or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Down with Fox News!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Down with Fox News! - Page 3

post #81 of 267
You just don't get it. And you never will.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #82 of 267
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

You just don't get it. And you never will.

No, of course not. Republicans/Conservatives never get it. Only liberals or...pardon me...progressives get it.

So, YOU get it, don't you? And just to prove that you get it, you'll have 17 lefties join you in a resounding "yessir!" just after I post this. Then you'll jerk off while reading The Huffington Post and watching An Inconvenient Truth for the 5th time.

Sounds like a pleasant evening.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #83 of 267
One word: unhinged.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #84 of 267
I agree. SDW is completely UNHINGED in that response. SDW, you apologize right now for suggesting that Northgate has watched An Inconvenient Truth only four times. We all know he has watched it many more times than that.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #85 of 267
Never saw it. Didn't see "Farenheit 9/11" either.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #86 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I agree. SDW is completely UNHINGED in that response. SDW, you apologize right now for suggesting that Northgate has watched An Inconvenient Truth only four times. We all know he has watched it many more times than that.

Nick

I realize the sarcasm flew right over your head considering that the word "unhinged" is a favorite of SDW's. Sorry about that. Low hanging fruit, and all.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #87 of 267
I dunno Northgate. Are Democrats going to blackball Fox News? No interviews, no debates sponsored by Fox, no appearances on any of their shows? And if that's going to be the case, should they first agree to a debate and then withdraw from it? It's just all very silly IMO.
post #88 of 267
No more Dem's on Fox News? ALLLLLLLL- RIGHT!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #89 of 267
It's not about the debate. It's about the network, the network's president, the network's anchors and personalities and their treatment of democrats.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #90 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

I dunno Northgate. Are Democrats going to blackball Fox News? No interviews, no debates sponsored by Fox, no appearances on any of their shows? And if that's going to be the case, should they first agree to a debate and then withdraw from it? It's just all very silly IMO.

I suspect that this blackballing of FOX news is the inevitable, and totally reasonable, response to FOX. And all the party needs to do is say that they were all good faith and hearts and flowers, albeit reluctantly, and then Ailes's comment was the final straw.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #91 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Then you'll jerk off while reading The Huffington Post and watching An Inconvenient Truth for the 5th time.
Sounds like a pleasant evening.

Wow. That's pretty impressive. Reading AND watching a movie WHILE jerking off. Multitasking at its best.
You and Trompeta have write the most bizarre sexually-related posts on this site. Bar none. Strange.


Tom
post #92 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I suspect that this blackballing of FOX news is the inevitable, and totally reasonable, response to FOX. And all the party needs to do is say that they were all good faith and hearts and flowers, albeit reluctantly, and then Ailes's comment was the final straw.

Agreed. Part of what's gone wrong is the normalization of raw invective as some kind of analysis and the mainstreaming of naked partisan attack presented as "news".

As long as an operation like Fox is treated as a legitimate news source it acts as a corrosive influence on the entirety of political discourse in America.

Simply walking away from their already in progress shouting match is really the only thing to be done. There is no winning over or reasoning with or providing more balance by getting your guys on their shows. That would work if Fox cared about journalism and the truth and could be educated regarding some of their more egregious abuses of same.

But they don't. They were designed from the ground up to be a mouthpiece for the right and an adjunct to power, Republican style. Approaching them in good faith is a suckers game, I'm just sorry it's taken the Dems this long to figure it out.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #93 of 267
Thread Starter 
adda:

Quote:
Agreed. Part of what's gone wrong is the normalization of raw invective as some kind of analysis and the mainstreaming of naked partisan attack presented as "news".

Yes, agreed. NBC, CBS, CNN, the NYT, LA TIMES et al do that extensively.

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #94 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I suspect that this blackballing of FOX news is the inevitable, and totally reasonable, response to FOX. And all the party needs to do is say that they were all good faith and hearts and flowers, albeit reluctantly, and then Ailes's comment was the final straw.

But where does it stop? The other networks are hardly much better. CNN has Loud Dobbs*, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace. MSNBC has Scarborough and Tucker. This study shows that all the news shows favor Republicans and conservatives. Are Democrats going to withdraw from all media? I don't see how they can withdraw from Fox and fail to withdraw from the others.




* [edit: Ha, I didn't mean to put "Loud Dobbs" but it sorta fits, don't it?]
post #95 of 267
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

But where does it stop? The other networks are hardly much better. CNN has Loud Dobbs*, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace. MSNBC has Scarborough and Tucker. This study shows that all the news shows favor Republicans and conservatives. Are Democrats going to withdraw from all media? I don't see how they can withdraw from Fox and fail to withdraw from the others.




* [edit: Ha, I didn't mean to put "Loud Dobbs" but it sorta fits, don't it?]


The number of guests does not tell the story.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #96 of 267
I like BRussell's graph but what it doesn't address is the real reason those programs need a Republican on is to be the punching bag for the Democratic press members.

Take "This Week" as an example. George Stephanopoulos helped run the Clinton campaign and served in the White House for Clinton. Cokie Roberts is clearly from a Democratic family with members having served or run for several offices, all as Democrats.

My other link dug into many of the others and noted their Democratic credentials, though it did so in a comedic manner.

Just to insure the tone is softened, I will note that BRussell did note the many clearly biased members of various news organizations. The fact that George Stephanopoulos puts on a serious tone instead of acting like a nutjob (like Scarborough for example) hardly excuses their bias.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

Wow. That's pretty impressive. Reading AND watching a movie WHILE jerking off. Multitasking at its best.
You and Trompeta have write the most bizarre sexually-related posts on this site. Bar none. Strange.

If you want a date, just ask.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #97 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If you want a date, just ask.

Nick

Oooooooh. "Straight" guy asking me on a date. Let's see:

Married......check

Gay offer......check

You have got to be a republican.



Steve
post #98 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I like BRussell's graph but what it doesn't address is the real reason those programs need a Republican on is to be the punching bag for the Democratic press members.

So Fox News, with the highest number of Republican guests, uses them as punching bags? At some point this is a non-falsifiable theory. No matter what the facts, it supports the theory. More Democrats? Bias! More Republicans? Punching bags!
post #99 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

But where does it stop? The other networks are hardly much better. CNN has Loud Dobbs*, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace. MSNBC has Scarborough and Tucker. This study shows that all the news shows favor Republicans and conservatives. Are Democrats going to withdraw from all media? I don't see how they can withdraw from Fox and fail to withdraw from the others.

You are absolutely correct. The other networks are also conservative. Not nearly as unabashedly biased as FOX, but certainly conservative in tone almost across the board. OIbermann is the only real outlier, of course.

With the exception of Glenn Beck, MSNBC's and CNN's presidents and anchors don't repeatedly imply that Democrats are cowards, traitors, terrorist appeasers, etc, on a routine basis. FOX does, and despite it the Democrats keep letting them do it without consequence. And by consequence, I mean "doing anything at all." And by "doing anything at all" I mean "by still going on FOX as if it's to be anything other than a token."

In short, the Dems need to stop being a token.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #100 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

So Fox News, with the highest number of Republican guests, uses them as punching bags? At some point this is a non-falsifiable theory. No matter what the facts, it supports the theory. More Democrats? Bias! More Republicans? Punching bags!

I suppose we would have to dig into the true nature of the "independents" and know what criteria they assign to determine them because the Independents plus Democrats and up to a majority in every case. At least in my view that would be worth investigating.

Also it isn't as if you aren't asking for the same sort of double conclusion. We are told to believe that Fox News being willing to host a Democratic Debate is proof of Republican bias.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #101 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You are absolutely correct. The other networks are also conservative. Not nearly as unabashedly biased as FOX, but certainly conservative in tone almost across the board. OIbermann is the only real outlier, of course.

