News Does Fox News live up to the slogan Fair and balanced?

[Char. Limit]

Does Fox News live up to the slogan "Fair and balanced"?

It's tough not to try to sway people...

 

[Newai]

No. A range of people, largely uneducated or who just don't care, get to hear what they want from them. But at least their existence assures that free speech is safe and sound, regardless of the consequences.

 

[chemisttree]

http://www.cmpa.com/pdf/media_monitor_jan_2009.pdf"

 

[mikelepore]

Journalism is supposed to limit itself to reporting what, who, when, where, how and why. Fox New isn't the only one that does it, but TV news generally makes the error of informing us of who is right and who is wrong. This is usually done with terminology, for example, if there is ever a war between the U.S. government's adversaries and the U.S. government's allies, we can be sure that it will be reported on TV in terms of "the guerrillas" versus "the freedom-fighters."

Fox News merely makes it too obvious by often using such unsophisticated language as: Unfortunately, some of the bad guys killed some of the good guys; however, fortunately, some of the good guys also killed some of the bad guys.

Even Bernard Goldberg, a conservative writer who complains about the "liberal media", cited Fox for doing this. In his book _Arrogance_, Goldberg wrote:

"Personally, some of Fox News 'fair and balanced' coverage was a little too rah-rah, flag-waving for my taste. I didn't need to hear Shepard Smith refer to the Iraqi soldiers as 'the bad guys.' But the truth is, I can't get too worked up over it." [page 230 of the hardcover first edition, 2003]

 

[mugaliens]

http://www.cmpa.com/pdf/media_monitor_jan_2009.pdf"

So the unknown, but neutral-sounding "Center for Media and Public Affairs" is more accurate than Fox, how, exactly?

Just because someone is reviewing the various networks doesn't make them any more or less biased than any of the networks they're reviewing.

 

[rootX]

http://www.cmpa.com/pdf/media_monitor_jan_2009.pdf"

S. Robert Lichter, the editor, is president of the Washington-based Center for Media and Public Affairs and a paid consultant to the Fox News Channel.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=S._Robert_Lichter

 

[Char. Limit]

Interesting results so far, although the poll is in no way closed...

Adding the "yes" and "in some ways/areas" categories, it's about evenly split. Should I make a poll of whoever the liberal version of Fox News is? Who is that?

 

[chemisttree]

S. Robert Lichter, the editor, is president of the Washington-based Center for Media and Public Affairs and a paid consultant to the Fox News Channel.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=S._Robert_Lichter

And how did that fact affect the enumeration of positive/negative stories? Does a Fox News consultant count differently? Nonsense.

 

[chemisttree]

Interesting results so far, although the poll is in no way closed...

Adding the "yes" and "in some ways/areas" categories, it's about evenly split. Should I make a poll of whoever the liberal version of Fox News is? Who is that?

Just how would you do that? The closest you could come to that would be ABC news. That news network employs a former Clinton Communications Director as a news anchor!

 

[Alfi]

2.5 million Americans watch Fox News, which means that 297.5 million Americans don't.

The squeakiest wheel gets the attention?

 

[Pattonias]

I think that they are all biased and I try to develope my opinion from the information that I find most credible. What more can I do?

 

[BobG]

Interesting results so far, although the poll is in no way closed...

Adding the "yes" and "in some ways/areas" categories, it's about evenly split. Should I make a poll of whoever the liberal version of Fox News is? Who is that?

MSNBC. Oblermann and Maddow, especially (although MSNBC does carry more balanced commentators, as well, such as Matthews and Scarborough).

It's tough for news organizations to maintain unbiased stances. CNN is pretty heavy handed in the way they do this, going to the point where their TV personalities have to agree not to contribute to any political campaigns.

 

[MotoH]

I'll watch the view in the morning to get my dosage of extreme liberalism, and glenn beck in the afternoon to get my dose of extreme conservatism. There's no such thing as fair and balanced news.

 

[Alfi]

I'll watch the view in the morning to get my dosage of extreme liberalism, and glenn beck in the afternoon to get my dose of extreme conservatism. There's no such thing as fair and balanced news.

good balance. :)

lmao - I like to watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report to get the most 'accurate' take on politics.

 

[rootX]

And how did that fact affect the enumeration of positive/negative stories? Does a Fox News consultant count differently? Nonsense.

You posted it as a response to

Does Fox News live up to the slogan "Fair and balanced"?

