Imagine that!

[615 Vol]

Gergen is a massive liberal, but does a very good job of being objective about his views.

True. I guess the real question is not who is biased or unbiased rather who does the best job of being objective. I think Joe Scarborough is objective in his views but being a conservative on MSNBC, they probably force him to.

 

[lawgator1]

True. I guess the real question is not who is biased or unbiased rather who does the best job of being objective. I think Joe Scarborough is objective in his views but being a conservative on MSNBC, they probably force him to.

He is very conservative, and it comes out at times. But I agree that by and large he does a pretty good job of staying in the middle. There are a lot of things he respects about Obama, including his intellect and his discipline on the campaign trail. He can (and prior to 11/4 did) bring himself to say that without collapsing into labeling, etc.

 

[lawgator1]

Part of Matthews' "problem," if you will, is that he has been part of the establishment and even worked in some Republican staff offices. But he has been there a long, long time, and I think he just really gets all wound up and excited about it because its his interest. So he gets very moved by the election results and excited about all the changes coming. Not just because he welcomes them, but because for his career he just gets a kick out of it. His enthusiasm makes him see everything as bigger than it really is.

 

[kptvol]

But Fox's claim that its news coverage is unbiased is just plain fraudulent (and I'm not talking announced commentators such as Hannity --- I'm talking Britt Hume, Shepard Smith, etc.)

Virtually every post you've had condemning Fox News has been regarding Sean Hannity.

 

[volinbham]

The "Fair and Balanced" argument refers to an approach of bringing both sides to the issue. It doesn't refer to the general tone of the network. Fox does lean right while CNN, MSNBC lean left.

I'll have to dig them up but several recent media studies have confirmed that the balance of stories on Fox has been more even than on any other broadcast news media. In other words, they are have more equivalence in positive/negative stories about both sides.

As has been pointed out, all journalists have some biases - some hide it better or prevent it from coloring their reporting better. If you look at the straight news coverage of Fox, it is no more biased than that of it's competitors. Also, evidence shows they do present both sides more frequently and evenly than their competitors.

 

[k-town_king]

Anybody who say Fox is anything but a right wing propoganda machine is not living in reality.

 

[lawgator1]

Virtually every post you've had condemning Fox News has been regarding Sean Hannity.

Many have, true, but they have been about how illogical his arguments are and how shrill his tone is. My more general criticisms of Fox as a network have to do with their ballyhooed claim that they are objective when certainly they are not.

The "Fair and Balanced" argument refers to an approach of bringing both sides to the issue. It doesn't refer to the general tone of the network. Fox does lean right while CNN, MSNBC lean left.

I'll have to dig them up but several recent media studies have confirmed that the balance of stories on Fox has been more even than on any other broadcast news media. In other words, they are have more equivalence in positive/negative stories about both sides.

As has been pointed out, all journalists have some biases - some hide it better or prevent it from coloring their reporting better. If you look at the straight news coverage of Fox, it is no more biased than that of it's competitors. Also, evidence shows they do present both sides more frequently and evenly than their competitors.

I'm sorry, I just don't see how you can say that. When Hume sarcastically reads a story of how Democrats plan something and then sneers, there can be no doubt of what he is really saying. Its just painfully obvious.

 

[MG1968]

I'm sorry, I just don't see how you can say that. When Hume sarcastically reads a story of how Democrats plan something and then sneers, there can be no doubt of what he is really saying. Its just painfully obvious.

Katie Couric
Bob Schieffer
Matt Lauer
Charles Gibson

watch them read the teleprompter when talking about GWB or other members of the GOP and come back and tell us that their tone is neutral and completely removed of any personal bias.

you are really grasping at straws when you bitch about the "tone" someone uses when reporting.

 

[droski]

you are really grasping at straws when you bitch about the "tone" someone uses when reporting.

i'll say it again the tone on fox on election night was one of pure elation that obama had been elected. it was disgusting and i'm not the only one that noticed. he might as well have gotten down on his knees.

 

[joevol320]

What, exactly, do you guys think is going to happen because of the Ayers connection? Do you think that Obama is going to take a particular action because of it?

