Author Topic: Fox News - a glorious decade of lying to the planet. (Read 38582 times)

corkboy · « **Reply #680 on:** September 18, 2012, 07:18:35 PM »

Quote from: kkhaku on September 18, 2012, 06:30:10 PM

CNN was recently busted taking money from the Bahraini regime to make sure a comprehensive documentary wasn't aired.

Got a source?

Gene · « **Reply #681 on:** September 20, 2012, 04:32:27 PM »

I found this interesting...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/msnbc-tops-fox-news-in-th_n_1899889.html

Quote

Is a shift happening in the normally frozen-in-place world of cable news ratings?

It's hard to tell, but something unexpected has happened over the last two days: MSNBC has beaten Fox News in the all-important A25-54 category two nights in a row.

TVNewser was the first to spot the trend. While it may not seem like too big a deal for MSNBC to jump ahead of Fox News, it's rather surprising that it is happening at all. The total dominance of Roger Ailes' network is one of the biggest articles of faith in the television business. As Alex Weprin wrote, "The number one show in the demo on cable news is always, always "The O'Reilly Factor" unless there is some sort of unusual news event or huge booking."

But, on both Monday and Tuesday -- with neither a huge news event nor a huge booking -- MSNBC beat Fox News. Rachel Maddow's ratings in the demo on Tuesday were better than Bill O'Reilly's and Sean Hannity's. Lawrence O'Donnell's were better than Greta van Susteren's. Overall, MSNBC beat Fox News 575,000 to 526,000.

Fox News has little to worry about in terms of total viewers; the gap between it and the competition is a huge one. But A25-54 viewers are the most important ones because advertisers set their rates based on how many people in that category tune in. A change in the demo can powerfully affect a network's bottom line. While it is obviously too early to draw any big conclusions, a longer trend would be a very big deal indeed.

Canada Loves Anfield · « **Reply #682 on:** September 20, 2012, 04:45:14 PM »

Quote from: corkboy on September 18, 2012, 07:18:35 PM

Got a source?

Who needs those?

corkboy · « **Reply #683 on:** September 20, 2012, 04:51:30 PM »

Quote from: Gene on September 20, 2012, 04:32:27 PM

I found this interesting...

It is.

Gene · « **Reply #684 on:** September 20, 2012, 05:32:45 PM »

Fox News is so desparate to get someone to turn coat on Obama that they get pranked in the process.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/kwBiqeL6pMM" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/kwBiqeL6pMM</a>

firing squad · « **Reply #685 on:** September 21, 2012, 12:22:21 PM »

Quote from: Gene on September 20, 2012, 05:32:45 PM

Fox News is so desparate to get someone to turn coat on Obama that they get pranked in the process.

hahaha the look on her face.

Trada · « **Reply #686 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:08:23 AM »

Just turned on Fox news and they are show pictures and video of the dead ambassador surprised they are doing that I guess they are worried by the last polls and using it to attack Obama and the government 'cover up'.

Roopy · « **Reply #687 on:** September 26, 2012, 03:16:17 AM »

It's examples like Fox News which leads to so many people being misinformed about any given situation.

And the people are misinformed because the media (Fox News, CNN, BBC etc) is bought & paid for. It's one hell of a betrayal of the people when we have the media not telling the people the truth, because they are afraid that if they do tell the truth then their bosses will take their jobs from them. How can you have a democracy when you don't have a free press?

The media & their personnel are essentially all slaves - and they love it. They deserve what they get like the erosion of their 'democracy' - the media will soon be the laughing stock of the whole world. That's why people are 'Occupying' space in Chicago, in New York (Wall Street), in Boston, in Washington & now all over the world. Why? Because they're not looking to the media as a source of information for them.

Look how long it took the media to talk about what was going on with the whole 'Occupy Wall Street Movement'. It took the media TWO WEEKS. Why? Because the same people who control the financial institutions and the banks control the media. Now most of the media know this to be true, but they're afraid to say it ... but who knows, maybe someday the media will stand up and have the courage to stand up and give the world free media, but right now for me, they aren't worth the time of day.

We need somebody to tell the truth. We need somebody who is not afraid to die for the truth so that we can be free. But as of now, most mainstream media is not free and they don't know what it means to be a free white person, a free black person, or a free Asian person - if you're afraid to tell the truth, then what future do our children have in a society where the truth is kicked to the gutter?

