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.
Id be fine if they just called themselves Fox Media, or Fox Editorial or something like that. That leaves a lot of latitude for the opinionated programming, that I see so often on Fox News. But the fact that they brand their entire programming as Fox "News", as though there is some degree of objectivity to their production in its entirety is dishonest and misleading. Maybe their news coverage is impartial, but their programming is biased as can be. I think CNN is the least generally biased of the three that I have watched. MSNBC has an over the top liberal bias IMO...But they dont refer to themselves as MSNBC News. [although they are a news channel]
So essentially, I have no problem with Fox's conservative bias...hell I used to listen to talk radio regularly just for the conservative perspective. But at least talk radio is honest about what it is. "Conservative talk radio"...Right wing talk radio runs news reports every hour too, but its primary label is that of Conservative talk radio, so there is no expectation of objectivity in its programming..
But when I hear an outlet like Fox News tout themselves as a legitimate news source, and then run show after show of people referring to a sitting president as Socialist, Fascist, dictator, Communist, Marxist etc., then they are falsely portraying their supposed objectivity.
Was CNN or MSNBC opinion news and complimentary shows any different then Fox News today, back during the Bush administration? They sure as hell did not agree with anything the Bush admin was doing and came out against the Bush administration every single day.
So once again, if Fox News talked of 0bama in glowing, complimentary terms - well..... then fox News would be a for real news organization, but if their opinion shows come out against 0bama, then you people view them as an illegitimate news source.
Was CNN or MSNBC opinion news and complimentary shows any different then Fox News today, back during the Bush administration? They sure as hell did not agree with anything the Bush admin was doing and came out against the Bush administration every single day.
So once again, if Fox News talked of 0bama in glowing, complimentary terms - well..... then fox News would be a for real news organization, but if their opinion shows come out against 0bama, then you people view them as an illegitimate news source.
Other than MAYBE Rick Sanchez...which of CNN's shows is even opinion? Now MSNBC is obviously biased...which is why I hardly ever watch them. I dont care that Fox News is against Obama, I just dislike that they pretend to be a reputable source for news/fair and balanced.
Simple because the white house doesn't want us to realize the bad programs being crammed down our throats until it is too late, why do you think they are in such a big hurry to do all of this crap?
Simple because the white house doesn't want us to realize the bad programs being crammed down our throats until it is too late, why do you think they are in such a big hurry to do all of this crap?
Right, lets give our ear to the insurance spokespeople*.
Its not like we don't know how that turns out (yay for bankruptcies).
Profit-motivated businessmen are always more trustworthy than election officials.
*I know some of you won't connect the dots.
Fox/GOP are mouth-pieces for insurance companies.
Capitalism though not perfect, works way better than this crap, weak companies should just fail and go away and a stronger company takes over, that is how it is supposed to work.
Capitalism though not perfect, works way better than this crap, weak companies should just fail and go away and a stronger company takes over, that is how it is supposed to work.
I agree with this theory...and was against any sort of bailout for any of the companies...however, wasnt it the companiesasked for bailouts?...it wasnt the govts. idea if I remember correctly...and I thought Bush was the one who signed the legislation to actually set the whole bailout snowball into motion, wasnt he?...
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.
