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.
I don't watch MSNBC for "news", just for exposing Fox lies. That's its function. Fox is the little right-wing bully on the block, and has been for 35 years. So the voice of plutocracy is now being answered - too bad.
It calls itself "Fox News", and that is a clue to its aim - posing as a "fair and balanced" news source, when nothing is further from the truth. Shouldn't it call itself "Fox Propaganda" or something similar so people would know? That would be the honest thing to do. Why didn't they (Rove and Ailes) stick with its original name, "G.O.P. TV"?
As a propaganda outlet for the republican party, it mixes truths, half-truths, and lies for the political objective of persuading Americans to embrace oligarchy - so exposing it, which MSNBC does, is a public service.
Tell me, are the many Democrat and/or liberals hosts and guests on Fox News in on the "propaganda?"
Recent data from Pew Research shows that 71% of Romney stories on MSNBC were negative and 46% of Romney stories on Fox News were negative.
Back in 2008, the figures were like this:
2008 Presidential Election Coverage
MSNBC
14% of Obama stories were negative
73% of McCain stories were negative
Compare with:
Fox News
40% of Obama stories were negative
40% of McCain stories were negative
(Source: Project for Excellence in Journalism, Oct. 29, 2008)
Tell me again which is the actual "propaganda" network. And which one really is the more fair & balanced?
And Fox News has only been around since 1996, not quite "35 years."
Why are liberals so obsessed with Fox?
If it was really as irrelevant as you claim, there would be no need to constantly post and obsess over it... over, and over, and over...
Because they think every news station should be left-wing. If it's not, it's just "propaganda" for the Republicans.
Why are liberals so obsessed with Fox?
If it was really as irrelevant as you claim, there would be no need to constantly post and obsess over it... over, and over, and over...
It seems to me that the right wing media completely sold out and misinformed it's fan base. A Romney landslide they promised. The polls were skewed. Romney himself was "shell shocked..."
Well, as you know it turns out there was no Romney landslide. The polls for the most part turned out to be dead on balls accurate.
With other unbiased studies showing that Fox viewers are the most misinformed, isn't it time the right wing demand the truth from their news source(s)? Aren't they humiliated making bold predictions that turn out to be completely wrong. Doesn't bloviating about belief when fact contra-dicts you get embarrassing.
I fully believe that debate is positive and that both sides have something to offer the country-- but, my right wing friends, you have been misled. If you are willing to be continue to be because you prefer lies you enjoy to truth you don't your side will never contribute positively to the dialog.
What a disappointment. Based on the title of this thread, I thought I was FINALLY going to see a list of LIES told by FOX News. But instead, nothing but whiny, Liberal blather.
Now let me clue you in - they were PREDICTIONS, not FACT. There's a difference. What is reported on Benghazi for example, is FACT. What pundits and pollsters like Frank Luntz do is make PREDICTIONS.
Tell me, are the many Democrat and/or liberals hosts and guests on Fox News in on the "propaganda?"
Recent data from Pew Research shows that 71% of Romney stories on MSNBC were negative and 46% of Romney stories on Fox News were negative.
Back in 2008, the figures were like this:
2008 Presidential Election Coverage
MSNBC
14% of Obama stories were negative
73% of McCain stories were negative
Compare with:
Fox News
40% of Obama stories were negative
40% of McCain stories were negative
(Source: Project for Excellence in Journalism, Oct. 29, 2008)
Tell me again which is the actual "propaganda" network. And which one really is the more fair & balanced?
And Fox News has only been around since 1996, not quite "35 years."
The operative word is "stories." While Fox has a news segment with news stories, most of Fox is O'Reilly, Hannity, etc., which aren't stories but opinion. Those were decidingly anti-Democratic in 2008 and 2012.
Fox has the best disaster coverage. Whenever there is a disaster I tune to Fox. I will never forget the job Sheppard Smith did in exposing the miserable response to Katrina. His commentary was a classic of broadcast journalism. But for everyday news and commentary, well Fox is anything but fair and balanced.
Tell me, are the many Democrat and/or liberals hosts and guests on Fox News in on the "propaganda?"
Recent data from Pew Research shows that 71% of Romney stories on MSNBC were negative and 46% of Romney stories on Fox News were negative.
Back in 2008, the figures were like this:
2008 Presidential Election Coverage
MSNBC
14% of Obama stories were negative
73% of McCain stories were negative
Compare with:
Fox News
40% of Obama stories were negative
40% of McCain stories were negative
(Source: Project for Excellence in Journalism, Oct. 29, 2008)
Tell me again which is the actual "propaganda" network. And which one really is the more fair & balanced?
And Fox News has only been around since 1996, not quite "35 years."
If you were on the site anyway why didnt you just post it as a link?Your numbers dont explain what the criteria was for the results or what constitutes a negative story.. as for "the many Democrat and/or liberals hosts and guests on Fox News in on the "propaganda?" who might these people be?
What a disappointment. Based on the title of this thread, I thought I was FINALLY going to see a list of LIES told by FOX News. But instead, nothing but whiny, Liberal blather.
My problem with Fox is that they incite their viewers to join in their angry hatred of . . . well,just about everything. Glen Beck and Sean Hannity come to mind.
The Repulican Party has allowed these people - to become the face of their party: Rush, Glen, Hannity, Beck.
They need to quickly divorce themselves from this lot.
Recent data from Pew Research shows that 71% of Romney stories on MSNBC were negative and 46% of Romney stories on Fox News were negative.
Back in 2008, the figures were like this:
2008 Presidential Election Coverage
MSNBC
14% of Obama stories were negative
73% of McCain stories were negative
Compare with:
Fox News
40% of Obama stories were negative
40% of McCain stories were negative
(Source: Project for Excellence in Journalism, Oct. 29, 2008)
Tell me again which is the actual "propaganda" network. And which one really is the more fair & balanced?
^This.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
Fox has the best disaster coverage. Whenever there is a disaster I tune to Fox.
^And this too.
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.
