Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8749 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2017 2:47 AM
372 online now:
Dredge, Heathen, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Tangle (4 members, 368 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Roshankumar1234
Post Volume:
Total: 808,986 Year: 13,592/21,208 Month: 3,074/3,605 Week: 416/933 Day: 5/56 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
21Next
Author Topic:   Fox news = false news
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15928
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 226 of 301 (663687)
05-26-2012 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 4:04 AM


Re: All networks biased
But it's not the existence of right-wing pundits that people are complaining about. You're the first person on this thread to mention O'Reilly, Hannity, or Baier.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 4:04 AM Jzyehoshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 6:05 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Jzyehoshua
Inactive Member


Message 227 of 301 (663691)
05-26-2012 6:05 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Dr Adequate
05-26-2012 5:54 AM


Re: All networks biased
Still, Bernard Goldberg wrote his book 'Bias' several years ago about how networks like his own CBS (where he worked for decades) tilt the news to the left, identifying conservatives as radical conservatives but never identifying a radical liberal as such, and bashing men yet never criticizing women. They've got liberal and feminist biases that appear on closer scrutiny even if not as blatant as FOX News. Just because they're more subtle with their bias makes it no less serious or equivalent.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-26-2012 5:54 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2694
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 228 of 301 (663695)
05-26-2012 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 5:39 AM


Re: All networks biased
-2004 Pew Research Center State of the News Media. Showed 34% of the national press and 23% of the local press are liberal to just 20% of the general public, and 7% of the national press and 12% of the local press are conservative to 33% of the general public. Not only does it show the media is far more liberal than average Americans, but this is even more extreme at the national than local level due apparently to bias in the national ranks for promotion opportunities.
http://www.people-press.org/...05/23/iv-values-and-the-press

Thing is most people are liberal when it comes to one thing and conservative when it comes to a noter. If you where to explain that when you ask people you would only have a few % who are "radical liberals" and "radical conservatives". But fox news is a radical to the nutjob degree. And you have to admit its hard not to be bias because everyone has an opinion on a matter. But Fox news is actively bias, facts be dammed if they point the wrong way kind of bias. Its one thing to show a republican who screwed up 24/7, but its a noter thing to make up shit about a democrat and show it 24/7.

Like this just replace conservative with the word liberal and you have a story that will put liberal panties in a twist.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

Click if you dare!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 5:39 AM Jzyehoshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 7:14 AM frako has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18462
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 229 of 301 (663707)
05-26-2012 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 5:39 AM


Re: All networks biased
Hi again

-2004 Pew Research Center State of the News Media. Showed 34% of the national press and 23% of the local press are liberal to just 20% of the general public, and 7% of the national press and 12% of the local press are conservative to 33% of the general public. Not only does it show the media is far more liberal than average Americans, but this is even more extreme at the national than local level due apparently to bias in the national ranks for promotion opportunities.

Did you add up the percentages? You must have omitted a lot of people in the middle to pit one extreme against the other this way. Is that also why an 8 year old study is used? One with the curious title: "Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say Journalists
Press Going Too Easy on Bush "

The real bias in news is the bottom line, and this has turned news into entertainment, susceptible to whatever gets good ratings rather than what is actually news.

National Press 34% "liberal" and 7% "conservative" is only 41% of the national press -- so what are the other 59% biased for?

Local Press 23% "liberal" and 12% "conservative" is only 34% of the local press -- leaving 66% as relatively unbiased.

Seems to me that the preponderance of unbiased press is more than either extreme, would you not agree?

General Public 20% "liberal" and 33% "conservative" leaves 45% in the middle, they appear to be best represented in the media.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 5:39 AM Jzyehoshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 7:07 AM RAZD has responded

  
Jzyehoshua
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 301 (663711)
05-26-2012 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by RAZD
05-26-2012 6:49 AM


Re: All networks biased
quote:
Did you add up the percentages? You must have omitted a lot of people in the middle to pit one extreme against the other this way. Is that also why an 8 year old study is used?

I didn't mention the Moderates (54% of national press, 61% of local press, and 41% of General Public) because I didn't see it as that necessary. All 3 groups, National Press, Local Press, and General Public add up to 100%. I gave the link, the chart's not that hard to find there.

I used a 2004 study because the Pew Research Center hasn't followed up on the question since then. It caused controversy with groups like Newsbusters trumpeting the find as evidence of the liberal media, and the PRC hasn't asked the question since, unfortunately.