.

 

[Char. Limit]

good balance. :)

lmao - I like to watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report to get the most 'accurate' take on politics.

LOL, I do the exact same thing!

Strange how some of the most balanced news comes from a comedian.

 

[Pattonias]

LOL, I do the exact same thing!

Strange how some of the most balanced news comes from a comedian.

Its funny, but I figure that it only make sense when the most sobering opinions in regard to politics come from the cartoonists in my newspaper.

 

[edward]

For about a six month period Fox should have included a GODWIN'S LAW ALERT before Glen Beck came on.

 

[Char. Limit]

Is there yet an equivalent law stating "as the number of forum posts grows, the probability of someone calling someone else a racist approaches 1"?

If not, I hereby name it "Beck's/Jackson's Law".

Seriously, how many times have Glenn Beck and Jesse Jackson done that?

 

[Pattonias]

Is there yet an equivalent law stating "as the number of forum posts grows, the probability of someone calling someone else a racist approaches 1"?

If not, I hereby name it "Beck's/Jackson's Law".

Seriously, how many times have Glenn Beck and Jesse Jackson done that?

I don't know about a rascist, but I'm pretty sure that "You Sir... Are a communist!"

 

[lisab]

Is there yet an equivalent law stating "as the number of forum posts grows, the probability of someone calling someone else a racist approaches 1"?

If not, I hereby name it "Beck's/Jackson's Law".

Seriously, how many times have Glenn Beck and Jesse Jackson done that?

Ha, you should have named it "Char.Limit Law" .

 

[rolerbe]

To really conserve balanced reporting you have to draw the boundary larger. Fox does help to counterbalance the predominantly left wing reporting from most other networks. (but only in a bi-modal distribution sort of way).

 

[Char. Limit]

Well, going by my real name, Fitting's Law would be best...

Of course, they do. But they seem more... blatant about their bias than the "liberal media" do.

I love that term... I use it in most of my excuses.

 

[LURCH]

Well, going by my real name, Fitting's Law would be best...

I think you mean "most fitting," yes?

 

[Char. Limit]

I think you mean "most fitting," yes?

Well, my real name is Z. Fitting. And yes, I usually laugh or smile at puns on my name. I think they're funny.

 

[drankin]

I think a blatant bias is better than a subtle one.

 

[edward]

Fox likes to make their own news in their own special way.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/t...ean-hannity-uses-glenn-beck-s-protest-footage

 

[Legion81]

Before Fox News Channel came around, the conservative voice was largely muffled. Fox is obviously biased, but that makes up for the liberal 24 hour stations and keeps the news "fair and balanced" if you watch all stations.

The closest I have seen to a network that just reports the news without spinning stories is BBC world news, but that is not a 24 hour network.

 

[Jamin2112]

I'm guessing this slogan applied some time before I was born. With O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, and the rest, we know how the scales are weighted. (by the way, I despise those 3 people)

 

[Char. Limit]

Don't forget Greta Van Susteren and Ann Coulter.

Come now, Jamin, let us not be sexist in our hate.

 

[LURCH]

I'm guessing this slogan applied some time before I was born. With O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, and the rest, we know how the scales are weighted. (by the way, I despise those 3 people)

These three are not reporters, nor do they claim to be. Their shows are opinion shows, not news programs. They say this themselves, from time to time. They do speek to the bias of the station, but are not part of the station's news coverage, for whatever that's worth.

 

[drankin]

I'm guessing this slogan applied some time before I was born. With O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, and the rest, we know how the scales are weighted. (by the way, I despise those 3 people)

Yeah, I despise them too. I prefer Savage, Lavigne, & Ingraham. They aren't Fox.

 

[Skyhunter]

Before Fox News Channel came around, the conservative voice was largely muffled.

Really?

You mean that FOX news is the conservative voice?

No wonder the Tea Baggers are more popular than the Republicans.

 

[Dembadon]

In my opinion, Fox News is the worst news program in existence.

Edit: The facts aren't always fair and/or balanced. I don't need a report to be fair, I need it to be true.

 

[rolerbe]

True disappeared with Walter Cronkite.

 

[Nebula815]

No wonder the Tea Baggers are more popular than the Republicans.

Please don't use that term to describe people who are just in general concerned about the growth of government and spending under this administration.

