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.
What does Fox have to do with the topic of this thread? Nothing, but it should distract people from seeing that there are incompetent, quick to judge, unprofessional people on BOTH sides of any political writing.
The bolded part of your second sentence IS the point of the Fox example. Thanks giving the obvious answer to your question yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosopis
For what it's worth, I read Fox's website daily, but avoid the kinds of stories you describe and anything written by that Starnes guy. That's only a drop in the bucket compared to having to avoid ALL of CNN for largely the same reason - obvious bias.
CNN isn't even in the same league as Fox and MSNBC, both of whom are the champs when it comes to bias reporting.
Last edited by helenejen; 07-30-2014 at 03:00 PM..
The bolded part of your second sentence IS the point of the Fox example. Thanks giving the obvious answer to your question yourself.
Yes, it exists on both sides. Seeing it at Fox does not excuse seeing it elsewhere. You only bring Fox up as if to say "yeah, well you guys are worse!" That's not addressing the subject of discussion, how sources that are often held up as infallible by those on the left can be just as gullible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenejen
CNN isn't even in the same league as Fox and MSNBC, both of whom are the champs when it comes to bias reporting.
For news itself I find them about equal. For all the religious touchy-feely stuff Fox runs, CNN has "Funny cat video goes VIRAL!!!" For commentary, CNN is just as left as Fox is right - both have their tilt, but both run an opposing opinion now and then - but not as often as they should do. The ads on Fox's website are vastly more annoying, but I don't read news sites for the ads. Also, I am referring to their websites, as I do not watch either on TV.
When a Republican is elected President, I will go back to reading CNN. I find the biases of the underdog to be more easily overlooked than the biases of those who's guy is in office. It will be interesting the next time we get a Republican President, to see if Fox keeps the libertarian wing on their opinion page - those guys are going to find plenty to criticize in a GOP Prez.
The rest of the media was much better at being adversarial when Clinton was in office, with Mr. Obama they have, as a group with a few exceptions, been much more lax in asking tough questions and running critical stories.
It fit their narrative of the evil, hateful conservatives. Pretty much anything hateful, they'll believe, it helps reinforce their liberal armor that assures them how much better they are then those hated Conservatives.
Their politicians might be bad, but they will always believe the hated cons are worse, to justify voting for their liberal candidates.
Hardly the first time something like this has happened unfortunately:
"A Fox News correspondent has been busted again for pushing a one-sided story claiming religious persecution of Christians . . . Todd Starnes helped promote a story about a California first-grader who allegedly was not allowed to give a one-minute presentation about her family’s Christmas tradition because it included religious references. Other targets of Starnes’ poorly sourced reporting have reported similar harassment."
Yes, it exists on both sides. Seeing it at Fox does not excuse seeing it elsewhere. You only bring Fox up as if to say "yeah, well you guys are worse!"
I never implied "yeah, well you guys are worse." Given that I don't watch either, I don't have a horse in the race. That fact is is that this kind of thing is evidence of a systemic problem with pseudo-journalism today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosopis
That's not addressing the subject of discussion, how sources that are often held up as infallible by those on the left can be just as gullible.
You just illustrated how I addressed the subject of the discussion by stating "can be just as." That implies a comparison. And where in the world did you get the idea that people on the left think MSNBC is infallible? Based on their ratings, hardly anyone is watching so . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosopis
For news itself I find them about equal. For all the religious touchy-feely stuff Fox runs, CNN has "Funny cat video goes VIRAL!!!" For commentary, CNN is just as left as Fox is right - both have their tilt, but both run an opposing opinion now and then - but not as often as they should do. The ads on Fox's website are vastly more annoying, but I don't read news sites for the ads. Also, I am referring to their websites, as I do not watch either on TV.
When a Republican is elected President, I will go back to reading CNN. I find the biases of the underdog to be more easily overlooked than the biases of those who's guy is in office. It will be interesting the next time we get a Republican President, to see if Fox keeps the libertarian wing on their opinion page - those guys are going to find plenty to criticize in a GOP Prez.
The rest of the media was much better at being adversarial when Clinton was in office, with Mr. Obama they have, as a group with a few exceptions, been much more lax in asking tough questions and running critical stories.
There's an interesting thread from a while back that reported the findings of a study that showed that Fox and MSNBC were the most biased cable news sources. I can't seem to find it. Maybe someone else can and can post it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
You have mastered the art of deflection, young grasshopper.
Pssstt.... The story isn't about Fox. Do you have an on-topic comment to make?
The story is about false stories being reported as true by a news outlet. The thread gives an example of a larger problem. I'm speaking to the larger problem. Why does that bother you exactly?
Why is it that the war on women seems to be coming more from the left than the right? Palin, Bachmann, Haley, and all conservative females are open season.
Don't be silly.
The so called War on Women refer to legislative and rhetorical attacks on women.
Not caring for some politicians who happen to be women is not a War on Women.
It fit their narrative of the evil, hateful conservatives. Pretty much anything hateful, they'll believe, it helps reinforce their liberal armor that assures them how much better they are then those hated Conservatives.
ThinkProgress, which the daily caller describes as being owned by "the Center for American Progress, is populated with numerous veterans of the Clinton and Obama administrations" published a story about conservative Michele Bachmann that turned out to be completely fabricated.
Someone created a phony website "KCTV 7" and an equally phony interview of beautiful Michele Bachmannn. Liberal websites including ThinkProgress, DailyKos, and Crooks and Liars all fell for the hoax, as did liberal posters on CD. //www.city-data.com/forum/polit...ids-labor.html
An old maxim from the world of flim-flam states that "you can't cheat an honest man."
Kind of like how mindless partisans parrot things on here that aren't true?
Hardly the first time something like this has happened unfortunately:
"A Fox News correspondent has been busted again for pushing a one-sided story claiming religious persecution of Christians . . . Todd Starnes helped promote a story about a California first-grader who allegedly was not allowed to give a one-minute presentation about her family’s Christmas tradition because it included religious references. Other targets of Starnes’ poorly sourced reporting have reported similar harassment."
"The teacher, Tammy Williams, explained what really happened"
"The school's principal, Ami Paradise, likewise released a statement declaring that the claims of anti-Christian bigotry made by Advocates of Faith and Freedom were entirely bogus"
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.
