Political Crossfire Forums

[Sukoi]

This is a bit off topic but a couple of posts by Radley Balko, a FOX news columnist certainly sheds some light on the workings of that so-called "news" outlet:

CNN Shamelessly Exploits O.J. Murders

CNN Bribes Terrorists

[Federali]

Fox News is not even conservative anymore. It has become a heaven for Neo-Con lunacy like Billy Krystal. It's just a mouth piece for Bushbots, Bushiites. No better than CNN is for the DemocRats.

[Justinius Honorious]

TNBiologist wrote: JDHURF wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#44393

How is any conservative able to reconcile events such as the one currently exposed with the idea that Fox is “fair and balanced” or that Fox is even a reputable news organization?

All news organizations are biased, especially if you have different views than them. To me, MSNBC is biased as h*ll towards anti-americanism so I take what they report with a grain of salt just as I do any news organization.

Also, using the Huffington post to call Fox news biased is about like asking a muslim is Isreal should exist.

This is the man you should be listening to because he's right.

[Vexillum]

cap'n queasy wrote: I can think of a few examples of negligence, Dan Rather and his story on Bush, however, they took accountability for this situation and people lost their jobs. Is Fox taking accountability for this?

Bush fabricated a mountain of fake WMD evidence, and thousands died.

Fox News is the porn channel of news networks.

[Alizard]

Justinius Honorious wrote: TNBiologist wrote: JDHURF wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#44393

How is any conservative able to reconcile events such as the one currently exposed with the idea that Fox is “fair and balanced” or that Fox is even a reputable news organization?

All news organizations are biased, especially if you have different views than them. To me, MSNBC is biased as h*ll towards anti-americanism so I take what they report with a grain of salt just as I do any news organization.

Also, using the Huffington post to call Fox news biased is about like asking a muslim is Isreal should exist.

This is the man you should be listening to because he's right.

:rotf:

[Moracca]

Violaxcore wrote: Moracca wrote: Violaxcore wrote: cap'n queasy wrote:

So basically the idea that Fox is some really biased right wing propaganda distributor is not really accurate. That is a biased statement to make because what they do is report both sides of the aisle, while the others don't.

so, what's your explaination for the memo?

Who needs an explanation? You have to make a case that the memo is wrong in some way first! John Moody runs the editorial direction for Fox News. Not the News - the editorials. Just like every newspaper has editorial pages, and how ever other news organization has editorials.

However, in this case, he is telling Fox news programs to look for stories that would hurt the Dems, and make the Republicans look good. That's the bias. Bias does not mean lying to the public. Bias is how you spin it. While whether or not those stories are "right" or "wrong" is debatable, to deny that Fox News is biased to the right is absurd.

I'm not making the argument that they aren't biased, but the memos asking Fox staffers to look for something specific isn't wrong. I'd be more willing to toss a tizzy if they had attempted to make up a story out of thin air or whatever.

Thing is, Fox News is the only major news organization with a conservative lean. Some newspapers such as the Washington Times and the New York Daily News are conservative as well, but they don't even dominate their own markets. Fox doesn't get the ratings that the nation network newscasts get. The liberal bias is safe in the media.

[Justinius Honorious]

Hello out there,
I've entered this forum realizing most of you are probably young, and/or really don't understand what's happening today. I'd gotten a little angry at the foolish nonsense people have written to counter the remarks I've written to all of you to hopefully help you better understand what's actually happening.

Truthfully, before I begin, my latest prediction on what the Democrats would do with the control of the Houses has actually turned out worse than I thought. They're not trying to make us forget about Iraq and looking to issues of healthcare, education, new programs, etc. They're actually looking to pull our troops out of Iraq for reasons I have already explained in my last post under " Democrats are liars" or something of that sort.

Moving on, I thought this was an interesting topic because it's total nonsense which is basically the standard today in my generation as far as politics are concearned (at the very least ofcourse).

You guys obviously don't understand how Fox came to be and have really no comprehension of why you think Fox is biased, moreover the only biased news programs on tv.

First of all, I think all networks should be biased. They're all biased anyway but I believe they should at least chanel that into being biased for our country. The truth is you'll never get rid of biasm just like you'll never get rid of censorship. If you tell a party they can't be biased for one thing, they'll evolve to be biased for another. This is what content is; and it's collected by likeminded people who work together in the network studio.

