Fox is obviously biased but I find it hard to believe that they haven't had anyone opposing that law.
If you don't care, why did you post anything at all?Did Media Matters bother to detail for us how many times the Arizona law has been the subject of interviews on all the other cable news programs? Or they can't count that high? Oh yeah, and did they forget to tell us why we should care?:roll:
Because posting is the nature of the endeavor here abouts McFly. But seriously, why should anyone care that a cable news network has run 18 interviews with one of the players in one of the biggest stories of the year? I'd bet real money that between all the cable news channels this sheriff has been interviewed at least a hundred times or so, not even counting radio interviews. To quote a cliche, so the F what? Gianormous WHOOP TEE DOO. Carry on.If you don't care, why did you post anything at all?![]()
I think anyone would have to admit this is clear bias. I often hear that Fox News is biased; up 'til now, I hadn't thought much about it. Clearly they are. Thanks for the post.
Meh, I really don't understand why people need a story like this to question whether or not FOX is biased. Just watch when they interview or debate a Conservative/Republican, and then contrast that with a Liberal/Democrat. Since this New Black Panther Party is hot in the news, lets use it as an example:
Interviewing the "whistleblower" who happens to write for a conservative news outlet:
The same anchor interviewing Kristen Powers
Just listen to the tone, the language, it's obvious whose side she favors. but this is just one example.
Then there is the fact that Ms. Kelly makes no pretensions and is quite up front about her bias and the nature of her show. I always wonder why obvious as daylight things like that escape the notice of the oh so well informed Fox News fixated sorts we get at DP.:doh
Here let me try this out. Fox News is biased, you can listen to the tone, the language, it's obvious. But there is no "liberal" bias the mainstream media.:lamo
The bias in the MSM is not liberal, it's a corporate bias. After all, most of the MSM is owned by large corporations. They aim to make money.Here let me try this out. Fox News is biased, you can listen to the tone, the language, it's obvious. But there is no "liberal" bias the mainstream media.:lamo
Then there is the fact that Ms. Kelly makes no pretensions and is quite up front about her bias and the nature of her show. I always wonder why obvious as daylight things like that escape the notice of the oh so well informed Fox News fixated sorts we get at DP.:doh
Here let me try this out. Fox News is biased, you can listen to the tone, the language, it's obvious. But there is no "liberal" bias the mainstream media.:lamo
Actually no Fox does not designate her as straight news. She host an interview based hour long show that comes on during the day. This is hardly unheard of, in fact CNN and MSNBC do they same things during their programming day, but I suspect we won't find any post from you bemoaning the bias of those show host.Actually, according to FNC themselves, Megyn Kelly's show falls within the "straight news" time block. So it appears she is supposed to be considered as an anchor, not as a commentator. But I can't blame Fox for getting things mixed up, considering all their so called straight news shows peddle the same GOP talking points and cherry picked stories.
Actually no Fox does not designate her as straight news. She host an interview based hour long show that comes on during the day. This is hardly unheard of, in fact CNN and MSNBC do they same things during their programming day, but I suspect we won't find any post from you bemoaning the bias of those show host.![]()
Pointing to a 2009 article to argue about a five month old "new" show does not really do much for your argument here. Besides since virtually everyone employed at every cable news network is biased, what is your bias argument worth anyway? Get back to me when the host of this show starts lying and reporting false stories due to her ....gasp.....bias.Fox News argue it's "news hours" from 9 AM to 4PM
(NYtimes article, if you can't view it, check this TIME blog)
"America Live" with Megyn Kelly airs at 1pm. So yea, Fox does designate her as a hard news anchor.
Pointing to a 2009 article to argue about a five month old "new" show does not really do much for your argument here. Besides since virtually everyone employed at every cable news network is biased, what is your bias argument worth anyway? Get back to me when the host of this show starts lying and reporting false stories due to her ....gasp.....bias.
Well it is invalid for plenty of other reasons beyond the fact that the 2009 article does not speak to the 2010 schedule and the new show they have added which Kelly host. Seems pretty obvious that her show is formatted on her takes on issues as well as interviews of guest on a variety of topics. And while as you say, it can be argued, does not mean it is a very intelligent argument.Haha, sooo the story is invalid because it's a year old? Give me a break. It can be argued that the NBPP story she's been pushing (which I posted videos of earlier) is a false story because she has been alleging that the DOJ has a racist policy now where they do not prosecute cases with white victims across the board, based on zero evidence in the form of the testimony of a conservative activist. So yea, that will probably turn out to be a totally bogus story. She has also reported on death panels quite frequently, unless you believe in those (if thats the case, maybe you believe Obama was born in Kenya?)
The whole argument is that people in media have their biases, but FOX has practically made it a sport.
Well it is invalid for plenty of other reasons beyond the fact that the 2009 article does not speak to the 2010 schedule and the new show they have added which Kelly host. Seems pretty obvious that her show is formatted on her takes on issues as well as interviews of guest on a variety of topics. And while as you say, it can be argued, does not mean it is a very intelligent argument.![]()
Meh, the whole caterwauling about Fox News because they are biased is so overdone in the first place and not terribly intellectual IMO.:roll:Well I don't think it's very intelligent to take one disgruntled employee's story as gospel without any supporting evidence, but it's fairly apparent that our standards of intellectualism differ greatly.
Meh, the whole caterwauling about Fox News because they are biased is so overdone in the first place and not terribly intellectual IMO.:roll:
Fox News is at least guilty of what? Bias? Didn't we already cover that? The liberal media I claim to oppose? Where did I say anything about that? Like I said earlier, what is your bias argument worth? Looks from here like not much at all. :dohJust because an opinion is espoused by many does not make it false. If you can't see that Fox is atleast as guilty as the liberal media you claim to oppose, then we have nothing else to discuss. The evidence is overwhelming, just do a google search of "fox news controversies". That doesn't mean it's OK for MSNBC or NPR to display bias, but it isn't an excuse for overt conservative bias either.