Now that the election is over, and the generalized claim that having anything to do with Ayers reflects, again generally, on poor judgment by Obama at that point in time (or even generally), I think the people who continue to bring this up need to trace some particular anticipated action to it so that we can see if it actually matters. Otherwise, it just seems like a distraction that means nothing.

they have the same mindset, same philosophy, same beliefs. he's going to govern or "rule" with a marxist mindset. in his book, he said deliberately hung around marxist and socialist people and professors. yes, he'll govern that way, he'll nominate judges with his same philosophy.

i know you lawyers are just licking your chops to fact you'll be able to sue ever company or corporation over and over and you'll have a slew of judges that will rule on your side 90% of the time.

 

[joevol320]

Anybody who say Fox is anything but a right wing propoganda machine is not living in reality.

anyone who agrees with your BS isn't living reality. get a clue dude.

 

[SavageOrangeJug]

Anybody who say Fox is anything but a right wing propoganda machine is not living in reality.

Let me guess? You trust only paragons of unbiased news, such as MSNBC?

 

[MG1968]

Anybody who say Fox is anything but a right wing propoganda machine is not living in reality.

you might want to learn how to spell "propaganda" before you accuse somebody of spewing it.

here is an excellent resource for you to take a look at: www.dictionary.com

 

[TXA&M07]

Why does every debate turn into a spelling contest?

 

[rjd970]

they have the same mindset, same philosophy, same beliefs. he's going to govern or "rule" with a marxist mindset. in his book, he said deliberately hung around marxist and socialist people and professors. yes, he'll govern that way, he'll nominate judges with his same philosophy.

This same mindless babble over and over again from the right is tiresome. I swear, some of you guys hear this same crap on Hannity, Limbaugh, Fox...I don't even know where else, and repeat it. Squawk and take the cracker.

Obama taught at the University of Chicago, which despite what you may hear, is very pro-right-of-center on economic policies. Most all of his leading economic advisors throughout the campaign, specifically Austan Goolsbee, realize that Americans stand to gain the most from a free market and without government intervention into their affairs. He is currently surrounding himself with many of the Clinton economic advisors who understood this too.

Larry Hunter, a supply-side conservative who worked in the Reagan White House, was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years, helped write the Republican Contract with America, served on Bob Dole's presidential campaign team, and was chief economist for Jack Kemp's Empower America....had this to say about Obama:

But overall, based on his embrace of centrist advisers and policies, it seems likely that Obama will turn out to be in the mold of John Kennedy - who was fond of noting that "a rising tide lifts all boats." Over the last few decades, economic growth has made Americans at every income level better off. For all his borderline pessimistic rhetoric, Obama knows this. And I believe he is savvy enough to realize that the real threat to middle-class families and the poor - an economic undertow that drags everyone down - cannot be counteracted by an activist government.

...but whether you agree with any of this or not is immaterial. No matter what he does it will be wrong or not good enough, simply because he is not a republican...who, mind you, said all the "right" things economically over the last 8 years and had almost zero follow-through.

 

[MG1968]

Why does every debate turn into a spelling contest?

If you're going to throw out a word which you claim to have an understanding of, it helps your point if you are actually capable of spelling it.

 

[rjd970]

I have found that most posts with spelling and/or grammar mistakes are overlooked or deliberately ignored. It is mostly done on this board during a debate of some sort when either side is grasping for whatever they can.

I think it is ridiculous myself. Who cares about the stupid spelling, it isn't a sign of intelligence. This isn't an English class, but some like to think so.

 

[MG1968]

I'm not grasping for anything. To say that Fox News is a republican propaganda machine without providing any sort of context is intellectually dishonest. Especially when you consider the antics of the hosts on MSNBC, CNN, CNBC, ABC, NBC, and CBS.

Scott McCellan's claim that the Bush administration provided talking points to FNC has been discredited, and he backed down on his assertion when confronted by O'Reilly. I've never understood all the fear and loathing directed at FNC, it must have something to do with it's success more than any perceived bias since it's obviously the only major news organization that leans to the right.

 

[rjd970]

I've never understood all the fear and loathing directed at FNC, it must have something to do with it's success more than any perceived bias since it's obviously the only major news organization that leans to the right.

I watch it to see what is going on from time to time over there. Hannity and Colmes is entertaining, and there is a certain amount of pleasure in seeing O'Reilly rant about ridiculous stuff. Fox's success has nothing to do with the validity of what they are saying. The right tune in for their daily news and the left tune in for their daily entertainment. At least I do anyway.

