Burgold Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Perhaps, but it's not like FOX is the new kid on the block anymore. They've been around for a long time and been quite profitable too. They don't get the rookie growing pain excuse. They are big, wealthy, and profitable enough to be exactly who they want to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spearfeather Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Application server error 500? Try it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Funny. Silly, but funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Perhaps, but it's not like FOX is the new kid on the block anymore. They've been around for a long time and been quite profitable too. They don't get the rookie growing pain excuse. They are big, wealthy, and profitable enough to be exactly who they want to be. I don't think you're taking their origination date or economic status into account. MSNBC and FOX came about 15 or 17 years after CNN. FOX didn't take off economically until about 2003 or so. FOX is just now spending about the same amount at CNN. But all that is besides the point. Really, Burg, even if FOX were to continue to increase bureaus at a pace of 3 a year, do you think they'd become less biased? I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 That's true. I do think it is an organizational poison, a festering sickness that breeds within the corrupt and hate filled mind of profiteering leeches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 That's true. I do think it is an organizational poison, a festering sickness that breeds within the corrupt and hate filled mind of profiteering leeches. Well now we're back to a general statement about all for-profit news organizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Well now we're back to a general statement about all for-profit news organizations. I like that I can get away with being over the top with you. There's a part of me that expected someone to villify me for that and think that I meant it absolutely seriously. I suspect someone still will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebowski Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Intriguingly, I just found this--http://thecablegame.blogspot.com/2010/11/jann-wenner-liberal-democrat-bigtime.html Rolling Stone owner-publisher Jann Wenner gave 98 percent of his more than $200,000 in political campaign contributions to Democrats and lefty organizations, including Barack Obama, according to the curiously named, but comprehensive website NewsMeat. That little circle on the screen grab above shows it: Lotsa blue, just a tiny sliver of red. Other lefty recipients included Al Franken, John Kerry, and Dick Durbin. You get the idea. Something to keep in mind when Wenner's hit piece on Fox News comes out. ------------------------------- Now, 98% is not the same as 100%, but it seems that there is a little descrepency going on. (mind you, on a practical level I don't think there's a big difference between 98 and 100, but still) Btw, did you get your data from Wiki? I saw something that sounded like what you pasted under Wiki when I did a Google search? If conservatives dismiss an article in the Rolling Stone based on the editor's policies, aren't they in turn dismissing their own entire network? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 If conservatives dismiss an article in the Rolling Stone based on the editor's policies, aren't they in turn dismissing their own entire network? No because that network is answering the bias by providing a balance. See, if there's 97 news agencies, and 96 of them are so far left that we've never gotten anything but lefty spin our whole lives (coincidentally while the country has turned into a haven for communist homo-lovin' socialist anti-God nutjobs), then the only way to insure fair reporting is to come up with a news source that is SO biased the other way that it offsets every other news organization that is biased (ie: everyone who ever disagrees with the them.) that way it's not lying and manipulating. That way its "Fair and Balanced". And it's never, ever . ever "mainstream".. no matter how many people tune in. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Be nice. Some people feel a pathological need to be lied to... to be condescended to. Some people just can't face reality and need the comforting hand of Roger to steer their thinking and confirm their every fiction. Show compassion for those who demand to be deluded and knowingly swallow horse**** every day just so that their worldview can be confirmed. Imagine a world where no one is stoking your anger and creating false enemies daily. Bang. Is that really a world you want to live in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I like that I can get away with being over the top with you. There's a part of me that expected someone to villify me for that and think that I meant it absolutely seriously. I suspect someone still will. Oh no, I thought that mini-rant was accurate. I just happen to think we could throw most news organizations under the bus while we're at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Be nice. Some people feel a pathological need to be lied to... to be condescended to. Some people just can't face reality and need the comforting hand of Roger to steer their thinking and confirm their every fiction.Show compassion for those who demand to be deluded and knowingly swallow horse**** every day just so that their worldview can be confirmed. Imagine a world where no one is stoking your anger and creating false enemies daily. Bang. Is that really a world you want to live in? Maybe after swallowing one kind of horse**** for 50 years or so, some people just want a different flavor. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Maybe after swallowing one kind of horse**** for 50 years or so, some people just want a different flavor. lolYou mean after NOT swallowing for 50 years. Now the side that has been swallowing for those 50 years is just realizing that press manipulation is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I wouldn't label Fox News as a "Fear Factory." Sure they have some opinionated blowhards, but they are more of a right leaning news source as opposed to a fear mongering news outlet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Personally, I get all my news right here, from the perfectly fair and reasonable posters of Extremeskins. Careful, I'm going to warp your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The big issue I have with FoxNews is that it's not really a news-gathering organization. It's an opinion journal brought to cable. And everyone understands this at their core. There is a reason that when a major event takes place - like the death of Bin Laden - everyone turns to CNN. CNN has reporters; Fox has editorialists. Granted, opinions are more interesting which is why - day to day - Fox buries CNN. But the Fox model is dangerous in the sense that at some point - someone somewhere needs to actually report a story for their to be opinions on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headexplode Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 No, you're not the only one. I never looked at CNN as a "liberal" network. Its just straight news to me. No particular agenda. I always looked at it as standard, corporate driven filler in between commercials. Of course, Fox News is the same, but as others have pointed out, it has a more specifically targeted audicence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 it has a more specifically targeted audicence. KHJbSvidohg&feature=related Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The big issue I have with FoxNews is that it's not really a news-gathering organization. It's an opinion journal brought to cable. And everyone understands this at their core. There is a reason that when a major event takes place - like the death of Bin Laden - everyone turns to CNN. CNN has reporters; Fox has editorialists. Granted' date=' opinions are more interesting which is why - day to day - Fox buries CNN. But the Fox model is dangerous in the sense that at some point - someone somewhere needs to actually report a story for their to be opinions on.