Jimmy Carter thinks Fox News and MSNBC is Biased, CNN in the Middle

[LizardofOz]

Jimmy Carter Takes A Stand Against Glenn Beck and Fox News

Yep...

 

[Fiddytree]

Not Jimmy Carter:
President Carter’s bigger point is dead on. As more Americans limit themselves to news sources that reinforce their partisan biases, whether they be on the left or right, facts become distorted and warped as they are presented through the prism of partisan narrative. The news has gone from being about what is happening in the world to information that is used on both sides to attribute credit or blame for what is happening in the world to an ideology.

When people stop agreeing on facts, it tears away at the fabric of our society. If we can’t be united in agreement and acceptance of fact then the fragmentation that not only plagues our politics will spill out into the nation itself. Glenn Beck and Fox News have found that distorting the news is a very profitable enterprise. They don’t care about the toxic waste their enterprise is leaving behind. They are the foremost intellectual polluters of the American mind, and it is encouraging to see Jimmy Carter call them out.

This is another odd statement that keeps popping up no matter where anyone goes. Somehow there is this romanticism of the press and "newspapers" like its central mentality throughout much of its history was gathered on the notion of objectivity and careful writing. This isn't the case. Much of the time when this statement is brought up, it is in some sort of woeful declaration of a lost art, which is simply ridiculous. In effect, the author chose one of the two classical appeals to history: History as nostalgia.

 

[Barbbtx]

Jimmy Carter Takes A Stand Against Glenn Beck and Fox News

Yep...

Another left winger afraid of Glenn Beck and Fox News. I guess Jimmy and Rockefeller want to do away with the first amendment.
They are both willing to throw MSNBC under the bus just to look "fair".

 

[LizardofOz]

Another left winger afraid of Glenn Beck and Fox News. I guess Jimmy and Rockefeller want to do away with the first amendment.
They are both willing to throw MSNBC under the bus just to look "fair".

It is just the truth. Fox News and MSNBC are incredibly dangerous in the way they report. Information is power and both of them know this, and they both use information like a dangerous weapon. By definition, Glenn Beck is close to being a terrorist:

a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

 

[Fiddytree]

It is just the truth. Fox News and MSNBC are incredibly dangerous in the way they report. Information is power and both of them know this, and they both use information like a dangerous weapon. By definition, Glenn Beck is close to being a terrorist:

I think I am going to thank this post because the irony is too great. Your signature makes it even better.

 

[LizardofOz]

I think I am going to thank this post because the irony is too great. Your signature makes it even better.

No problem. I have yet to come up with something ironic or interesting to put in my signature and well, it is outdated now.

 

[American]

Jimmy Carter Takes A Stand Against Glenn Beck and Fox News

Yep...

How patriotic of him. :roll:

 

[Wiseone]

Another left winger afraid of Glenn Beck and Fox News. I guess Jimmy and Rockefeller want to do away with the first amendment.
They are both willing to throw MSNBC under the bus just to look "fair".

Yes he said they shouldnt have first amendment rights, thats exactly what he said except for all the parts where he didn't say it at all, which happens to be all of them.

The man has spent almost the last 30 years staying out of the public light and building houses with habitat for humanity, he wasn't the best President but at the very least you can't argue he wasn't a good man.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Kathleen Parker - Led Assassination Of Sarah Palin | Ziegler | Mediaite




so fair. :thumbs:

 

[Middleground]

This is another odd statement that keeps popping up no matter where anyone goes. Somehow there is this romanticism of the press and "newspapers" like its central mentality throughout much of its history was gathered on the notion of objectivity and careful writing. This isn't the case. Much of the time when this statement is brought up, it is in some sort of woeful declaration of a lost art, which is simply ridiculous. In effect, the author chose one of the two classical appeals to history: History as nostalgia.

Hmmmmm. I am not going to completely agree with you. I think the information age has greatly changed since 24/7 news and the internet.

Years ago, we all got our news from either newspapers or the one hour broadcast on major networks. Now we can have every single item dissected ad nauseum by panels of "experts" because heck, they have 24 hours to fill. And really, how much of the balloon boy story can be told before it gets repetitive? So each 24/7 find ways to make the story more interesting, and often, the listeners are no more informed.

 

[Gill]

Yes he said they shouldnt have first amendment rights, thats exactly what he said except for all the parts where he didn't say it at all, which happens to be all of them.

The man has spent almost the last 30 years staying out of the public light and building houses with habitat for humanity, he wasn't the best President but at the very least you can't argue he wasn't a good man.

Staying out of the public light ???????

I spit my morning coffee when I read that.......... too funny. He's either on tv hyping the latest monthly book that he "wrote" or in some other country meddling in their private affairs. He's only at the habitat houses long enough to get some tv time.