The point of my post was agreeing with the other poster. The spelling/grammar police routine gets old.

 

[MG1968]

Fox News runs original programming for at least 18 hours a day, if the best you can come up with is a voyeuristic peek at Hannity or O'Reilly, then my criticism of FNC-bashers stands.

 

[rjd970]

Fox News runs original programming for at least 18 hours a day, if the best you can come up with is a voyeuristic peek at Hannity or O'Reilly, then my criticism of FNC-bashers stands.

I also check the website on an hourly basis. By the time I get home I already know what the news stories are. Hume, Smith and company are boring, and I already know what they are going to talk about. Hannity and Colmes is fun because I get my daily dose of Hannity repeating "Ayers, Wright, Socialist, Guns..religion..." and Colmes interrupting people every 10 seconds. O'Reilly is just a loon I find funny to watch.

Trust me, I have seen more than you think. Most of what is said over there is garbage. And yes, before you bring it up, I think the same things about MSNBC, CBS, and ABC. They just don't have as funny of loons to watch.

 

[volinbham]

I also check the website on an hourly basis. By the time I get home I already know what the news stories are. Hume, Smith and company are boring, and I already know what they are going to talk about. Hannity and Colmes is fun because I get my daily dose of Hannity repeating "Ayers, Wright, Socialist, Guns..religion..." and Colmes interrupting people every 10 seconds. O'Reilly is just a loon I find funny to watch.

Trust me, I have seen more than you think. Most of what is said over there is garbage. And yes, before you bring it up, I think the same things about MSNBC, CBS, and ABC. They just don't have as funny of loons to watch.

Why can't people separate opinion commentators (Hannity) from news reporting (Shepard Smith). Using Hannity or O'Reilly as an example of biased reporting is meaningless.

Look at the news anchors and reporters in the field and while they are biased - they are on par with their anchor/reporter pals at CNN, MSNBC, etc.

 

[volinbham]

Many have, true, but they have been about how illogical his arguments are and how shrill his tone is. My more general criticisms of Fox as a network have to do with their ballyhooed claim that they are objective when certainly they are not.

They don't claim objectivity - the claim fair and balanced - as in giving both sides a chance to tell their story.

If this bothers you, Campell Brown's no BS must aggravate you too.





I'm sorry, I just don't see how you can say that. When Hume sarcastically reads a story of how Democrats plan something and then sneers, there can be no doubt of what he is really saying. Its just painfully obvious.

Disagree - Brian Williams, Katie Couric, etc. do the same.

 

[iceman9]

For those who dont like Fox, their is this great device called the "clicker", it will set you free. We all know who Hannity is, if you already have built in audience of 14 million, this is a no brainer. But O'Reilly is a centrist at best, Shep (should be Shemp) is a dem at the least. Beck is a libertarian, Fox Business is a mix, Cavuto is one of the best things going on Fox, IMO, conservative certainly, but a fair interviewer, who lets his guest speak, and ask relevant question on the topic matter. We all know which way Rupert leans, but he knows how to make money. The latest viewer demographics on Fox shows why they continue to lead the way, a pretty even split between Republicans, Democrats, Independents.

 

[rjd970]

The latest viewer demographics on Fox shows why they continue to lead the way, a pretty even split between Republicans, Democrats, Independents.

I guess this would explain why all the Fox polls leading up to the election showed it was extremely close. Right....

Those fox polls couldn't have been more wrong.

I still think you have committed right wing people that watch it because they consider guys like O'Reilly legitimate news anchors, and then you have the left wing people watch it for entertainment purposes and like to get themselves all worked up.

But O'Reilly is a centrist at best

How so? Is this your opinion or is there something to back it up? I found this:

64 percent of The O'Reilly Factors regular viewers identify as conservative while 10 percent consider themselves liberal. In June 2007, Adweek Magazine sponsored a survey that asked participants who they trusted more as a source of political information between ABC News and Bill O'Reilly. According to the poll, 36 percent believe that O'Reilly is a better source than ABC News, while 26 percent believe the opposite. According to the survey, 23 percent of Democrats believed that O'Reilly was a better source while 55 percent of Republicans believed the same.

The O'Reilly Factor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia