Poll: If you could topple FOX news would you?

[infinitydark]

firefly.

 

[Eponet]

No, of course not, they have the right to say whatever they wish. I would however laugh whenever someone cites them, as it is also my right to criticise them.

 

[gibboss28]

No because I'm not an idiot.

I'm not stupid enough to think that if they're gone this will all stop.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I love how everyone gets off on hating Fox News...when they're just supporting the opposite of their perspective and opinion, therefore in an unbiased sense "earn" the said person's vehemence. Given the current administration, the fact that they "troll people" all day long, THEN THOSE VERY SAME PEOPLE FALL FOR IT AND COMPLAIN AND THEREFORE FUEL THE FIRE FOR FOX NEWS...I can't really say I blame them.

Even then, truth in certain matters are subjective depending on how the news viewer looks at everything. Do I watch them? No. But I find it absolutely hilarious that people hate them with a seething passion and in the end, never truly understand that they are just merely expressing the opposite viewpoint which "they" can't stand or seem to tolerate.

Actually, even if that was the case, that'd still be enough to condemn them.

Expressing an opinion is fine. Expressing an opinion as fact is not. The sort of angry ranting we have in this thread is fine because this thread is not a news service.

The news service is there to provide facts. Interpretation or opinion of those facts is not news.

 

[Normalgamer]

I dunno, I find it hysterical that people in the US think it's really news so I'm almost tempted to get the thing preserved as a comedy show.

Though don't go mixing up the news segments with editorials.

Hold on, have you actually met someone who genuinely believes in fox news and isn't trolling you? I can honestly say a good 95% of people I have met know it's biased as fuck.
Love the name by the way.

 

[Kryzantine]

Free speech and freedom of the press is all fine, but for the love of god, they should not be called a news station unless they report actual news.

Our current society is far too reliant on the media to function, and when you have tabloids and editorials posing as news, it is a major negative force.

Look at the Anthony Weiner scandal. It was spun in the media, really as a sex scandal. It wasn't a sex scandal if you look at what actually happened, but then the other victory for the media is that most people don't really remember what Anthony Weiner ACTUALLY DID ANYMORE. Now, I'm one of his former constituents, and my respect for the man has been lost, not in that he got caught sending photos of himself to women over Twitter, but that he resigned over this stupid mess. He should have waited another year for Congressional reelection, because even if only 10% of the country likes him at this point, I can guarantee you 80% of his former district still likes him more than the next guy. And really, that's all that matters.

But he bowed to pressure from the Democratic party to resign, and the party bowed to pressure from the media. If he didn't resign, what would have happened is that the media would have attacked the Democratic Party over this relentlessly, and probably put a dent into Obama's reelection campaign, large enough that the possibility forced the Democrats to force him to resign.

But that's getting way off topic. My point is, media sources like FOX News should be able to broadcast themselves, it's just that their opinions shouldn't be called news, and they should definitely be open to suits of slander, libel and defamation.

 

[mb16]

yes.
with all this "right to free speech" what if:

-I had made a campaign to kill everyone with brown hair, convincing people to join me with facts i made up.

-I went on national TV and for no reason called your mother a c**t

its my right to free speech, you cant stop me.

 

[WoodenPlanck]

Yes...Yes...Yes...Why is this even a question?
Free speech is perfectly fine until idiots abuse it and spread fear among the less educated of the population.

[. . .]
Personally, I'd prefer to take down the stupid fuckers choosing to believe Fox news.
[. . .]

As a non-American, it's nice to see the insanity that the highest rated "NEWS" network pushes off on the thirsty masses who don't know the difference between opinion and fact. So nope. I wouldn't topple it at all. I'd miss the laughs too much.

What horribly cynical people you three are.

Honestly the problem is systemic. Ever since news began to be funded solely based on ratings it was downhill from that point. So in a sense, yes if I could go back in time and stop that from happening then I would.

 

[thenumberthirteen]

Yes. Someone else would fill the gap, but they deserve to be punished for all the crap they spew.

 

[DanielDeFig]

I find the American term "slander" to be a very clever concept, and very appropriate for this situation.

There is a difference between expressing your opinion (free speech and all that), and presenting false information as if it were fact. Since Fox News does do the latter (although it's not exactly shy about the former either), I think it would be legitimate to give them one final warning to never present false information as fact ever again, or they will be immediately shut down.

