News Is Fox News Truly Fair and Balanced?

[kyleb]

Sometimes, I think it's staged. It has to be.

Some is, but most is just self perpetuated mass delusion.

<sigh> I did not mention Fox in my Stewart post.

He was referring to https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2135598&highlight=stewart#post2135598", in the context of the conversation.

 

[LowlyPion]

Now comes Fox Nation:

"It's Time to Say NO to Biased Media and Say YES to Fair Play and Free Speech."

Their motto?

I'm thinking if people actually do that, what audience will Fox have left?

Interesting article about the network and its bias and the business niche their launch is attempting to profit from.:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../AR2009032902102.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

 

[Woody101]

Now comes Fox Nation:
Their motto?

I'm thinking if people actually do that, what audience will Fox have left?

Interesting article about the network and its bias and the business niche their launch is attempting to profit from.:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../AR2009032902102.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

Perhaps you should read Bill O'Riely's column in todays paper, it might give you a different perspective on him.

 

[LowlyPion]

Perhaps you should read Bill O'Riely's column in todays paper, it might give you a different perspective on him.

Have him send it to me then.

Until then I'll continue to think he is a self absorbed, ill tempered bully that can't take a punch.

 

[Woody101]

LowlyPion: I am sure with a few clicks of the mouse you could find it online if you were really interested. Obviously you don't want to make any effort because what he says might run contrary to your bias.

 

[Cyrus]

LowlyPion: I am sure with a few clicks of the mouse you could find it online if you were really interested. Obviously you don't want to make any effort because what he says might run contrary to your bias.

You could just provided the link since your the one who brought it up...

 

[LowlyPion]

LowlyPion: I am sure with a few clicks of the mouse you could find it online if you were really interested. Obviously you don't want to make any effort because what he says might run contrary to your bias.

If you're saying that I couldn't be interested in what he has to say, you would be on to something. Why would I want to paw through his rubbish to find the pearl that apparently found resonance with you as to the kick-off of Fox Nation?

 

[Skyhunter]

I must agree with LowlyPion here.

O'Reily has never had anything insightful or meaningful to say in the past, therefore why should we waste our time digging through his bloviations to perhaps find the elusive pearl of wisdom that may or may not even exist?

 

[seycyrus]

Away for the weekend. I finally got the time to rush back here, worried that I had missed some first hand documentation about the objectivity of new sources.

Wrong again.

Just clap trap from people who are linking to cheryypicked segmenst. As usual...

Does anyone have any integrity?

Name the day, time and channel. Let's watch it and take notes. We can then compare.

 

[seycyrus]

I must agree with LowlyPion here.

O'Reily has never had anything insightful or meaningful to say in the past, therefore why should we waste our time digging through his bloviations to perhaps find the elusive pearl of wisdom that may or may not even exist?

Yeah let's keep up the attempts to pass off opinion as fact. Keep repeating yourselves.

Name the time coordinates and the channel.

 

[Skyhunter]

So O'Riely's insistence that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre" was Americans killing German POW's, and not the other way around is an opinion you share?

What other opinions of his do you share that are completely false?

If you have such a strong bias that even defaming the 90 American WWII soldiers massacred at Malmedy does not sway your opinion then I don't believe there is any reality that will alter such a biased perspective.

And FYI I don't watch television. I don't even own one.

 

[seycyrus]

So O'Riely's insistence that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre" was Americans killing German POW's, and not the other way around is an opinion you share?

This is an example of a deceptive tactic being used by some. O'reiley was either misunderstood, incorrect or some combination of the two. It has been debated both ways. ie. The whole transcript thing.

But who cares? Are you implying that O'reiley holds the position that Americans commited mass atrocities against Germans? Are you trying to make the case that O'reiley does not support U.S. troops? What exactly is your claim?

Do you claim that if you asked O'reiley point blank about the facts of Malmedy, he would choose the incorrect one?

Or are you claiming that O'reiley was wrong? If so, Big whoop!

You are using anecdotal evidence on a small case to make a larger charge.

What other opinions of his do you share that are completely false?

Please stop with the Fallacies. It is obvious that I do not share any false opinions! I only share factual ones!

And FYI I don't watch television. I don't even own one.

You admit that your entire opinion is based on a preselected data set! AMAZING!

'Nuff Said!

 

[Cyrus]

seycyrus, seriously. The way you try to justify this guy is mind boggling. What reason do you have to prop this bozo up? Do you own stocks with Fox News or something?

Name the time coordinates and the channel.

Man, you hard core television watcher you. How is anyone to take you seriously if you post like this.

 

[seycyrus]

seycyrus, seriously. The way you try to justify this guy is mind boggling. What reason do you have to prop this bozo up? Do you own stocks with Fox News or something?

How is it that an insistence that people make judgements based on their own experience instead of on preselected tidbits, propping him up?

Man, you hard core television watcher you. How is anyone to take you seriously if you post like this.

No hard core watching necessary. That is *if* we agree on a time and a channel and then compare notes.

What exactly is your intellectual objection? It's not as if I am suggesting that we *just* watch FN. I have repeatedly voiced my opinion that it would be illustrative to watch an hour of each to come to a conclusion. The note comparing would at least minimize the chance of deceptive on either parties part, and would enable disussion.

 

[Evo]

Time to put this thread out of it's misery.