[/quote'] I think CNN basically ceded that responsibility to Headline News didn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I wouldn't label Fox News as a "Fear Factory." Sure they have some opinionated blowhards, but they are more of a right leaning news source as opposed to a fear mongering news outlet. I actually really think "fear factory" is a pretty fair descriptor. They certainly primarily barter and trade in fear and hate. After all, that's why the other side is the enemy and no quarter can be given. Think about how quickly they came up with a way to villainize Obama for his part in getting Bin Laden. They couldn't stand the possibility that all of America could stand united and celebrate this so they fabricated a story of Obama stealing all the credit and disrespecting the military not to mention having no role whatsoever in the mission except as a rubber stamp. The job of FOX and a primary strategy of Conservatives since Nixon is a concerted effort to paint the media as other and the enemy. It's worked to a really fantastic degree. Just a few pages up, two folks are including the golden age of newspaper as manipulative horse hockey. It takes a lot of paranoia to get there and they passed that threshhold a long time ago. For the people who defend FOX, every other news source seems dubious and nefarious and laden with liberal agendas as if every other news agency was some homogenous entity that didn't compete against each other and worked hand in hand to lead us I don't know where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I wouldn't say "fear factory." I would say "outrage factory." I was watching Fox the other day and they had this Memorial Day story about this old woman who used to work for the Marines who wanted to fly her American Flag in front of her house all year round, but her nasty homeowner's association wouldn't let her. And so we got to hear her make her speech about how all her family served in the military, and so many have died, and she just wanted to honor all the soldiers. Then the reporter said "imagine how she felt when they wouldn't let her fly the flag!" And then she got to make another speech about how she wanted to cry. The outrage built up nicely. Another assault on patriotic Americans. What is this country coming to? Then Fox dropped in the last little bit in the last 10 seconds of the piece: the homeowners association denies that they asked her not to fly the flag and says she can fly it all year round if she wants. No follow up. But the story was important enough to replay it all day on Memorial Day. Moving on... Did Obama deliberately insult the Queen of England? We'll tell you after the Break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I don't get why some people have a problem with Fox news. Put the politics aside for a moment and consider what I am saying. If I asked you how you liked your bullspit, either in your face or barely mentioned, the truth is we would all choose a different method of hearing it. We all like to listen to things the way we can understand them. Fox caters to an audience that happens to like the bullspit said the way they do it. You can argue if it's news with a slant, and some of it is. You can argue if they make crap up and some of that is too. The bigger story about Fox news is why as Americans do we want to listen to this crap? Why did so many people switch off ABC/NBC/CBS just to listen to the same old tired crap told a different way? I think the reason is people were fed up. Your average person watching the news was sick and tired of the pansy ass way they were getting the news told to them. The average person didn't really give a damn if the story was true or not. They liked enjoyed the style the news was broadcast in. So they bought into Fox and it became the number one news channel. So what about the guy who figured out how to communicate to that audience. My question is why isn't there competition to Fox news since the blue print for success is right there for you. Why hasn't the democrats who complain about Fox news come out with Fox news for Liberals instead of putting out a Katie Curock show? Why hasn't a station like CNBC who has many fewer followers come out with a hard hitting in your face program like Fox has? The country voted for Obama in a landslide, clearly the audience is there that would listen to the same lies and bullspit spun a different way and a news channel could kick Fox's ass if they truely wanted to. I think the reason why its never happened is for many liberals they think better of themselves for not sinking to the low that Fox did. But this kind of thinking in the hearts and minds of men doesn't work. Who brings morals to a gun fight anyway? Not all liberals think this way. Surely there is a group of people out there who would love a liberal version of Fox news. Why hasn't it come out yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Because it's the opposite of what news should be. FOX generates controversy. It provokes passion, fear, and anger. Some of that is good, but if you have to lie to do it, if you have create artificial storieslines and villianize people who are innocent of wrongdoing then you are doing a misservice. Worse, you are causing harm. People believe the lies FOX tells. They embrace them. Even the ones they know to be lies. It's an odd pathology. And if you say the other side does it... no, they don't, or if they do the perpetrator gets suspended, fired or reprimanded. My proof? If the so-called liberal media did what FOX does we would hear about it. They're certainly always on the hunt to crucify any liberal or liberal organization. The fact that you don't hear it or rarely hear it despite being outnumbered (according to the right-wing media) by at least 100:1 means something. The number of watch groups that pounce on every war on Christmas, the number of talking heads on radio and tv would never let the liberal media get away with slander or lies. So, we must presume that only one side does it with regularity. The conservative listener deserves better. They should demand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The conservative listener deserves better. They should demand it. It's the difference between listening to Hannity or Beck or Mark Levin... and listening to John Bachelor. The first are angry and dishonest and manipulative, while Bachelor is thoughtful, even handed, yet totally conservative. Fox is 100 percent Hannity Style - and Zero percent Bachelor style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebowski Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Who brings morals to a gun fight anyway? That's part of the problem. News and politics shouldn't be a gun fight. It should be rational. It is the fight mentality that is holding back any change. The right is more concerned with winning the fight than working towards solutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.