WTF Fox News

Hey.. seriously.. If my opinion is subjective, why isn't yours? That simple enough for you to understand?

I disagree with what you have provided as "evidence". I don't have to dispute each thing you say or to justify that opinion for that matter. I said I would challenge anyone who said that Fox was any worse than any other network. I have a well-considered opinion based on a fair bit of - what I consider to be objective - research about the networks. The master's work was not the only time I have looked at media in America. You diagree because you have personal experience within the industry and claim that my shorter period is valueless... Fine, but I don't accept that as evidence/argument of value to me either.

What would I consider "evidence"? Nothing that you can provide - and that is not a slam nor stubbornness. It's a reference to the fact that I stand back and do research before jumping to any conclusions. This is neither the forum (pun intended) nor the time to go into my analytic process.

Tell you what. Let's let this drop... This thread really was not intended to be about Fox, you and me, was it? I think it was about a Dutchman whose nose was out of joint.

I imagine that the closer a network is to a viewer's own bias, the more benign and neutral they're going to see it. Personally I think they all suck. Often I think it has less to do with presenting a biased agenda than it does with simply lazy reporting. It's easier to pad a story with "some people say" statements that don't have to be qualified than it is to round it out with objective contextual information. Fox and MSNBC both definitely pander to partisan audiences (MSNBC just tries to pander to both at various times during the day). CNN is more about lazy reporting and using partisan "analysts" to fill airtime. I do think it's fair to say that Fox has the least integrity and is the most blatant about playing to a particular ideology. I'll watch whatever is most neutral and least jingoistic. I don't even bother to check Fox anymore.

Seeing a white card and saying 'that is white' is hardly jumping to conclusions.. but all things considered, I'm more than happy to let it drop - I've made my point - several times - if you refuse to see the actual content of the broadcast as evidence - once again NOT of bias and slant, but as simple 'good and bad journalism' then thats your biz..

I really have nothing against you - but I still believe - as someone with fresh eyes and seeing/working in the US Media this past decade - that the Fox network is the lead turd in the swirlybowl race for the S-Bend that will be the deathknell of TV Journalism in this country... The others being a close 2nd, 3rd and 4th is by no means a great accomplishment on thier behalf either... It's all shit, it all stinks.. And it's all headed in the same direction.

Siggy.

I agree Darko, both parties are tired, self-satisfied (self-serving) and dogmatic. In the last two decades the media has had a profound effect on society and for the most part, I believe a harmful one.

We are “Creating Monsters and Selling Fear”

“The resources of the US and its citizens are being diverted and drained to create a tyrannical corporate global government that has no respect for the wishes of it US citizens, dismissing their legitimate concerns with false assurances, denial, ridicule and intimidation; yet these are concerns that all Americans share, regardless of partisan politics. And we are beginning to see increased overt manifestation of this in the US much more so than the W. European nations whose citizens are more accurately and fairly represented by coalition government representation of diverse views, therefore more politically empowered to oppose the inhumane and profit-driven agendas of attempts of corporate dominance.

The two-party system is a joke, mere theater, offering no representation for other than two barely differing canned NWO/corporate backed platforms - based upon a false dividing lines between the two with mindless 'battles' promulgated and fomented by corporate media, diverting the attention of gullible citizens from serious issues of common concern. Yet the unaccountable corporate bureaucrats will continue to employ their strategies to further their agendas for absolute power and control over this country, its resources, its population.

Our federal leadership has failed to represent the will of the people, instead favoring the objectives of the military/industrial/chemical/pharmaceutical/media complex, creating chaos, if necessary, to further the goals of faceless, unaccountable NWO bureaucrats who lurk in the shadows behind their investments - those who do their bidding. And while our national leaders create international chaos in their misrepresentation of the nature and will of the populace of the United States of America, 'we the people' have no formal allies, only enemies made by our leadership and their manipulations for global control. 'We the people 'are the commodities for the corporate nation. We are also the conscience of this nation. We are a nation under siege from our own 'leadership'.

This comes from Creating monsters and selling fear by Mirage.

Some of us see it though and are willing to take steps to change it.

I've never been in the news business, nor did I do any Masters Degree in media studies, nor can I really claim to be a 'newbie' or an 'oldbie'. So, any way you cut it, the following opinion has no validity whatsoever.

