• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Thread to Call Out Fox News Network

mpg said:
Sometimes bias is done consciously and sometimes it isn't. Only a mind reader can tell the difference. Content is what counts.
Click to expand...

Yes, accurate content. We really should worry less about bias and more about accuracy. Much easier to navigate bais than inaccuracy.
 
Boo Radley said:
What does is that one will have more support than another. It is the one with adequate support that means the most when trying to convince.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail right on the head.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes, accurate content. We really should worry less about bias and more about accuracy. Much easier to navigate bais than inaccuracy.
Click to expand...
Some of us feel that media bias is extremely important. That's why it has its own sub-forum.
 
mpg said:
Some of us feel that media bias is extremely important. That's why it has its own sub-forum.
Click to expand...

I know, i just think there are much larger problems. Media for profit has led us to less news and more political entertainers (with no standard of accuracy), emphasis on sensationalism over substance, and an excessive amount of silliness. Bias is the least of our concerns.

And these political entertainers (Along with politicians needing someway to negate their troubles) feed a notion of what bias is that is inaccurate. Bias is not how a story makes me look, because there is no good way to look at sex with interns (for example), but in the language and in inaccuracy without consequences. Too many don't really understand what real bias is. And fail to look at all the factors surrounding a story.
 
mpg said:
You hit the nail right on the head.
Click to expand...

And that has been my point to you all along. Where I think you fail is in recognizing solid support, or the lack thereof. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
A couple of those are less than accurate, let alone unbiased. Newsbusters is no different than media matters, only their bias is conservative. They're just as skewed and just as inaccurate.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim that any on my list were unbiased. And I know that one is sometimes inaccurate--but is also very often first.

When I check Newsbusters, what I see are clips and transcripts that I can check out for myself. Are you saying that the clips or transcripts are altered?
 
Jryan said:
lol, but you definitively agree that MSNBC should be taken off the air for their biased?
Click to expand...

Not at all.

Whatever gave you that impression?
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes, accurate content. We really should worry less about bias and more about accuracy. Much easier to navigate bais than inaccuracy.
Click to expand...


Still doing the Tango I see.

One man's accuracy is another man's inaccuracy. We all make decisions on personal judgement.
 
Last edited:
JasonI said:
Not sure if you can see them now...try this link...they have Zimmerman looking like this sad guy and Martin like a pissed off gangbanger with what looks like people fighting in the background...look at "related images" on the left

George Zimmerman charged with 2nd-degree murder in Trayvon Martin shooting | Fox News
Click to expand...



I saw Zimmerman's booking photo from yesterday. Then it went into 3 attorneys who were going to discuss the case.

There were two small photos below the article/video. Martin looked older; I didn't see a gangbanger photo of Martin.
 
JasonI said:
I think current pics are fair as well...I think they way they are portraying Martin in this photo is quite evident considering their history...
Click to expand...
I don't see how anyone could look at that pic and see a gangbanger. He looks normal to me, and I don't see any fighting going on in the background.

What if they showed a picture of him fighting? Would that be wrong?
 
Boo Radley said:
I didn't defend anyone, and that's a different discussion. I asked you what makes PBS's news liberal. Be specific.
Click to expand...

You might as well ask me to defend my opinion that the sun is hot. There is never enough for you. When dealing with people who suffer from "Who, What, Where, When" syndrome, you must realize the disease is very manipulative and deceiving, always looking for dark corners of the brain to hide in until needed.
 
mpg said:
I don't see how anyone could look at that pic and see a gangbanger. He looks normal to me, and I don't see any fighting going on in the background.

What if they showed a picture of him fighting? Would that be wrong?
Click to expand...

Like I said, to each his own...Fox has an agenda and everyone knows it...
 
JasonI said:
Like I said, to each his own...Fox has an agenda and everyone knows it...
Click to expand...


Tell me what was the Fox agenda by showing current pictures of both involved?
 
JasonI said:
Like I said, to each his own...Fox has an agenda and everyone knows it...
Click to expand...
I don't dispute that. It's easy to find examples of their bias, but some people see examples that aren't actually there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom