Political Crossfire Forums

[puffin]

Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'. Yes Fox can appear to lean right but that's simply because viewers are so used to watching biased LIB networks they can't help noticing a difference.

One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.
You want an example? A few days ago I used the phrase "Dirty Harry" a number of times in a thread/post. I hadn't heard it used to describe Harry Reid before from any source. Lo and behold a couple of days later someone on Fox used the phrase. It may be a coincidence but it happens too often to be so.

[lilwolf]

puffin wrote: Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'. Yes Fox can appear to lean right but that's simply because viewers are so used to watching biased LIB networks they can't help noticing a difference.

One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.
You want an example? A few days ago I used the phrase "Dirty Harry" a number of times in a thread/post. I hadn't heard it used to describe Harry Reid before from any source. Lo and behold a couple of days later someone on Fox used the phrase. It may be a coincidence but it happens too often to be so.


They are a good news outlet and that is probably another reason why they will be around a long time to come.
The big boys have all tried and died when it came to crushing Fox and they pretty much have to accept the fact that someone is better than they are.

I like watching Cavuto and Hannity and Colmes and O'reilley once in a while

[Snake]

Fox news is solid in my opinion. I think it's funny how the left always gives a full on assault to shut Fox down, while at the same time they speak of freedom of speech rights. Thats a big LOL :lol:

[Alizard]

puffin wrote: Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh, sorry.... you were serious? :lol:

That one made my day....

You'll have to excuse me...... but considering I am the one who posted and documented FOX's lies and fabricated "news" (as recently as last month with their "Saddam Diaries" adventure into creative writing) it's hard to take such a ludicrous statement seriously.

But, don't let that dissuade you.....

[Alizard]

Kamel wrote: Fox news is solid in my opinion. I think it's funny how the left always gives a full on assault to shut Fox down, while at the same time they speak of freedom of speech rights. Thats a big LOL :lol:

Nobody has ever tried to shut FOX down, we just call if for the Rupert Murdoch lies dispenser/Bush mouthpiece that it is.

[Alizard]

lilwolf wrote: puffin wrote: Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'. Yes Fox can appear to lean right but that's simply because viewers are so used to watching biased LIB networks they can't help noticing a difference.

One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.
You want an example? A few days ago I used the phrase "Dirty Harry" a number of times in a thread/post. I hadn't heard it used to describe Harry Reid before from any source. Lo and behold a couple of days later someone on Fox used the phrase. It may be a coincidence but it happens too often to be so.


They are a good news outlet and that is probably another reason why they will be around a long time to come.

That and the fact they are part of Murdoch's trillion dollar empire, and the fact that FOX has it's thumb in about 1/3 of all the media being transmitted on the globe.

Not to mention, they are the mouthpiece for the most corrupt government ever to disgrace this nation.

FOX has succeeded on the two most importatnt points: they have completely crossed the line into entertainment television, and don't even bother to try to separate their editorial content from their news. They also make no attempt to give a fair account and pander shamelessly to their core base, which is wealthy conservatives and bible thumpers.

They will be around a long time.

[Alizard]

puffin wrote:
One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.

WOW.

Somebody seems to think the world revolves around them....... :shock:

Adjust that tinfoil hat properly and the "FOX lurkers" won't be able to intercept your thoughts any more..... :lol:

[JoeBen81]

puffin wrote: Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'. Yes Fox can appear to lean right but that's simply because viewers are so used to watching biased LIB networks they can't help noticing a difference.

One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.
You want an example? A few days ago I used the phrase "Dirty Harry" a number of times in a thread/post. I hadn't heard it used to describe Harry Reid before from any source. Lo and behold a couple of days later someone on Fox used the phrase. It may be a coincidence but it happens too often to be so.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Thanks for the laugh.

[Alizard]

JoeBen81 wrote: puffin wrote: Could the 'Fox News Report' be heading for the same fate as AA?
Could be. It's a little early to tell but considering it has only been the #1 news show for FIFTY NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS the future doesn't look too rosy! LOL
You know what? There's a simple reason why FOX has almost more viewers than some other networks have combined week in and week out. Because FOX is trully 'fair and balanced'. Yes Fox can appear to lean right but that's simply because viewers are so used to watching biased LIB networks they can't help noticing a difference.

