and the left commentators like Geraldo and Donahue don't?? truthfully this is very childish...."who is calling who names"?? who cares? they all do it....Caraville labels republicans fascists if you disagree with him...so what? the big point is this: the left had a free ride for nearly 30 years and it bugs them that there is 1) not only a challenger but 2) a leader because I heard that Fox is winning the ratings war each night... when all there was available was liberal points of view nobody worried, now there is a different voice and you would think it was Anarchy outside LOL
OK, all of these are political commentators. Here are others that use name calling Al Franken Michael Moore Al Sharpton Jesse Jackson So what's the point, they are on both sides of the isle. The argument here is to differentiate news reporting from commentary. These are completely different worlds.
Do two wrongs make a right? Is it right for someone with a conservative point of view to attack a liberal point of view in a childish manner, just because the liberal started the childish behavior? In an argumentation process, a solid point, well argued and supported by facts need not fall into the gutter of a Carville or a Hannity in their constant personal attacking method. Or you saying that after 30 years, they are justified in climbing into the same gutter to spew the same venom? Is it a party of rationalization, or a party of doing what is right, proper, civil and adult in nature? Have you watched these political shows where all people do is scream at each other? What is the sense of all of that? Might as well watch Jerry Springer for that stuff. When was the last time that one political side was screaming at the other side, and the other party just sat quietly, impassively, and when the screamer was done, just quietly asked: "Are you done now?" Way too much drama, which keeps people in their emotions and out of the part of their personality that can reason calmly and effectively. Maintaining the drama is actually a method of control and mind conditioning.
I understand your point, but the original topic of this thread was about slandering the Fox news network. So are we all in agreement then that Fox is not a right wing network and that Fox also reports factual news events just like the other news networks? And are we also in agreement that Fox has many liberals on their shows as both hosts and guests? And that if someone watches the Fox news network, they are not being so called brainwashed? If we are then good, otherwise I am still waiting to see the evidence that backs up the slander on this board towards Fox news.
If you really feel that way, then why don't I see any of your posts arguing against the liberal news stations that only present the liberal point of view and that parcicipate in this type of behavior? That's not very fair and balanced is it?
Since you brought it up...i'd like to show the double standards: hoodooman Senior Member Registered: junk 2003 Posts: 118 10-23-03 12:06 PM I am deeply concerned about how Fox manipulates the news and I truly believe that they along with the right wing radicals on talk radio have upset the balance of politics in this country. Fine, your point of view I live in the south which is now dominated by the republicans. The majority of these people received no meaningful tax break. They live "hand to mouth" but because they hate homosexuals and minorities, oppose abortion, want christian prayers in the public schools etc. , they will never again vote for the democratic party unless they are forced to by terrible economic conditions. WHOOOAA!!! you just accused the majority of Southern people of being RACIST!!!!! You just did what you accused the other side of doing!! You also basically said the majority of the south is poor and intolerant...pretty broad stoke there I think they know that poor people have nothing to gain financially from joining the republican party and yet they do it anyway because of hate rather than common sense. ditto! hate speech in which you accuse people of being poor, stupid and racist , whats even funnier is that you are sayiong they are preying on the poor yet the liberal presss always paints them as catering to the rich Fox regularly interviews professional right wing radicals to stir this pot of hatred, unopposed by another point of view, while crooked politicians who Fox and talk radio has helped to elect are now in control of our federal government. sounds pretty hateful to me ..especially considering that from 8-11 fox runs Orielly ( conservative) Hannity and Colmes ( one Conservative One Liberal and then Greta ( liberal).... looks like a pretty even slate ...also, regular guests include SHarpton, Gingrich, Rangel ???? what shows are you watching or are you just going by things you have read? Fortunately, we still have a significant number of independent voters in this country like myself and I hope that I am right when I say that this group could send bush packing in the next election. fine, just an opinion Unfortunately, the southern states are lost to the hate mongers for the rest of my life time unless the left wing counters this hate mongering with their own news networks. WHOOAAAA NELLY!!! after all you just said, you called the other side HATE MONGERS????? regards didn't mean to single you out but you brought up the hate mongering thing....it goes both ways
