Fox news "fair and balanced" yeah RIGHT

#102
#102
volinbham said:
I understand but most news sources on the Internet are tied to major news organizations - therefore the same bias would trickle through whether it be on TV or in print (e-print).

In my view, all news will have bias; some news has an agenda. While I rarely agree with LG in this forum, I do share the view that part of how journalism is taught creates an inherent bias towards uncovering the wrongdoing of those in power. It is an important role to be sure but it begins with an implicit assumption that those not in power are somehow not worthy of the same scrutiny or worse that they are the victims of power. I saw an interview with Tom Brokaw where he said he viewed his job as speaking for those who don't have a voice (the "weak"). Clearly, this approach only values one side of a story.
Click to expand...

to further that, Chris Matthews' openly admitted that it was "his job to help make this president succeed."

I don't recall any FNC personality openly admitting, say in early February 2001, that it was his job to make George W. Bush succeed. Even Bill O'Reilly, as caustic as he normally is to people he disagrees with (like Barney Frank or Stuart Smalley) refrains from personal criticisms of Obama.
 
#103
#103
Well, I certainly wouldn't say Fox doesn't lean right. They clearly do. I cringe at times at the editorializing by some of the anchors. That being said, I do find watching multiple sources including Fox allows me to see an issue from multiple perspectives.
 
#104
#104
volinbham said:
Well, I certainly wouldn't say Fox doesn't lean right. They clearly do. I cringe at times at the editorializing by some of the anchors. That being said, I do find watching multiple sources including Fox allows me to see an issue from multiple perspectives.
Click to expand...

Watch FNC and MSNBC coverage of the same story, and the truth is probably somewhere in between. Problem is, they never seem to cover the same stories.
 
#106
#106
volinbham said:
Well, I certainly wouldn't say Fox doesn't lean right. They clearly do. I cringe at times at the editorializing by some of the anchors. That being said, I do find watching multiple sources including Fox allows me to see an issue from multiple perspectives.
Click to expand...


I can go along with that.
 
#108
#108
if you look at foxnews programming, they are much more balanced than the hussein msnbc. at least you know that hannity is conservative, o'reilly is center-left, gretchin is center-left, she's a lib and scientologist. the fox panel and has libs and conservatives. the morning show might lean right some but they do have both sides of any issue. geraldo is a commie leftist. i think they're more fair than cnn and msnbc. the libs are so used to news outlets giving them a pass on anything, they cry like little babies when someone actually presses them on an issue or challenges them.
 
#111
#111
volinbham said:
I don't see how O'Reilly could be considered "center-left" in any way, shape or form.
Click to expand...

It depends on who you ask. Only extreme right wingers would label him center left. I would consider him center right. If you listen to the far left lunatics you would think he was extreme right wing.
 
#112
#112
I see O'Reilly as definitely center-right, right. He's too socially conservative for me but not free-market enough for me. He's generally clueless when he tries to discuss economic theory.
 
#113
#113
volinbham said:
I see O'Reilly as definitely center-right, right. He's too socially conservative for me but not free-market enough for me. He's generally clueless when he tries to discuss economic theory.
Click to expand...

So you disagree with his spiel about a guy that sits somewhere and sets the price of oil? :blink:
 
#115
#115
BigPapaVol said:
funny that your commentary in no way seems to jibe with this comment. If you were being honest here, you would eviscerate Olbermann as often as you do Hannity.
Click to expand...


Olbermann uses evidence and legitimate logic to make most of his arguments. Most, not all. I cringe at his comments a good 20 percent of the time.

Hannity is well-spoken, but his argument structure is red herring, followed by straw man, followed by faulty syllogism, followed by another red herring. Rinse. Repeat.

The intellectual honesty quotient for Olbermann is probably about a 65 on a scale of 100. For Hannity, its about a 10.
 
#117
#117
lawgator1 said:
Olbermann uses evidence and legitimate logic to make most of his arguments. Most, not all. I cringe at his comments a good 20 percent of the time.

Hannity is well-spoken, but his argument structure is red herring, followed by straw man, followed by faulty syllogism, followed by another red herring. Rinse. Repeat.