The reason why fox is here and the reason why it's so damn popular is because the need for a news network like Fox has been needed for quite some time and people were sick of the stupid silly unamerican liberal news programs whom your all well accustomed to evidently. Truthfully, Fox was only possible because of Rush Limbaugh who became the embodiment of the American Conservative voice people had been looking for for years. He is without a doubt the biggest radio talkshow sensation ever, far surpassing that know-nothing Howard Stern with 600+ radio stations compared to Stern's 250+. Rush Limbaugh is who got the attention of the networks and convinced them to believe there is an audience for conservatism and it would really sell. It did because it's mainly the same audience, and I'd bet most of the people that watch the fox news channel don't watch any of the others at all.

The reason how Fox became and why in a nutshell is because people were sick and tired of listening to the nonsense the other networks try to shove down your throats and call it news.

You all believe there is something wrong with fox news is because it stands out as a loose cannon to you compared with all the other news networks that are all international in thinking or downright anti-american. You people fail to realize that news and politics are inseperable. Politics don't happen by people looking at them after they've happened. They're looked at obviously while its happening and people will always defend their opinion. All news is really opinion to one degree or another. It's an opinion to put the death of a guy on bike on the first page compared to the news report that North Korea has walked out of the UN council meeting. I personally recommend to all of you who really want to know what's going on in the world and in domestic politics Fox News because they're by far in my opinion the best news program there is (maybe ever) and it's not because I'm some fanatic. I search for the truth and can look at and detect spins effortlessly and I'll tell you personally it's a good source of information that is by far the best on television because it wasn't built on the sand, it was built on the rock, the no-nonsense conservative community.

[Violaxcore]

Moracca wrote: Violaxcore wrote: Moracca wrote: Violaxcore wrote: cap'n queasy wrote:

So basically the idea that Fox is some really biased right wing propaganda distributor is not really accurate. That is a biased statement to make because what they do is report both sides of the aisle, while the others don't.

so, what's your explaination for the memo?

Who needs an explanation? You have to make a case that the memo is wrong in some way first! John Moody runs the editorial direction for Fox News. Not the News - the editorials. Just like every newspaper has editorial pages, and how ever other news organization has editorials.

However, in this case, he is telling Fox news programs to look for stories that would hurt the Dems, and make the Republicans look good. That's the bias. Bias does not mean lying to the public. Bias is how you spin it. While whether or not those stories are "right" or "wrong" is debatable, to deny that Fox News is biased to the right is absurd.

I'm not making the argument that they aren't biased, but the memos asking Fox staffers to look for something specific isn't wrong. I'd be more willing to toss a tizzy if they had attempted to make up a story out of thin air or whatever.

Thing is, Fox News is the only major news organization with a conservative lean. Some newspapers such as the Washington Times and the New York Daily News are conservative as well, but they don't even dominate their own markets. Fox doesn't get the ratings that the nation network newscasts get. The liberal bias is safe in the media.
Then you have the San Diego Union Tribune which essentially is the only newspaper in our market and endorsed all republican candidates last election except for (and even I'm still not sure why or how) Jerry brown. Go figure.

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

JDHURF wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#44393

How is any conservative able to reconcile events such as the one currently exposed with the idea that Fox is “fair and balanced” or that Fox is even a reputable news organization?

So you mean we are suppose to believe a quinessential leftists rag's (MSNBC) morally challenged view that FAUX is biased? :lol:

[The Ferryman]

Justinius Honorious wrote: Hello out there,
I've entered this forum realizing most of you are probably young, and/or really don't understand what's happening today. I'd gotten a little angry at the foolish nonsense people have written to counter the remarks I've written to all of you to hopefully help you better understand what's actually happening.

Truthfully, before I begin, my latest prediction on what the Democrats would do with the control of the Houses has actually turned out worse than I thought. They're not trying to make us forget about Iraq and looking to issues of healthcare, education, new programs, etc. They're actually looking to pull our troops out of Iraq for reasons I have already explained in my last post under " Democrats are liars" or something of that sort.

Moving on, I thought this was an interesting topic because it's total nonsense which is basically the standard today in my generation as far as politics are concearned (at the very least ofcourse).

You guys obviously don't understand how Fox came to be and have really no comprehension of why you think Fox is biased, moreover the only biased news programs on tv.

