 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Lies about Fox
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Amos Date: 18 Dec 10 - 11:10 AM Study: Some Viewers Were Misinformed by TV News By BRIAN STELTER News organizations can educate voters about public policy and economic conditions, but they can also misinform voters. As if to prove the point, a study released Friday found that Òsubstantial levels of misinformationÓ seeped out to the electorate of the United States at the time of the midterm elections this year. The study was conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a project that is managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. According to the study, which can be reviewed online, in most cases, the more a person watched and read the news, the less likely they were to have been misled about the facts. But Òthere were however a number of cases where greater exposure to a news source increased misinformation on a specific issue,Ó the studyÕs authors wrote. In particular, they found that regular viewers of the Fox News Channel, which tilts to the right in prime time, were significantly more likely to believe untruths about the Democratic health care overhaul, climate change and other subjects. The study found other cases where greater exposure to media meant greater misinformation on a subject. Regular viewers of MSNBC, which tilts to the left in prime time, were 34 percentage points more likely than non-viewers to believe Òthat it was proven that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was spending money raised from foreign sources to support Republican candidates.Ó Consumers of public broadcasting were 25 points more likely to believe the same. But the study found many more instances that involved Fox News. ÒAlmost dailyÓ viewers of Fox News, the authors said, were 31 points more likely to mistakenly believe that Òmost economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit;Ó were 30 points more likely to believe that Òmost scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring;Ó and were 14 points more likely to believe that Òthe stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts.Ó They were also 13 points more likely to mistakenly believe Òthe auto bailout only occurred under Obama;Ó 12 points more likely to believe that Òwhen TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it;Ó and 31 points more likely to believe that Òit is not clear that Obama was born in the United States.Ó The studyÕs authors continued, ÒThese effects increased incrementally with increasing levels of exposure and all were statistically significant. The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it Ñ though by a lesser margin than those who voted Republican.Ó Asked for comment on the study, Fox News seemingly dismissed the findings. In a statement, Michael Clemente, who is the senior vice president of news editorial for the network, said: ÒThe latest Princeton Review ranked the University of Maryland among the top schools for having ÔStudents Who Study The LeastÕ and being the ÔBest Party SchoolÕ Ð given these fine academic distinctions, weÕll regard the study with the same level of veracity it was ÔresearchedÕ with.Ó (NYT) |
|
Subject: BS: Lies about MSNBC... From: Bobert Date: 17 Dec 10 - 07:31 PM Why not??? See how well it fits into the existing thread, Bobert? There's already one copycat of the Fox thread. No need for more... -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 17 Dec 10 - 07:22 PM Garbage in = garbage out... And the beat goes on... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: frogprince Date: 17 Dec 10 - 07:14 PM "That anyone would think of the Wall Street Journal as liberal illustrates my previous point perfectly." As God is my witness, about three days ago a Fox "news" fan told me that he dislikes The Reader's Digest because of it's liberal bias. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: mousethief Date: 17 Dec 10 - 06:23 PM Why should the left tell lies about Fox when the truth is so damning? Unless the thread title means lies told by Fox about itself -- such as "fair and balanced." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Dec 10 - 03:15 PM `. . . right wing is so thoroughly brainwashing these people that these people are no longer part of an ***informed electorate*** . . .` No need to brainwash. A light rinse would do! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 17 Dec 10 - 09:53 AM "That is very scary and reminiscent of Gewrmany in the 30's..." Just don't mention the Nuclear weapons... as distinct from the Weapons of Mass Hysteria, which it seems Fox is but one... Assange mentioned that when a country has Senior Political Figures publicly calling for assassinations of those it disagrees with, and thus departs from the Rule Of Law, we seem to be repeating History, and it starts to get very serious... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 17 Dec 10 - 09:43 AM Yeah, and the scariest part, like I have pointed out from time to time, is that uneducated people will "believe" a lie even when confronted with real facts... Prime example was the number of people who still believed that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 even after it had been factually debunked... I mean, I heard the poll in NPR a year after even the Bush administration had publicly stated that Saddam ***did not*** have any involvement with 9/11 but because of the hard sell during the mad-dash-to-invade-Iraq days there were about 30% of the people polled who, in spite of the facts, still ***believed*** the lie??? This is what scares me... I mean, the right wing is so thoroughly brainwashing these people that these people are no longer part of an ***informed electorate*** that Jefferson said the country would need if democracy was to survive... That is very scary and reminiscent of Gewrmany in the 30's... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,TIA Date: 17 Dec 10 - 12:25 AM EXACTLY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: EBarnacle Date: 17 Dec 10 - 12:20 AM What is Truth? So why is it ALWAYS acceptable when funded by left-wing sources, and NEVER when funded by right-wing ones??? At least with the left, there is some effort to respect the truth. The Murdoch organization owns [among other things] The New York Post and Fox. Various of its owners, including Dorothy Schiff and Alexander Hamilton, considered it a rag. At least they were honest about it. At present, they have pretensions of respectability...with emphasis on the word pretensions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,TIA Date: 16 Dec 10 - 11:57 PM Truth is not democratic (small d). When 40% of the population believes the Earth is flat, it is still round. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 10:42 PM What, Amos??? You think FOX is like some zombie stuff??? Like you join and yer now a zombie??? 'Er like hip-hop... Infectious mindless rhythms that just go round 'n round???... I mean, ya' don't have to go too much further than Huxley's "epsilons"... Makes me wonder if in dumbin' down the population if the DNA will just say, "Fuck it, ain't worth the fight..."??? 'Er you remove FOX and put facts and real educational stuff in front of people they will come back as intelligent people??? Maybe ain't too late to get be a couple million$$$$ to ponder it... Heck, NASCAR is gonna get $40 mill and the oil companies gonna get $6 billion so what's a couple mill??? And, hey, they got the right guy right here in this mountain holler ready and willing to ponder so send the $2 mill and I'll crank up the ponerator... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: michaelr Date: 16 Dec 10 - 09:29 PM That anyone would think of the Wall Street Journal as liberal illustrates my previous point perfectly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Dec 10 - 09:17 PM Lies about FoxNews: Fox is -
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Amos Date: 16 Dec 10 - 09:07 PM It is a self-reinforcing spiral of "negative attention"--the tendency to substitute association for differentiation and substitute identification of different things for merely associating them in some way. This slide into the abyss of over-identifying things darkens the doorways of perception and gives primacy to the jungle-patterns of reflex reaction and emotional prejudice in place of discrimination. Once you're in that loop you seek out the kind of sound bites, gossip and exaggerations that are easy to deal with because they are closer to unconsciousness. So you tune in to Fox, once you have outgrown Sesame Street. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 08:37 PM The point about what people "believe" is one that I have tried to make over and over here going way back... Eric Hoffer wrote a book about "True Believers" and it completely describes most of the folks who watch FOX... They are not interested in the truth... They just want to be on the winning side... Too bad for most of them because they are digging their own graves "believing" Fox/BossHog propaganda and by the time they figure it out, it will be too late to save whatever it was that they thought government was supposed to protect US from... Silly --- no, make that very stupid --- people... B~ p.s. I agree with what Bill said... I like Bruce, too... It's just that this Bruce is not the same one that I know away from Mudcat... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 10 - 08:03 PM "... people in the survey who had the most exposure to Fox News were more likely to believe falsehoods and rumors about national and world affairs ..." But it is hard to say what is cause and what is effect....as in, "Does country music make folks voices sound like that, or do folks with those kind of voices tend to sing country music?" *I* tend to suspect that those with certain mind-sets about certain topics tend to go to places like Fox where someone is agreeing with their Lordy...it 'may' be basic DNA! ☺ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Jeri Date: 16 Dec 10 - 08:00 PM I think people like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman are accused of being biased because they point out the lies of people like Beck and Hannity. While I believe they aren't overly fond of conservatives, I think they REALLY don't like liars. With those who lie and defend liars on one side and those who try to expose them on the other, it's not difficult to see why Fox and fans wind up feeling set upon. Lots of lies to expose, and they way they seem to retaliate is by telling more lies. I think if the right wing wanted respect, they'd steer clear of Fox, but I guess it's all they've got... unless they stick to the truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:31 PM " Folk songs very seldom deal with the agonies of ruling over the masses or the trials and tribulations of corporations dealing with perceived unfair taxation or regulation." But they do deal with things such as: The banks were made of marble with a guard at every door.... The other side of the coin is still the coin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: bobad Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:30 PM Extended exposure to Fox News makes voters stupid, university study finds By Stephen C. Webster Thursday, December 16th, 2010 -- 4:53 pm The troublesome record of spin by conservative television station Fox News has long been a cause for concern to many Americans, who frequently allege that the nation's most viewed "news" network has the effect of dumbing down voters. Turns out, they were right. A University of Maryland study (PDF) published earlier this month found that people in the survey who had the most exposure to Fox News were more likely to believe falsehoods and rumors about national and world affairs when compared to those who paid attention to other news outlets. In a summary carried by Alternet, the following falsehoods were most relayed by Fox News viewers: 91 percent believed the stimulus legislation lost jobs; 72 percent believed the health reform law will increase the deficit; 72 percent believed the economy is getting worse; 60 percent believed climate change is not occurring; 49 percent believed income taxes have gone up; 63 percent believed the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts; 56 percent believed Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout; 38 percent believed that most Republicans opposed TARP; 63 percent believed Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear). http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:26 PM He has been MY friend for 25 years or more... (at least I think we both still think so)... I KNOW Bruce to be a decent, generous guy with a lot of expertise in several areas. We do disagree on politics ...as you may have noticed... but in person, we almost never talk about those things. (yes.. it's best that way) When I chastise anyone here, it is a name in print I am disagreeing with. There may be others here whom I mostly agree with, but who I would not get along with RT.... It is an awkward thing to 'know' that someone you see at times RT has views that make you upset....but this is an open forum where we are comparing ideas, and I will not...(and obviously, Bruce will not)...change anything just because someone we know RT says so. I will try, whenever possible, to point out errors...both of fact and of reasoning... in hopes that MY viewpoint will clarify some issues. After all, others are reading these threads, and all sides can/should be heard. It disturbs me that online, Bruce feels that he is 'ganged up on' and that the 'liberals' here don't give HIS opinions proper reading and/or respect. All I can say is that I am trying to judge ONLY the posts, and not the person.... as tricky as that can be. *shrug* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:07 PM He may be the biggest pain in the ass on Mudcat--however, he is my friend. Now, the sonnet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:03 PM "What is it exactly that appeals to you about "our kind of music?" " Sorry, I was not aware I had to agree with the "conventional Mudcat wisdom" on political matters to be interested in music. If this is the case, I will have to leave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 07:01 PM Try "First Amendment Center's Freedom of Information Hall of Fame " http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?item=FOIA_Hall_of_Fame |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,saulgoldie Date: 16 Dec 10 - 06:46 PM Bruce, Thanks for starting this thread. It gives us a chance to hone our arguments against the rightwing spin machine. I have heard Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, Chris Mathews, Ed Shultze, Lawrence O'Donnell, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert all admit to mistakes on the rare occasions when they have made them, and to issue formal and PROPER apologies. All of these individuals have phenomenal fact-checking machines, and they say, "I am sorry for the error and I will do everything I can to make sure it doesn't happen again," or something to that affect. As opposed to bogus rightwing "apologies" which go, "I am sorry if I offended anyone...