The intellectual honesty quotient for Olbermann is probably about a 65 on a scale of 100. For Hannity, its about a 10.
Click to expand...

Your being way to generous to Olbermann, but then that is the nature of the beast, the statements or arguments you agree with will seem much more logical to you.

That being said Olbermann and Hannity are the same guy just packaged differently. Olbermann's delivery is much more methodical, even though much of his commentary consists of twisting words to fit the purpose or taking statements out of context. hannity does the same thing his delivery is much more off the cuff. In the end though they are the same guy.
 
#118
#118
volinbham said:
I see O'Reilly as definitely center-right, right. He's too socially conservative for me but not free-market enough for me. He's generally clueless when he tries to discuss economic theory.
Click to expand...

what? oreilly is pro abortion, anti death penatly. how is that socially conservative. he is for jessica's law and does press judges that let off pedophiles. he's more conservative when it comes to economics than he is socially.
 
#119
#119
lawgator1 said:
Olbermann uses evidence and legitimate logic to make most of his arguments. Most, not all. I cringe at his comments a good 20 percent of the time.

Hannity is well-spoken, but his argument structure is red herring, followed by straw man, followed by faulty syllogism, followed by another red herring. Rinse. Repeat.

The intellectual honesty quotient for Olbermann is probably about a 65 on a scale of 100. For Hannity, its about a 10.
Click to expand...

olbertool is whack job. the problem with him is that he claims to be a journalist instead of a leftist whacko. at least hannity doesn't pretend to be something he isn't.
 
#121
#121
lawgator1 said:
You mean rational?
Click to expand...

I think what he means (and I would find myself in agreement) is that I find it much MUCH more distasteful to hear someone with an obvious bias portray themselves as not being biased (Olbermann) than if you simply state who you are and go from there. The latter (Hannity, Rush, etc) might "cherry pick" their arguments to suit themselves but hey, they never claimed they weren't biased. The former...it just comes off to me as lying. You want to argue left wing? Have at it, but don't cram yourself in the far left corner sqealing at the "other guy" across the room while trying to claim you're doing so from the center.
 
#122
#122
At long last a news outlet for liberals; Worldfocus.

I know nothing will stop their never ending complaining but hey, maybe it will keep them busy for an hour or so each day.
 
#123
#123
gsvol said:
At long last a news outlet for liberals; Worldfocus.

I know nothing will stop their never ending complaining but hey, maybe it will keep them busy for an hour or so each day.
Click to expand...
Doesn't Al Jazeera pander towards groups that likes to think of themselves as traditional conservatives?
 
#124
#124
lawgator1 said:
Olbermann uses evidence and legitimate logic to make most of his arguments. Most, not all. I cringe at his comments a good 20 percent of the time.

Hannity is well-spoken, but his argument structure is red herring, followed by straw man, followed by faulty syllogism, followed by another red herring. Rinse. Repeat.

The intellectual honesty quotient for Olbermann is probably about a 65 on a scale of 100. For Hannity, its about a 10.
Click to expand...

You pretty much lose any credibility you may have had with this statement.

Olbermann uses emotional rhetoric and party-line talking points way more than he uses any form of "logic". He's so logicial that his best "comeback" against O'Reily was to call him a Nazi, which is pretty much the same as being out of bullets and throwing the gun.

Hannity is an RNC waterboy, that's clear. You'll get no argument from me on him, but don't make me laugh that Olbermann is somehow so much better than Hannity in this regard. That's just simply a joke.
 
#125
#125
hndog609 said:
I think what he means (and I would find myself in agreement) is that I find it much MUCH more distasteful to hear someone with an obvious bias portray themselves as not being biased (Olbermann) than if you simply state who you are and go from there. The latter (Hannity, Rush, etc) might "cherry pick" their arguments to suit themselves but hey, they never claimed they weren't biased. The former...it just comes off to me as lying. You want to argue left wing? Have at it, but don't cram yourself in the far left corner sqealing at the "other guy" across the room while trying to claim you're doing so from the center.
Click to expand...


I couldn't have said it any better. And the problem is guys like Olbermann and Matthews aren't called out enough over it. You're both left-wingers, stop acting like you're center.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top