Escapians who watch Fox News...why?

[Something Amyss]

"This proves all along that global warming was a hoacs..." I'm paraphrasing there, but still, quite funny.

Regarding "Climategate?" Yeah, it kills me they clung to that even after it was debunked the first time.

And they didn't cover it at all, either the first time, or after the more recent look into it.

Which goes to the whole "everyone is biased" thing. Because if MSNBC were really the equal of Fox, surely they would have run with this. Or, like Fox does when the facts are inconvenient, just ignored the "Climategate" story in the first place

 

[Something Amyss]

So attacking Fox News for doing something that the press has been doing for centuries seems silly to me. But hey, if you're not conservative then feel free to hate on it. Just don't blame people who lean toward the right for not liking CNN or MSNBC.

False equivalence fallacy FTW!

Sorry, I just hate logical fallacies. Nothing personal.

 

[Therumancer]

Given that the left wing controls most of the rest of the media,

Because I've got this study [http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/cr]

Spoiler: Including this rather telling graph

And a few choice quotes on the subject [http://pearlyabraham.tripod.com/htmls/media-quotes.html] which all say that you're not telling the truth.

But feel free to provide credible evidence to the contrary.

A citation is not needed, since it's a matter of simple observation and common sense. The side benefitting from an imbalance always wants to try and claim that it's simply "fair and accurate" since it favors them. Likewise when your dealing with something like a media imbalance, that also means most records and media are going to favor those in power, by showing there is no imbalance if that is the most favorable way for things to be viewed.

Graphs, quotes, etc.. can all be made up, or presented out of context (or in a scewed context).

In the end we're not going to agree, but you really accomplish nothing by trying to be cute. In the end people who would agree with a citation being needed or think that's funny are people who likely would have agreed with you anyway, and honestly I entered this knowing I speak for an extreme minority in this enviroment.

 

[Mxrz]

Every time someone calls Fox News, or its supporters on its bullshit they just point the finger at other networks, or start screaming about the liberal media. So no. Fuck off. There is bias and there is out right lies and propaganda, and no they aren't the same thing.

 

[Aulleas123]

So attacking Fox News for doing something that the press has been doing for centuries seems silly to me. But hey, if you're not conservative then feel free to hate on it. Just don't blame people who lean toward the right for not liking CNN or MSNBC.

False equivalence fallacy FTW!

Sorry, I just hate logical fallacies. Nothing personal.

Perhaps I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but I believe that you're trying to suggest that I'm exonerating Fox News because every other news station has a bias as well. However, if people claim that Fox News is the only station that makes up information for political gain then it doesn't seem fair to hate them alone.

Basically, what I'm trying to suggest is: if you choose not to like Fox News then cool; hate them for their politics, not for their methods.

 

[Lilani]

Eh, I tend to flip rotate between news channels if I'm ever watching the news for a certain amount of time. All news sources are biased, so it's always best to get an even dose of all biases to keep things in perspective.

 

[Flac00]

Fox is as legitimate a news source as MSNBC, CNN, or Pravda. I read and watch as many news shows and newspapers (online) as I can because I hope if I get enough versions of a story I will find something approaching the truth.

However one wonders if the OP actually has a purpose in asking this question (i.e. a quest for knowledge) or if this is just more bullshit. I expect it is the latter but let us see how this goes before I pass judgment.

Actually, I'm sorry to say this but they are not as legitimate as any other source. MSNBC, maybe is on an equal level. But CNN, PBS, CBS, and such all are more legitimate than fox news. Why? Because they report the news without major bias. Yes, their editorial and commentary might be biased, but that is separate from their news reporting. Fox does not have this clear separation. Instead it is all opinion, all the time. Do you want true, real, reporting with barely any bias? Go onto the radio and listen to NPR (or at least look up WBUR online).

 

[camazotz]

I know there have to be some people on this site who watch Fox...why do you? Is it for comedic purposes, or do you consider it a legitimate news source?

I watch it because it provides me with entertainment.

They're a comedy station whether they know it or not.

Ah, thank you for reminding me of why I do not own a television and do not watch the crap "news" that spews forth every day.

 

[Vrach]

Well, not that I have a choice, not having the channel over here, but I don't watch any news on TV, period. I have a phone app with a local news source and that's more than enough for me. I find being able to read it at leisure and scroll through and ignore mountains of bullshit, useless information, political crap etc. is much preferable to sitting in front of a TV at a scheduled time of the day and suffering through all the crap any news source is these days.

 

[Flac00]

Given that the left wing controls most of the rest of the media,

Because I've got this study [http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/cr]

Spoiler: Including this rather telling graph

And a few choice quotes on the subject [http://pearlyabraham.tripod.com/htmls/media-quotes.html] which all say that you're not telling the truth.