This showed self-identification of journalists. It shows that both moderates and conservatives are at higher levels in the local press than national, and are thus being kept out of the upper ranks, rather than given promotion. That's a solid statistical evidence of liberal bias in media promotion, similar to evidence of racial profiling and racism in the workplace requiring Affirmative Action. It shows far fewer conservatives are allowed into the national press and the press in general than are found in the general public.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by RAZD, posted 05-26-2012 6:49 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by RAZD, posted 05-26-2012 7:38 AM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
Jzyehoshua
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 231 of 301 (663716)
05-26-2012 7:14 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by frako
05-26-2012 6:18 AM


Re: All networks biased
Agreed, everyone has their own opinions and points of view. Still, I would argue commentary on other networks is just as consistently liberal as FOX's is conservative, when you look at Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Piers Morgan, or Chris Matthews. To any conservative that bias is undeniable. Matthews and Olbermann were obviously fawning over Obama from the start, with Matthews even getting a 'chill' up his leg over the candidate.

I don't think FOX is more biased than MSNBC by any stretch of the imagination. It arguably is less extreme than MSNBC since at least it has a few commentators from the other side like Juan Williams and Alan Colmes, where I don't think MSNBC has any who are even moderate.

I think this is just a case of it being less apparent where bias occurs when it's on your side. Someone who is liberal won't recognize liberal bias as readily because they agree with it and it just seems normal. Likewise with a conservative, they won't consider it conservative bias since for them it's their view, and they view their beliefs as the norm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by frako, posted 05-26-2012 6:18 AM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by frako, posted 05-26-2012 8:05 AM Jzyehoshua has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18462
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 232 of 301 (663723)
05-26-2012 7:38 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 7:07 AM


Re: All networks biased
Hi again Jzyehoshua

I didn't mention the Moderates (54% of national press, 61% of local press, and 41% of General Public) because I didn't see it as that necessary. All 3 groups, National Press, Local Press, and General Public add up to 100%. I gave the link, the chart's not that hard to find there.

Actually there were four groups, the last one being "not sure"

This showed self-identification of journalists. ...

Which shows one of the problems with the survey, using self-identification (admission) rather than some empirical scale position. You can have half of the "liberal" people being moderate liberals and all of the conservatives being reactionary conservatives - which should be more properly contrasted with radical liberals.

I didn't mention the Moderates (54% of national press, 61% of local press, and 41% of General Public) because I didn't see it as that necessary. All 3 groups, National Press, Local Press, and General Public add up to 100%. I gave the link, the chart's not that hard to find there.

So the majority are not biased against either liberals or conservatives ...

... It caused controversy with groups like Newsbusters trumpeting the find as evidence of the liberal media, and the PRC hasn't asked the question since, unfortunately.

Do you have evidence of this or is this just your opinion?

It shows that both moderates and conservatives are at higher levels in the local press than national, and are thus being kept out of the upper ranks, rather than given promotion. ...

... or it could just be that the selection was based on education and ability to do the job ...

You are aware of who owns the networks right? Do you think they have no say in who gets promoted or hired?

Have you seen the surveys on actual coverage of news and whether that shows bias or not?

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 7:07 AM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2694
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


(4)
Message 233 of 301 (663733)
05-26-2012 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 7:14 AM


Re: All networks biased
I don't think FOX is more biased than MSNBC by any stretch of the imagination. It arguably is less extreme than MSNBC since at least it has a few commentators from the other side like Juan Williams and Alan Colmes, where I don't think MSNBC has any who are even moderate.

If you go by that standard then the best news show would be real time with bill Maher. He usualy has people form all sides on his show. So he should be completely unbiased right?

Thing is he actually is unbiased at what he reports, the problem is he only reports the nutjob republicans and the stupid things they do. I atcually love the show and watch it regulary but not because of the "news" because he shows the world how fucked up people in america are.

I am willing to admit that the liberal media is biased but if the liberal media can be called biased then Fox news should be called liars. Because liberal media still reports facts they may have their own opinions on these facts but facts are still facts. Fox news makes shit up and lies and reports that as it where true. I was willing to call that bias but if you insist on using such a deteiled scale for bias then liberal media falls in to the bias category but fox news falls in to the liar liar pants on fire category.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

Click if you dare!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 7:14 AM Jzyehoshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 6:25 PM frako has not yet responded

    
Jzyehoshua
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 234 of 301 (663783)
05-26-2012 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by frako
05-26-2012 8:05 AM


Re: All networks biased
quote:
If you go by that standard then the best news show would be real time with bill Maher. He usualy has people form all sides on his show. So he should be completely unbiased right?

Thing is he actually is unbiased at what he reports, the problem is he only reports the nutjob republicans and the stupid things they do. I atcually love the show and watch it regulary but not because of the "news" because he shows the world how fucked up people in america are.

I am willing to admit that the liberal media is biased but if the liberal media can be called biased then Fox news should be called liars. Because liberal media still reports facts they may have their own opinions on these facts but facts are still facts. Fox news makes shit up and lies and reports that as it where true. I was willing to call that bias but if you insist on using such a deteiled scale for bias then liberal media falls in to the bias category but fox news falls in to the liar liar pants on fire category.