(yada, yada)," which is not a sincere, genuine, and heartfelt apology. Indeed, when was the last time you heard ANY of the rightwing mouthpieces admit an error of any kind and sincerely apologize for it? Simple. They don't make mistakes, so they don't need to apologize or take back anything. Anyway, this website gathers together people with an interest in folk music. Folk songs very seldom deal with the agonies of ruling over the masses or the trials and tribulations of corporations dealing with perceived unfair taxation or regulation. What is it exactly that appeals to you about "our kind of music?" Just wundering. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 16 Dec 10 - 06:41 PM Google -> No results found for "First Amendment Freedom of Information Hall of Fame". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 16 Dec 10 - 06:30 PM "how the huge % of working and non-working poor, who have the numbers to elect politicians who might be helpful, still elect the greedy Republican type" Since voting is not compulsory a massive number just don't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 16 Dec 10 - 06:28 PM "In the USA, the "center" has shifted so far to the right that even left-leaning Democratic politicians are way right of center compared to Europe " Same comment from Australia. The anti-Commo/Pinko/Unions etc rantings of the 50s & 60s wiped out all US rational thinking. Except for a few, comrades, and we've got your names, we're just letting you walk around to act like flypaper for any new corrupt thinkers! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Art Thieme Date: 16 Dec 10 - 05:53 PM The only lie I've ever heard Democrats perpetuate is the one that travelled all over the folk scene for the last 50 years--and even before that. Fox went out on a chilly night, He prayed for the moon to give him light, He had many a mile to go that night Before he'd reach the town-o. THE LIE was that it was a "chilly night"----I remember it clearly. It was nice out---and nothing even close to being chilly. Art |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: michaelr Date: 16 Dec 10 - 05:21 PM pdq - your point is?? Are you trying to say that the Democratic Party is in any way "left" or "liberal"? What a joke. In the USA, the "center" has shifted so far to the right that even left-leaning Democratic politicians are way right of center compared to Europe (excepting rare true progressives like Kucinich). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 05:10 PM Absolutely, Dorothy... The right not only controls the government, the media but has a team of folks revising history as we go... And then scariest part about this is that the uneducated will "believe" lies even when they are confronted with facts... That does not bode well for the future when the truth no longer matters... Case in point... The uneducated Tea Partiers "believe" that it was the Obama administration was responsible for the bank bailouts... Even when told or shown proof that TARP was under Bush they continue to "believe" the lie because it fits nicely into their little revised ballgame... Go figure??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 05:04 PM "I guess is you are an upstanding citizen of John Birch City then," Uncalled for! You want me to call you a racist bigot??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Dorothy Parshall Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:56 PM I never listened to news channels or read major newspapers when I lived in the USA (1999-2009) and yet I surprised myself by always having a grasp of what was happening in the world. Still do not ..., and still do.... What really gets to me is the insistence on the part of the far right member of the family that everything is the fault of "the LIBERAL PRESS!!!" I only found the press to be far right. Guess that says a lot about where I'm at. Don't we all know that history, as well as the news, is slanted toward the right wing elite and always has been? Anyone who wants to really know history will read Howard Zinn. Only by careful study and unpleasant experience do the "people" come to realize just how much they have been "had". And, even then, they try to maintain the status quo out of fear that things could get worse, which they often do. The critical mass that finally created the French Revolution suffered greatly but ultimately brought about moderate positive change. Also the "American Revolution". Or was that a creation of the well off trying to protect their interests in the new world. Perhaps the USA needs a real revolution, hopefully of a non-violent nature. It is so hard for me to understand how the huge % of working and non-working poor, who have the numbers to elect politicians who might be helpful, still elect the greedy Republican types. They must listen