|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Not owning a TV helps a lot though
Ah, that explains everything. 
|
|
|
|
|
The difference is that occasionally CNN exhibits some positive qualities. When big events (missing planes[^], for instance) take place, they tend to be pretty good at reporting (and reporting, and reporting, and reporting) what's going on. Fox News will report it, then try to figure out how it is Obama's fault.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, CNN, do have to fill a 24 hour news cycle and do so by endlessly repeating the same news items.
I've not seen Fox do that. I have seen guests do that but they'll always have someone from the other side who is just as critical of the right. Result: they're all a bunch of wankers.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 15-Jul-15 13:42pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, nice to meet you too, wanker. I see that you have plenty to add to the debate. Moron.
|
|
|
|
|
They also threaten to knock each other out, which I guess is a good thing...? Clickity[^]
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
|
|
|
|
|
I think that GR is an odious little man with a puffed up chest and zero talent. Plus the other guy would have squashed him. Would have made for fun TV...
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I agree, but I hate Eric Bolling even more. He is absolutely awful. He once stated on the air that he couldn't think of a single terrorist attack on American soil while Bush was President from 2000-2008. He subsequently got tore to shreds on social media for somehow failing to remember the single largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States. The next day he "apologized" saying that the far left liberals were senselessly attacking him and that he "obviously" meant post-9/11, despite clearly saying "between 2000 and 2008" the day before...
Anyways, this discussion is becoming more like Soapbox material, so I'm just going to leave it at that.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
|
|
|
|
|
|
A credible news source doesn't show "The horrible actions of demonstrators in Wisconsin" and the video has palm trees in the background. It's like they don't even try to hide that they're lying.....
|
|
|
|
|
milo-xml wrote: A credible news source doesn't show "The horrible actions of demonstrators in Wisconsin" and the video has palm trees in the background. It's like they don't even try to hide that they're lying.....
How do you know that there are no palm trees in Wisconsin? 
What if the actions were horrible? Is that somehow more offensive than someone on, for instance, MSNB-hee-haw calling Donald Trump names?
|
|
|
|
|
I live in Wisconsin and for that matter lived in our capital Madison where the demonstrations were taking place
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you actually watch Fox? I watch that and the others (and a few lesser channels). Fox is no better or worse than any of the others. Unless you have a balanced view to the contrary?
|
|
|
|
|
If you really want balanced, watch Reuters or BBC news. The bonus of that is it shows the impact we have on the world.
|
|
|
|
|
I've watched BBC back-to-back with DW. Both reported the same story. The difference was that BBC left out items that quite substantially changed the opinion one would get of the adversaries in the conflict.
BBC is resting on it's laurels of days-gone-by while promoting an agenda that (judging by the makeup of an unusually high proportion of the news readers I see) is pushing continuous bias.
Softly. Gently. So it lasts.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
If you really want balanced, watch Reuters or BBC news. The bonus of that is it shows the impact we have on the world.
|
|
|
|
|
milo-xml wrote: If you really want balanced, watch Reuters or BBC news.
Not sure about the BBC - they do have a leftist bias (although that may change if Cameron gets his way and rewrites how they exist). Sky news in the UK can also be pretty good if you ignore the editorials.
Ha: so good you posted it twice!
|
|
|
|
|
Oops. Not that good, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Excuse me, but Faux "News" is nowhere near fair and balanced. Yeah, all the news channels are crap, but it's well-known that Faux is the mouth piece of the Republican Party, heavily biased toward conservatives, VERY pro-Christian/anti-anything else, and lies constantly about science to the point of bringing in "experts" on all science topics that have no expertise at all in the topic.
I'm not saying that everyone else is better at being balanced, just not as blatant about it.
|
|
|
|
|
And it's well known, for instance, that MSNB-heee-haw is the mouthpiece of the democrats. So what? Happy to admit they're all terrible and have bias one way or another. But everyone seems to be fox bashing without being willing to admit that other media outlets are also biased which is hypocritical.
|
|
|
|
|
Karel Čapek wrote: And it's well known, for instance, that MSNB-heee-haw is the mouthpiece of the democrats. So what?
So what? I wasn't comparing Faux News to anyone.
You made the claim that "Fox News is fair and balanced". Well, do your homework on them and their so called "experts". You'll find that they are FAR from it, not compared to other news outlets but to just any layman definitions of "fair" and "balanced"!
They also don't get to call themselves a news program, BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION in an appeal in a 2003 lawsuit that they lost:
Quote: During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! You are one angry man! Too much MSNB-hee-haw, I would imagine. I took the side of Fox because everyone else was having a go at them and because their straight news reporting is as good as anyone else. They also tend to do less editorial and opinion pieces than some of the others though I admit I try to avoid those on any channel.
Not sure why you're being a bit of a dick about this; try to relax; if you want to carry iton, let's talk in the Soapbox. have a nice day and RELAX
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