I applaud the pioneers of technology who have given us things like the iPad & tools such Twitter, YouTube and other social media programs because they are giving a voice to the people - so much so that Zbigniew Brzezinski, advisor to Barack Obama, said that before it was easier to control 1 million people than it was to kill 1 million people. But now he says it's easier to kill 1 million people than it is to contain 1 million people.

He says this because the genie is out of the bottle, the cat is out of the bag and people around the world are beginning to wake up - and now the media needs to wake up and operate freely so that we and our children can have a bright future. But if the media are afraid to tell the truth ... well, afraid of what? We're all going to die at some stage anyway - where can you run to escape death?

jason67 · « **Reply #688 on:** September 26, 2012, 08:11:17 PM »

Quote from: Roopy on September 26, 2012, 03:16:17 AM

Good post that but I feel it will fall on deaf ears, not just on here but on most of the people you talk to.

Outer Mongolian Red · « **Reply #689 on:** September 28, 2012, 08:54:15 PM »

They showed a man shooting himself earlier today.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/28/shep-smith-apologizes-fox-news-live-suicide-messed-up_n_1923971.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

exiledintheusa · « **Reply #690 on:** September 28, 2012, 08:59:35 PM »

Quote from: Outer Mongolian Red on September 28, 2012, 08:54:15 PM

They showed a man shooting himself earlier today.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/28/shep-smith-apologizes-fox-news-live-suicide-messed-up_n_1923971.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

Must be the most amount of times that 'Sorry' has ever been said on that channel.

RedinExile · « **Reply #691 on:** October 1, 2012, 12:15:26 AM »

Good post roopy.

Redallover11 · « **Reply #692 on:** October 1, 2012, 03:15:07 AM »

Fox Five news.........coming up in sports mentions a come from behind win for the Yankees an embarrassing loss for the jets and a tim tebow question and FAILS to mention the Ryder Cup whatsoever.
Staggering journalism.

exiledintheusa · « **Reply #693 on:** October 2, 2012, 03:47:02 PM »

Quote from: Redallover11 on October 1, 2012, 03:15:07 AM

Fox Five news.........coming up in sports mentions a come from behind win for the Yankees an embarrassing loss for the jets and a tim tebow question and FAILS to mention the Ryder Cup whatsoever.
Staggering journalism.

The NBC coverage was meant to run until 4pm on Sunday, at 3.20 they said you can watch the celebrations on the Golf Channel and then they showed 40 mins of infomercials.

kkhaku · « **Reply #694 on:** October 3, 2012, 03:31:30 AM »

Quote from: corkboy on September 18, 2012, 07:18:35 PM

Got a source?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/04/cnn-business-state-sponsored-news

http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/04/cnn-international-documentary-bahrain-arab-spring-repression?cat=world&type=article

corkboy · « **Reply #695 on:** October 26, 2012, 10:11:04 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/OFZ8h2ygIcg" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/OFZ8h2ygIcg</a>

Ronanoman · « **Reply #696 on:** October 29, 2012, 09:40:40 PM »

Quality isn't great but some of the lies are incredible. Had a quick look at the site and sadly this quote from Reilly was listed as true:
"A Democratic poll operation shows that Fox News is the most trusted news operation in the country."
How....I have no idea.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/bqA8oxY6aao" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/bqA8oxY6aao</a>

Fanxxxxtastic · « **Reply #697 on:** October 29, 2012, 10:45:58 PM »

I fucking hate Fox News.

JohnHobbes · « **Reply #698 on:** October 29, 2012, 10:55:03 PM »

Quote from: corkboy on October 26, 2012, 10:11:04 AM

Has anyone seen him since or he is locked in Fox's dungeon (or worse) for such heretical beliefs?

LiverBirdKop · « **Reply #699 on:** October 29, 2012, 11:37:57 PM »

Quote from: JohnHobbes on October 29, 2012, 10:55:03 PM

Has anyone seen him since or he is locked in Fox's dungeon (or worse) for such heretical beliefs?

He probably got some kind of "warning" that he wouldn't be invited again for that line of reasoning and he'll NO DOUBT make up for it with another appearance more in line with what the neocon/winger/birthers/tea party nutters want to hear.

Trada · « **Reply #700 on:** November 2, 2012, 08:32:17 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/NF0rwxc4yTU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/NF0rwxc4yTU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US</a>

jerseyhoya · « **Reply #701 on:** November 3, 2012, 06:26:19 AM »

MSNBC, more partisan than Fox

Not surprising at all

optared · « **Reply #702 on:** November 3, 2012, 07:26:48 AM »

In a weird way, fox news is good.
Let me explain.

