Worth a listen:
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/player...raight&wvx-300

Bah! Everyone knows nothing on Fox is worth watching. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 11-19-2003, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Hmm, I love the Simpson's!!

Maybe you don't watch enough Fox!

Maybe I should have clarified my reference as being to the 'Fox News Network'. Everyone here knows that nothing, absolutely nothing, they air has any legitimacy. ;) [img]smile.gif[/img]

What, Fox is bad because they ask the questions that the other news outlets don't have the balls to ask? You should be mad at the others who give the dems a pass on so many of the questionable things they do.

Ummm....Khazadaman, while news agencies as a whole do tend to lean towards the left, there is general agreement by most people (dems and Reps alike)that they are very unbiased in their reportaing.

Fox news, on the other hand, is EXTREMELY biased towards the right. More worrisome, is that they market themselves on the idea that they are the only non-biased news station---its a load of garbage. It's not that the ask the tough quesionts, its that they manipulate the facts and screen the news reels in such a manner as to express a one sided opinion

Not true, while most people do recognize that the traditional US news media leans to the left, the overwhelming majority of those who believe the media leans to the left but is still very unbiased in it's reporting are very much on the left themselves.

After all, you can't lean either way and still be unbiased. That doesn't mean individuals working for the media can't have their own leanings, but it does mean they can't show it. If leaning is recognized, then the reporting cannot be unbiased.

EDIT - While I recognize that Fox is biased, my initial response in this thread was sarcastic. Unsuccessfully so obviously, but sarcastic none the less. ;)

[ 11-21-2003, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Not true, while most people do recognize that the traditional US news media leans to the left, the overwhelming majority of those who believe the media leans to the left but is still very unbiased in it's reporting are very much on the left themselves.

After all, you can't lean either way and still be unbiased. That doesn't mean individuals working for the media can't have their own leanings, but it does mean they can't show it. If leaning is recognized, then the reporting cannot be unbiased.

EDIT - While I recognize that Fox is biased, my initial response in this thread was sarcastic. Unsuccessfully so obviously, but sarcastic none the less. ;) </font>[/QUOTE]Don't take this the wrong way, but now you're just irritating me. Every opinion ever made by anybody is biased. No news station, tv show, speech, journal, or conversation between two people can be made with complete unbias. There is a difference, however, between being bias and being maniupulative. More to the point, the degrees of biasness are quite relative...traditional news shows may be biased...but they make an honest attempt not to be--and do so quite well according to the majority of Americans.

The reason you are irritating me is two fold. (a) you seem to disagree with me just for the sake of disagreeing and (b) by your statements you seem to be suggesting that it is ok for FOX to broadcast 'no spin' news without any regard for the truth because the other news agencies lean a bit to the left. It's not that FOX leans to the right, its that FOX is so far on one side of the rainbow that the color purple is starting to hit the ultra violet spectrum.

Believe it or not, i am a Republican at heart (when it comes to Economic theory, not moral values and the 'actual' republican economic policies) and what forever keeps me from voting that way is the incesent manipulation of the average American by the party. FOX news is just one example of an epidemic in American society where a political party takes advantage of the idiots and pats themselves on the back for a game well played.

I was a young republican in college my first semester...I switched to a young democrat when the leadership of the young republicans held strategy sessions on ways to keep down the black and gay votes on campus and villainize rival student body members by intentionally and recklessly qouting them out of context---and it was nothing but a stupid student body elections!!!!

There are only two kinds of people who vote consitantly Republican--really rich people, and really stupid people.

What angers me about the republicans (in general) isn't there policies, it's the manner in which they enact such policies---by decieving the public.

*Disclaimer--this is a biased opinion...intentially generalized to state a point and invoke commentary---I do recognize that there are many wonderful and honest Republican Reprentatives and leaders whom I hold in the highest of regard.

[ 11-21-2003, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: Pikachu_PM ]

Do you have any proof to present backing your argument that the majority of Americans believe the media is trying to be honest? Most people I personally know believe the media to only present topics in a one sided manner to sway public opinion.

I must say the irritation isn't mutual. It doesn't bother me at all to have to tell you when you're being arrogant on a level that is asinine. In this and ever other thread I've ever seen you involved in, you become irritated at those who disagree and refuse to see your logic as the only correct view. In addition, you like to go out and speculate on the statements of others and randomly assign meanings to them that fit your ideals of their wrong-ness. That's not the way it works.