First of all, I think all networks should be biased. They're all biased anyway but I believe they should at least chanel that into being biased for our country. The truth is you'll never get rid of biasm just like you'll never get rid of censorship. If you tell a party they can't be biased for one thing, they'll evolve to be biased for another. This is what content is; and it's collected by likeminded people who work together in the network studio.

The reason why fox is here and the reason why it's so damn popular is because the need for a news network like Fox has been needed for quite some time and people were sick of the stupid silly unamerican liberal news programs whom your all well accustomed to evidently. Truthfully, Fox was only possible because of Rush Limbaugh who became the embodiment of the American Conservative voice people had been looking for for years. He is without a doubt the biggest radio talkshow sensation ever, far surpassing that know-nothing Howard Stern with 600+ radio stations compared to Stern's 250+. Rush Limbaugh is who got the attention of the networks and convinced them to believe there is an audience for conservatism and it would really sell. It did because it's mainly the same audience, and I'd bet most of the people that watch the fox news channel don't watch any of the others at all.

The reason how Fox became and why in a nutshell is because people were sick and tired of listening to the nonsense the other networks try to shove down your throats and call it news.

You all believe there is something wrong with fox news is because it stands out as a loose cannon to you compared with all the other news networks that are all international in thinking or downright anti-american. You people fail to realize that news and politics are inseperable. Politics don't happen by people looking at them after they've happened. They're looked at obviously while its happening and people will always defend their opinion. All news is really opinion to one degree or another. It's an opinion to put the death of a guy on bike on the first page compared to the news report that North Korea has walked out of the UN council meeting. I personally recommend to all of you who really want to know what's going on in the world and in domestic politics Fox News because they're by far in my opinion the best news program there is (maybe ever) and it's not because I'm some fanatic. I search for the truth and can look at and detect spins effortlessly and I'll tell you personally it's a good source of information that is by far the best on television because it wasn't built on the sand, it was built on the rock, the no-nonsense conservative community.


:clap: yeah, and it has the ratings to back up....what u said.

[Justinius Honorious]

Violaxcore wrote: Moracca wrote: Violaxcore wrote: Moracca wrote: Violaxcore wrote: cap'n queasy wrote:

So basically the idea that Fox is some really biased right wing propaganda distributor is not really accurate. That is a biased statement to make because what they do is report both sides of the aisle, while the others don't.

so, what's your explaination for the memo?

Who needs an explanation? You have to make a case that the memo is wrong in some way first! John Moody runs the editorial direction for Fox News. Not the News - the editorials. Just like every newspaper has editorial pages, and how ever other news organization has editorials.

However, in this case, he is telling Fox news programs to look for stories that would hurt the Dems, and make the Republicans look good. That's the bias. Bias does not mean lying to the public. Bias is how you spin it. While whether or not those stories are "right" or "wrong" is debatable, to deny that Fox News is biased to the right is absurd.

I'm not making the argument that they aren't biased, but the memos asking Fox staffers to look for something specific isn't wrong. I'd be more willing to toss a tizzy if they had attempted to make up a story out of thin air or whatever.

Thing is, Fox News is the only major news organization with a conservative lean. Some newspapers such as the Washington Times and the New York Daily News are conservative as well, but they don't even dominate their own markets. Fox doesn't get the ratings that the nation network newscasts get. The liberal bias is safe in the media.
Then you have the San Diego Union Tribune which essentially is the only newspaper in our market and endorsed all republican candidates last election except for (and even I'm still not sure why or how) Jerry brown. Go figure.

Make no mistake. Fox news is biased to the right. They are and there's no reason why that's wrong. They're the only network that is which barely puts a dent into the entire liberal media. It's preposterous to think this is a bad thing. Also, they've jumped through quite a few hoops to balance their programs even if conservatism is still ofcourse the underlying theme. Also, Listen to Sean Hannity. He really does know what's going on and he used to be 'my boy' but I've faired away from Hannity and Limbaugh because I disagree with them on some issues like economics and immigration as well as anti-favoritsm to WASPs like myself.