With the exception of Glenn Beck, MSNBC's and CNN's presidents and anchors don't repeatedly imply that Democrats are cowards, traitors, terrorist appeasers, etc, on a routine basis. FOX does, and despite it the Democrats keep letting them do it without consequence. And by consequence, I mean "doing anything at all." And by "doing anything at all" I mean "by still going on FOX as if it's to be anything other than a token."

In short, the Dems need to stop being a token.



Don't confuse anchors with commentator. Yes, Fox commentators lean a little right of center.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #102 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Don't confuse anchors with commentator. Yes, Fox commentators lean a little right of center.

FOX Anchors are different from commentators?

And again Southside, you made me laugh out loud with "a little right of center." Thanks for giving me a good belly laugh this morning.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #103 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

We are told to believe that Fox News being willing to host a Democratic Debate is proof of Republican bias.

Do you really think that's a fair summary of the argument?

post #104 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

FOX Anchors are different from commentators?

And again Southside, you made me laugh out loud with "a little right of center." Thanks for giving me a good belly laugh this morning.

A little right of center when the wind is blowing from the left.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #105 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Do you really think that's a fair summary of the argument?


I put forward that there were more Republicans on Sunday news shows in order to be punching bags for the Democratic news anchors.

Are you claiming that the reason Democrats are unwilling to host their debate on Fox News is something other than being a punching bag for the Fox News/Republican bias anchors?

Isn't the contention that biased networks provide air time to folks who they want to put in a bad light?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #106 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Are you claiming that the reason Democrats are unwilling to host their debate on Fox News is something other than being a punching bag for the Fox News/Republican bias anchors?

Well, there is a little more to it, but that's a lot more accurate than what I quoted.

That's basically it though.
post #107 of 267
Can't believe this is up for debate...

come on guys. Everyone knows where Murdock stands in World Politics. It doesn't matter if it is Republican or Democrat - his troops will back the one that have the policies he wants enacted.

This is him on the Iraq War.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...897015,00.html

Quote:
Their master's voice


Rupert Murdoch argued strongly for a war with Iraq in an interview this week. Which might explain why his 175 editors around the world are backing it too, writes Roy Greenslade

Monday February 17, 2003

..Most revealing of all was Murdoch's reference to the rationale for going to war, blatantly using the o-word. Politicians in the United States and Britain have strenuously denied the significance of oil, but Murdoch wasn't so reticent. He believes that deposing the Iraqi leader would lead to cheaper oil. "The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy...would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country."

He went even further down this road in an interview the week before with America's Fortune magazine by forecasting a postwar economic boom. "Once it [Iraq] is behind us, the whole world will benefit from cheaper oil which will be a bigger stimulus than anything else."...

post #108 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by OfficerDigby View Post

Can't believe this is up for debate...

come on guys. Everyone knows where Murdock stands in World Politics. It doesn't matter if it is Republican or Democrat - his troops will back the one that have the policies he wants enacted.

This is him on the Iraq War.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...897015,00.html


I think he is mostly interested in making money. His other endeavors are far from right wing conservative. FOX News sells. It fills a rather large market created by the current culture. I don't think that old Rup would go down the tubes for "what he believes in" ala Air America
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #109 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I put forward that there were more Republicans on Sunday news shows in order to be punching bags for the Democratic news anchors.

And I pointed out that Fox also has more Republicans, so how can your statement be true, unless you're arguing that Fox uses Republicans as punching bags?

Quote:
Are you claiming that the reason Democrats are unwilling to host their debate on Fox News is something other than being a punching bag for the Fox News/Republican bias anchors?

Isn't the contention that biased networks provide air time to folks who they want to put in a bad light?

I don't really know what the contention is. At first it sounded like they didn't want Dems to debate on Fox News because Fox would be mean to them. Now it sounds like they don't want to legitimize Fox because they're a Republican propaganda outfit. Whatever their argument, I don't agree with it.
post #110 of 267
I didn't mean to imply you agreed with it BRussell. I was just noting the similarities.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #111 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

I think he is mostly interested in making money. His other endeavors are far from right wing conservative. FOX News sells. It fills a rather large market created by the current culture. I don't think that old Rup would go down the tubes for "what he believes in" ala Air America

I see what you mean. I beg to differ on only want to put some space between you opinion and mine. He want to make money. So he thought supporting Iraq war gonna make lots of money so the coverage is pro-war.