I've only watched Fox News a few times, and what irks me about it is the whole "Fair and Balanced" tagline of the network. Yes, Fox News reports news facts as accurately as any other network...but it's not their news coverage that bothers me....it's the obviously slanted editorial asides I saw the anchors make after each story. I've *never* seen this done so blatantly and so often as I did in the one 30-min news segment I saw on that channel.

Again, it's not the fact that Fox News did a story on infant euthanasia that bugs me; that's a valid news story. What does bug me is the fact that the anchor then does a ham-handed free association with the Nazis killing Anne Frank. Say what you will about the 'liberal media', but even Dan Rather doesn't usually show that kind of obvious bias when reading the teleprompter.

Fox News needs to stop pretending to be a news outlet...It's a channel targeting what I expect is a particularly desirable demographic to marketers nowadays - the conservative base. I really don't have a problem with that; There should be a place for the Ann Coulters of the world. However, this "Fair and Balanced" label is simply insulting to intelligence in general.

The difference between Fox and other networks is that Fox is so much worse at hiding their biases and covering over their incompetence. This doesn't mean they have more integrity. It just means they're actually incompetent at being incompetent. And satirical about television journalism without intending to be satirical.

Why should I want to sue you? Do you have money?

I agree. I'm almost done digging the pit

Here is a Dead Annie for your pit and a little something to remember her by after she is buried.

LOL. That first pic is dangerous. Remember the big flap about the Kerry pic with the rifle? hehe. The second one is hilarious

Waiting for the secret service to show up at my cube. They should slinking by any moment now.....

You have got to love it. Someone at FOX makes a closing comment that is clearly non sequitur, some folks point out that Dutch euthanasia practices are in no way related to the murder of Anne Frank, and Korg, as per usual, has to turn it into a liberal/conservative fight. That would be fine if he was reacting to those who said; "FOX News sucks, they are a bunch of neo-cons." Despite the fact that numerous people stated they have issues with all or most TV journalism and that FOX just happens to be the most smug and obvious offender, it has to be partisanally black or white. Wrong. The fact that Korg chooses to "debate" those who are against FOX because of their level of integrity is somewhat mystifying and is probably just an indicator that he likes to argue, and has an overwhelming urge to be "right", all the time. An urge most likely fueled by contempt for any viewpoint that is outside his sphere of thought and what he considers to be fact, i.e., his opinions. You will be summarily dismissed as; a liberal; unwilling to read his posts; unable to comprehend his posts, a Second Life Oldbie snob, etc, etc, ad infinitum.

Siggy stated I don't know how many times, that it's about journalistic integrity in his case. Korg simply rejects that over and over, and tries desperately to turn it back to a political slugfest. Why don't you just get it over with and accuse Siggy of lying about his motivations? Your repeated refusal to accept what he is saying at face value simply showcases the fact that you have issues with anyone who disagrees with you and if they dare to do so, they must be a left winger.

The backpeddling. It was a paper to research and detail whether or not there has been a liberal bias in the media in the past 40 years at first, ('the identifiability of a growth in liberal bias across the Big Three Television Networks from the 1950s to the mid 90s - in evening news transcripts') and now it's magically morphed into a paper to see if there was no bias ('... my master's degree work was not designed nor intended to prove anything. I started not actually believing what my conclusion ended up as --- as a matter of fact, I set out to determine if there was a middle of the road bias...'). What would be the point of writing such a paper? To expose fair and balanced, non-partisan journalism in the US? Which is it? The one that fits your argument at the time? What am I missing here? The description of this paper clearly states that it was to illustrate the 'identifiability' (the word 'identifiability' is not showing up in my dictionary or in dictionary.com) of the growth of liberal media bias, then you state that it wasn't intended to prove anything. The earlier description of the paper clearly belies this claim.

Any credibility Korg may have had is now gone, at least in my eyes, especially with vainglorious statements like this one; 'I state opinions as fact'. That about sums it up for me and actually is the last straw for me. There is no point in arguing with someone who views his own opinions as the final word.

o·pin·ion
A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof.

*Eagerly awaits Korg's claim that his dictionary has a different definition.*

Make your reply a good one Korg, because it will be the last time we converse. That is not an idle promise.