This is a discussion board, so you'll really need to get used to the 'discussion' part of it, or you're wasting your time here because if you're just looking to have people accept your view on things, you've hooked up with the wrong group and there is much irritation in your future.

This statement is stupid. Complete and utter BS.

Do you have any proof to present backing your argument that the majority of Americans believe the media is trying to be honest? Most people I personally know believe the media to only present topics in a one sided manner to sway public opinion. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes...a Gallup pole done about 7 months ago...I'll see If I can locate the actual pole results---in which 26%% of Americans said the American media is completley unbiased, and 45% said the American media, while occasionally biased, generally does a good job of being unbiased.

I must say the irritation isn't mutual. It doesn't bother me at all to have to tell you when you're being arrogant on a level that is asinine. In this and ever other thread I've ever seen you involved in, you become irritated at those who disagree and refuse to see your logic as the only correct view. In addition, you like to go out and speculate on the statements of others and randomly assign meanings to them that fit your ideals of their wrong-ness. That's not the way it works.

This is a discussion board, so you'll really need to get used to the 'discussion' part of it, or you're wasting your time here because if you're just looking to have people accept your view on things, you've hooked up with the wrong group and there is much irritation in your future.

Quote:

There are only two kinds of people who vote constantly Republican--really rich people, and really stupid people.

This statement is stupid. Complete and utter BS. </font>[/QUOTE]I said you were irritating me, I never said I didn't love you (I do).

Also, I never said i was right, I just said you were wrong. If I assigned meaning to your statments that is my right to do so--so long as there is logic behind my assignment (which there was/is).

Further, you call my statments arrogant and imply that I do not respect other peoples opinions---where have I stated someone to be wrong without proof? More to the point, where in my post did I make a statement that you can disprove? I may have firm opinions, but they are firm because they are opinions based on fact.

As for the whole rich person/stupid person thing---while stated as an intentionly antagonizing generality I would yet challange you to name one person who is Intelligent(about politics), consitantly votes republican, and whose family middle class or 'lower'. I can't think of a single person...and if you can, please remember that its the exceptions that prove the rule.

[ 11-21-2003, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

What were we arguing about again? I forgot.

Semantics. ;)

[ 11-21-2003, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

The video bit I posted to start this thread is a prime example of how the Fox and certain other right wing voices do exactly that. Clark calls the interviewer to task for it in a very forceful manner.

Ok, sorry, I just did that last post to be irritating...I apologize.

Ultimatley, I take extreme views on things to challenge ppl and illicit well thought out (as opposed to haphazard) responses. You have risen and met the challange with grace and elequence (sp?--ironic, huh). I really enjoyed that last post, and while my opinion still remain that our argument has spun off into an entirely different meaning than the author of this thread intended I nonetheless salute you.

Of course, I still stand by the idea that there is a difference between a bias and manipulation, that meanings may be implied, that the stereo type of the manipulative Republican is founded, and that FOX News is evil. But I now believe the liberal media is also evil, opinions are forever futile, and that I'm an arrogant bastard.

But, you do have to admit now that all people who vote *consistantly* Republic are either rich or stupid...you admited as much yourself...only added that people voting *consistantly* Democrat are also stupid. I couldn't agree more.

Ah but nothing on Fox is real. ;)

That video must have been edited and only made Clark look good by accident...lol. :D

The video bit I posted to start this thread is a prime example of how the Fox and certain other right wing voices do exactly that. Clark calls the interviewer to task for it in a very forceful manner. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]FINALLY! Rokenn see's what I have been doing. Often times, to make a point, one must demonstrate to the other party by example the point one is trying to make. I don't know if that makes sense...but in short, what you (Bman) were feeling while reading my post is exactly how I feel everytime I watch FOX news...and I hope now you know why you shouldn't take its biasness so lighthearted in the future. I consider it's manipulation to be a very serious issue, and not something to laugh about.

[ 11-21-2003, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: Pikachu_PM ]

If that is the case someone at Fox forgot to read their daily memo. ;)

Ah Pickachu, but you assume I watch Fox. I don't(unless it is on at the gym and I can't change the channel). Again, I'll point out that you are pretty blasé about the fact that the mainstream media leans. You seem to find that acceptable, but the only logical reason for that would be that you agree.

Rokenn, my only question about the video clip is whether that was during a newscast or a commentary show. I'm not familiar with the host, but I do know that on MSNBC left-winger Bill Press hits the right with everything possible while his partner, right-winger Pat Buchanan, does the exact same to the left. The reason I like Buchanan and Press is because it's more balanced when you hear from both sides, but even if it was just the left or just the right represented that show is quite a bit different than a newscast.

Please understand I'm not blind to what this guy was doing to Clark, and I think Clark handled the incident perfectly. The guy was making an issue of a non-issue. Of course he was, but it happens everyday. I don't accept it on Fox anymore than I can accept it everywhere else. I can see that bias even though I'm on the right. Maybe it's because I'm not that far right that I can see it.

What I see as disingenuous is when those on the left can't or won't see something that leans to the left or worse try to excuse it. Does it really make a difference if it's more subtle? Is it really ok to lean on a report as long as you are subtle? I think not. I'd rather see the cartoonish Fox leanings and accept them for what they are, than try to justify the fact that the mainstream leans a bit but it's only an acceptable leaning. Acceptable for whom?

Maybe a straight forward discussion of the subject would be better? After all, you didn't know the extent of my position before supposedly implimenting your demonstration. I'm perfectly capable of understanding ideas, so you don't have to become a caricature for me.

Me understand good.

<font color=steelblue>Can we lay aside the idea that voting a certain way is proof that one is stupid? That is a stonger, more vulgar word in Spanish than it is in English, and there are Hispanic-Americans that visit this website that might vote Republican. Some other Americans that are not Hispanic may also be offended. Therefore, this is breaking TOS Rules by using such grammer to pool people into, due to their preferences.

Thanks.</font>

"A biased opinion is one you don't agree with." --David Brinkley

"What I see as disingenuous is when those on the left can't or won't see something that leans to the left or worse try to excuse it. Does it really make a difference if it's more subtle? Is it really ok to lean on a report as long as you are subtle? I think not. I'd rather see the cartoonish Fox leanings and accept them for what they are, than try to justify the fact that the mainstream leans a bit but it's only an acceptable leaning. Acceptable for whom?"

__________

I never said i didn't see it...in fact I said I did see it and implied (though maybe not obviously enough) that I don't agree with it--because I don't. Bias is bad...it is also unavoidable. Anybody who tells you anything, no matter how unbiased they try to be (and the traditional media really does try to be unbiased) is always going to, at best, unknowling spin it a certain way according to their perceptions. I am not claming the media is perfect...I am saying they at least make the attempt to be 'clean'. FOX on the other hand issues directives from its board to spin all stories in the 'right' directions (did you like my pun!). It doesn't even try to be unbiased.

I've got no problem with a right leaning media outlet...I do have a problem with a media outlet (liberal, conservative, or otherwise) that intentional and maliciously distorts the facts.

"Maybe a straight forward discussion of the subject would be better? After all, you didn't know the extent of my position before supposedly implimenting your demonstration. I'm perfectly capable of understanding ideas, so you don't have to become a caricature for me.

Me understand good. "

_____

But I did know the extent of your position...I could tell in your first argument, and the confirmation of my opinion of your position has come in your later post. Further, of course I could just try and have a straight forward discussion...but those aren't nearly as entertaing, take twice as long, do a worse job at proving a point, and without restructuring the view point for the other party rarely succeed in changing anybodies mind.

Just wondering: What does your not watching FOX have to do with anything?(that sounds rude---i'm really asking, not being a ****) You may not, but plenty of other Americans do and a lot of them have no concept of the fact that it is even biased, much less downright manipulative.

[ 11-25-2003, 07:59 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Wow, I can't believe I missed this...


"Your insight is truly amazing. Can you do card tricks, too?"

As a matter of fact...yes.


"You may want to rethink your strategy because you didn't prove anything to anyone except yourself, and since you were already on your side, that was a given wasn't it? Impressing one's self isn't really all that impressive a talent.

Twice as long to actually discuss it? Maybe, but then you may have actually made your point. Of course entertainment was listed first in your list, so I'll assume that is what was most important to you in your posts. "

Oh Really? Perhaps if you actually read and understood the point of my post you'd come to your senses. What have I said thus Far? That traditional media is biased slightly to the left and that is bad. That FOX Leans heavily to the right and that is very very bad. What of this do you not agree with? In fact, from what you're written you do agree with me and are currently just arguing petty points to come off looking 'right'.


"I'm confused, I thought you had me figured out. What's with the questions?

A lot of Americans do see Fox, millions in fact, but I have to believe only a tiny portion of those don't know Fox for what it is. The real point is that 50 times the number of viewers who watch Fox watch the mainstream media. 50 times the actual viewer ship! The mainstream’s leaning is MORE difficult for the average Joe to detect because it isn't so overt as Fox's.

Hmmm... political leanings that are more difficult to detect, reaches many, many more people, and is excused as being acceptable. Nope, that doesn't sound too bad.

I guess the one thing we can agree on is the fact that leaning the news is wrong, but I also guess we'll have to differ on even the nuances of that since I see it ALL as wrong without having to make any excuses or exceptions for either side...

Of course, you knew I'd say all that, but I figured I'd type it out so everyone else could further enjoy your prognosticative powers. "

Wow, you REALLY took a comment and have spinned it in a totally new direction...you should apply for a job at FOX! When did I say I had you 'all figured out' or 'knew everything about you'? ALl I said was that based off your initial post I could logically deduce where your argument was going. Your more recent post have shown me I was right...I could very well have been wrong.

There was a study done awhile back about media influences on politcal voting that would cement this debate...I only wish I could remember all the details. Its a sad thing to know my facts but not know my sources (I can already smell your sarcastic comments). Essentially, what I gather from YOUR statement is that it's ok for FOX to manipulate people because traditional media is slighly biased and reaches more viewers. You go further to assume that the people who watch FOX know it's manipulative...thats a rather naive statment.

Traditional news outlets are what they are because we've given them the duty of becoming government watch dogs...a duty they are entirley unqualified to handle. More to the point, because of this they have a tendency to lean in the opposite direction of whatever political party is currently in the executive office. Republicans have been in office for most of the last 2-3 decades and hence part of the perception that the media is left winged (remember the Clinton administration...how left winged did the media seem then?)

I'm not saying thats 'ok', i'm just saying tha that at least the bias isn't intentional and is a result of the media attempting to keep the government honest. You can say what you want...but there is a line between being biased and being manipuative, and FOX has crossed that line by several hundred steps. Oh, and the real argument would be if I would feel the same way if FOX was manipulative to the left...and the answer would be 'yes'. Believe it or not, I'm actually turning into a Republican...maybe I've been watching too much FOX news.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ 11-26-2003, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Pikachu_PM ]

They way I see it, news station leaning on the left ae usually more anti-govenrment and anti-capitalism, which is a good thing for a news station, while those leaning on the right are usually pro-government and pro-capitalism, which is usually not very good.

I'd rather have someone over hyping my government's and corporation's mistake, frauds and abuse rather someone trying to hide and justify it.

Of course this is just a streotype, but it's mostly true.

Pikachu, now you're just making me laugh at the degree to which you are impressed by yourself. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I appear to agree with you, so why am I arguing? I'd say that despite your agreeing with my position, you were the one arguing with me. You were so busy trying show me the error of my ways that you missed the boat. Your amazing insight(one of those that initially irritated you anyway) into my post(s) was that I think it is ok for Fox to say and do whatever they want because of the leaning of the mainstream, when I've never said or implied anything of the kind. You made a leap, but it wasn't a logical one based on my post, and nothing I've said has backed that idea, so not only was your initial logic was flawed, your opinion regarding my later posts was biased based on your initial misconception.

I should be a spin doctor? Please spare me. I'm not a spin doctor, I'm a smart ass, and you are an enabler. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I'm arguing just to appear correct? Where is chewie's "pot calling he kettle black" image when I need it? [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

"EDIT - While I recognize that Fox is biased, my initial response in this thread was sarcastic. Unsuccessfully so obviously, but sarcastic none the less."
--RonnBMan


This statement of yours is the foundation of my whole reasons for continuing to 'argue' with you. With your original post about "nothing on FOX is worth watching" being 'sarcastic' it's logical for me to assume you find FOX well worth watching despite its biasness.

My original post focussed on agreeing with the 'topic originator' that FOX news is very manipulative. In response to this basic post you went off on a tangent about 'liberal' media, and within that context made the above statement.

You have defended FOX news and attacked traditional media in every post since...acknowledging the manipulation but excusing it because of a percieved liberal bias. I have attempted to challange this asserstion, and in doing have acknowledged the liberal biaseness in traditional media...admitting it is a problem. I have simply gone further to state that FOX news is worse.

You have agreed FOX is extremely biased, and the traditional media is slightly biased...but are holding your ground at the idea that it is 'ok' for FOX to do what it does because 'the other guy does it less as bad, but to more people.' This is where we disagree, and your viewpoint on this is where I think you are arguing just to argue. You seem like too intelligent a guy to actually think that.

[ 11-28-2003, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: Pikachu_PM ]

PM, as we have both stated, we disagree with bias in the media whether left or right. Your problem with my post(s) is the ill conceived notion that I've said, or support the idea, that it is ok for Fox to manipulate the news since the mainstream also leans(to a lesser degree) to the left, but that simply isn't true and is based on nothing I've said or insinuated.

This is where your logic fails the test, jumps the gun, and assumes you know too much about others based on too little information. Absolutely nothing in my sarcasm indicated that FOX was well worth watching. I admitted that my attempt at sarcasm had failed, based on posts from the left and right of IW's posters, but you made an assumption that was not based on the logic you've claimed as a defense and used again here as your explanation. My sarcastic assertion that there is nothing worth watching on FOX meant that there are indeed things worth watching, like the clip of Clark that started this thread which we have so seriously derailed, but not that FOX is well worth watching. Such a leap is not a logical progression of the statement, but if there was any question, discussion could have quickly resolved it whereas your *hasty, entertainment concept* only perpetuated your erroneous interpretation.

As I've stated from the beginning, you've assumed too much and based your ideas about my post(s) on your own faulty assumptions and not on logic regarding my statements.

Yes, we do agree in theory on the issues, but I don't think I'm as concerned with being right and continuing the argument(as you've suggested) as I am with being correctly represented in regard to what I said. No matter how many times you say 'logic', you got it wrong regarding my post and opinion, and I've corrected you.

I'm not in this forum for the entertainment value other's can provide me. While posting here can be enjoyable, the reason for bothering to discuss the issues here is to be exposed to different ideas and positions from different people. I'm certainly not interested in doing those things in half the necessary time, because if you'll look back over this thread, you'll find that the *double-time, entertainment* approach has saved you neither time nor helped share ideas.

Isn't it ironic that just as the FOX interview originally linked to in this thread tried to make a issue out of an non-issue with Clark, that you've tried to pin a defense of FOX on me? A defense which simply has NOT been there. A complaint about the mainstream is not a defense of FOX. When did I ever say Fox was justified in their manipulations? When did I deny their manipulations?

Never. In fact, over the past year I've stated repeated that Fox is news commentary more than news on most occasions, but maybe those statements were before your time here. ;)

I AM too intelligent for that. In fact, as I've said and will continue to say, I'm holding the ground on no such idea. This is where we disagree!

Maybe it's your new Republican influence affecting your interpretation? ;) [img]tongue.gif[/img] :D

I'm an Independent. ;)

-EDITED FOR CLARITY

[ 11-29-2003, 08:12 AM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

You were right. I was wrong.

*washes hands of the whole affair*

It was jolly good fun though...good show!

As long as you're not bitter... [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Never bitter, lest bitter sweet.


(I have no idea what that actually means but it sounds real deep doesn't it?)

[ 11-30-2003, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: Pikachu_PM ]

Quite, and tasty, too! [img]smile.gif[/img] :D

Fox is right leaning, but most others are left leaning, its all to varying degrees, there is no unbiased media. I would appreciate it however, if you took note through the War in Iraq it was found that most of Fox's reporting was correct. Also note of course, that on CNN, it was like a Funeral, on Fox, it was like Mardi Gras. And I won't even get into the new york times...

Anyhow, in my opinion, if you want a balanced look at the news watch the right leaning fox news and a left leaning channel of your choice, left rules the television, right rules talk radio.

Now this I can grok. It's kinda like our old college addage:
A slut is a girl who sleeps with everybody.
A bitch is a girl who sleeps with everybody but you. :D

Erm... perhaps the wrong thread? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img]

Look, all media is biased to an extent. As a lawyer this bothers me little. I've very congnizant of the truism that how you state the facts (including not only tone and characterization, but also the order the facts are stated in) is in and of itself part of your argument. ;)