Mensch1351
Cherished Member
Take notes folks -- in Psychology this statement is what is termed "Transference!" (Look it up!!):biggrin1::biggrin1::biggrin1:
My problem with Fox is multi-layered. The "style" of journalism practiced by Fox is not information based but is instead ratings based. By doing what they do Fox places a "spin of opinion" into their newscasts which reflect the conservative views of their fearless leader Rupert Murdoch. The news telecast from Fox is not what the news in fact is, it is in fact a policy of what the management of Rupert Murdoch wants it to be. It is well written and cleverly done. Another problem with Fox is that they take pure entertainment shows and misrepresent them as being news or information oriented. Commentators for the ratings busters include but are not limited to O'Reilly or VanSusteren. These shows present controversy again and place a spin on it in order to create sensationalism. In the end, a message that may be colored to represent a viewpoint or incomplete information is presented as absolute fact. Fox news is indeed many things. It is freedom of speech in action when important side facts can be left out and something can be presented as if it were complete. It is great business sense because Fox viewership based on it's sensationalism is of course higher. The only thing true of the Fox network in general is that it is 100% based on profit and in spite of the high road it's fearless leader implies, it is in fact the lowest road on the planet and can be deceptive. The Fox network in general has some of the lowest standards in programming of any network and telecasts on a regular basis many shows with little value.
It's a ten year old story but absolutely nothing has changed:
MercyfulFate
Experimental Member
Why does anyone pay attention to any mainstream news? They all distort and cow tow to the government.
Because they're tied up in identity politics, so they have to defend their choice in viewing.
Bbucko
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
- Posts
- 7,232
- Media
- 8
- Likes
- 326
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Sunny SoFla
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
I find it odd that you consider pure propaganda to be a legitimate source of information: aren't you supposed to be a fiscal conservative/social moderate? There is absolutely nothing even remotely moderate about Fox's approach to packaging and presenting "news". They are a propaganda vehicle for movement conservatives; pretending they're anything else is either delusional or else sheer ignorance.
As I do not believe you to be ignorant (you definitely have shown yourself to be a high-info poster about things that you feel passionate about), and I don't believe you to be delusional. Living in the greater Boston area is obviously a challenge to anyone sincerely espousing a conservative POV, same as a progressive in a place like Colorado Springs or just about anywhere in OK or UT.
Your information gathering obviously takes you further afield than places like RedState, Powerline, WND and FreeRepublic (and, obviously, Fox), just as mine goes further than FireDogLake, ThinkProgress and HuffPo. There's room in my brain for both Alex Pareene and David Frum; I'm certain you have the same capacity yourself.
The way you worded the OP obviously shows that you're spoiling for some sort of fight: it's pretty over the top in terms of unnecessary provocation. I have no intention of feeding that need, but when I saw this posted on BuzzFeed, this thread came immediately to mind.
This isn't really about straight-on, in your face bias: everyone's biased one way or the other. Rather it's about grown-up adults recognizing the POV of whatever source they use and consciously seeking alternatives to those biases which complement their own and broadening their scope of understanding on any particular issue.
Propaganda has its place: I refresh Gawker's tab constantly, because I find their snarky tone and the topics chosen for discussion to be entertaining. But if I'm looking to be really informed, I click on the link they provide as their source and, if necessary, Google the topic for additional takes on the issue. I'd be a fool if I really thought I'd be getting pure journalism from Gawker; they're pure editorial.
Fox is much the same, but on the other side of the mirror. The difference between them, however, is that Fox's POV is generally hostile to me, my friends, parts of my family and my community more broadly, whereas Gawker essentially is the voice of my community, much like Pam's House Blend. I don't mind a challenge but I dislike being insulted directly.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2006
- Posts
- 770
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 175
- Points
- 363
- Location
- Tucson (Arizona, United States)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
lol anyone else feel like Chris Wallace wants to agree with him, but the evil fox empire is bitch slapping him back into place?
id image nipple clamps and testicle electrodes are involved.
midlifebear
Expert Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2007
- Posts
- 5,789
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 179
- Points
- 133
- Location
- Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
- Sexuality
- 60% Gay, 40% Straight
- Gender
- Male
All Faux News folks are required to wear electrode nipple clamps. Even Sister Sarah. That's why she's so perky.
MercyfulFate
Experimental Member
lol anyone else feel like Chris Wallace wants to agree with him, but the evil fox empire is bitch slapping him back into place?
id image nipple clamps and testicle electrodes are involved.
Probably, Shepherd Smith has deviated a little from the right wing Fox line before. Wallace knows if he says something not like he's supposed to, he knows he can get in trouble and bye bye job.
Glenn Beck was an exercise in madness, as was Fox's attempt at the Daily Show.
If major media outlets would return to a NON-PARTISAN objective reporting agency, I'd be happy. Sadly they know they get ratings with attacks and lies to inflame people, so they stick with it.
If American's would stop participating in this left vs. right garbage things might improve.
Unfortunately they've gone way past Republican cheerleader. They engage in a willful grotesquely irresponsible campaign of disinformation that is immeasurably harmful to the country.
Study finds Fox News viewers most misinformed on issues
Dave NoCal
Superior Member
I think this particular piece says more about Faux News than anything I've ever read.
14 Propaganda Techniques Fox "News" Uses to Brainwash Americans | Truthout
14 Propaganda Techniques Fox "News" Uses to Brainwash Americans | Truthout
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Posts
- 266
- Media
- 8
- Likes
- 1,911
- Points
- 598
- Location
- United States
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