How about this fact: when there was no conservative press, back in the early 80's there was a pro-life demonstration in Washington DC. Some estimates were that the crowd numbered a million and a policeman that had seen every demonstration in DC for a long time said it was by far the largest. Guess what? IT DID NOT MAKE THE NEWS!! It did not fit the liberal agenda and it did not make the news, at all. Who needs these "researchers" to tell us we aren't getting the facts right?? With the old boy liberals in charge you don't get the facts at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please provide fact that the so called stations you are referring to are liberal. If I saw an article that provided facts like the article I initially posted, I would present that too. Can you provide articles of a factual nature that provide evidence of studies like this one did? I have heard of a few, but have not read or seen them. There is a theory, currently being proposed by the extreme right wing, that the media is advancing a liberal agenda. I have come across this theory many times in other threads, but am lacking evidence to support that theory. The theory may or may not be true. Frankly, I don't have sufficient data to form an opinion, but I to take issue with those who say it is true, but do not provide proof of their beliefs. I personally favor a media that is investigative in nature, and takes to task the job of uncovering corruption within the power structures of this country. It is the nature of power left unchecked to corrupt, and it is necessary to keep the public informed of the real intentions, and practices of the government, corporate America, etc. I do have a serious problem with a right or left wing trying to control the media, to in effect censor them, or control content just to fit their political agendas, and this is possibly what the right wing is doing at present. I saw many attempts to label those who did not agree with the administration during the war as traitors, etc. I find this disgusting, and very unAmerican. Equally, to try and denounce or control the press from reporting fact, is without question a threat to our freedom in this country. A free press is the cornerstone of our liberty. A press who can live without fear of being controlled by public opinion, or the opinions of a few extreme thinkers. In that regard, I believe the light of suspicion that was directed at the Clinton administration, should shine as brightly on the current administration. I have seen no evidence that convinces me beyond a reasonable doubt that the media is trying to push a liberal agenda. I conclude that their bottom line motive in this era of corporate ownership are trying to get ratings, in order to get advertising money, so that the corporations can profit maximally. Anyone who is attempting to control the press and the media, is attempting to control what news and information the public receives. I believe this is wrong, whether it is done by liberals or conservatives. I favor a free press, free to print whatever are the facts that help the readers draw their own conclusions.
Think the media are biased? CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN crying foul for years, but now a veteran CBS reporter has come forward to expose how liberal bias pervades the mainstream media. Even if you've suspected your nightly news is slanted to the left, it's far worse than you think. Breaking ranks and naming names, Emmy Award-winning broadcast journalist Bernard Goldberg reveals a corporate news culture in which the close-mindedness is breathtaking, journalistic integrity has been pawned to liberal opinion, and "entertainment" trumps hard news every time. In his three decades at CBS, Goldberg repeatedly voiced his concerns to network executives about the often one-sided nature of the news coverage. But no one listened to his complaints-or if they did listen, they did nothing about the problem. Finally, Goldberg had no choice but to blow the whistle on his own industry, to break the code of silence that pervades the news business. Bias is the result. As the author reveals, "liberal bias" doesn't mean simply being hard on Republicans and easy on Democrats. Real media bias is the result of how those in the media see the world-and their bias directly affects how we all see the world. In Bias you'll learn: -How on issues ranging from homelessness to AIDS, reporters have simply regurgitated the propaganda of pressure groups they favor, to the detriment of honest reporting -The Peter Jennings test for classifying politicians-and how all the networks do it -The network color bar-why so many "victims" on network news stories are blond-haired, blue-eyed, and middle class -How one high-level CBS News executive told Goldberg that of course the networks tilt left-but in the next breath said he'd deny that statement if Goldberg ever went public -One of the biggest stories of our time-and why you probably didn't hear about it on the evening news -How political correctness in network newsrooms puts "sensitivity" ahead of facts -The real Dan Rather-a man who regards criticism of liberal bias as treason. If you ever suspected the network news was shortchanging the truth, Goldberg will not only prove you right, he'll give you a glimpse of just how it's done, and how fairness, balance, and integrity have disappeared from network television.
So we have one man who has an opinion to share. Is there some reason to believe or disbelieve his claims? Fact of a liberal bias, not opinion please.