It doesnt hid what it is, it isnt like the BBC which has its own agenda but hides behind a fake impartiality banner.

You know when you watch fox your getting the more hardline republican party opinion, theres no hiding it.

The problem is people who dont see it for what it is.

BostonScouse · « **Reply #703 on:** November 3, 2012, 07:39:25 AM »

The study is not about "bias" or "dishonesty" it's about tone. Here, from the actual study, and not some silly synopsis of it:

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign_2012

Quote

The study of the tone in news coverage is not an examination of media bias. Rather, it measures the overall impression the public is receiving in media about each candidate, whether the assertion is a quote from a source, a fact presented in the narrative that is determined to be favorable or unfavorable, including poll results, or is part of a journalistic analysis.

Romney is a joke candidate who has lied consistently throughout this entire campaign, lost 2/3 of the debates and trailed in the polls so naturally, with reality tending to have a liberal bias, you will see more negative stories concerning him and the GOP from any remotely worthwhile news service. There's basically no qualitative analysis in the study at all wrt the truthfulness of the story, whether it was reported or dealt with in an opinion segment, which makes it meaningless. Also, the vast majority of the coverage has been about the polls, wich Obama has been consistently up in in the swing states for months, and mostly up in the national polls outside of a brief period surrounding the second debate, making any story about them a positive for obama and a negative for Romney. And, of course, bias and dishonesty is not just limited to positive v. negative stories about the oppositional candidate.

A good example of this is the contrast in coverage right now between MSNBC dealing with the Obama's poll position currently and the factual inaccuracy of Romney's Jeep jobs to China ad v. Fox's totally manufactured and blatantly dishonest Benghazi-gate and "this is Obama's Katrina" 'stories.'

here's a quick snapshot of msnbc.com and Foxnews.com at this moment

I can't hardly tell the difference!

jerseyhoya · « **Reply #704 on:** November 3, 2012, 03:19:41 PM »

Quote from: BostonScouse on November 3, 2012, 07:39:25 AM

The study is not about "bias" or "dishonesty" it's about tone. Here, from the actual study, and not some silly synopsis of it:

It is bias. If 71% of the stories you're running about a candidate are negative and 3% are positive you're intentionally selecting negative stories and ignoring positive ones.

MSNBC.com is a much better site than FoxNews.com. MSNBC.com has been well run for much longer than the news channel has been hyperpartisan, and they don't seem to have followed the channel as far to the left.

Ronanoman · « **Reply #705 on:** November 3, 2012, 06:45:51 PM »

Quote from: jerseyhoya on November 3, 2012, 06:26:19 AM

MSNBC, more partisan than Fox

Not surprising at all

Quote from: jerseyhoya on November 3, 2012, 03:19:41 PM

It is bias. If 71% of the stories you're running about a candidate are negative and 3% are positive you're intentionally selecting negative stories and ignoring positive ones.

I think or at least hope that everyone can admit that both MSNBC and Fox are to some degree biased. I can't think of a news station that isn't. The article you posted however is flawed in it's assertion that the cited study shows that MSNBC is more biased than fox. The study itself makes it clear that its "not an examination of media bias" because while it may show the presence of bias, it doesn't show the degree of bias.

The candidates will naturally not have the same number of positive and negative assertions made against them from a hypothetical news provider with zero bias; especially if poll results are included. The study also considers a fact that is negative in nature and a fabricated assertion that is negative to be the same whereas I believe the former to be less biased, even if it was selected for reasons of bias. The study doesn't take into account how positive or negative an assertion is, one that is slightly negative and another that is extremely negative are again considered to be the same. Lastly the study doesn't show the number of positive and negative assertions made by the news providers, it shows the number of positive/negative news stories with a news story containing a 3:2 ratio of positive/negative assertions considered to be positive/negative. The 3:2 ratio is a rather arbitrary number and so a story with a 3:2 ratio of negative to positive assertions is deemed to be as negative as one with a 10:1 ratio.

Yes, MSNBC leans to the left and Fox to the right but that study doesn't come close to showing which is more biased or how biased either station is. To suggest so, as the article you posted does, is simply wrong.

LiverBirdKop · « **Reply #706 on:** November 3, 2012, 07:57:21 PM »

Quote from: Ronanoman on November 3, 2012, 06:45:51 PM

Yes, MSNBC leans to the left and Fox to the right but that study doesn't come close to showing which is more biased or how biased either station is. To suggest so, as the article you posted does, is simply wrong.

I agree with this. Not so sure I would've called it "simply wrong" though imo. Not with the "liberal media" myth pushers.

Mouth · « **Reply #707 on:** November 3, 2012, 08:16:58 PM »

Quote from: optared on November 3, 2012, 07:26:48 AM

It doesnt hid what it is, it isnt like the BBC which has its own agenda but hides behind a fake impartiality banner.

corkboy · « **Reply #708 on:** November 5, 2012, 12:12:13 AM »

source

Mouth · « **Reply #709 on:** November 5, 2012, 12:28:26 AM »

Fox are fair and balanced.

LiverBirdKop · « **Reply #710 on:** November 5, 2012, 05:10:09 AM »

Quote

At least 32 Fox News hosts and contributors have campaigned for Republican candidates and organizations this election cycle. The campaigning has occurred nationally and in 42 states. Fox News figures helped raise and spend hundreds of millions of dollars this cycle in support of Republicans. They have also been featured in at least 105 fundraisers across the country.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/02/map-has-fox-news-campaigned-for-republicans-nea/191067

Finn Solomon · « **Reply #711 on:** November 5, 2012, 06:22:26 AM »

Oh wow, look how liberal MSNBC is. Fuck the liberal biased media.

Trada · « **Reply #712 on:** November 5, 2012, 08:44:12 AM »

Quote from: corkboy on November 5, 2012, 12:12:13 AM

source

Doesn't surprise me I was watching it the other night and they showed both of them talking live they must have shown Obama for about 4 minutes before going away from it and they showed the whole of the Romney speech about 40 minutes and they spoke about how great the speech was for about 20 minutes afterwards.

Mouth · « **Reply #713 on:** November 5, 2012, 07:19:09 PM »

Quote from: Trada on November 5, 2012, 08:44:12 AM

Doesn't surprise me I was watching it the other night and they showed both of them talking live they must have shown Obama for about 4 minutes before going away from it and they showed the whole of the Romney speech about 40 minutes and they spoke about how great the speech was for about 20 minutes afterwards.

Why would you watch that much of it? I'd rather spend an hour stapling my cock to my leg.

Brentie · « **Reply #714 on:** November 5, 2012, 09:20:46 PM »

Quote from: Mouth on November 5, 2012, 12:28:26 AM

Fox are fair and balanced.

Saw what you want about them, they're certainly fairer and more balanced than the FA are.

Mouth · « **Reply #715 on:** November 5, 2012, 09:21:20 PM »

Quote from: Brentie on November 5, 2012, 09:20:46 PM

Saw what you want about them, they're certainly fairer and more balanced than the FA are.

So were the nazis

Bangin Them In · « **Reply #716 on:** November 7, 2012, 11:06:43 AM »

Fox now re-examining the electorial college system and abandoning it as a system. Loads of generous Mitt coverage, before they set him on fire

Dick Morris now railing against single women, blacks and Latinos who won't vote Republican for some reason.

8:45 Carl Rove is on, probably live from Nuremberg

SP · « **Reply #717 on:** November 7, 2012, 11:28:17 AM »

Quote from: corkboy on November 5, 2012, 12:12:13 AM

source

Surely that is evidence of a pro-Obama slant at Fox. The more they showed of Mitt speaking, the less likely you are to vote for him.

Libertine · « **Reply #718 on:** November 7, 2012, 11:32:15 AM »

Quote from: Bangin Them In on November 7, 2012, 11:06:43 AM

Dick Morris now railing against single women, blacks and Latinos who won't vote Republican for some reason.

speaking of Dick:

"It will be the biggest surprise in recent American political history," Morris said. "It will rekindle the whole question on why the media played this race as a nailbiter where in fact Romney’s going to win by quite a bit."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/11/05/dick_morris_stands_by_prediction_romney_will_win_325_electoral_votes.html

Trada · « **Reply #719 on:** November 7, 2012, 11:45:37 AM »

Quote from: Mouth on November 5, 2012, 07:19:09 PM

Why would you watch that much of it? I'd rather spend an hour stapling my cock to my leg.

Because it's great fun it was comedy Gold last night.

Karl Rove Causes Fox News Chaos By Challenging Obama Victory Projection

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJg3z5c93zU

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/karl-rove-causes-fox-news-chaos-by-challenging-obama-victory-projection/

O'Reilly and Hannity should be a good laugh tonight.

I imagine they will run lots of stories today about voting fraud to try to give the election doubt.

Funny just as I type this that is what they are doing.