Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the derangement of the left in full blossom. They've had years of unobstructed leftist propaganda coming from the mainstream media--be it the "journalist" community, on television, Hollywood, or what have you. The New York Times all but functioned as the German statist newspaper in the last election.
When FoxNews shows up on the scene, they go howling mad. Heaven forbid a right to centrist leaning television broadcasting channel should stand against the leftist bulwark they've created.
There was a a UCLA study that came out maybe 4-5 years ago that pretty much highlighted that pretty much all the major media outlets aside from FoxNews and the New York Post were left of the American voter.
Why are you so concerned about Fox News. Are you saying that the average American are too stupid to see this so called "lies". What are you really so worried about. This country voted for Obama but you are still complaining. I just don't get it?
Why are you so concerned about Fox News. Are you saying that the average American are too stupid to see this so called "lies". What are you really so worried about. This country voted for Obama but you are still complaining. I just don't get it?
Next thing you know you will consider the BBC an unbiased news source.
How can the Associated Press POSSIBLY be biased? Reuters is not biased either, certainly not compared to Faux News or MSNBC. I didn't mention BBC, did I?
Reuters has actually come under fire for being too unbiased and for maintaining objectiveness.
Quote:
Reuters has a strict policy towards upholding objectiveness. This policy has caused comment on the possible insensitivity of its non-use of the word "terrorist" in reports covering major global events, including the September 11, 2001, attacks. In the enforcement of this policy, Reuters has been careful to only use the word "terrorist" in quotes, whether quotations or scare quotes. Reuters global news editor Stephen Jukes wrote, "We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist." The Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz responded, "After the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and again after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Reuters allowed the events to be described as acts of terror. But as of last week, even that terminology is banned." [3] Reuters later apologised for this characterisation of their policy [8], although they maintained the policy itself.
The September 20, 2004, edition of the The New York Times reported that the Reuters Global Managing Editor, David A. Schlesinger, objected to Canadian newspapers' editing of Reuters articles by re-inserting the word "terrorist," stating that "my goal is to protect our reporters and protect our editorial integrity." [9]
However, when reporting the 7 July 2005 London bombings, the service reported, "Police said they suspected terrorists were behind the bombings." This line appeared to break with their previous policy and was also criticised.[10]. Reuters later clarified by pointing out they include the word "when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech," and the headline was an example of the latter.[11] The news organisation has subsequently used the term "terrorist" without quotations when the article clarifies that it is someone else's words.
Media Matters - Jon Stewart on Beck's remark to Keith Ellison: "Finally, a guy who says what people who aren't thinking are thinking" (http://mediamatters.org/items/200611180006 - broken link)
It started with Bill O'Reilly's grandmother. And it blew up into charges of O'Reilly being called a racist (http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1665904,00.html - broken link) and me being attacked as a "Happy Negro" (read that as a lackey or Uncle Tom).
I joked with O'Reilly that for him, a guy from Long Island, a visit to Harlem was like a "foreign trip." That's when he brought up his grandma. He said she was prejudiced against black people because she knew no flesh-and-blood black folks but only the one-dimensional TV coverage of black criminals shooting each other and the rappers and comedians glorifying "gangsta" life and thug cool. He criticized his grandmother as irrational for being afraid of people she really did not know.
I defended his grandma.
Do you know the difference between news and commentary? O'Rilley, Hannity, and Beck are NOT news reporters, they are commentators. O'Rilley's "talking points" are not news reporting, he is clearly giving HIS opinion on current events.
And that is what they all hate. Their opinions. I like O'Rilley and agree with him on a lot of points.
So what? Should I start a new thread asking the same question? Or maybe I can just add on to the current thread? I mean, we are kind of...on the same subject? Just a thought!
I'd also like to point out that there are people on the right who dislike Fox News as well. A lot of traditional conservatives can't stand them. Neocons love them.
So what? Should I start a new thread asking the same question? Or maybe I can just add on to the current thread? I mean, we are kind of...on the same subject? Just a thought!
You asked why people on the left were so concerned with Fox News. We didn't start the thread. We just answered the OP's questions. Concern is on the other side.
Senior figures admitted that the BBC is guilty of promoting Left-wing views and an anti-Christian sentiment.
They also said that as an organisation it was disproportionately over-represented by gays and ethnic minorities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
