Tablet, iPhone OS 4.0, iLife 2010 'confirmed' for Apple event - report

167891012»

Comments

  • Reply 221 of 224
    The bottom line is that nobody watches cable news from any outlet to become better informed. At best they watch it to be entertained; at worst to have their prejudices confirmed. Fox may have perfected this cynical formula, but it's a deep barrel, and each and every cable outlet lives so near the bottom of it that trying to distinguish one from the other is a nearly pointless exercise.
  • Reply 222 of 224
    macgregormacgregor Posts: 1,434member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    The bottom line is that nobody watches cable news from any outlet to become better informed. At best they watch it to be entertained; at worst to have their prejudices confirmed. Fox may have perfected this cynical formula, but it's a deep barrel, and each and every cable outlet lives so near the bottom of it that trying to distinguish one from the other is a nearly pointless exercise.



    Except for C-SPAN, I somewhat agree. My point is network news and CNN (except for disaster reporting) are lazy and bland and targeted to the least common denominator. MSNBC and FOX News are targeted to the most uncommon, polarizing denominators.



    Yet not all cable news shows can be painted with the same brush. MSNBC has Pat Buchanan as a regular commentator. Pat Buchanan! A past Republican party candidate and strongly and honestly conservative in almost every way. Does FOX News have anyone like that to speak for the liberals?!?!?! No, that would be like them getting Walter Mondale or John Kerry in studio and giving them plenty of air time. Not going to happen



    So cable news has issues, but they none are quite as biased and quite as dependent upon creating "the other" as FOX.
  • Reply 223 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacGregor View Post


    Except for C-SPAN, I somewhat agree. My point is network news and CNN (except for disaster reporting) are lazy and bland and targeted to the least common denominator. MSNBC and FOX News are targeted to the most uncommon, polarizing denominators.



    Yet not all cable news shows can be painted with the same brush. MSNBC has Pat Buchanan as a regular commentator. Pat Buchanan! A past Republican party candidate and strongly and honestly conservative in almost every way. Does FOX News have anyone like that to speak for the liberals?!?!?! No, that would be like them getting Walter Mondale or John Kerry in studio and giving them plenty of air time. Not going to happen



    So cable news has issues, but they none are quite as biased and quite as dependent upon creating "the other" as FOX.



    I don't argue the point, I simply refuse to watch any of them by choice. Whenever I'm forced to see any of these "news" outlets I am horrified by what passes for information. Deliberate bias, laziness, sensationalism, or what other explanation is offered hardly matters -- they collectively stink to high heaven.
  • Reply 224 of 224
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacGregor View Post


    I know, the sad thing is that I'm sure you are not twelve.



    90% of people in the news lean democrat, not "leftist" - and actually the number is 70%. Does that make them any less reliable to America, than the possibility that 70% of the military is republican or 80% of Wall Street is republican or that 70% of catholics are democrat?!?!? What do those percentages say to you?



    And have you ever wondered why journalist might lean democrat? Have you thought for a moment longer than the pure emotional reaction time to your amygdala? Let alone the fact that many grew up during Watergate and Viet Nam and saw the dishonesty and hubris of the Republican party at the time, there are some real reasons for their political leanings.



    FOX News does not do that. Many pro-Fox folks on this board pick at one or two contributing commentators on CNN and PBS as if that is the same as FOX. It isn't. And it isn't intellectually honest to say it. Honesty doesn't come from patriotism it comes from experience and often from a diverse and liberal education ... and I don't mean liberal in the current political sense, I mean liberal in the classic way of John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Rousseau and others whom both Dems and Repubs claim as patron saints.



    Newt, Rove, Huckabee and now Sarah Palin are on FOX more than any Dems have been even on MSNBC. You might as well have the Republican national committee have their own 1 hour variety show opposite Leno! And Hannity and company have the hubris to say that they are conservative, not republicans ... yeah, take your tongue out of Palin's ear before you say that.



    So rather than be snarky and telling other people that they are not a "thinking person" in your mind. Just think things through yourself. There are reasons why people have the beliefs they do. There are reasons why conservatives tend to be the ones with guns shooting people in churches and the ones shooting doctors and the ones shooting people in the Holocaust Museum and the ones putting tons of explosives in Rider trucks in Oklahoma City. While liberals tend to warn about global warming and whine about Wall Street cheaters and moan about health care and occasionally throw red paint at ladies in fur coats.



    The difference is that one group of radicals is dangerous and the other is just annoying.



    Whoa! I went to a tech site and found a political debate about the nature of the country. won't delve into all, but the figure is 90%+ of reporters voting democratic (multiple surveys over a number of years), and no, I don't think they can entirely put that aside in their reporting. none of us can.



    also, all the big j schools are liberal through and through and it's no surprise they turn out dewey-eyed grads who've spent 4-6 years on the Kool Aid diet.



    as for Fox News, you're peddling more "non sense." Fox's evening lineup is filled with conservative hosts and its hard new segments are, if only in their selection, somewhat shaded right, at least compared to the other nets, while MSNBC's prime-timers are all liberal to ultra-liberal. however, conservative guests on MSNBC are rarer than hen's teeth, while all the Fox evening shows have liberal guests (if not a majority) who are allowed to make their case. CNN pretends to be the middle ground, but the whiff of that 90% is clear to any nuanced news palette.



    and immediately after you tell people not to be snarky, you next characterize conservatism itself as the cause of mad bombers, doctor killers, church shooters and such. while the worst leftist thinking leads to is red paint on fur coats? gee, that's not the way I see tree spikers (who cause serious injury or death to innocent timber workers), breaking into labs and destroying millions in research to "liberate" animals who will quicky die when tossed into the world, all those riots wherever the G8 gathers, nor since you brought up old history (McVeigh), the Weathermen. so I don't buy the "their kooks are worse than our kooks angle." plenty of kooks all across the board.



    though, if Scott Brown's a mad bomber (or in imminent danger of becoming one from inhaling conservative precepts), I guess that makes President Obama an anarchist or anarchist-candidate by your own logic.



    and yes, you are in your own lack of being as "balanced" as you think you are, dangerous, and certainly, for sure, annoying.



    and having read only your post, I leave this debate for more tidbits of upcoming wares, soft and hard.
Sign In or Register to comment.