 

[rootX]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8453223.stm

Former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin has signed to be a contributor on the Fox News Channel, her lawyer has said.

 

[Nebula815]

In my opinion, Fox News is the worst news program in existence.

Edit: The facts aren't always fair and/or balanced. I don't need a report to be fair, I need it to be true.

Well if it was not for Fox, we probably never would have found out about the whole Reverand Wright issue with Barack Obama except maybe for those who listen to talk radio or check things on the Internet. The rest of the media were completely ignoring it and were going to cover it up. Fox occassionally makes mistakes like all the news organizations, but it serves as a nice balance I think.

As for "fair and balanced," well for news to be fair, that's because there's a lot of debate over just what the facts are on quite a few subjects. For example, big debates on this very website go on about the legitimacy of climate change. Both sides cite facts, and there is still lots of disagreement.

So what is a news reporter to do? Get people from both sides of the issue and get their views and present them, and let the viewer make their own decision.

 

[Char. Limit]

Er... What Reverend Wright issue? The one where Glenn Beck tried to paint Obama as a terrorist for having a somewhat foolish and inflammatory preacher?

Considering how foolish and inflammatory Glenn Beck can be, I suppose this means that all conservatives are terrorists.

Judge not a man by the company he keeps.

Note: Who kept connecting Obama to a radical from 40 years ago, when Obama was a little kid? After answering that question, tell me who the real character assassin is.

Finally, if Tea Baggers isn't acceptable (and I don't care if it isn't, I'll use it anyway), how about "Guy Fawkers"?

 

[mheslep]

...
Finally, if Tea Baggers isn't acceptable (and I don't care if it isn't, I'll use it anyway), how about "Guy Fawkers"?

You don't care if you're being intentionally inflammatory?

 

[Char. Limit]

You don't care if you're being intentionally inflammatory?

I like how you ignore my real content and hit on the one sarcastic comment in my post.

I'm anti-PC in all forms. I'm inflammatory because I don't think others can tell me not to be. So yes, I am intentionally inflammatory.

 

[russ_watters]

I know some people who can force you not to be inflammatory...

...this thread is riding the edge right now.

 

[Char. Limit]

On this forum, yes.

But not in public, where my first amendment rights apply.

I haven't seen that phrase, "riding the edge" before. Prithee, could you explain it to me?

 

[russ_watters]

Pushing the limits of what is acceptable here.

 

[Char. Limit]

I see.

I'll shut up (read: moderate my tone) now.

 

[Skyhunter]

Please don't use that term to describe people who are just in general concerned about the growth of government and spending under this administration.

I was specifically referring to those who label themselves such.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Did anyone catch Roger Ailes, CEO of Fox News, on ABC's This Week? There are two or three parts to the roundtable discussion.
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/roundtable-scott-brown-republican-9710855

Seating Ailes with someone like Krugman strikes me a bit like sitting Larry Flint next to Einstein, but it was interesting. I don't know that this reflects well on ABC and their choice of guests, but one appearance is fair play, I guess. Krugman didn't look very happy.

When Huffington asked Ailes why he cut away from the meeting between Obama and the House Republicans, he responded "Because we are the most trusted news source on television!" or some ridiculous and non-applicable response close to that. Within the context of responsible reporting and providing reliable news and information, when asked why he allows someone like Glenn Beck to run his circus show every day, Ailes said that it is all about ratings, and they're [Fox is] winning. So, apparently he has no interest in credibility. What a yutz!

 

[Gokul43201]

Fox occassionally makes mistakes like all the news organizations, but it serves as a nice balance I think.

You'd be close if you replace 'occasionally' with 'regularly', 'makes mistakes' with 'fabricates news' and 'like' with 'not quite like'.

 

[Char. Limit]

I wouldn't use regularly.

Regularly denotes a pattern. There's not really a pattern to when they do it.

 

[Gokul43201]

I wouldn't use regularly.

Regularly denotes a pattern. There's not really a pattern to when they do it.

Okay, I'm being a little loose with the use of the word 'regularly', but from my memory, John Stewart seems to catch them pulling their tricks every few of months or thereabout. A recent one that I recall was the bit where Hannity switched the footage for a protest rally, and later admitted to "an inadvertent mistake" after the Daily Show blew his act. Using footage from a different event to jack up attendance numbers - that's how low Fox stoops with their pettiness.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/t...ean-hannity-uses-glenn-beck-s-protest-footage