Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It should be called the FOX Editorial Network not the FOX News Network

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It should be called the FOX Editorial Network not the FOX News Network

    a couple of weeks ago, the senior veep at fox news responded to obama's objections to the cable news network by scoffing that the president should know the "difference between the A section of the paper versus the editorial page," as the average american does.

    the new york times piece indicates "fox argues that its news hours — 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays — are objective." as jon stewart pointed out (video at the link), this means only nine hours of any 24 are actual news--the rest is mere opinion. the remaining 60%+ of its programming hours, as jon stewart points out, includes fox news darlings beck, hannity & o'reilly--names synonymous with fox news, are all, therefore "NOT NEWS!!" more treacherous is that the supposedly straight news part reports on the opinions expressed on the editorial side as if it were actual news, not faux news.

    maybe i'm playing captain obvious here. but earlier this week, fox news...or wait, let's be more correct--sean hannity, a faux news flunky, presented something much more than opinion masquerading as fact regarding congresswoman michelle bachman's tea party last week.

    it starts with bachman grossly inflating attendance (20 to 40 thousand versus 10 thousand). yawn--that's normal for faux news. but it turns more perfidious. after showing actual footage of attendance at the bachman event, hannity presented footage from a much more widely attended glenn beck protest a couple months ago as being from bachman's protest. the discrepancy is made obvious by the fact that trees, earlier shown to have much of their leaves fallen, are suddenly verdant. the sky, earlier shown to be clear, were suddenly overcast. stewart even provided the original reporting on beck's protest and showed it side by side with the falsely presented bachman footage, and it was exactly the same.

    video here and here.

    bottom line? faux news spends most of its programming to spout off its right wingnut opinions, but manufactures, fabricates and fictionalizes film in order to further that opinion. what are fox news's slogans? fair and balanced? real journalism? we report, you decide? only in the bizarro world that is fox news.

    the saddest & most pathetic thing about this: as far as i can tell, MSM is pretty much ignoring this one.
    superbia (pride), avaritia (greed), luxuria (lust), invidia (envy), gula (gluttony), ira (wrath) & acedia (sloth)--the seven deadly sins.

    "when you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people i deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly..."--meditations, marcus aurelius (make sure you read the rest of the passage, ya lazy wankers!)

    nothing humiliates like the truth.--me, in conversation w/mixedplatebroker re 3rd party, 2009-11-11, 1213

  • #2
    Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

    Originally posted by cynsaligia View Post
    ...as far as i can tell, MSM is pretty much ignoring this one.
    Why give Fox News any semblance of being a legitimate source for unbiased information in America, when their prime reason for existence is to be a dividing factor, to play up the emotional dissatisfaction of a percentage of the country, and (foremost) to make bucketloads of money doing so?

    Calling people like Rush Limbaugh & Glenn Beck "journalists" is like calling Ronald McDonald "chef."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

      Originally posted by cynsaligia View Post
      bottom line? faux news spends most of its programming to spout off its right wingnut opinions, but manufactures, fabricates and fictionalizes film in order to further that opinion. .
      Cyn, you are being way too logical......and we all know THAT is not being "fair and balanced"! Ya betcha, wink, wink.
      Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

      People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

        Before the next election cycle is over, Fox News will find a way to blame slavery on President Obama.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

          hmm. tis notable that on this thread we're hearing nothing but crickets from certain HTers who have not only declared a rightist leaning, but a have demonstrated a fondness for media. should we take their silence to mean they think such actions by faux are acceptable? inquiring minds would like to know.
          superbia (pride), avaritia (greed), luxuria (lust), invidia (envy), gula (gluttony), ira (wrath) & acedia (sloth)--the seven deadly sins.

          "when you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people i deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly..."--meditations, marcus aurelius (make sure you read the rest of the passage, ya lazy wankers!)

          nothing humiliates like the truth.--me, in conversation w/mixedplatebroker re 3rd party, 2009-11-11, 1213

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

            It's Not Necessarily the News.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

              Originally posted by cynsaligia View Post
              hmm. tis notable that on this thread we're hearing nothing but crickets from certain HTers who have not only declared a rightist leaning, .
              OTH, the participants on this thread so far have been the usual suspects.

              To be fair and balanced to Faux News, they did correct Para Sailin that it was, in fact, W. Bush who approved the new "In God We Trust" coin, not B. Obama. As you say Cyn, nothing humiliates like the truth!