ROFL!

That's Pulitzer material Rose!

While I do find the above images mildy offensive, they are of legitimate public figure and don't actually depict anything expressly prohibited by our forum guidelines.

Generally, the purpose of these forums is discussion and education about Second Life, in the future, please refrain from linking to or attaching objectionable material from our forums.

Rose those pics were so worth it! Haha.

It's a tough call, isn't it? - What's more offensive, the images, or what comes out of Ann Coulter's mouth and word processing program?

WOW... so fucking impressed. Awesome post, Darko.

Same here. Nobody is unbiased, nor should they be. We all evaluate the moment from the perspective of our accumulated experience. "Fair and balanced" is a slogan, nothing more. I'm sure all the media would happily apply it to themselves if they had thought of it first. It doesn't mean you should expect Fox to be any less biased, or the other networks any more so. Take everything that all of them say with a grain of salt.

...



Uh. Yeah.

Not sure if you're agreeing with me or trying to point something out. Feel free to elaborate.

No, I just thought it was an odd juxtaposition. I could have said the same thing. They all suck. C-Span doesn't suck though, and in my opinion is the closest thing we have to unbiased news. I bet we can agree on that.

As to FOX, when I watch TV at all, which is rare, I tend to prefer it to the others. But then, I'm conservative on many issues and would prefer to see that spin, if I have to see any spin at all.

I'm still waiting for someone to say that because the story that started this thread was from one of the wire services we should avoid reading any news from them. That would be hard to do of course.

These days, and perhaps at no time can/could you get away with reading just one newspaper or watching even one or two TV networks and claim to be well informed. If you happen to be interested in an event, and C-Span happens to be covering it (as they say) unedited, without interruption, in its entirety, then you are fortunate to be getting the unspun news. That's a very time consuming way to go about it though. If you rely on summarizers of the news though, you have to learn just what their prejudices are (it helps if they simply tell you).

Oh yeah. I agree with you completely, Mac... well, aside from the favoring Fox part hehe. CSPAN is a great thing to have. I think the News Hour with Jim Leher is very well done and quite fair minded. I also think Nightline is a good news show since the stories they run are detailed and in depth without much postulating. The rest of tv news works on a crappy fromula... 30 seconds of paltry information followed by a biased summary (which usually consists of a "sources say" type thing). I get most of my news online. Google News is a wonderful thing.

I really loathe Rupert Murdoch. If he owns Fox and and I were in the USA, there is no way I would watch it.

I do not read his newspapers in the the UK which are totally biased, nor do I pay for cable TV because he owns Sky Television and although I don't have to watch it, I do not want to contribute any money to him. This leaves me with 5 terrestrial channels which actually is fine since I'm mostly on SL and don't watch TV much. I know to Americans only having five channels is unthinkable but its really ok.


Also quite like watching baseball in the middle of the night over here, and supported the LA Dodgers. He bought them so now I'm teamless.

------------------------------------------------------------------
So while you may think Nazi's are EVIL... and many people do; I think your statement would be more appropriate and less ignorant if it were stated as an opinion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

What you write here is utter crap.

If you had been alive at that time (and i was born at the end of WWII) you would be in no doubt that they were evil. Forget the sappy movies that have been made about the war, there are people alive who still have the Nazi numbers tattoo'd on their arms. If the people in the camps weren't gassed to death then they were starved to death. I have seen RL film of emaciated dead bodies piled into mountains. If this is not the work of evil then I don't know what is.

I have a friend who was a refugee. Every single member of her family died in the camp. Tell her that Nazi's being evil is just an opinion.

Alexa

Sorry dude. I consider myself to be conservative in many ways and liberal in many others. And the "conservatives" as we have today in the USA are not "conservative". They are "neo-conservative", which I would define as puritanical, religious zealots bent upon forcing their will upon their country and the world.

"Liberal News" is not liberal versus conservative. When you call something "Liberal" you mean non-narrow minded. What neo-cons want, and what Fox delivers, is a narrow-view on the world, using fear as their vehicle.

ditto.

good vs evil. right vs wrong. strong vs. weak. and the sad thing is that poeple lap that crap up. people rarely want to take the time to consider this complex world. nothing is simple where humans are envolved.