[Violaxcore]

Justinius Honorious wrote: Hello out there,
something about Democrats in Iraq I had a response, but it was off topic, so I might look in that other thread you mentioned instead

Quote: You guys obviously don't understand how Fox came to be and have really no comprehension of why you think Fox is biased, moreover the only biased news programs on tv. No one is saying Fox News is the only biased organization. A lot of people are trying to compare and contrast, but it is, in my opinion, quite difficult to give a measure to "bias"

Quote: First of all, I think all networks should be biased. They're all biased anyway but I believe they should at least chanel that into being biased for our country. The truth is you'll never get rid of biasm just like you'll never get rid of censorship. If you tell a party they can't be biased for one thing, they'll evolve to be biased for another. This is what content is; and it's collected by likeminded people who work together in the network studio.
and I agree

Quote: The reason why fox is here and the reason why it's so damn popular is because the need for a news network like Fox has been needed for quite some time and people were sick of the stupid silly unamerican liberal news programs whom your all well accustomed to evidently. "unamerican liberal?

Quote: Truthfully, Fox was only possible because of Rush Limbaugh who became the embodiment of the American Conservative voice people had been looking for for years. He is without a doubt the biggest radio talkshow sensation ever, far surpassing that know-nothing Howard Stern with 600+ radio stations compared to Stern's 250+. Rush Limbaugh is who got the attention of the networks and convinced them to believe there is an audience for conservatism and it would really sell. It did because it's mainly the same audience, and I'd bet most of the people that watch the fox news channel don't watch any of the others at all. So you compare Stern, who works as an entertainer and focuses more on things more on the absurd, to Limbaugh, who is a conservative political pundit as reason for Fox News? I agree that there was an outlet needed for conservative bias in news, but I doubt limbaugh was that reason.

Quote: The reason how Fox became and why in a nutshell is because people were sick and tired of listening to the nonsense the other networks try to shove down your throats and call it news. Exactly, some people just can't take liberal nonsense. They need conservative nonsense.

[quote]You all believe there is something wrong with fox news is because it stands out as a loose cannon to you compared with all the other news networks that are all international in thinking or downright anti-american.[quote] again, wtf is with this whole anti-american stuff?

Quote: You people fail to realize that news and politics are inseperable. Politics don't happen by people looking at them after they've happened. They're looked at obviously while its happening and people will always defend their opinion. All news is really opinion to one degree or another. It's an opinion to put the death of a guy on bike on the first page compared to the news report that North Korea has walked out of the UN council meeting. I concur

Quote: I personally recommend to all of you who really want to know what's going on in the world and in domestic politics Fox News because they're by far in my opinion the best news program there is (maybe ever) and it's not because I'm some fanatic. I search for the truth and can look at and detect spins effortlessly and I'll tell you personally it's a good source of information that is by far the best on television because it wasn't built on the sand, it was built on the rock, the no-nonsense conservative community. So, you prefer Fox News because it has an outright conservative bias. good to know.

[JDHURF]

el_hombre_de_Dios wrote:

So you mean we are suppose to believe a quinessential leftists rag's (MSNBC) morally challenged view that FAUX is biased? It’s the evidence they provide which should determine ones believing them or not, not the provider of the evidence; however, I realize you are entirely unpersuaded with evidence. Furthermore, I don’t have any vested interest in any of the television news networks.

[Lumina]

JDHURF wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#44393

How is any conservative able to reconcile events such as the one currently exposed with the idea that Fox is “fair and balanced” or that Fox is even a reputable news organization?

Gee, too many questions! But as a lifelong news-junkie, I am happy to share my rews-collecting background. Listened to CNN for a long time. Abandoned it during thye 2000 Election because Drudge routinely scooped it. Randomly discovered Fox about two and a half years ago.

Don't buy all they sell but always made a point of tuning into Neal Cavuto, the "Beltway Boys," and Tony Snow. Good heavens, TV news, thanks to CBS and "Rathergate" are nearly moribund. The 'Net provides an amazing variety of news sources, and the only block to truth is censorship...as in Google's selling out to the People's Republic of Chinca.

[The Newb]

JDHURF wrote: The Newb wrote: JDHURF wrote: pyrophasma wrote: THIS JUST IN! All people have biases, and these tend to show in the work they do.

More at 11. However, news networks do not tend to have an agenda wherein they prophesize the news and then make the daily news fit the prophecy.

the alphebet stations dont? Are you going to evidence what is a clear claim, or are you going to continue to act as though an antagonistic and vacuous statement is vindicated by merely being waged without support?

