SixStringHero said:Um, isn't wikipedia's information user modified?
freethought6t9 said:I guess it would be fueling the fire to bring up Chomsky and Hermans Propaganda model in a venue like this so I won't.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Mach said:!!!
Let's find out what these so called "misperceptions" are.
If I recall right, they were that...
1) Fox viewers repeatedly believed we had found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
2) That Iraq and Al-Qaida were closely allied.
3) I don't recall.
Here's a little light reading for you....Captain America said:One reason, in my opinion, that FOX enjoys such high ratings is that their base is not spread as thin.
30 some odd percent of our population are the type that needs to hear the news such as FOX presents it. The other 60 plus percent of the viewers are spread out amongst multiple other networks.
If there was only ONE network, such as FOX, that catered to the center to left portion of television viewers, I submit that FOX would be left in the dust ratings wise.
For example, by comparison, in my town there are hundreds of taverns for straight people. But there are only a handful of gay bars. And even though the gays make up a minority of the population, their bars are always packed wall to wall.
I hope that made sense to everyone.
Could agree more Gunny.GySgt said:I thought it was hilarious. I loved how they refrained from asking the correct questions. But in defense of the scripted show, the reporter and commentator probably didn't know the right questions to ask anyway.
But let's all sit back and enjoy our pathetic politicians and media force wreck each other. This is about the time we'll see CNN specials bashing every effort and FOX praising every effort. We'll see every trivial event paraded around for us to scoff at and be entertained. Our politicians will forsake everything important for the simplest vote and then thank America by bickering over everything after they get it.
In the mean time, the "insignificant, poor, and hapless victim of American imperialism" troop abroad will be more focused on the bullets and IED blasts and this "War on Terror" as our nation rips itself apart over partisan slavery and naive ignorance. All of who exploit the troop on every level.
WI Crippler said:Could agree more Gunny.
Ooh-Rah and Semper Fi brother. I was one of the "insignificant, poor troops" that actually participated in the actual war on terror, rather than the media/partisan war happening in this country.
Captain America said:One reason, in my opinion, that FOX enjoys such high ratings is that their base is not spread as thin.
30 some odd percent of our population are the type that needs to hear the news such as FOX presents it. The other 60 plus percent of the viewers are spread out amongst multiple other networks.
If there was only ONE network, such as FOX, that catered to the center to left portion of television viewers, I submit that FOX would be left in the dust ratings wise.
For example, by comparison, in my town there are hundreds of taverns for straight people. But there are only a handful of gay bars. And even though the gays make up a minority of the population, their bars are always packed wall to wall.
I hope that made sense to everyone.
:roflThe only thing I gained from this is, you can't seem to find a good seat at the gay bar.
:roflFox has an excellent record for being honest, fair, and balanced,
Captain America said::rofl
:rofl
Thanks Dee. I appreciate the humor. I can always count on you for a good laugh.
Keep the faith.
Deegan said:It's my pleasure, but you still seem suspicious, have you an instance of where Fox was not all of these things in their news programming? Now I said their news, not opinion shows, not their guests, and not their own personal bias away from the set? They have never been dishonest in their news, but please, if you have an example, share it with me?
Captain America said:I refer to pundits like O'Reilly and his sort of ilk on FOXNews who present their shows as if they were actually "news."
Captain America said:All I recall from watching FOX is coming away thinking, "This is DEFINITELY a Republican news channel.":roll:
Captain America said:Well, I did it folks. I finally watched the actual "news" portion on FOX. I didn't really see any punditry slant to it at all. Certainly no more than any other channel.
I think I might have made my error in judging too quickly the news portion of FOX due to the other shows on that channel which, no doubt we can all pretty much agree, is designed to appease the rightwing GOP kinda people.
It just seems to me, and I could be mistaken, that the actual "news" programming there, timewise, in minimal compared to all the rest of the time they spend on rightwing GOP propaganda.
But you guys were right. The little time they do actually devote to "the news" was pretty much just "the news."
I think, and again this is just my opinion, if they really wanted to gain more credibility regarding their claim to be "fair and balanced" they should make more of an effort to differentiate between their propaganda shows and their actual news. I mean, even when you watch Bill O'Reilly, it has "FOXNews" icon in the lower lefthand part of the screen. And, as you guys pointed out before, O'Reilly is NOT the news. It's propaganda. Republican propaganda.
So, I still am of the opinion that FOX is, in fact, The Republican News Channel......except for their actual news......which is only a fraction of their actual programming.
CNN ran a story with the same title.Captain America said:After FOXNews ran their Rumsfeld propaganda piece "Why He Fights" infomercial is there ANY doubt in ANYBODY'S mind that FOX is just a Republican News Channel anymore?
Fair and Balanced...... :lamo :2rofll: :2funny: :rwbelepha
Captain America said:Well, I did it folks. I finally watched the actual "news" portion on FOX. I didn't really see any punditry slant to it at all. Certainly no more than any other channel.
I think I might have made my error in judging too quickly the news portion of FOX due to the other shows on that channel which, no doubt we can all pretty much agree, is designed to appease the rightwing GOP kinda people.
It just seems to me, and I could be mistaken, that the actual "news" programming there, timewise, in minimal compared to all the rest of the time they spend on rightwing GOP propaganda.
But you guys were right. The little time they do actually devote to "the news" was pretty much just "the news."
I think, and again this is just my opinion, if they really wanted to gain more credibility regarding their claim to be "fair and balanced" they should make more of an effort to differentiate between their propaganda shows and their actual news. I mean, even when you watch Bill O'Reilly, it has "FOXNews" icon in the lower lefthand part of the screen. And, as you guys pointed out before, O'Reilly is NOT the news. It's propaganda. Republican propaganda.
So, I still am of the opinion that FOX is, in fact, The Republican News Channel......except for their actual news......which is only a fraction of their actual programming.
Deegan said:Well good for you, and see, your eyes didn't leap out of your head, lazers didn't shoot out of Brit Humes ***, and burn you alive, and Bill didn't come to your house to tell you to shut up.:lol:
But, I would point out that Fox is the only news station reporting on Senator Harry Reed's land deal with the mafia... go figure...
PeteEU said:because there was no story.
But question to you Fox fanatics.. is Fox and Friends a "news show" or a an editorial?
PeteEU said:because there was no story.
But question to you Fox fanatics.. is Fox and Friends a "news show" or a an editorial?
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Ya Reid just committed a federal offense no big deal.
I always just considered it gay, I watch C-SPAN's Washington Journal in the mornings and on my weekdays off I then listen to Glenn Beck, then Rush, then Hannitty, then Savage, then I turn back on the t.v. to listen to O'reilly, then Hannity and Colmes, then the Daily Show, then the Colbert Report, then the second airiing of Keith Olberman. God I gotta kick the habit I'm a political junkie.
PeteEU said:Is not the editoral stuff a reflection of the attitude and policy of a news organistaion? So when O'Rielly goes after gays and same sex marriage, he speaks for his station, when he uses missleading and wrong information to prove his points, then his methods and comments reflect the station and what they stand for...... else they would not have him on that station correct?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?