One small issue with the people at FOX who 'lurk' at PCF each day. Stop taking my phrases from PCF and using them a day or so later when writing script for Fox shows or give me credit.
You want an example? A few days ago I used the phrase "Dirty Harry" a number of times in a thread/post. I hadn't heard it used to describe Harry Reid before from any source. Lo and behold a couple of days later someone on Fox used the phrase. It may be a coincidence but it happens too often to be so.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Thanks for the laugh.

I got a bad feeling he was serious....... I hope it was a laugher post.

[JoeBen81]

All jokes aside. Why do you think you need to make a thread about this?Anyone who has been here more than once could guess you(and all the other Conservatives) like Fox and think it's great. Is this an attempt to make fun of AA while pointing out how well fox is doing?? All your doing is making a thread that bound to become a flame thread, cause it's just you giving your opinion on fox news, we dont need a whole thread for that. If you were pointing out something specific then maybe, but in this case it's a big.... NO SH!T!?! Really, I would have never guessed! It's almost as juvenile as some of Wayne L's threads

[Rankor and Pissing]

Oh come on now... you guys will just have to live with a few threads that rub it in with Fox while show AA in the toilet. It's a good turn-about for all the bulls**t that everyone has to endure with the OMG!!!!!111 posts on how Fox is so slanted to the Right.

It's fair turn-about no?

[JoeBen81]

Rankor and Pissing wrote: Oh come on now... you guys will just have to live with a few threads that rub it in with Fox while show AA in the toilet. It's a good turn-about for all the bulls**t that everyone has to endure with the OMG!!!!!111 posts on how Fox is so slanted to the Right.

It's fair turn-about no?
I'm not saying it's not fair, it's just like "No SH!T" redudency, expeciialy becuase of who the OP is.
You are right though, this is exactly the same as someone on the left making a thread about how Fox is generaly slanted-right(and yes there are way too many of those). If you look at some of those Fox bashing threads that srn't specific and just someone's blanket opinion of Fox, then you should see similar post from me telling the OP that thier thread isn't helping or adding anything new.

[norulers]

Fox News half the report all the time. The real question is, " can the world survive Fox News". Fair and accurate reporting is not a concern for Fox News. Info-tainment without saying anything about what under handed things the government and the ruling class elites are pulling. That information is continuously omitted. While focus is placed on small individuals deviance elite deviance is all but ignored.

The murder of hundreds of thousands is legitimized (through the creating of bogymen deliberately causing alarm that will overly charge irrational emotions of the apathetic; particularly fear tactics) while the murder of one person is made headline news that will increase the ratings for commercial purposes. Want to buy some plastic and duc tape to protect you from anthrax, anyone? :lol:

Before giving a biased opinion on Fox News do some research on the issues and concerns with American Media including the FCC and how corporate america dominate what is consider "All the news that is fit to print". The media is used to manufacture consent (a public opinion manager) for the purpose of obtain cooperation and consent of unaware citizens who are too apathetic to actually take time to inform themselves. This is also referred to as Public Relations policy or PR.

There is no such thing as "the Liberal Media". That would imply a media serving the interest of people who don't have the means to pay for media programs. Only corporations have such finances and therefore the media serves corporate interest who pay by means of commercial advertisements.

Corporate interest and human interest are polarized; not harmonic. People have been fighting for human rights against corporations since the beginnig of the "Industrial Revolution". Corporate interst are not democratic. If they was they could not make a profit. Really, this does not take a lot of intelligence. It just takes common sense.

[lilwolf]

I figure they will be around because for decades all that was there was the left wing crap and nothing to counter them. People are and have been for a long time ...fed up with ABC, NBC, CBS and all the rest. It is rather refreshing to see another side of the view other than media that just caters to one side and never talks about other sides of issues.

[Rankor and Pissing]

norulers wrote:

There is no such thing as "the Liberal Media". That would imply a media serving the interest of people who don't have the means to pay for media programs. Only corporations have such finances and therefore the media serves corporate interest who pay by means of commercial advertisements.