I can think of a few examples of negligence, Dan Rather and his story on Bush, however, they took accountability for this situation and people lost their jobs. Is Fox taking accountability for this?

wow big words, open your eyes watch the stations, and see what the rest of the world sees, leftists bias on cbs, nbc, abc right bias on cnn, and fox

whats funny is most of foxes stories are preceded with one word that exonerates them OPINION they tell viewers that it is the "personalities" opinion a lot the other stations do not

next time you use the "big word" card make sure you have all your ducks in a row, and can back it up, or maybe you have a new thesaurus and are trying it out, just dont hurt yourself

[RealRepublicanArmy]

The Newb wrote: JDHURF wrote: The Newb wrote: JDHURF wrote: pyrophasma wrote: THIS JUST IN! All people have biases, and these tend to show in the work they do.

More at 11. However, news networks do not tend to have an agenda wherein they prophesize the news and then make the daily news fit the prophecy.

the alphebet stations dont? Are you going to evidence what is a clear claim, or are you going to continue to act as though an antagonistic and vacuous statement is vindicated by merely being waged without support?

I can think of a few examples of negligence, Dan Rather and his story on Bush, however, they took accountability for this situation and people lost their jobs. Is Fox taking accountability for this?

wow big words, open your eyes watch the stations, and see what the rest of the world sees, leftists bias on cbs, nbc, abc right bias on cnn, and fox

whats funny is most of foxes stories are preceded with one word that exonerates them OPINION they tell viewers that it is the "personalities" opinion a lot the other stations do not

next time you use the "big word" card make sure you have all your ducks in a row, and can back it up, or maybe you have a new thesaurus and are trying it out, just dont hurt yourself

Yup, reality sure does have a liberal bias..

[Vexillum]

Justinius Honorious wrote: Truthfully, before I begin, my latest prediction on what the Democrats would do with the control of the Houses has actually turned out worse than I thought.

Indeed, in the Senate, Republicans won under a third of the races. That in spite of the fact that the system is setup as to favor incumbents that incumbents win about 99% of the time. The election was a slaughter.

Quote: They're not trying to make us forget about Iraq and looking to issues of healthcare, education, new programs, etc. They're actually looking to pull our troops out of Iraq for reasons I have already explained in my last post under " Democrats are liars" or something of that sort.

I would hope a thoughtful person like yourself would undestand that it's not in Americas interest to stay in Iraq. Daily American deaths and billions more spent is assured by staying. Any reason you can give for staying is at best wishful thinking, at worst, total BS.

Quote: You guys obviously don't understand how Fox came to be and have really no comprehension of why you think Fox is biased, moreover the only biased news programs on tv.

Yes, Fox News, like AM talk radio, exists to fill a niche - to entertain the people in the "red states." The people who would believe every Iraq WMD lie Bush told just because he was waving a flag.

[sublime]

JDHURF wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#44393

How is any conservative able to reconcile events such as the one currently exposed with the idea that Fox is “fair and balanced” or that Fox is even a reputable news organization?

How is any Liberal able to reconcile events such as the ones currently exposed throughout this website with the idea that the networks and CNN are balanced or they are even reputable news organizations?

www.mediaresearch.org


CHECK IT OUT. This site has been exposing media Liberal Bias for years. They have an annual Dishonors Award presentation that is fun and right on target.

Some of the awards they've given have these names:

Aaron Brown Memorial Award for Stupidest Analysis
Slam Uncle Sam Award
Cindy Sheehan Media Hero Award
Send Bush to Abu Ghraib Award
I’m Not a Political Genius But I Play One on TV Award

Their are also funny clips from the annual award shows. One of them shows Dan Rather saying about CBS news that they "think of themselves as a Magical, Mystical Kingdom of Journalists Knights............" (gag)


They have loads of other info on some of the leading Liberals in the major media. You can follow links to all of the following and read some clips or see videos.

"Profiles In Bias

Walter Cronkite: Liberal Media Icon
Since his retirement, Walter Cronkite, anchor of the CBS Evening News from 1962 to 1981, has made clear his liberal views on a range of issues, including how being a liberal is essential to being a good journalist. The MRC has compiled a representative collection of Cronkite's liberal pronouncements, and denunciations of conservatives, since the late 1980s.

ABC’s Charles Gibson, Conventional LiberalCharles Gibson, ABC’s longtime co-host of Good Morning America was tapped to replace Elizabeth Vargas as solo anchor of World News Tonight, starting May 29, 2006. On his morning show, and as a frequent fill-in for Peter Jennings on World News Tonight, Gibson over the years has shown little willingness to stray from the media elite’s liberal template.