In the UK Mr. Murdock probably has more power than in US - with much more papers.
In this case he decides who to support for the elections and whom ever it is will win, period.

All Blair foreign policy is discussed with Murdock to guage approval before the policy is implemented... In other words he is running the country internationally.
post #112 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by OfficerDigby View Post

I see what you mean. I beg to differ on only want to put some space between you opinion and mine. He want to make money. So he thought supporting Iraq war gonna make lots of money so the coverage is pro-war..

It goes far beyond "supporting the war". He appeals to the "America is good and we have nothing to be ashamed off" need in the American people. For years, other media outlets have been down on the US. Everything we do is wrong. We waste. We imperialize. We use and abuse the third world..... ..Fox, like talk radio, says NO. We are Americans. We are good and we are not ashamed to say so. This sells..
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #113 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

It goes far beyond "supporting the war". He appeals to the "America is good and we have nothing to be ashamed off" need in the American people. For years, other media outlets have been down on the US. Everything we do is wrong. We waste. We imperialize. We use and abuse the third world..... ..Fox, like talk radio, says NO. We are Americans. We are good and we are not ashamed to say so. This sells..

So you agree the Fox is driven by a straightforward ideological agenda instead of standards of journalism.

The only contention then, is whether or not it is true that "all the other news organizations" are also driven by an ideological agenda and Fox just acts as a corrective.

Presumably, that other agenda is "America is bad and always does bad and is always wrong", possibly also "Republicans and the right are stupid and wrong and evil" and presumably this message is also crafted with profit in mind, that is, because it sells.

Which makes sense, because the executives of the huge corporations that own the other news outlets are nothing if not America haters. Or maybe it's because they stumbled on the surprising news that "America Hating" was a hot commodity on TV. Or because J-school has classes both in "how to compromise America's sense of itself as good" and "how to override the executives that run the huge corporations that own the news outlets to insert your agenda by just blurting things out on the air".

Makes sense to me.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #114 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

adda:



Yes, agreed. NBC, CBS, CNN, the NYT, LA TIMES et al do that extensively.


Perhaps you could cite some examples? Maybe something other than "Dan Rather" and "that interview where that guy was really rude to the pres" (see also my post on festishized "incidents" proffered as stand-ins for overwhelming trends).
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #115 of 267
How do CNN and MSNBC and the networks compare to Fox in the ratings ,Box?
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #116 of 267
Compilation Of Fox Attacks On Black America

Fox Attacks: Black America is a new video on Fox Cable Channel's coverage and portrayal of African Americans.

James Rucker of ColorOfChange.org conceived of the video after learning the Congressional Black Caucus Institute considered partnering with FOX Cable Channel on an upcoming debate.

Foxattacks.com
post #117 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

festishized "incidents"

Best characterization yet.

By far.
post #118 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

How do CNN and MSNBC and the networks compare to Fox in the ratings ,Box?

How do Britney Spears' album sales compare to Beethoven's? American Idol vs. the History Channel? The box office receipts of David Lynch vs. Johnny Knoxville? Ratings don't mean quality.
post #119 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

How do CNN and MSNBC and the networks compare to Fox in the ratings ,Box?

They trail. So it would appear that their "liberalism" is in direct conflict with their profit motive. Whereas Murdock has hit on a profitable formula, although it requires jettisoning "journalism" in favor of "pandering".

I wonder why you ask. It seems to me that acknowledging that Fox is following the money undercuts the idea that they are a necessary corrective to the "liberal" media, at least as far as "fair and balanced" goes.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #120 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

How do Britney Spears' album sales compare to Beethoven's? American Idol vs. the History Channel? The box office receipts of David Lynch vs. Johnny Knoxville? Ratings don't mean quality.

Zing!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Down with Fox News!