I haven't watched Bill Maher's show before but I will definitely have to look into it, as that's what I always thought should happen, having polar opposite sides debate the issues. Not necessarily Republicans and Democrats either but Pro-Life and Pro-Choice or Creationism and Evolution.

He could still be biased in the sense of having opinions and strong beliefs, but a willingness to let opposing sides debate would show a strong level of objectivity and fair-mindedness, assuming of course he's accurately representing both sides and not just cherry-picking one side's bad opponents. Again, I'm not familiar with the show so I wouldn't know.

CNN though has done the same thing as far as making stuff up and reporting it as true. For example, their reporter Susan Roethsgen used a fake Tea Party plant to make the movement look bad. After the interview Tea Party supporters confronted her and it got caught on video, where they asked why she deliberately interviewed a fake who left right afterward, and that she was trying to make them look bad.

Afterwards, CNN made a pretense at getting rid of Roethsgen by not renewing her contract, but brought her back once the controversy died on. By no means do I view FOX News with a halo and I get disgusted with their biased reporting at times too (especially on economics and trickle-down/invisible hand stuff) but to say CNN and MSNBC aren't equally guilty seems to me ridiculous.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by frako, posted 05-26-2012 8:05 AM frako has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2012 4:27 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded
 Message 238 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-08-2012 8:12 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded
 Message 239 by Panda, posted 06-08-2012 9:08 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1647
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


(1)
Message 235 of 301 (665125)
06-08-2012 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 4:04 AM


Re: All networks biased
(e.g. Anderson Cooper, Piers Morgan, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopolous, Stephen Colbert, Keith Olbermann, Dan Rather, and Jon Stewart).

You do realize that the two bolded names are comedians who work for a comedy channel right?

God separated the races and attempting to mix them is like attempting to mix water with diesel fuel.- Buzsaw Message 177

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 4:04 AM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6439
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(2)
Message 236 of 301 (665133)
06-08-2012 3:09 PM


Be Biased Towards the Truth
Frankly, I prefer to watch programs that are biased towards the truth. That is what disgusts me most about Fox is that they will push known lies, or feel it necessary to have liars on their programs for "balance".

We really need to get over the idea that the truth needs to be balanced by lies. It is one of the greatest scams that the Republicans have pulled off in recent years, that somehow the truth needs to fought with lies. Death panels? Birthers? Global climate change denial? Evolution denial? Guess where you find these? In the Republican party and pushed by Fox News.

Sorry, but if reporting the truth is bias then bias is what I want.


  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 237 of 301 (665145)
06-08-2012 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 6:25 PM


Re: All networks biased
For example, their reporter Susan Roethsgen used a fake Tea Party plant to make the movement look bad.

Yeah...

That didn't happen. That's a conservative lie - which is the source, in fact, of most of the claims of "media bias."

Here's the reality of media bias:

The media - even, and especially, the "liberal" mainstream media - privileges conservatives. It's the result of being cowed by two decades of manufactured outrage about nonexistent bias.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 6:25 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15928
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 238 of 301 (665156)
06-08-2012 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 6:25 PM


Re: All networks biased
CNN though has done the same thing as far as making stuff up and reporting it as true. For example, their reporter Susan Roethsgen used a fake Tea Party plant to make the movement look bad. After the interview Tea Party supporters confronted her and it got caught on video, where they asked why she deliberately interviewed a fake who left right afterward, and that she was trying to make them look bad.

Afterwards, CNN made a pretense at getting rid of Roethsgen by not renewing her contract, but brought her back once the controversy died on.

Wow ... you even spelled her name wrong. I applaud your consistency.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 6:25 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 1123 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 239 of 301 (665160)
06-08-2012 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Jzyehoshua
05-26-2012 6:25 PM


Re: All networks biased
Jzyehoshua writes:

CNN though has done the same thing as far as making stuff up and reporting it as true. For example, their reporter Susan Roethsgen used a fake Tea Party plant to make the movement look bad. After the interview Tea Party supporters confronted her and it got caught on video, where they asked why she deliberately interviewed a fake who left right afterward, and that she was trying to make them look bad.


No, she did not interview a fake protester.
No, other protesters didn't ask her why she interviewed a fake protester.

Here's the interview:

Jzyehoshua writes:

Afterwards, CNN made a pretense at getting rid of Roethsgen by not renewing her contract, but brought her back once the controversy died on.


CNN did not renew her contract in 2009.
They did not make a pretence of anything.
They did not bring her back.

CRYSTALS!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Jzyehoshua, posted 05-26-2012 6:25 PM Jzyehoshua has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15928
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


(3)
Message 240 of 301 (723438)
04-01-2014 2:28 PM



Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2014 8:05 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 242 by vimesey, posted 04-02-2014 9:03 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 243 by saab93f, posted 04-02-2014 9:05 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 245 by ringo, posted 04-02-2014 12:46 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017