CBS’s Mike Wallace: Too Many Minutes of Liberal Bias
To mark his retirement, the May 21 edition of 60 Minutes devoted a tribute to Mike Wallace. Below, from the MRC's archive, are some comments and views from Wallace that were not mentioned on the tribute show.

Top Ten Left Wing Scenes on The West Wing
On May 14, 2006, NBC aired the final episode of The West Wing. Since its debut in September of 1999 when "President Josiah Bartlet," played by Martin Sheen, told some cartoon-ish conservative religious leaders to "get your fat asses out of my White House," the prime time drama regularly advocated liberal policies and showcased liberal causes. The MRC's compilation provides text and video/audio for a "Top Ten" presentation of some of the program's most notorious liberal moments and crusades. Actually, you'll find nine scenes pushing liberal ideas followed by one unusual scene which mocked liberal opposition to tax cuts.

Katie Couric’s Years of Liberal Tilt
Read and watch quotes from Katie Couric, former co-anchor of NBC’s Today and, starting in September 2006, the anchor of the CBS Evening News. Katie Couric has a long history of liberally biased reporting: a soft spot for Jimmy Carter, Hillary Clinton, and the U.N., knee-jerk posture on global warming, war on terrorism, higher taxes, more regulations, national health insurance, and blatant hostility towards conservatives.

Meredith Vieira: Megaphone for the Liberal Cause
On April 6, 2006, NBC announced that Meredith Vieira, a host of ABC's The View, would succeed Katie Couric as co-host of the Today show. In picking Vieira, NBC chose a journalist with a record of liberal views on many contentious issues: participation in anti-war protests, anti-capital punishment, very critical of abstinence-based sex education, and on record as saying the Iraq war was "built on lies."

Dan Rather's Outrageous Liberal Bias
Dan Rather ascended to the CBS Evening News anchor chair on March 9, 1981. Since then, his on-air liberal bias has become the stuff of legend. To find out why, read and watch MRC-selected Dan Rather highlights.

World News Tonight With Peter Jennings: 20 Years of Liberal Bias On September 5, 1983, Peter Jennings took the helm of ABC’s World News Tonight as its sole anchor. While based in ABC’s London bureau from 1978 to 1983, Jennings had shared anchor duties with Chicago-based Max Robinson and the Washington, D.C.-based Frank Reynolds, who was the newscast’s main anchorman until his death in July of 1983.

Peter Jennings: A Review of the ABC Anchor's Iraq Coverage ABC's Peter Jennings was consistently critical of the American military effort in Iraq, as a compilation of more than 70 items from Media War Watch demonstrate.

Howell Raines: Editor and Partisan
New York Times Executive Editor Howell Raines has consistently and aggressively promoted liberal policies throughout his career. Listed on this page are what others have said about the head man at the Times and a couple of comments from Raines himself.

Stephanopoulos: Lone Anchor of This Week
George Stephanopoulos will take over as the solo host of ABC's Sunday interview show This Week in the fall, ABC News President David Westin announced on June 18. Stephanopoulos's rise has been marked by numerous acts of bias.

Connie Chung: CNN's New Prime Time Star
Connie Chung Tonight will become part of CNN's prime time lineup on June 24. In anticipation of the new show, the MRC takes a look back at some of Chung's most outrageous incidents of liberal bias.

Carter Goes to Cuba
Former President Jimmy Carter recently completed a tour of Cuba that created a flurry of network coverage and provided viewers with a fleeting glimpse inside the island nation.

Bryant Gumbel Set to Retire
Check out videos of Gumbel at his most biased in "Top Ten Gumbel Stumbles" and read a staggering anthology of the liberal activist-anchor's personal bias masquerading as journalism.

Palestine Pete: Jennings and the Palestinians
ABC's World News Tonight anchor Peter Jennings has demonstrated a pro-Palestinian, pro-Arab bias in Middle East coverage for years.


http://www.mediaresearch.org/Profiles/welcome.asp

[The Newb]

good job sublime, i was just gonna let them learn on their own and if they got a bit to thick in the head i would have proved it :tu:

[Dookiestix]

Moracca wrote: Umm...I didn't see the problem with the internal memos at all. I don't see what the big fuss is about. So what if Fox News is looking out for insurgents celebrating a Dem win or stating that just because the Dems won the election that the WoT isn't over. I don't see how this can really be all that controversial. They aren't making up the news, they'll on the look out for a certain type of news. The rest of the media does the same when they look for the bad and ignore the good.
:rotf: