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

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Char. Limit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    News
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the slogan "Fair and balanced" as it pertains to Fox News, examining whether the network lives up to this claim. Participants explore various aspects of media bias, the role of journalism, and the perception of news reporting across different networks.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Fox News does not provide fair and balanced reporting, suggesting that it often sways public opinion and uses biased language.
  • Others contend that Fox News serves a purpose by counterbalancing what they perceive as predominantly left-wing reporting from other networks.
  • A participant cites Bernard Goldberg's criticism of Fox News for its overly patriotic language, indicating a perceived lack of neutrality.
  • Concerns are raised about the credibility of media reviews, particularly regarding the Center for Media and Public Affairs and its ties to Fox News.
  • Several participants express skepticism about the existence of truly unbiased news, suggesting that all news outlets exhibit some level of bias.
  • Some participants mention alternative news sources, such as BBC and comedic programs, as potentially more balanced or credible.
  • There are references to the challenges of maintaining unbiased reporting in a highly polarized media landscape.
  • Humorous remarks are made about the nature of political commentary and the perception of bias in news reporting.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on whether Fox News lives up to its slogan, with multiple competing views on the nature of media bias and the role of different news outlets. The discussion remains unresolved, reflecting a range of opinions and interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific individuals and organizations, raising questions about their credibility and potential biases. The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of media and the definitions of fairness and balance in reporting.

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

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 9.3%
  • No

    Votes: 58 67.4%
  • In some ways/areas

    Votes: 20 23.3%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    86
Char. Limit
Gold Member
Messages
1,222
Reaction score
23
Does Fox News live up to the slogan "Fair and balanced"?

It's tough not to try to sway people...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
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.
 
http://www.cmpa.com/pdf/media_monitor_jan_2009.pdf"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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]
 
chemisttree said:
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
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?
 
rootX said:
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.
 
Char. Limit said:
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!
 
  • #10
2.5 million Americans watch Fox News, which means that 297.5 million Americans don't.

The squeakiest wheel gets the attention?
 
  • #11
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?
 
  • #12
Char. Limit said:
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.
 
  • #13
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.
 
  • #14
MotoH said:
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.
 
  • #15
chemisttree said:
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"?
.
 
  • #16
Alfi said:
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.
 
  • #17
Char. Limit said:
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.
 
  • #18
For about a six month period Fox should have included a GODWIN'S LAW ALERT before Glen Beck came on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
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?
 
  • #20
Char. Limit said:
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!" :wink:
 
  • #21
Char. Limit said:
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" :smile:.
 
  • #22
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).
 
  • #23
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.
 
  • #24
Char. Limit said:
Well, going by my real name, Fitting's Law would be best...
I think you mean "most fitting," yes?
 
  • #25
LURCH said:
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.
 
  • #26
I think a blatant bias is better than a subtle one.
 
  • #28
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.
 
  • #29
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)
 
  • #30
Don't forget Greta Van Susteren and Ann Coulter.

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

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
10K
  • · Replies 340 ·
12
Replies
340
Views
50K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 253 ·
9
Replies
253
Views
28K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K