to FOX. When I was a kid, the last word on TRUTH in journalism came from IF Stone's Weekly. In the absence of that dynamic publication, I feel a strong need to look at what is going on in the world and the people who are causing it, and make my own studied conclusions. A dear Quaker friend once shocked me by telling the youngster pedeling The Philadelphia Inquirer, "I wouldn't dirty my hands on that rag!" I would not dirty my ears on Fox news. Life is too short to waste time on garbage. As for liars, Kendall, They are to me the worst thieves of all. To steal the TRUTH is just as much a CRIMINAL act as stealing a car or... In fact, imo, it is far worse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:49 PM I don't have any problem with Bill O or Keith O... That's cable... I have problems with FOX having a FCC license to broadcast over airwaves that are owned by all the American people... I also have a problem with ABC, NBC and CBS never having any liberals on nor stories that balance the noise machine of the right... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: kendall Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:42 PM I heard Bill O'Riley admit that Fox leans to the right. There is no question that Chris Mathews leans to the left. I'll bet that the number of people here who are liberal is way higher than the national figure. I also believe that the vast majority here have an average IQ way above the national average. That's why I hang out here; I'm hoping some of it will rub off on me. Now, that said, BB, don't get the idea that I think you are below average in IQ. I respect your intellect; I just don't agree with your politics. Or your need to stir the pot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:35 PM Gosh, bruce... I guess is you are an upstanding citizen of John Birch City then, yeah, anything that isn't complete facist bullshit must seem mighty liberal... The problem I have with yer logic is that there is no logic... I am a leftist andf I haven't heard a leftist since maybe the early 70s on any of the publicly aired news shows... Bet yo can't same the same fir yer side... Wewll, of course you can't because you are so accustomed to having as much rightwinged bullshit blown all over you that you get yer sufficiency on a daily basis... Try standing on a leftist shoes fir a day... No, make that 40 years... We are completely blackballed from the conversation... Thus, one stupid war after another... One bad piece of crap legislation after another... One more reg screamed down... One more reg ignored... One more family living in poverty... One more year orf the mrich stealing from the working class... One more year of paying 17% of GNP for shitty health care... I mean, we have had 40 years of stupid, greedy people running the show and in that 40 years the left has been "left out" of all the decision making... That's right, bruce... 40 years of being blackballed!!! That is our reality... But if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy (because the right wants you to feel that way when you parrot their BIGASS LIES) then parrot away... We on the left know the truth and you do to... You just aren't allowed to admit what is painfully obvious and that is that yer side has the game completely rigged... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: pdq Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:25 PM "Benefactors and staff According to the New York Times, Media Matters initially received "more than $2 million in donations from wealthy liberals" with ties to the Democratic party (including Peter Lewis, Steve Bing, Marcy Carsey, Susie Tompkins Buell, Leo Hindrey, Gail Furman, and James Hormel). Byron York said Media Matters received an unspecified amount of funding from MoveOn.org, and the New Democrat Network. In 2004 Media Matters received the endorsement of the Democracy Alliance. Though the Alliance does not make direct donations to organizations, its endorsement resulted in direct donations to MMfA from Alliance members. In October 2010 Alliance founding member George Soros announced his first donation to Media Matters, saying "Despite repeated assertions to the contrary by various Fox News commentators, I have not to date been a funder of Media Matters." Soros said concern over "recent evidence suggesting that the incendiary rhetoric of Fox News hosts may incite violence" moved him to donate $1 million to Media Matters, which thanked Soros for announcing his donation "quickly and transparently." Political.com reported that Media Matters' policy was to not "offer a comprehensive list of its donors, and hasn't given any indication that it's going to do so going forward." Former chief of staff to president Bill Clinton John Podesta provided office space for Media Matters early in its formation at the Center for American Progress, a Democratic think tank that he had created in 2002. Hillary Clinton advised Media Matters in its early stages out of a belief that progressives should follow conservatives in