The man has spent the past 30 years on a doomed mission to fool people into forgetting what a horrible president he was, and he's failed miserably.

 

[Josie]

It is just the truth. Fox News and MSNBC are incredibly dangerous in the way they report. Information is power and both of them know this, and they both use information like a dangerous weapon. By definition, Glenn Beck is close to being a terrorist:

Oh Good Lord.

 

[Grim17]

What Carter said was incorrect.

”The talk shows with Glenn Beck and others on Fox News, I think, have deliberately distorted the news.”​

Does anyone else see what's wrong with that statement?

Glenn Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly present opinions just like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Mark Levin do on radio. I mean how ridiculous would it be for Carter to say or even imply that Rush Limbaugh was a member of the news media or a news reporter, so therefore he "distorts" the news?

Take for example Bill Moyer who retired from PBS. Moyer was as far to the political left as Limbaugh is to the political right, but you never heard conservatives say that because of the opinions Moyer expressed on his show, that PBS "deliberately distorted the news." That's because Moyer show centered around his opinion, and the "The News Hour" was/is centered on hard news.

The bottom line here is, "Talk shows" don't present the "news" people... News programs like Special Report present the news. Mr. Carter is doing exactly what the president, his administration, the democrats in DC, and far left progressives organizations have been doing for the last several years... which is trying to blur the lines between opinion and hard news in an effort to bring down Fox News, and silence conservative political speech... It's that simple.

 

[Middleground]

Staying out of the public light ???????

I spit my morning coffee when I read that.......... too funny. He's either on tv hyping the latest monthly book that he "wrote" or in some other country meddling in their private affairs. He's only at the habitat houses long enough to get some tv time.

The man has spent the past 30 years on a doomed mission to fool people into forgetting what a horrible president he was, and he's failed miserably.

That made me spit my morning coffee. Can you be any more ridiculous?

 

[Gill]

That made me spit my morning coffee. Can you be any more ridiculous?

Care to elaborate, or is this more of your typical fly-by posting ???

 

[Fiddytree]

Hmmmmm. I am not going to completely agree with you. I think the information age has greatly changed since 24/7 news and the internet.

Years ago, we all got our news from either newspapers or the one hour broadcast on major networks. Now we can have every single item dissected ad nauseum by panels of "experts" because heck, they have 24 hours to fill. And really, how much of the balloon boy story can be told before it gets repetitive? So each 24/7 find ways to make the story more interesting, and often, the listeners are no more informed.

But comparatively speaking, that development is rather young in media objectives. Even at that time, there were severe limitations with how objective people truly were, but at least they used it as a mantra, that is granted. But, again, in the history of "newspapers" over the centuries... objectivity as even a mantra is incredibly new.

 

[Wiseone]

Staying out of the public light ???????

I spit my morning coffee when I read that.......... too funny. He's either on tv hyping the latest monthly book that he "wrote" or in some other country meddling in their private affairs. He's only at the habitat houses long enough to get some tv time.

The man has spent the past 30 years on a doomed mission to fool people into forgetting what a horrible president he was, and he's failed miserably.

That made you spit into your coffee? Really?

I havent seen anything of the man, perhaps you could google some stuff up about how exposed he is

 

[Harshaw]

You haven't seen "anything" of Carter? He's in the news at least every few months or so.

 

[Middleground]

Care to elaborate, or is this more of your typical fly-by posting ???

Do I really have to dissect your over the top, biased, and overly exaggerated view of Jimmy Carter? It does not matter what this man does to some here. He does great work for Habitat for Humanity, and to some, it's because he's an attention whore.:roll: If he saved the world for nuclear war he'd still be lambasted for something asinine.

 

[EnigmaO01]

You haven't seen "anything" of Carter? He's in the news at least every few months or so.

If i knew someone I didn't see for four months at a time I'd say he's being scare. :lamo:lamo:lamo That's hardly being in the news much.

 

[Middleground]

objectivity as even a mantra is incredibly new.

That's right. As long as you keep reminding your audience that your "fair and balanced" then they will eventually believe it. :roll:

 

[Middleground]

What Carter said was incorrect.

”The talk shows with Glenn Beck and others on Fox News, I think, have deliberately distorted the news.”​

Does anyone else see what's wrong with that statement?

Glenn Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly present opinions just like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Mark Levin do on radio. I mean how ridiculous would it be for Carter to say or even imply that Rush Limbaugh was a member of the news media or a news reporter, so therefore he "distorts" the news?

Even seen Megyn Kelly, LOL? Think she's fair and balanced? Actually, imbalanced is a better way to describe her. In any event, she's not even close to being objective.

