Fox News

[Govinda]

Do any of you watch this? Lately I have been investigating it. It is scary ****ing shit. I am worried that some Americans might take it seriously. I have noticed a correlation. It runs thus. Those with the most insane opinions (I'm talking to you, Obama Is the Anti-Christ crew) tend to have the worst grammar and the most guns.

At the moment, I am a little freaked. I have been watching a man called Glenn Beck, who personifies the term Batshit ****íng Crazy. Then there is one called Rush Limbaugh. And Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity.

Long story short, I am never ever going to diss the BBC ever ever ever again.

Anyway, all of these men, none of them journalists, work for Fox News. Fox News is apparently the number one cable TV channel in the US.

So, if you do watch it, do you believe this tripe?

Also, if so, have you noticed the remarkably swift turnaround from when Bush was in charge? If memory serves, Bush also sanctioned a fairly healthy bailout, and watched the Federal Reserve whack out a few others. Maybe Jon Stewart was right. Maybe all the Batshit Crazy is is Fox reacting to McCain losing the election.

Final Note:

One day, should I have the opportunity, I am going to lob a great big lovely giant dictionary over the Atlantic and watch with glee as it arrives. I will watch the Fox people read it and their faces light up as they learn to distinguish between the words 'socialism' and 'communism'. The EU is largely socialist, but we are not by any means on the verge of communism. Then there are the special Batshit Crazy who cannot seem to tell apart socialism, communism, and fascism. For the love of God. Do something to your schools. Pronto.

So then, Americans of TFF, what do you think of Fox News?

Also, what are the other cable channels like in relation? Can any of them be relied upon not to have moments of the Batshit?

Or you could just sum up how you feel about American media today. Maybe that's a better way of phrasing it.

As always, ta.

[Taco-Calamitous]

My dad watches Fox News several hours out of the day. I generally don't pay attention to it; I get my news through online networks, mostly. I'll listen to Fox News Radio sometimes, but usually just to listen to Coast to Coast, because the crazy things they talk about are really interesting, and George Noory is a good radio show host.

Sometimes I'll listen to Rush Limbaugh, who is totally full of himself, and probably says at least half the things he says to piss the liberals of this country off. OTher times I'll listen to Michael Savage, who is insane: I like to listen to him when he gets really angry and goes on a tirade about something. It's kinda funny.

Bill O-Reilly is a bully, and is full of crap. Actually, most radio/talk show hosts are. They'll ask you specific questions and cut you off if they don't like what you're saying. Savage is especially bad about this. It's not just the conservatives, though. There's this one guy who's like the liberal equivalent of Bill O-Reilly, on like MSNBC or something. I also like Lars Larson, a conservative radio show host here in the Northwest who listens to people who call in and actually uses reason for the most part. And I've never heard him raise his voice, even.

But yeah: don't listen to Talk Show Hosts if you want to hear "fair and balanced" news. Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

EDIT: Free Newt! Do it now!

[Walter Sobchak]

I remember a poll, I think around 2006, that showed that FOX News viewers were the most likely people to think that Iraq had been tied to 9/11, long after the real world had moved beyond such trifling.

There is a pretty healthy constituency that watches FOX News at night and listens to Rush Limbaugh during the day. They are the Tea Party trolls. Luckily, age is their enemy, and they are dying off by the day.

America has always had its rabid opposition to progress. They seceded from the Union over slavery, they stood in the way to keep the Africans from entering the school, and they claw as hard as they can at the black President. While they win elections from time to time, culminating in the dark period of 1976 to 2008, but for the most part we continue scooting along.

[Govinda]

I saw an especially good piece about the Tea Parties.

There was a man in the background waving a sign which read: 'TEABAG THE LIBERALS BEFORE THEY TEABAG YOU'.

I hope you all shower.

[Rocky]

I would normally have something witty and slightly intelligent to say, but I wouldn't be able to say it better than NaS, so I'll let him say it for me instead.

[Sean]

During the election coverage for this last election in November, I was watching CNN, but Fox was on my "last" button. After CNN declared Obama the winner, I had to flip to Fox to see their reaction. Pretty much knew it was over when Fox declared him the winner as well.

