[jweave23]

I thought this was funny:

http://www.moveon.org/fox/

If you download and read the PDF file with the claims against FOX News, they go into some detail regarding the rather obvious bias. The O'Reilly clip is good too. Why do I post this? Why not, it will give VG, PC1, and the rest of the gents something to keep themselves occupied

Also another great link on the topic: http://www.outfoxed.org/

and yes, it's quite obvious these links are biased towards the left...well duh!

[VanillaGorilla]

Your not saying that move on.org is a reliable source of information and is fair and balanced are you? lol They compaired Bush to Hitler.
Are they really pursuing this? That's just as ridiculous as FOX suing Frankin. Everything moveontotheleft.org is saying the mainstream press is guilty of just in favor of a left wing agenda. Look at half the stuff Dan rather, Peter Jennings, and the other guy says. It's abc, cbs, nbc, cnn, msnbs, cnbc against FOX. With news papers it's the Wall Street Journal and the Washington times against well all of the papers. Conservative talk radio is so successful because there is such a predominantly liberal bias in the print and news media. There many conservative hosts against NPR (which is still on the air because the tax payer subsides it) and Al Frankin (who isn't doing very well with ratings).

http://www.ratherbiased.com/

[jweave23]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

Your not saying that move on.org is a reliable source of information and is fair and balanced are you? lol They compaired Bush to Hitler.

Note this:

Originally Posted by jweave23

and yes, it's quite obvious these links are biased towards the left...well duh!

Of course it's biased towards the left, that goes without saying. The difference with FOX News is the pure bullshit tagline of "fair and balanced". They use this as their motto, a major news agency and member of the press, and it's simply not true in any way. Reliable? Well if you can discredit the direct evidence they provide in this instance then I guess they are unreliable

[CDB]

Originally Posted by jweave23

Note this:
Of course it's biased towards the left, that goes without saying. The difference with FOX News is the pure bullshit tagline of "fair and balanced". They use this as their motto, a major news agency and member of the press, and it's simply not true in any way. Reliable? Well if you can discredit the direct evidence they provide in this instance then I guess they are unreliable

Actually they are fair and balanced compared to the mainstream press. Liberals don't like it though because FOX labels everyone with their ideology when they're on, not just the conservatives. They don't go to a blatantly leftist group like NOW for 'America's Reaction' to this or that decision on abortion for instance, and then invite some seriously untelegenic and inarticulate "conservative" on for an oppossing viewpoint. They don't report a school shooting and conveniently leave out the fact that a citizen with a gun, not a cop, stopped the killer. Conservatives are labeled conservatives, liberals liberal, and everyone is given a fair shake.

The problem is the mainstream press and those who think it's fair have been so insulated for so long they actually do think they're moderate. They've cut off the right wing of the political spectrum and relabeled themselves as middle of the road and they actually believe it. They're completely and blissfully unaware that anywhere besides the eastern and western seaboards exist. They have no knowledge of the unbelievably vast amount of conservative scholarship that's out there that forms the basis of the real right wing or traditional conservatives, like Murray Rothbard, Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, Menken, Santayana, Lew Rockwell, Joseph Sobran, Hayek, Garet Garrett, etc. I know because I used to be one of those liberals. I was put into a position where I had to actually defend my views consistently in college and I ended up doing a complete U turn and going further to the right than most people know exists. Interesting trip to say the least, especially when I saw the visciousness, intolerrance and unbelievably violent reactions of one time friends when they realized how I was changing, even at first when those changes were slight.

[VanillaGorilla]

They use this as their motto, a major news agency and member of the press, and it's simply not true in any way. Reliable? Well if you can discredit the direct evidence they provide in this instance then I guess they are unreliable

The rest of the media claims to be fair and balanced as well though it's not the slogan of their station. Take the paper of record for the united states. The New York times is supposed to be fair and balanced but it's not. It slants the news to the left and is increasingly blurring the line between it's editorial page and it's news room. The Times is the template for the rest of the media to follow. On 60 minutes Dan rather did his best impression of Monica Lewinski when he was interviewing Bill Clinton. He asked him absolutely no tough questions and was as giddy as a school girl to be around Bubba. It's funny I can recall them interviewing any former republican president like that. They gave a full hour to Richard Clark. It's funny but I can't recall them giving anyone critical of the Clinton administration a full hour or one segment other than to try to debunk what they were saying. The 60 minutes had on the John/ John ticket and their wives. Did they ever have Bush/ Cheney and their wives like they covered Kerry/ Edwards? Hell no. That's just one news program. I could come up with stories for most media outlets. Read Biased by Goldberg or Coloring the News which is a really good book.
Does FOX have a conservative slant? Sure but you can't say they are inaccurate or pure bullshit. If your upset about that why aren't you upset about every other news agency having a slant to the left?
What I noticed one of the things FOX does do is give coverage to stories that the rest of the press would ignore. Hanity is on with Combes so you can't really say there is only one point of view there. O'Reilly has a short temper when someone will dodge questions or will refuse to answer or make an asinine point. He replayed a interview with Michael Moore a few weeks ago and he wasn't very hostile towards him at all. I have seen him interview democrats and had a civil discussion.What specially have they put on that's unreliable?

[VanillaGorilla]

Of course it's biased towards the left, that goes without saying. The difference with FOX News is the pure bullshit tagline of "fair and balanced".

You can't compare fox news to moveon.org. Moveon.org is a bunch of socialist and about as far leftwing as you can get. It's a political organization not a news agency. You are acting as if moveon doesn't have an agenda and their complaint about FOX is a valid one. So FOX news is complete bullshit but moveonovertocommunism.org isn't? If anything you have shown what a bunch of sycophants moveon.org really is. If I gave money to an organization like that I would be pissed that they were wasting my donation and their time on something so asinine. I guess when your a professional activist and you don't have a real job it tends to warp the mind.

[VanillaGorilla]

Look at the list of the people interviewed in that take out piece on FOX. They are guilty of what they are accusing FOX of. They sure as hell didn't do a fair and balanced job of making a documentary. Hypocrisy is a word liberals don't know the definition of. Do as I say not as I do.

[CEDeoudes59]

the news part is definitly fair, accurate, and balanced on fox.
The talk shows are definitly on the right however.

Thats what sets fox apart.
Other networks, BOTH the news and the talk shows are bias.

[CDB]

Originally Posted by Deoudes59

Thats what sets fox apart. Other networks, BOTH the news and the talk shows are bias.

And the anchor women on FOX are hotter.

[jweave23]

Originally Posted by CDB

Actually they are fair and balanced compared to the mainstream press. Liberals don't like it though because FOX labels everyone with their ideology when they're on, not just the conservatives. They don't go to a blatantly leftist group like NOW for 'America's Reaction' to this or that decision on abortion for instance, and then invite some seriously untelegenic and inarticulate "conservative" on for an oppossing viewpoint. They don't report a school shooting and conveniently leave out the fact that a citizen with a gun, not a cop, stopped the killer. Conservatives are labeled conservatives, liberals liberal, and everyone is given a fair shake.

The problem is the mainstream press and those who think it's fair have been so insulated for so long they actually do think they're moderate. They've cut off the right wing of the political spectrum and relabeled themselves as middle of the road and they actually believe it. They're completely and blissfully unaware that anywhere besides the eastern and western seaboards exist. They have no knowledge of the unbelievably vast amount of conservative scholarship that's out there that forms the basis of the real right wing or traditional conservatives, like Murray Rothbard, Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, Menken, Santayana, Lew Rockwell, Joseph Sobran, Hayek, Garet Garrett, etc. I know because I used to be one of those liberals. I was put into a position where I had to actually defend my views consistently in college and I ended up doing a complete U turn and going further to the right than most people know exists. Interesting trip to say the least, especially when I saw the visciousness, intolerrance and unbelievably violent reactions of one time friends when they realized how I was changing, even at first when those changes were slight.

Well apparently many disagree with you regarding FOX, including myself. If you have read the statement filed on that link, it seems rather hard to argue those facts. I actually used to watch FOX most of the time, I generally like their talent and programming, but the spin just got too much for me. When it becomes quite apparent to people like me, who very casually follow politics, I consider them ridiculous. I would love to see someone present, in a concise and quantitative manner with sources as was done here, that either 1. FOX is not bias and should use the slogan "fair and balanced" or 2. other agencies are equally as bad

As for scholarship and the inner workings of right and left....I agree, most don't know what is out there (either side), but that's simply because most average citizens don't have the time to get in that deep. I work at a law school (albeit a 4th teir, lol), so believe me I see academics every day who seem to forget the average, or even what would be considered highly informed average citizen, simply do not take the in depth interest they do.

I relate it to this: it's all about expectations. My area of expertise is IT. If I engage in a conversation with someone reagrding IT who is not in the industry, I have to adjust my arguments due to their experiances and probable lack of in-depth knowledge regarding IT and appeal to their judgement based on what the average Joe knows, not what the average IT guys know. Anyway, I disagree completely with you on FOX.