And Brit Hume? Another conservative shill.

I will go on to say that I think Shepard Smith is good, but in essence, Jimmy Carter was right in his critique.

Take for example Bill Moyer who retired from PBS. Moyer was as far to the political left as Limbaugh is to the political right, but you never heard conservatives say that because of the opinions Moyer expressed on his show, that PBS "deliberately distorted the news." That's because Moyer show centered around his opinion, and the "The News Hour" was/is centered on hard news.

As far as Billy Moyers goes, it's obvious you have never seen his show. When he came back to PBS to host "Billy Moyers Journal," he mostly did interviews. And it was not uncommon to see a full panel of conservatives and zero liberals. Why? Because to Bill, he wanted the best informed people on the subject and leanings didn't matter. How refreshing it was to see people chat about topics in a calm, intelligent and rational matter. He did, at times discuss happening in his own viewpoint, but from what I saw, he didn't reserve his criticism for the Republicans only. Man I miss that guy.

The bottom line here is, "Talk shows" don't present the "news" people... News programs like Special Report present the news. Mr. Carter is doing exactly what the president, his administration, the democrats in DC, and far left progressives organizations have been doing for the last several years... which is trying to blur the lines between opinion and hard news in an effort to bring down Fox News, and silence conservative political speech... It's that simple.

Isn't it pathetic that some people don't know the difference?

 

[Fiddytree]

That's right. As long as you keep reminding your audience that your "fair and balanced" then they will eventually believe it. :roll:

Yes, just like the other stations or papers, including CNN.

But to me, I think the appeal towards History is disingenuous.

 

[Middleground]

Yes, just like the other stations or papers, including CNN.

But to me, I think the appeal towards History is disingenuous.

You know, we've had this conversation before. ;-) And while I do agree to some extent that is true (for instance, I don't necessarily believe that the 50's era was more moralistic than today), I don't believe that all things are better, even in today's age of technological advancement.

Having said that, I stand firmly that real journalism has turned to crap in the last few decades. There are a few factors as to why, and 24/7 news is one of the main culprits.

 

[Grim17]

Even seen Megyn Kelly, LOL? Think she's fair and balanced? Actually, imbalanced is a better way to describe her. In any event, she's not even close to being objective.

I commented on what Jimmy Carter said. You know, the reason this thread was started... But I realize that is meaningless to those of you obsessed with trying to destroy Fox News, so I'll play along.

Megyn Kelly is an outstanding anchor/host, as she proved when she co-hosted Fox's election coverage 3 weeks ago. Her 1pm show is typical of what all morning/midday issue oriented shows are. Kelly addresses the issues of the day, but just like Harry Smith, Matt Lauer, Andrea Mitchell, George Stephanopoulos, along with the daytime people at CNN and MSNBC, if she doesn't like something that's happening, she will sometimes show it. What she does not do, is endorse individual political candidates or any one political party. Although Kelly does show a degree of bias on certain subjects, it's a moral/personal bias, not a political one. You see the same thing from the others I mentioned above, except tilted the other way. If her show, or any of the other morning and midday issue oriented shows on the other networks were intended to be 100% straight, hard news, they wouldn't check with so-and-so at the news desk.

Megyn Kelly is not a political pundit nor is her show based on political opinion... Her show does not "distort" the news any more than Harry Smith does with CBS, or Andrea Mitchell does with NBC.

Carter's statement was disingenuous and inaccurate, therefore guaranteed to be repeated over and over by those on the left obsessed with silencing Fox News and conservative political speech.

And Brit Hume? Another conservative shill.

Britt Hume doesn't host any shows on Fox... But that doesn't matter, because the idea was to fling an insult... Accuracy is irrelevant.

I will go on to say that I think Shepard Smith is good, but in essence, Jimmy Carter was right in his critique.

Of course you think it was right, even though political opinion is not the news. Agenda trumps honesty every time when it comes to shutting down contrary viewpoints... Right?

As far as Billy Moyers goes, it's obvious you have never seen his show. When he came back to PBS to host "Billy Moyers Journal," he mostly did interviews. And it was not uncommon to see a full panel of conservatives and zero liberals. Why? Because to Bill, he wanted the best informed people on the subject and leanings didn't matter. How refreshing it was to see people chat about topics in a calm, intelligent and rational matter. He did, at times discuss happening in his own viewpoint, but from what I saw, he didn't reserve his criticism for the Republicans only. Man I miss that guy.

The fact that you are trying to convince people that Moyers isn't a hard core liberal that expressed his views openly on his show, explains why Fox offends you so much.

Isn't it pathetic that some people don't know the difference?

After reading your defense of Moyers, I have to agree with you.