I was fully expecting some sort of mass suicide that is very reminiscent of something you'd see in a cult. Little was I expecting the next several months to be full of fear and hate mongering, baseless accusations, and overall complete bullshit.

Fox news infuriates me to no end.

[Walter Sobchak]

I saw an especially good piece about the Tea Parties.

There was a man in the background waving a sign which read: 'TEABAG THE LIBERALS BEFORE THEY TEABAG YOU'.

I hope you all shower.

It is a silly protest. They claim that they are against Obama's spending, but Bush had a bailout and increased the debt dramatically. The apologists will say they were angry at that too, but if you scratch the surface, you see that the events are full of the anti-Muslim, anti-black, secessionist, anti-science people that were quiet for a few days after November. One video had a woman yelling "Burn the books!". When pressed, she said she was referring to that "evolution crap".

[Andromeda]

I'll try to leave as short and simple as I can. This is a highly loaded topic. Either way, all of the media is bias to one side or another. There tends to be a more heavy amount of liberal media than conservative media, but none of them are really fair and balanced. I would feel that FOX news makes more of an effort to try to have both sides, but I hold no illusions that they are not bias as well.

I try to get some of the news, but ignore most of what they say since it is all loaded to make you feel or think in a manner that they wish. So I'll just take the generic facts and move on.

Anything further I say I know is just going to incite a mob against me. So I'm leaving it there.

[Govinda]

Anything further I say I know is just going to incite a mob against me. So I'm leaving it there.

That really is the most succinct way I can think of to describe what I see on Fox, their mentality. It is a phrase I will keep. Thank you.

James, I have since looked further at the Tea Parties. You're right. They're not about a 3% tax hike for richer people, or about bailout spending. I wonder if anything interesting will happen at them. The later they learn the definition of the term 'to teabag', the better.

[Cheesevixen]

I don't care to watch Fox news. That station is completely one sided when it comes to politics, and you rarely get a full story out of them. Whenever I tell my fiance to turn on the new he likes to let it sit on Fox news. I immediately correct him..."I said I wanted to watch the news...the real news." When I want to get the best stories I turn to abc or pbs. Besides; adults watch news at 10...not 9 lol j/k But seriously Fox news sucks.

[Pete]

I get my news from fark. You get a lot from both sides of the spectrum, and even more from right down the middle. CNN is the ultra liberal network and Fox News is ultra conservative. Neither is unbiased, but it's always amusing to flip back and forth between the channels and see the takes on whatever event is unfolding. I don't particularly like Fox News, but I can totally understand it's purpose. I also find the completely different appearances of Hannity and Colmes to be amusing. Of course the conservative is going to be a good looking guy with a full head of hair, versus the gaunt and weaselly looking liberal.

[Polk]

I pretty much agree with what Pete said, though I will admit to watching Bill O'Reilly at times, because I find the guy to be entertaining.

Oh. And this, too. This is fantastic.

[Clint]

I don't care to watch Fox news. That station is completely one sided when it comes to politics, and you rarely get a full story out of them. Whenever I tell my fiance to turn on the new he likes to let it sit on Fox news. I immediately correct him..."I said I wanted to watch the news...the real news." When I want to get the best stories I turn to abc or pbs. Besides; adults watch news at 10...not 9 lol j/k But seriously Fox news sucks.

All news stations are one-sided. It's all about political preference. Fox News leans more towards conservative politics, while other news stations, such as CBS, ABC, and CNN, lean towards liberal politics.

[Sasquatch]

Alright, since the only other objective members here haven't said it, I will.

How exactly is Fox News biased?

I'm not talking about their commentary. I'm talking about their reporting.

(O'Reilly, by the way, is a commentator, not a reporter.)

Media Research Center

Newsbusters

UCLA

Just because Fox News isn't liberally slanted like most of the rest of the media doesn't make it ridiculously conservatively slanted.

Oh:

America has always had its rabid opposition to progress. They seceded from the Union over slavery, they stood in the way to keep the Africans from entering the school, and they claw as hard as they can at the black President.

If you think the secession from the Union and the Civil War were about slavery, you've never learned about the Corwin Amendment. Research it a bit, then get back to that issue. And while some people wanted to keep segregation around, very, very few people were against Obama because of his race and nothing else, more than that amount supported Obama because of his race and nothing else.