Actually there's a 4 year running report that proves there is such a thing as liberal leaning news and media. It's using language, timing, and context that appears on the surface to be providing an objective opinion, yet when looking closer, it does not.

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

And the 2004 Study

http://economics.missouri.edu/Working_Paper_Series/2005/wp0501_milyo.pdf

[norulers]

lilwolf wrote: I figure they will be around because for decades all that was there was the left wing crap and nothing to counter them. People are and have been for a long time ...fed up with ABC, NBC, CBS and all the rest. It is rather refreshing to see another side of the view other than media that just caters to one side and never talks about other sides of issues.

So! Which side did they cater to? The corporation or human interest? I'm sure you meant republican or democrat. Break free from this limited paradigm.

Beyond these two fraction of the business party are humans. Making it a human rather then a political issue changes everything. Supposedly politics are in the interest of humans but it serves the interest of corporations. Media is a tool used for that purpose.

Common people do not pay for the politician's campaign; corporations do. If a politician fails to meet the needs of the corporation (always at the expense of people) they will not get another endorsement and that ends their career. Politicians are not in the habit of committing political suicide.

The media, all media is owned and operated by corporations. Many are owned by the same multi conglomerate ( a major concern amongst scholars) and their soul purpose for existence is profit. Profit is at the expense of people not the service of people.

What is so refreshing about Fox News? Their high point is their opinion segment ( the majority of their program is opinion used to sway the public). It is extremely biased. If it wasn't you right wingers would have nothing to toot your own horn about. You obviously ignored what I wrote above and failed to address any of it.

Your comment fails to counter what I said in my above post. Your comment simple says hurrah for my chosen side of the vote. Namely that you vote republic. Say something refreshing, please! Bet you can only spew the same old tiered republican rhetoric we all heard already.

Say something about the media as an institution that would support your comments. Show the human side of Fox News that could convince people that they are out for their interest. I would say you know nothing about the media industry, how it operates, or how it is interfaced with society and how it impacts on the citizens based on your above post..

People who have completed graduate school and beyond have written volumes critiquing the media and journalism. Read some. You have Internet access.

[norulers]

Rankor and Pissing wrote: norulers wrote:

There is no such thing as "the Liberal Media". That would imply a media serving the interest of people who don't have the means to pay for media programs. Only corporations have such finances and therefore the media serves corporate interest who pay by means of commercial advertisements.


Actually there's a 4 year running report that proves there is such a thing as liberal leaning news and media. It's using language, timing, and context that appears on the surface to be providing an objective opinion, yet when looking closer, it does not.

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

And the 2004 Study

http://economics.missouri.edu/Working_Paper_Series/2005/wp0501_milyo.pdf

Ok! Thanks for the references. I'm sure if I was to spend some time looking I could show counter reports.

Take note of the first paragraph in the UCLA report which is as follows:

While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

Note they say TV and radio are conservative compaired to ' the rest of mainstream media. Here we are discussing Fox News a television media program. Also, note that I am neither right nor left winged. My interest are purely human. The media does not serve human interest and US papers are no different because their major resource of profit comes from advertisers from large businesses. See Noam Chomski's : Manurefactured Consent

Nonetheless, I really do appreciate your input. It is by far the most intelligent post I've seen and one that certainly challenges me in a positive way. I will do some research on these more resent reports. I have studied much on "In Search of Liberal Media" in the resent past (involving some college professors) and may be able to give you some sources to read as well. Thanks Rankor.

[Alizard]

lilwolf wrote: I figure they will be around because for decades all that was there was the left wing crap and nothing to counter them.

And the myth just keeps on giving.

Quote: Liberal Media Bias - Dismantling the Myth
by Mike Bohling

Liberal Media Bias. You’re all familiar with it. You’ve probably heard it used to describe the media and news outlets in America hundreds, if not thousands of times. People have heard it so many times that they begin to believe it. Right wing political pundits regularly regurgitate the term, and their followers swallow it hook, line, and sinker without ever questioning it’s authenticity.

I invite all who believe in the Left Wing Media Conspiracy to take an honest, unbiased look at the facts that I am about to present, as well as my opinions on the subject. Let’s see if we can put this Liberal Media Bias idea to bed, once and for all.

First, Some Startling Numbers
According to the latest Harris Poll of 1,961 U.S. adults surveyed online between December 8 and 14, 2005…….

Forty-one percent (41%) of U.S. adults believe that Saddam Hussein had "strong links to Al Qaeda."

Twenty-two percent (22%) of adults believe that Saddam Hussein "helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11."

Twenty-six percent (26%) of adults believe that Iraq "had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded."

Twenty-four percent (24%) of all adults believe that "several of the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11 were Iraqis."

Now I ask you, if people were being unduly influenced by the Liberally Biased Media, why would so many believe the above absurdities? It’s scary to think that these people vote, but it explains a lot. This evidence makes it clear that a Conservatively Biased Media, not a Liberal one, has influenced a disturbingly large portion of Americans.

Hollywood
There is no arguing that Hollywood leans decidedly to the left. It is also a fact that Hollywood not in the News business. Hollywood is in the Entertainment business. A money making scheme in which people pay to watch their favorite celebrities act out fantasies conjured up by writers, directors, and producers. Hollywood is fantasyland, and it has no bearing whatsoever on reporting the state of world or national affairs. The Liberal Media Bias argument doesn’t apply here, but let’s touch on it anyway.

The TV show “Will and Grace” is a perfect example of controversial programming. For every homophobe boycotting the show’s sponsors, there are 50 consumers who watch the show and patronize those same sponsors. If those numbers were reversed, “Will and Grace” would not exist. It’s simple economics. Supply and Demand. It’s not a homosexual agenda, not a subversive attempt to desensitize the public to alternate lifestyles. It’s cash generating entertainment, and that is what Hollywood does for a living. When consumers are willing to lay down their money for right leaning entertainment, I predict that Hollywood will turn decidedly to the right.

Television News
Television and Newspapers form what has become known as the Corporate Media. Below is a glimpse of the membership affiliations of the Boards of Directors for the top five TV News outlets in the U.S.
(Taken from Common Dreams News Center, www.commondreams.org).

- News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments

- GE (NBC): Anheuser-Busch, Avon, Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM, Home Depot, Kellogg, J.P. Morgan, Microsoft, Motorola, Procter & Gamble

- Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Clorox, Estee Lauder, FedEx, Gillette, Halliburton, Kmart, McKesson, Staples, Yahoo

- Viacom (CBS): American Express, Consolidated Edison, Oracle, Lafarge North America

- AOL-Time Warner (CNN): Citigroup, Estee Lauder, Colgate-Palmolive, Hilton

Combined with the Boards of Directors from the top five Newspapers (affiliations listed below), the total of 118 Board Members also sit on the Boards of Directors of 288 other National and International Corporations. Eight out of the ten media giants share common memberships on boards of directors with each other.

With a few exceptions, these affiliation lists read like a who’s who list of Republican corporate sponsors. The Corporate Media serves only it’s own self interests, and those interests are to not divulge information harmful to the reputations of Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, Chevron/Texaco, Halliburton, Kmart, or any Politician who subsidizes their business interests. So, the news that we get from them is Laci Peterson, Michael Jackson, Shark Attacks, the missing girl in Aruba, and the War on Christmas. (I’ve yet to see Fox News even mention the Downing Street Memos or the Abramoff scandal).

How can we trust that these outlets will be fair and objective in reporting the news if the news is counterproductive to their corporate interests?

There is much evidence to support the claim of conservative media manipulation in television news. Jeff Gannon, the White House corespondent planted by the illegitimate “Talon News” to throw softball questions to Press Secretary Scott McClellan during briefings is a good example of media abuse by conservatives, as is the White House disseminating pro-Bush videos made to look like TV newscasts. Suppressing the Downing Street Memo story for over a month is another example of the Mainstream Media downplaying stories critical of the President. Very little coverage of the war in Iraq appears on television news, except when it’s being defended, and civilian casualties due to the conflict are ignored altogether. White phosphorus and depleted uranium weapons being used in combat areas populated by civilians are yet another story that you won’t see covered by the broadcast news outlets.

