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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikachu_PM:
"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.
|
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted By Pikachu_PM:
..but (you) 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.
|
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]
I'm an Independent.
-EDITED FOR CLARITY
[ 11-29-2003, 08:12 AM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]