Not all change is "progress".

[Walter Sobchak]

James, I have since looked further at the Tea Parties. You're right. They're not about a 3% tax hike for richer people, or about bailout spending. I wonder if anything interesting will happen at them. The later they learn the definition of the term 'to teabag', the better.

I look forward to the opportunity to teach the period, quite frankly. It will be hard for students to grasp such triviality. They will ask me how any of these Tea Party protesters were able to sleep at night knowing they were trivializing the importance of the Boston Tea Party over their meaningless gestures.

Proponents of the network will often brag of their viewership, as if popularity was synonymous with authenticity. The dirty little secret of the network is that they are last place in internet traffic, and their television audience is aging quickly and dying off.

America has had versions of FOX News before, just as all countries have their reactionaries. Think of FOX News has the outlet for the right-wing nationalists, and thank your deity of choice that they are becoming increasingly marginalized.

[Cheesevixen]

I agree with you Sassy, but truth is all news is slightly slanted.

However, Fox news doesn't usually give the whole story. Which leads a lot of people to believe they are trying to hide something. I like news that goes deep into a subject so that I have to tools I need to research it on my own. Instead of having a cracker jack hour of commercials ><. I don't have cable so I rely on the news to give me most of the info. I find the other stations (not including the WB) more helpful. IDK, I know this is probably going to get political now so I am outty


<3<3sassy<3<3 xoxoxo

[Furore]

Unbiased news just isn't as interesting due to the neutrality presented which more often than not kills any emotion that gets couch potatos riled up. No rage, sympathy or whatever else.

Though it'd probably be interesting if presented by a nutcase or a talking animal or something. IDK.

But yeah, I do dislike networks that are a good deal biased as I realise I'm missing out on half the details. Due to this my TV is a dedicated Wii-box. Mostly virtual console though as I'm too lazy to be constantly grappling with the wiimote.

On a sidenote, regardless of accuracy, the few times I watched anything on Fox I laughed my ****ing ass off to put it mildly, but I think I only ever watched commentary. If it was news I was watching I'd be even more greatly disillusioned with the current state of things...

But at least I can laugh, aye?

[Zargabaath]

Glenn Beck has gotten a little crazier than on his days on CNN Headline News, crazy viewpoints? Most are not. He does reveal more truth than NBC (Obama’s personal network), ABC and CBS (who won’t cast Obama or liberals in bad light) and CNN (who leans left but is not so bad). It seems you believe the left's slander against FOX news because they are desperately trying to get ratings (Glenn Beck got more than CNN and MSNBC combined, for instance last month). NBC should be scorned by all they publicly declared their support for Obama; that’s the way journalism should be bias and not objective, who cares about the facts lets spin it. ABC and CBS are not far behind NBC, one of their “shining” moments came when Obama went to Europe and all three major news networks went with him as if he had found the holy grail. They’re just waiting to do his bidding. FOX news showed more of McCain because the other news networks would bash him more (in the little amount of time they gave him) and focused on praising Obama as Muhammad and I use Muhammad since most hate Christianity and anything straight white males like.

Bill O’Reilly is no bully if you watch he gives people multiple chances to respond, he is okay with people disagreeing, invites people with opposing views (Dr. Lamont Hill, Code Pink, Barney Frank, Democratic Strategist, etc) and his ratings are waaaaaay better than MSNBC or CNN; he has been number one in his time slot for 100 months for Americans know if they want the truth they will go to him and FOX news because the other networks are liberal media machines. Jon Stewart while sometimes funny loves to spin and not tell the whole truth when using FOX news clips. Sean Hannity is conservative, I believe, he said something that he was conservative not a republican or vice-versa I have a hard time recalling that. In the end I don’t watch Hannity that much for he is too right.


Keith Olbermann maybe the guy you are referring to Hellfire who once said, “I’m not a liberal, I’m American”. Right and I’m still Catholic. He loves to distort the truth (the tea parties) and is a liberal trying to destroy what the founding fathers were trying to create which he loves to believe that socialism is what they wanted.

Nixon if you decided to watch real news about the tea parties you will have seen that they were upset with Democrats and Republicans, I’m sorry to ruin your liberal lie. Want to see the liberal bias of CNN go to Bill O'Reilly | The O'Reilly Factor - FOXNews.com scroll down to Featured Videos click Politics and select Tea Party Tussle and you will see. Olbermann tried to discredit them and mocked them by calling the event Teabaggers, real mature. The left said they were all republicans, which is wrong, there were plenty of independents and even some democrats who are tired of the huge amount of spending by the federal government in the past year (comprising of Bush/Democratic Congress and Obama/Democratic Congress). People who were disgusted that some of the architects of the economic meltdown deflect blame to Bush when this all started during Clinton’s reign and the passing of a bill that encouraged subprime mortgaging (risky loans) because politicians wanted home ownership to rise, one big person who loves to deflect Barney Frank.

Canada was the only first world country that did not have to bail-out their banks, why? Because their banks knew that subprime mortgages were too risky and stupid to make it such a big portion of their overall mortgages which the U.S government thought otherwise for it would get them votes. It is the government's fault that got us in the mess, the mistake banks did was following what the government wanted to do they should have resisted. Bush’s error was signing that bill again to let it continue however twice afterwards republicans tried to pass a bill to reverse it but it was knocked down by democrats.

And another video on Bill O'Reilly | The O'Reilly Factor - FOXNews.com you should watch to see the liberal hatred of people dissenting with big spending by the government by Obaman, Bush, their disgust with politicians on both sides, their displeasure with the liberal news media spinning stories and protecting democrats and burning right winged groups watch the video, also under Politics, Peacock Problem. In the video, if you decide to watch if you are not afraid that goes to all people, actress Janeane Garofalo calls the whole tea party protests were about “hating a black man… that this is racism straight up… a bunch of tea bagging rednecks”. This woman viciously attacked all the people at the protests calling all of them rednecks which I’m sure a lot of them weren’t. She tries to also deflect the true meaning of the protests and bring race so to cover up and discredit them. There were signs with displeasure towards republicans and big spending done by two presidents of opposite parties. Since she could not give an intellectual response to the tea parties she uses a frequent tactic of the left: name calling. The far-left is afraid and hates all who disagree with them but will scream bloody murder if anyone tries to discredit their protests, hypocrites and the real threat to America’s future.

[Walter Sobchak]

Nixon if you decided to watch real news about the tea parties you will have seen that they were upset with Democrats and Republicans, I’m sorry to ruin your liberal lie.

How am I a liberal? I don't support free markets.

I don't know how you wrote such a diatribe without taking an aside. "How do I sleep at night?" "Why am I fighting someone's battle?" I don't care about the makeup of Democrats and Republicans, and I doubt any one any substance does either. They are two factions of the Business Party, and perhaps the greatest achievement of the last one hundred years was their unification and ability to convince stupid people that they are different.

You are being used. Don't you feel dirty? At least whores make a good living. You aren't even getting paid for it.

[Sasquatch]

How am I a liberal? I don't support free markets.

And if you did, you'd be a conservative.

I'll ignore the rest of your post, since it's nothing more than poorly shrouded insults and blabbering. We get it, the Republicans and Democrats don't fit your extreme views, so they're all the same. Too bad for you. Guess you'll have to join the other two hundred million people in America who aren't happy with them. Maybe next time you'll realize that the Tea Party protests were not against Democrats only, but against Democrats and Republicans both.

They will ask me how any of these Tea Party protesters were able to sleep at night knowing they were trivializing the importance of the Boston Tea Party over their meaningless gestures.

And you will not, of course, respond with the honesty that they were protesting the overtaxation and underrepresentation, government control, and fiscal irresponsibility in both cases. If you ever attempt to instruct a child, I have nothing but pity for them.

Proponents of the network will often brag of their viewership, as if popularity was synonymous with authenticity.

Not at all -- but the fact remains that millions of Americans are tired of the liberal garbage being spewed by most of the rest of the media, and Fox is one of the few places they can get their news without hearing about how horrible conservatives and Christians are.

The dirty little secret of the network is that they are last place in internet traffic, and their television audience is aging quickly and dying off.

Any credible cite to back up either of those statements?

Think of FOX News has the outlet for the right-wing nationalists ...

According to you. Go ahead and keep thinking that those that disagree with you are racist extremists, the rest of us know better.

By the way, speaking of knowing better, why didn't you reply to my reference to the Corwin Amendment?

I'll ask again, since you obviously either ignored it or just plain missed it the first time. How is Fox News biased in their reporting?

[Zargabaath]

How am I a liberal? I don't support free markets.

I don't know how you wrote such a diatribe without taking an aside. "How do I sleep at night?" "Why am I fighting someone's battle?" I don't care about the makeup of Democrats and Republicans, and I doubt any one any substance does either. They are two factions of the Business Party, and perhaps the greatest achievement of the last one hundred years was their unification and ability to convince stupid people that they are different.

You are being used. Don't you feel dirty? At least whores make a good living. You aren't even getting paid for it.

Used? Well you are wrong. I am not a Democrat of Republican. I'm an Objectivist sorry to crush your insult.

I would assume since you don't support the free markets you're a socialist/communist/fascist. At least I know you don't care about the rights of humans and support oppression. Since you didn't comment on the videos would it be safe to think that you got a little scared of the truth. I guess you don't care about honest reporting because they're probably your favorite news channels. Let humanity be led by the nose for it is not important that they are lied to; honesty is over rated anyways.

You may not support democrats however the far-left is socialist, right up your alley right? And you used that great far-left/liberal technique in debating: Name Calling. Huzzah!! Let us rejoice with the great maturity far-left/liberals exhibit, without them humans would just be throwing poo like monkeys. Wooh.

[Walter Sobchak]

Used? Well you are wrong. I am not a Democrat of Republican. I'm an Objectivist sorry to crush your insult.

You just upped it a notch for me. Amateur philosophy for the win.

You are all over the place, so in order for me to understand what you are talking about, kindly name:

a. a fascist country.
b. a socialist country.
c. a communist country.

I suspect that your answers will be the end of it, mostly because you associate "far left", "socialist", and "liberal" together. Yes, socialists are far left, but liberalism is a right wing ideology, whether you use the real definition, which is support for free markets, or the fictional definition, which is the Democratic Party.

[Govinda]

I would assume since you don't support the free markets you're a socialist/communist/fascist.

Really? Really?

Which one is he? Is he the one that believes the rich should help the poor and move towards equality, is he the one who wants complete egalitarianism, or is he into Leviathan and 1984?

I am loading your videos as I type. I will return with comments. Keep in mind that I am Scottish, and a casual observer for the sole reason that American politics is a lot sexier than British politics. Smith husband watching porn. Ew.

[Walter Sobchak]

Really? Really?

That's like me telling you that you're a liberal because you support the free market, kind of. Damn Mussolini and his tariffs. I mean really.

Maybe we are expecting too much.

Simply put, liberalism means free markets and, for the most part, free social rights. The closest to that would be the American Libertarian Party. Conservatism means an authoritarian government that controls the people on social and economic issues under the guise of traditional values. An example would be the Taliban.

EDIT: This site has colors and is generally more entertaining.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

[Sasquatch]

I suspect that your answers will be the end of it, mostly because you associate "far left", "socialist", and "liberal" together.

Because modern liberalism is a less extreme form of socialism, which is the theory that equates to the practice of Communism.

Yes, socialists are far left, but liberalism is a right wing ideology, whether you use the real definition, which is support for free markets, or the fictional definition, which is the Democratic Party.

What the hell are you on, kid? Liberalism is not, and has never been, a "right wing ideology". You might be referring to libertarianism.

Social liberalism, Fiscal liberalism: Liberal
Social liberalism, Fiscal conservatism: Libertarian
Social conservatism, Fiscal liberalism: Republican
Social conservatism, Fiscal conservatism: Conservative (This used to fit Republican as well, but not in the past decade or so.)

But go on comparing people you don't like to the Taliban. I'm surprised you haven't pulled out the Nazi card yet.

[Zargabaath]

Liberalism is not a right winged ideology it is left winged.

Do you not understand what socialism, fascism, or communism are so need a country that practices that style of government to base your answer off of.

Objectivism is more than ameteur philosophy, it just goes against most philosophies making very unpopular on both sides.

Name calling is not a good tactic when will people learn. I am refering to you calling Objectivism ameteur, instead of stating what problem you have with it you simplify the process by trying to disregard by calling it ameteur.

What is ameteur is name calling in debate. Let's keep it in the big leagues and if you can't break the habit then maybe you are not cut out for this.

Still have not heard responses to those videos, I wonder why? lol
Watched O'Reilly this night and he discussed April's ratings and the total is... FOX news dominates once again. Those hoping that those who watch O'Reilly/FOX will die off soon for they are of the older generation, O'Reilly crushed the 25-42 demographic. It hurts that young and middle-aged are not tuning in to your "better" news (liberal bias) network.

[Walter Sobchak]

Do you not understand what socialism, fascism, or communism are so need a country that practices that style of government to base your answer off of.

Are you punting already? Give an example of each or it is impossible for me to reply for your assertion that I am likely one of the three. While preparing for graduate work in political science, I am in tune with the technical definitions. I need to know what alteration you are using.

I applaud you for thinking liberalism is left-wing, but in terms of the social and economic approach, it is right-wing. It is not something for debate; free markets belong entirely on the spectrum of the right.

[Govinda]

Economic liberalism is supported by those on the right, so in at least one respect, liberalism is part of a right-wing ideology.

Sasquatch, 'Because modern liberalism is a less extreme form of socialism, which is the theory that equates to the practice of Communism.'

The theory of socialism equates to the practice of Communism? Did I read that right or is there an unintentional grammar slip? Socialism doesn't lead to Communism. They are closer to one another than either is to fascism, but are by a mile not the same thing. Europe has been socialist for a long time now, and we still think that Commies are as nuts as you think they are. We just have a penchant for social security, paid tuition fees and nationalised healthcare.

Zargabaath, I watched your videos. I admit, they made more sense than Glen Beck crying. I was aware that the Tea Parties weren't all right wingers, but they were out in a majority, and the most crazy drew the most attention to themselves with their mental and sometimes offensive placards (as a European, there were a lot of offensive ones. I don't like being called a Communist and a fascist by proxy. I mean why the **** would you want to be like Europe? It's not like we're equal and help one another out whilst giving our young people opportunity without taking their financial status into account. I mean jeez. What a Satan-ridden shithole I live in).

However, we have nothing like Fox News here. The closest we have is ITN, and they are barely alarmist in comparison. I thought the BBC had left-wing tendencies until recently, where they've done a fair amount of government-bashing and have, much to my shock and pleasure, managed to remain neutral on the Tamil Tigers. Not that I want them to be nice to them, not at all, but it was nice to see them living up to their name. Sky News is okay.

What I'm saying here is that we have nothing a incendiary as Fox. I explored the website a little from your link to check on their reporting, and on news stories it was basically the same as you'd read on any site since most of it is copypasted from AP et al anyway. But some of the videos were quite alarmist, as were most of the user comments. I know Fox can't control its comments, but in comparison to sites like Huffington Post, they were freaked out. I must admit though, they were much more normal than I had anticipated. I was disappointed by this.

I am bored of Fox News now. I'll have to find some other outlet for American Crazy to satisfy my entertainment needs.

EDIT: I just found one with Glen Beck at the Alamo. People cheered when he spoke of Texan secession and then started chanting 'USA, USA'. That was neat. Also, how can Fox claim that the TP's are a grassroots movement when they are renting out the Alamo to host their own?

[Zargabaath]

Unfortunately liberals/Democrats and conservatives/republicans do not support a free market. If they both support a few, some, or tons of government interference in the economy than that does not equate to supporting a free market. That is a mixed economy which is detrimental to a country.

For your countries since you can't comprehend their philosophy's without a reference. Since you did not put this clause in there I will use past and present nations. If you desire all current notify me and I will accommodate.

Communist- China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Soviet Union, Cambodia, and Yugoslavia.

Socialist- most of the E.U, Venezuela, Bolivian.

Fascist - Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Iron Guard Romania.

[Govinda]

Socialist- most of the E.U, Venezuela, Bolivian.

The EU is completely different to Venezuela and Bolivia. They have full blown, perhaps even overblown, socialism; we do not. Ours works, and theirs does not, because their leaders cannot be trusted.

Do you understand socialism as a model of degrees?