Then again, there’s a good chance that 30% of you have never heard of Jeff Gannon, the Downing Street Memos, or Depleted Uranium. I guess if the news isn’t reported, it doesn’t exist, right?

The TV News has lost it’s edge. There once was a time, if a President made an absurd statement like “We have to fight the terrorists in Iraq, where they are making their stand" a shrewd anchorman would have pointed out the inconvenient fact that the terrorists were not there before he invaded. I think those days are gone forever.

TV News has become to Journalism what Televangilists are to Religion, and they’re both in close competition with what the World Wrestling Federation is to Sports.

One organization stands alone as the only major news outlet on television that is not beholden to Corporate America. PBS was all over the secret meetings between Vice President Cheney and the oil industry, the corruption in Congress, neglect of wounded veterans returning from Iraq, Pentagon cost overruns, and the manipulation of intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq. All of which are/were news items conspicuously ignored by the mainstream media. PBS’s independent reporting too often uncovers the news that powerful people want to keep hidden, and for that reason the Republican administration is attempting to cut taxpayer funding for the organization.

Newspapers
Below is the membership affiliations of the Boards of Directors for the top five Newspaper outlets in the U.S.

- Knight-Ridder: Adobe Systems, Echelon, H&R Block, Kimberly-Clark, Starwood Hotels

- The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): 3M, Allstate, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Kraft, McDonalds, Pepsi, Quaker Oats, Shering Plough, Wells Fargo

- New York Times: Caryle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, Johnson and Johnson, Hallmark, Lehman Brothers, Staples, Pepsi

- Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Coca-Cola, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette, G.E. Investments, J.P. Morgan, Moody's

- Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, Prudential, Target, Pepsi

As you can see, the Boards of Directors from the Newspaper industry serve many of the same masters as the TV News folks. I am of the opinion that Newspapers are only marginally more credible than television when it comes to reporting the news. The biggest difference being that, other than editorials, the news stories are presented with more of a “nuts & bolts” approach, and less opinion than what is seen on television. That’s not to say that Newspapers are any less guilty suppressing stories that harm their corporate interests, but I don’t notice as much spin injected into the stories.

Again, I would like to give some examples of manipulation. The New York Times held on to the NSA Domestic Spying story for over a year before publishing it, an issue that would have loomed large over the Presidential elections of 2004. The Downing Street Memos made Front Page Headlines in Europe for a full month before appearing in American Newspapers, where it was buried on page three. News coverage propagated by the White House during the run up to the Iraq War was virtually uncontested, and often inflated by the likes of Judith Miller and Robert Novak, while dissenting viewpoints (of which there were many) were virtually shut out of the media.

Exploitation of the Newspapers by the White House in retribution against Joe Wilson, and the whole Plamegate affair is the most glaring example of abuse that has come to light in recent years, but for some reason, I doubt it will be the last.

One thing I’ve noticed is that Conservatives regularly blast the Newspapers as being Liberal because they print the daily body count of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq. This of course is nonsense. The body count is nothing more than a fact, printed in black and white. Facts are facts. They can not be construed as liberal, conservative, or as opinions, they are just facts. If the mainstream media would give us more facts and fewer assumptions in the news, we would all be better off for it.

Radio
Not much to say about radio. According to the Pew Research Center 30 percent of Americans now say that their primary news source is talk radio, of which 90 percent is dominated by programming that leans to the right or far right. These statistics help explain the results of the Harris poll you just read.

The Internet
The World Wide Web is the last bastion of equal footing between right and left. There are still a few independent newspapers in publication, and we still (for the time being) have PBS, but they are both quickly being overwhelmed and gobbled up by the Corporate Media. The Internet offers both sides of the news in detail that cannot be found on television or in the newspapers. Unlike the Corporate Media, news is never suppressed on the Internet, and anyone who is willing to explore all points of view is able to come to their own conclusions by absorbing both liberal and conservative talking points.

The “real” news is out there, but you have to put a little effort into finding it. In the mean time, take what you see on TV, read in the papers, or hear on the radio with a grain of salt, because even when they do tell the truth, it is highly unlikely that you’re getting the whole truth.

http://www.faulkingtruth.com/Articles/OffTheRail/1015.html

[Green]

Alizard wrote: Kamel wrote: Fox news is solid in my opinion. I think it's funny how the left always gives a full on assault to shut Fox down, while at the same time they speak of freedom of speech rights. Thats a big LOL :lol:

Nobody has ever tried to shut FOX down, we just call if for the Rupert Murdoch lies dispenser/Bush mouthpiece that it is. There are groups that are trying to make Fox actually true and balanced. There are some groups that are trying to get the liberal news to become true and balanced. Neither groups have gotten any headway.

[lilwolf]

norulers wrote: lilwolf wrote: I figure they will be around because for decades all that was there was the left wing crap and nothing to counter them. People are and have been for a long time ...fed up with ABC, NBC, CBS and all the rest. It is rather refreshing to see another side of the view other than media that just caters to one side and never talks about other sides of issues.

So! Which side did they cater to? The corporation or human interest? I'm sure you meant republican or democrat. Break free from this limited paradigm.

Beyond these two fraction of the business party are humans. Making it a human rather then a political issue changes everything. Supposedly politics are in the interest of humans but it serves the interest of corporations. Media is a tool used for that purpose.

Common people do not pay for the politician's campaign; corporations do. If a politician fails to meet the needs of the corporation (always at the expense of people) they will not get another endorsement and that ends their career. Politicians are not in the habit of committing political suicide.

The media, all media is owned and operated by corporations. Many are owned by the same multi conglomerate ( a major concern amongst scholars) and their soul purpose for existence is profit. Profit is at the expense of people not the service of people.

What is so refreshing about Fox News? Their high point is their opinion segment ( the majority of their program is opinion used to sway the public). It is extremely biased. If it wasn't you right wingers would have nothing to toot your own horn about. You obviously ignored what I wrote above and failed to address any of it.

Your comment fails to counter what I said in my above post. Your comment simple says hurrah for my chosen side of the vote. Namely that you vote republic. Say something refreshing, please! Bet you can only spew the same old tiered republican rhetoric we all heard already.

Say something about the media as an institution that would support your comments. Show the human side of Fox News that could convince people that they are out for their interest. I would say you know nothing about the media industry, how it operates, or how it is interfaced with society and how it impacts on the citizens based on your above post..

People who have completed graduate school and beyond have written volumes critiquing the media and journalism. Read some. You have Internet access.



Okay I'll take a stab at this. I got tired of what the mainstream media had become. All was mostly dem and bashing. Then they evolved into something that was comic...Look at Good morning america, it used to be rather good and it went to the entire thing of cooking and the journalists (what ever they were called) setting around and just BS'n.
I want to see the news , not hear a commentary about martha stewarts cookies.
I used the staions CBS, NBC, ABC and whoever else because they no longer do anything that is not bias. Most it has seemed to me have leaned more towards the left and are not staying neutral. That is my gripe. There is no nuetrality at all anymore from them

Now I watch fox news as much as I watch the others but I do so because I want to see both sides of an issue, and not be swayed with one or the others rhetoric. This way I can make an educated opinion of what is going on. It is better that way.
Most corporations do pay the campaign crap. My corporation (I am a business man) has nothing to do with political contributions to either side. All they want is money and care little or none about what I need and others need, so until they can actually do something for a small business or people in a neutral manner, I have turned each and every politician away at the door. Not going to happen. I also do not go to the dinnerw that I am invited to attend. I stay out of the crap field.

Fox is refreshing because it gives me a different perspective to look and see and form my opinions on thibgs. That is why it is refreshing ..at least to me.
I try hard to stay neutral in politics. Many assume that I am one party or the other, when in fact I do not follow party line. I weigh all the facts about an issue or a candidate and make my decision based upon that. I can do it no other way.

All of the media outlets are after money and ratings...that is a fact and they all do it well. Some just better or more devious than others.
I also figure that because of the slide that has befallen the big 3 news sources that fox will be around for a good long time.