[jweave23]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

The rest of the media claims to be fair and balanced as well though it's not the slogan of their station. Take the paper of record for the united states. The New York times is supposed to be fair and balanced but it's not. It slants the news to the left and is increasingly blurring the line between it's editorial page and it's news room. The Times is the template for the rest of the media to follow. On 60 minutes Dan rather did his best impression of Monica Lewinski when he was interviewing Bill Clinton. He asked him absolutely no tough questions and was as giddy as a school girl to be around Bubba. It's funny I can recall them interviewing any former republican president like that. They gave a full hour to Richard Clark. It's funny but I can't recall them giving anyone critical of the Clinton administration a full hour or one segment other than to try to debunk what they were saying. The 60 minutes had on the John/ John ticket and their wives. Did they ever have Bush/ Cheney and their wives like they covered Kerry/ Edwards? Hell no. That's just one news program. I could come up with stories for most media outlets. Read Biased by Goldberg or Coloring the News which is a really good book.
Does FOX have a conservative slant? Sure but you can't say they are inaccurate or pure bullshit. If your upset about that why aren't you upset about every other news agency having a slant to the left?
What I noticed one of the things FOX does do is give coverage to stories that the rest of the press would ignore. Hanity is on with Combes so you can't really say there is only one point of view there. O'Reilly has a short temper when someone will dodge questions or will refuse to answer or make an asinine point. He replayed a interview with Michael Moore a few weeks ago and he wasn't very hostile towards him at all. I have seen him interview democrats and had a civil discussion.What specially have they put on that's unreliable?

I gave a link that presented a clear and detailed argument as to why FOX News should rethink using the slogan "fair and balanced", I have not seen the same from anyone else regarding another news agency, and your examples are quite lackluster in comparison...although everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion. When you put yourself out there with a tagline like "fair and balanced", expect to be called out on it if you're as obviously slanted as FOX is.

I'm not saying FOX is inaccurate or BS, but their tagline is when used in context to describe their news reporting practices, big difference. No news agencies cannot afford to be inaccurate or false, the point here is the spin and direction management gives towards their channel.

We're always going to have partisanship and a slight reflection of this in the media, I tend to believe that this incredibly hard to avoid considering human nature and the tendancy of most people to be subjective, but I do have a problem with it getting "out of hand" or a company being misrepresentative, which is IMO what FOX has done. Obviously we disgaree, lol.

[jweave23]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

You can't compare fox news to moveon.org. Moveon.org is a bunch of socialist and about as far leftwing as you can get. It's a political organization not a news agency. You are acting as if moveon doesn't have an agenda and their complaint about FOX is a valid one. So FOX news is complete bullshit but moveonovertocommunism.org isn't? If anything you have shown what a bunch of sycophants moveon.org really is. If I gave money to an organization like that I would be pissed that they were wasting my donation and their time on something so asinine. I guess when your a professional activist and you don't have a real job it tends to warp the mind.

I have not compared moveon.org to FOX, you just did. I simply linked to a complaint they have files against FOX, which I agree with. I conceded they are very left, I thought this was blatantly obvious going into it, and would not pretend it otherwise. Moveon is a PAC, not a major national news agency, they are apples and oranges in my book.

Moveon.org DOES have an agenda, this again is quite obvious....your point is what? If you can argue the facts presented in the complaint and render them useless, fine...otherwise their agenda does not invalidate their complaint.

[jweave23]

Originally Posted by CDB

And the anchor women on FOX are hotter.

Now that I definitely agree with!!

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by Deoudes59

the news part is definitly fair, accurate, and balanced on fox.
The talk shows are definitly on the right however.

Thats what sets fox apart.
Other networks, BOTH the news and the talk shows are bias.

Oh man, I accidentally happend to watch the fox morning 'news' show a couple of months ago. For me, I don't think that shows like that bring anything credible to the network.

[cr4ytonic]

Fox has all the MILF hotties to announce the news!

I think fox is pretty balanced compared to the New York Times, they at least label their guests well and get intelligent people from both sides. I have trouble reading the NYT any more.

If they had Michael Savage doing their programming then sure, they would be biased but it is not the case. Be sure to remember when you talk about news coverage, it does not include O'Rielly, etc (those are not news shows, they are talk shows).

Liberals tend to think fox is biased, conservatives think the NYT/LA times/etc are biased, it is just the way it is.

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by jweave23

I have not compared moveon.org to FOX, you just did. I simply linked to a complaint they have files against FOX, which I agree with. I conceded they are very left, I thought this was blatantly obvious going into it, and would not pretend it otherwise. Moveon is a PAC, not a major national news agency, they are apples and oranges in my book.

Moveon.org DOES have an agenda, this again is quite obvious....your point is what? If you can argue the facts presented in the complaint and render them useless, fine...otherwise their agenda does not invalidate their complaint.

Does FOX pande