But feel free to provide credible evidence to the contrary.

A citation is not needed, since it's a matter of simple observation and common sense. The side benefitting from an imbalance always wants to try and claim that it's simply "fair and accurate" since it favors them. Likewise when your dealing with something like a media imbalance, that also means most records and media are going to favor those in power, by showing there is no imbalance if that is the most favorable way for things to be viewed.

Graphs, quotes, etc.. can all be made up, or presented out of context (or in a scewed context).

In the end we're not going to agree, but you really accomplish nothing by trying to be cute. In the end people who would agree with a citation being needed or think that's funny are people who likely would have agreed with you anyway, and honestly I entered this knowing I speak for an extreme minority in this enviroment.

Alright, I'm sorry but you need citation and this fancy stuff called "EVIDENCE". Statements without evidence are worth as much as a bucket of spit. Yes, graphs can be skewed, but this is why we check up on our evidence and ensure it is correct.
Next, gut feeling is not a legitimate way to prove that the media has a liberal bias. I would like to hear some actual examples and maybe even (god forbid) quotes of this.
Finally, the idea of a liberal media is a LIE. There is no such thing as the "liberal media", especially with the recent popularity of Fox news, which technically makes them the "main-stream media". Look, here are the facts, good news reporting requires total lack of opinion. Thus, a good news reporter does not have a vocal bias. "Boring" channels like CNN or PBS don't use this vocal bias, therefore they are not bias in reporting. Fox does the opposite, it puts bias into even the vocabulary people use. Words like "Obamacare" instead of "The Affordable Care Act" is bias. Comparing Fox to legitimate news channels is like apples to apples, just fox is an extremely rotten and racist one.

 

[LarenzoAOG]

Sometimes I feel that the human race is on a path to Nirvana and ultimate goodness, so I watch Fox News to slap those silly delusions down like the stupid, stupid, ideas they are.

 

[Edible Avatar]

I watch it with the same mindset as i would with CNN,MSNBC,ETC.: This is a company that is trying to portray their view on events. There is always a bias in a media network, as well as a habit sensationalizing particular news events according to their individual agendas.

Because every news source is biased. The best historian is the one you can identify his bias and then be able to read his writings while ignoring his bias. When you do not know what is his bias, you take everything he writes as truth.

I could not have said it better myself. Quoted for truth.

I agree, very well said.

 

[Kinokohatake]

As I write this I am watching Rachel Maddow lob softballs at Michael Moore. It's less an interview and more of a circle jerk. What I am saying is there is left and right. Both are wrong when they allow themselves to put up biased people to report. That being said, no I do not watch Fox News as their set and anchors are garish.

 

[DarkRyter]

Given that the left wing controls most of the rest of the media,

I never actually understood this. Fox News is the only news station people ever talk about or watch, and yet somehow, news has some kind of liberal bias.

OT: Also, "Escapians"? That's not right at all.

 

[Sandytimeman]

Yeah I love to watch fox news because they are so far beyond "bias" that you can literally see the puppet strings getting pulled from backstage.

I love how at first they tried to vilify the protestors, to discredit and to disrespect them. How they talked about the Oakland protests and then showed a crazy man from new york that had nothing to do with the Oakland protest and claimed this is what the Oakland protests were all about.

And now how they are saying that what the protestors are doing is "mean" to the top 1%, and that vilifying the rich isn't going to solve out problems. It's also fun when you can see that all their "opinion part of fox news" all use the same exact buzz words, and general arguments for whatever the puppet-masters want them to say. Its so funny because you can pretty much tell that their isn't a single bastion of individualism or even a different perspective from within their own bias.

 

[Tanis]

Most of Fox News is yellow journalism, the worst kind.

 

[everythingbeeps]

Yep, and some of those programs that call themselves "news" (particularly Fox & Friends and the Megyn Kelly rubbish) aren't news, they're opinion, or at best news with extreme bias. Megyn Kelly especially is a nutcase.

So yeah. Fox News is telling you they're the news, but they aren't.

Shep Smith is the only thing remotely close to news on that network.

1. news/no͞oz/
Noun: 1. Newly received or noteworthy information, esp. about recent or important events.
2. A broadcast or published report of news.


Fox?s news programs provide new and noteworthy information. They also make bias comments from time to time. Do you have an example of a news program that doesn?t do that? If not then the fact that you are insulting fox for doing the exact same thing as everyone else is idiotic. If you want to use them as an example fine but do not pretend that they do not provide news just because you do not like their opinions.

So by your definition, any old blog qualifies as "news". So bravo. Fox News is as reliable as a blog.