Most modern news networks/journalist are smart enough to present cold hard facts, and then express their opinions about said facts(possibly very strongly), and possibly "forget" a few details, thus being bias. But Fox News is the only major modern news network I know of that blatantly presents fiction as fact , so it looks like they just heard some rumours at the café, but couldn't be bothered to even google the info to check it's validity.

(Ok, so i'm only counting modern developed democracies. Obviously the endless amout of propaganda throughout the undeveloped/undemocratic world present falsehood as fact. But they're "sort of" excused, while Fox news isn't. It's not even working for the US government. I think...)

 

[Ekonk]

I would. Not because I think they shouldn't be allowed to say what they want, but because I think they are enormous pillocks.

 

[Tib088]

Free Speach is fine. Until you bend the turth to suit your purposes.

If I take down Fox news, will that get rid of Sky News too? I heard they were run by the same company.

 

[justcallmeslow]

I voted yes. But only because there wasn't a specific vote with my caveat attached. I wouldn't want it to be a direct assault on their freedom of speech. I'd want it to be an act that broke the organisation itself without restricting its rights at any point. maybe if i had the power to ruin their finances or something like that.

Straight up banning them would be wrong because freedom of speech is important. If you start letting this mess get banned it's only so long before some asshat bans something they oppose that's not so easy to argue is a negative thing.

 

[Moromillas]

Hmm, I find it hard to classify it as free speech. Sure opinions are all well and good, but trying to pass off random bullshit as gospel truth, especially when others look to the news for truth. I donno, it just seems like the sort of thing a spy would do, the bad kind that spread miss-information for an agenda.

 

[Arsen]

If everyone dislikes Fox News so much how about going after the ones that are supportive of their own opinions? No one can tell me CNN, MSNBC, Yahoo News, and several other sites don't perform the exact same actions as Fox News.

EVERY news site "puts a spin" on things. Some headlines just tell the "interesting" portion without fully divulging the details behind everything. You open the link...skim the page...then, wait a minute-... that was only a tiny portion of the overall picture. Whether or not news is or isn't credible in "eye of the beholder" status of mind.

 

[bootz]

I hate the any news in the U.S. anymore its either fox news lies or How to make your hair shinier or How to buy this product. The news is pretty much advertsing anymore. There's no news. I usually get my news from other countries, they have no reason to spin it.


I love how people say that anything non conservative is automatically liberal. That makes me laugh.


All fox news wants is to pay less taxes so it can have more money. Thats its agenda, they make it so crystal clear.

 

[LordOfTheDance]

A lot of fans of totalitarian government on this board. I am disappoint.

 

[Jabberwock King]

Yes. How is this even a serious question? Bias is one thing, but Fox Noise gets things wrong on a regular basis on purpose, also known as lying.

I will now provide proof to support my claim.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5914682&mesg_id=5914819
Click the link and be amazed, as those screen captures are real.

Nothing in your link suggests that what they did was on purpose. It looks like typos to me.

Not to say Fox News doesn't lie, just that your argument in support of your position is weak at best. I seriously doubt they labeled John McCain a Democrat on purpose.

Bullshit. This has happened too many times and with way too convenient a timing for this to be anything but blatant deception. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence, you just need a lot of it. Also, the mislabeling of Ted Stevens and Mark Sanford came after their sex scandals, a big no-no for any "good" republican, so why wouldn't these sleaze bags try to ease the minds of their ignorant viewers, telling them that the guy that just fell into a pool of steaming hot shit isn't one of their own.

 

[Marmooset]

However free speech is a right and they and I have the right to exercise it. If though, you had the chance to take FOX news down forever or make them change to not be like they are now would you?

Thing is, the FOX News issue is not freedom of speech, but freedom of the press. And, as there are (were) laws protecting a free press, there are (were) also laws limiting it to representing the truth. As FOX no longer (and I believe may never have) represents the truth, it forfeits said protections.
Finally, FOX News has actively advocated the weakening/disenfranchisement of other news agencies (NPR, Al Jazeera, etc.), so if it's willing to live by the sword, well...

In short, I'd have no trouble flipping the off switch, even if it meant axing some media outlets leaning on the other side. There's precious little of what can be called actual journalism out there.