              I love the fact that Sarah just wont go away. Every time she opens her mouth she proves again and again what a dumb burro she is.
              Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

              People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                This thread is so predictable. After watching it since its inception, I figured it would not be long before there were comments about how no "conservatives" would engage. Why should anyone engage such an obviously biased thread? Personally, I think Cyn was feeling particularly adversarial that day, and Fox News just got on her last nerve.

                But I can't just let it go.....I find CNN as left-leaning as you find Fox to be right-leaning. Keith Olbermann's show is the left's version of Fox's (pick the Fox commentator of your choice.) I have heard him be so vicious that spittle left his lips during a rant. I put him in the same camp as Bill Maher; after listening for about 1 minute, it's time to change the channel.

                If you Google CNN vs Fox, there are 37,500,000 hits. So this thread is just one version like more than 37 million other liberal vs conservative TV blogs and threads.

                In America we have the freedom of choosing which version of reality we want to believe. I reject your reality and substitute my own, as do millions of other conservative Americans. Vive la Liberte!

                PS It will be nice to see Lou Dobbs move over to the Fox fold!
                Last edited by cyleet99; November 12, 2009, 07:38 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                  The difference between CNN and FOX is blatant. One tries to get out factual stories or commentary, and the other has no use for facts.
                  https://www.facebook.com/Bobby-Ingan...5875444640256/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                    Jon Stewart caught Sean Hannity using old footage to insinuate that a new teabagging protest had reached sizable numbers.

                    http://insidetv.aol.com/2009/11/12/s...o-jon-stewart/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                      Originally posted by Ron Whitfield View Post
                      The difference between CNN and FOX is blatant. One tries to get out factual stories or commentary, and the other has no use for facts.
                      Both have their good points and their bad points. One could argue your point both ways. Here are 7 reasons CNN is having problems and losing viewers to Fox.
                      Last edited by cyleet99; November 12, 2009, 07:46 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                        Originally posted by cyleet99 View Post
                        Why should anyone engage such an obviously biased thread?
                        Pointing out an obvious manipulation of the news by Faux News is somehow showing bias? If you have examples of CNN manipulating the news by showing crowd clips from other rallies, please post them. I'd like to know about it.

                        In America we have the freedom of choosing which version of reality we want to believe. I reject your reality and substitute my own, as do millions of other conservative Americans.
                        What about those of us who don't watch any of the "news" channels? I don't even have a TV. I choose to form my own opinions rather than let a "news" channel dictate to me their version of reality. Limbarf says it is not necessary to listen to any news, he will tell you everything you neeed to know. Yea, right, hell will freeze over in my house before that happens!

                        PS It will be nice to see Lou Dobbs move over to the Fox fold!
                        Who is Lou Dobbs?

                        I think it is interesting that Shawn Enmity admiited that Jon Stewart was right that Faux had manipulated the coverage of the Bachmann rally. Then he added a snarky remark thanking Stewart's writers for watching his show. My question is, how would Enmity know what was on Stewart's show unless his writers were watching Stewart? Snarkiness works both ways!
                        Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

                        People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                          Originally posted by cynsaligia View Post
                          hmm. tis notable that on this thread we're hearing nothing but crickets from certain HTers who have not only declared a rightist leaning, but a have demonstrated a fondness for media. should we take their silence to mean they think such actions by faux are acceptable? inquiring minds would like to know.
                          Chirp, chirp.

                          I haven't watched TV "news" since Walter Cronkite left the set.

                          My father-in-law worked for CBS in Washington from the mid-1960s to the early '90s. Judging from his stories it was barely news then, either, and Fox's shenanigans certainly aren't new(s) today.
                          Youth may be wasted on the young, but retirement is wasted on the old.
                          Live like you're dying, invest like you're immortal.
                          We grow old if we stop playing, but it's never too late to have a happy childhood.
                          Forget about who you were-- discover who you are.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                            Far be it that CNN are perfect, they're just a basic news show. They don't go much for the over the top stuff that generates higest ratings, let alone tossing bloody raw meat to those that FN purposely attract.

                            The seven deadly CNN sins, much of that isn't too true. But it's to be expected that they will have ups and downs, eventually more loses because - it's just news.

                            Update on your link, they now have Hannity's mea culpa, and as Stewart sed "like they didn't know".
                            Last edited by Ron Whitfield; November 12, 2009, 08:54 AM.
                            https://www.facebook.com/Bobby-Ingan...5875444640256/

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: "Faux News...Literally!" or, "Oh, for Fox's Sake!"

                              I love Cyn's threads!

                              This is gospel.
                              Twitter: LookMaICanWrite


                              flickr

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X