Fox News isn't just bad. It's un-American.

[bcp (Premo)]

actually looking back at their history, Murdock did start up Fox news to give the conservative side to what he felt was an overly liberal news media at the time.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by Alexa

If you woke up in China this morning, your news program would be spouting out propaganda that would have you believe that the government is taking care of your best interests and isn't oppressive at all. .

I'm glad you got it on the first try. I'm getting the impression that THAT is what is supposedly making FOX "un-American". Because they DON'T say that.

Originally Posted by Alexa

However, I do have a problem with them labeling themselves as unbiased news sources. We all know they are anything but unbiased.

"Fair and balanced" does not mean for one nanosecond that it is unbiased. I'm clearly biased. But I try to be fair in my online discussions, and grant time to both sides in my presence. I don't go off on rants or prejudge people and I am willing to change my position if the argument is compelling.

My dad coached my team in Little League. He was biased to ME, as his son, but he benched me as often as I deserved and he showed no favoritism in his *coaching* even though everyone knew I was his actual favorite. It was his job to hit practice balls to everyone, not just me.

As I've mentioned before, I once got on Sam Donaldson's old radio show, and his comment was that even if you're very liberal - as he is - you can be FAIR if you don't softball questions or remember to give scrutiny to both sides of an issue. FOX, more often than not will at least bring guests on who are not in agreement with the host and are often antagonistic - something I've almost never seen other hosts do. They also have people like Geraldo and Shep Smith host shows, and they're big time liberals.

If you're conservative, and you watch the major networks, you'll see bias right from the morning show to the evening news. People are excoriated just for being conservative, as if that alone is reason for alarm.

[Toxick]

Originally Posted by Alexa

If you woke up in China this morning, your news program would be spouting out propaganda that would have you believe that the government is taking care of your best interests and isn't oppressive at all.

Ni Hao!
Youqu de shi. Wo faxian liao hen duo jintian zai Zhongguo!

[chernmax (Premo)]

I'll stick with mostly watching Fox for my news!!!

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Please show me where Fox has ever labeled themselves as unbiased. I'll wait.

They bill themselves as "fair and balanced," which they are.

I just read a quote by Charles Krauthammer coming out in an interview in an upcoming National Review by Jay Nordlinger:

He says, “Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes are geniuses: They found a niche market — half of America.”




(scroll down to the bottom of the page)

[cwo_ghwebb]

Originally Posted by Alexa

However, I do have a problem with them labeling themselves as unbiased news sources. We all know they are anything but unbiased. It is important to hold the integrity of the news of the day. News that isn't influenced by a political party or mired with political views. Walter Conkrite is a prime example of what real journalism is all about and VERY American.

If we allow ourselves to accept the opinion pieces of the aforementioned as hard news, then we may as well be waking up in China.

You seem to forget (or weren't around at the time) that Cronkite started advocacy journalism, with his reporting of the Tet Offensive. Look where it's gotten the press now, half of America now recognizes the establishment media is in the tank for socialists.

[cwo_ghwebb]

Every White House complains about its press coverage. A contentious relationship between the Executive Branch and a free and independent media is part of America's DNA. Always has been.

But this White House seems to feel they're different. It's not just that the current occupant of the Oval Office has a particularly thin skin when it comes to criticism - which is especially ironic given that he's been the recipient of more glowing press coverage than possibly any candidate or president in modern American history. But not since Nixon conjured up an "enemies list" have we seen the full weight of the Office of the Presidency brought to bear in such a targeted and deliberate effort to delegitimize a media organization critical of the President.

When Communications Director Anita Dunn first announced the White House's war against FOX News last week, many people from across the political spectrum dismissed it as silly. But two of the administration's heaviest hitters, Senior Advisor David Axelrod and Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, went on the Sunday talk shows and made clear that the White House's attempt to delegitimize FOX News is deadly serious.

/snip

...MSNBC doesn't push a certain "perspective?" What about the New York Times? The idea that FOX News's perspective disqualifies it as a "legitimate" news operation lays bare the manipulation and hypocrisy at work here. The White House is all for news organizations taking certain "perspectives" - so long as they're favorable to the administration's agenda.

RealClearPolitics - Media Wars: White House Crosses the Line

As the article states, this thuggery may work in Chicago, but most Americans see it for what it is, and you're not in Chicago anymore Toto.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by cwo_ghwebb

You seem to forget (or weren't around at the time) that Cronkite started advocacy journalism, with his reporting of the Tet Offensive. Look where it's gotten the press now, half of America now recognizes the establishment media is in the tank for socialists.

I remember watching "Platoon" and seeing the Tet offensive, and thinking oh crap, it's Tet, the Americans are gonna get their butts whooped. And of course, they do in the film and every other film at that point.

It wasn't until years later I learned that the success of the Tet offensive was in the American press, because the Vietnamese were so crushed by it, they might not have ever recovered from it. We were surprised by it, mostly because we didn't think they could have put such a thing together - but once we were engaged, we beat the ever living snot out of them. But you'd never know from the American press - you'd think it was Pearl Harbor all over again.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

I remember watching "Platoon" and seeing the Tet offensive, and thinking oh crap, it's Tet, the Americans are gonna get their butts whooped. And of course, they do in the film and every other film at that point.

It wasn't until years later I learned that the success of the Tet offensive was in the American press, because the Vietnamese were so crushed by it, they might not have ever recovered from it. We were surprised by it, mostly because we didn't think they could have put such a thing together - but once we were engaged, we beat the ever living snot out of them. But you'd never know from the American press - you'd think it was Pearl Harbor all over again.

However, the generals and the pols back home were the ones that over sold things as they were and said we were doing so good the enemy can't even mount any kind of serious offensive. We you lie to polish your turd, you can't be surprised when it turns out to still be sh1t.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

However, the generals and the pols back home were the ones that over sold things as they were and said we were doing so good the enemy can't even mount any kind of serious offensive. We you lie to polish your turd, you can't be surprised when it turns out to still be sh1t.

The Vietnamese won that war in the American press, and the press helped them. Militarily we were beating them. It was a war they couldn't win and would have to capitulate, eventually.