forming think tanks and advocacy groups to support their political goals. Media Matters hired numerous political professionals who had worked for Democratic politicians and for other progressive groups. In 2004 article on Media Matters the National Review referred to MMfA staffers who had recently worked on the presidential campaigns of John Edwards and Wesley Clark, for Congressman Barney Frank, and for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee." {all groups highlighted are Democrat activist groups who have no interest in getting truthful news to the American people because they do not disseminate news as FOX does...these groups are trying to destroy people they see as being in their way, hense the enemy...that being FOX New} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:18 PM Bobert, Right of YOU does NOT make a network less left of center. Three of the four you mention are Left of Center. 20% of the population is "liberal". One of the four is right of center. 40% of the population is "conservative". Yet YOU draw the conclusion that there is no "liberal bias" in the media. Please explain your logic- it defies conprehension. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bobert Date: 16 Dec 10 - 03:42 PM The BIGGEST of the right's BIGASS LIES is "liberal media"... There are four publicly broadcast television news/so-called new stations: ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox... When was Dennis Kucinich asked to be on any one of them??? Until Bernie Saunders mini-filibuster last week when was he last on any of them??? Just where is this "liberal bias", anyway??? Well, I'll tell ya'll where it is... It isn't!!! This is all part of the right's drumbeat to only have right and further right conversations on the news... That is reality... It is a trick... Believe me... I am a leftist and I certainly know a leftist when I hear one and they are blackballed from the *BIG 4*... Yet there isn't anyone too far to the right that can't get all the microphone time they want... I mean, the further right, the better as far as the BIG 4 are concerned... And please spare us the worn out, "Yeah, but MSNBC"... So what... MSNBC doesn't have a FCC license to use the publicly owned airwaves, does it... Fox does and it frequently airs righties in addition to it's cable propaganda program... That is reality... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,999 Date: 16 Dec 10 - 03:15 PM Bruce, In truth I no longer listen to much news. I have no TV and the radio isn`t on much. I`m working on a CD--as you know--and it`s time consuming. To point out: I actually don`t find the media to be all that liberal. There are some that are liberal--as there are stations like FOX that seem to slant a bit to the right, of in FOX`s case, lots to the right. I am not on a bandwagon with regard to FOX. I have listened to them and I find their bias to be too far to the right for me. I`m sure that papers or stations I like would be too far left for you. That`s cool with me. I think that the absolutely worst thing that has happened to your country in ages is eight years of Bush and Cheney. If I recall, you did your best to defend them. I admire that. However, defending FOX ain`t too bright, and I know you are a smart man. Now, leave this shit alone and get me the damned sonnet for the liner notes--could use them for Jan 15, 2011. Love and kisses, BM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,TIA Date: 16 Dec 10 - 02:58 PM "YOU are now claiming that the liberal biased media ONLY presents the truth, and the entire truth??" Again, classic Bruce. You just love to start each post by putting words in people's mouths. "So YOU are saying blah blah blah...." You are not worth responding too. It's always the same old river of shit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Don Firth Date: 16 Dec 10 - 02:50 PM The severest "critics" of the easily verifiable scientific evidence for global warming are those who have a vested interest (i.e., profit by) continuing to polute the planet, have no interest beyond the next quarterly financial report, and don't give a second's thought to the welfare of future generations. And, of course, their dim-witted dupes. I agree wholeheartedly with Jeri at 15 Dec 10 - 08:17 p.m. I refuse to waste my time and energy arguing with someone who does not want to believe the truth when it is patently obvious. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 02:27 PM YOU are now claiming that the liberal biased media ONLY presents the truth, and the entire truth?? I tyhink you have a major ptoblem with comprehension of reality. Thge claims HERE are thet Fox must be lieing BECAUSE of comments by those who disagree with them. WHEN facts are presented, I listen- when liberal opinion is presented AS fact, I treat it like many here treat ALL comments by FOX. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: GUEST,TIA Date: 16 Dec 10 - 02:21 PM YOU are being characteristically (and I believe intentionally) OBTUSE as usual. The issue isn't viewpoint left vs. right. It is RIGHT VIEWPOINT vs. ACTUAL NEWS (which may or may not be presented by people who are left or right of whatever center you pick). You are comparing apples and oragnes, and I actually thought you were smarter than that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 02:06 PM **I** recognize that Fox presents a conservative viewpoint. Yet I also recognize that many other media sources present a minority, libberal viewpoint- WHICH MOST HERE refuse to admit. So who exactly is being unfair??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Dec 10 - 01:36 PM "There is a HUGE difference between 'baised' in the sense of tending to favor and express one viewpoint over another' and **BIASED** in the sense of ignoring facts and information which does not agree with one's pre-set position(s). " Yes, there is. And **I** have heard FOX on several occasions make corrections..(usually minor).. on later programs.- YET YOU HAVE STILL CLAIMED THEY LIED BECAUSE OF THE ORIGINAL REPORT. " I admire Rachael BECAUSE she listens, analyzes and comes to the most rational conclusion she can based on all the data she can get. Fox and it's minions BEGIN with an agenda and make the news fit...whether they have to spin & distort it or not. " I consider that thie statement is opinion- WHICH I DISAGREE WITH. **I** try to determine the TRUTH from listening to BOTH sides, unlike many here that presume one side is correct, and the other wrong WITHOUT any attempt to determine reality, because of what they WANT to believe as true. "DO you agree that Fox issues those memos?" What memos? The ONE that my post quotes from? "For the record, here's what Sammon said in a Dec. 8, 2009, memo to his reporting staff shortly after the Climategate global warming email scandal erupted: "Given the controversy over the veracity of climate change data, we should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question. It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies." Now I am from out of town and all, but Sammon's injuction sounds to me exactly like what editors are supposed to tell their charges – report what A claims and what B says about what A claims, but keep your personal views about both A and B out of it. Note that Sammon includes both those who say the planet has warmed – i.e. global warming advocates – and those who claim the opposite, that the planet has cooled – global warming critics. How much more even-handed – dare I say it, fair and balanced? – can the guy be? There is also the factual nature of Sammon's statement that critics question data. Critics DO question the data for a warming planet. He doesn't demand that his reporters agree with the critics about the data or tell viewers that the critics are right and the global warming advocates are wrong." I have no idea what internal memos EITHER network has- but I know how to look at facts, instead of deciding truth based on my own bias. "MSNBC makes clear they do nothing of that sort" I agree that MSNBC has stated that, NOT that it is true. I have no idea what internal memos EITHER network has- but I know how to look at facts, instead of deciding truth ONLY based on my own bias. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Ebbie Date: 16 Dec 10 - 01:33 PM Disregard my post above- I copied the wrong part. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Ebbie Date: 16 Dec 10 - 01:30 PM Dunno the Answer but I DID find this: "Journalists have used the act for more than three decades to generate thousands of news stories, including some of the most important exposés of our time. Using FOIA, journalists have held government accountable, exposed crime, and helped shape American public policy in major ways." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 10 - 01:29 PM "To use Rachel as a judge of Fox is like asking Adolph Hitler if the Jews deserved to be killed." I am aghast at that comparison! That is beyond any reasonable...... I am at a loss for words. ...shame.................................................. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Lies about Fox From: Bill D Date: 16 Dec 10 - 01:26 PM "IF you believe Rachel, then YOU are listening to a biased viewpoint." Rachael and her staff scrupulously monitor the claims they make and facts they present. I have heard her many times make corrections..(usually minor).. on later programs. There is a HUGE difference between 'baised' in the sense of tending to favor and express one viewpoint over another' and **BIASED** in the sense of ignoring facts and information which does not agree with one's pre-set position(s). I admire Rachael BECAUSE she listens, analyzes and comes to the most rational conclusion she can based on all the data she can get. Fox and it's minions BEGIN with an agenda and make the news fit...whether they have to spin & distort it or not. THAT is dishonest. You didn't bother to answer my direct question. DO you agree that Fox issues those memos? MSNBC makes clear they do nothing of that sort. |
