Are you watching the election coverage on Fox News?

[deanrd]

I’ve been switching over to Fox to get their take on the election.

Finally they said Democrats won a few elections in states Trump lost. That was it.

So what did they talk about the rest of the time? Hillary Clinton. Endless coverage of Hillary Clinton.

She is yesterday’s news. Anyone understand this fixation?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

 

[Camp]

FOX whatever it is has become irrelevant. Just background noise for propagandized fools.

 

[Kat]

I’ve been switching over to Fox to get their take on the election.

Finally they said Democrats won a few elections in states Trump lost. That was it.

So what did they talk about the rest of the time? Hillary Clinton. Endless coverage of Hillary Clinton.

She is yesterday’s news. Anyone understand this fixation?

Then you must have watched all of 2 minutes. They said MUCH MUCH more than that. And had several different discussions.
Why are you making things up?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

 

[deanrd]

It’s Republicans that keep Hillary in the news.

 

[deanrd]

I’ve been switching over to Fox to get their take on the election.

Finally they said Democrats won a few elections in states Trump lost. That was it.

So what did they talk about the rest of the time? Hillary Clinton. Endless coverage of Hillary Clinton.

She is yesterday’s news. Anyone understand this fixation?

Then you must have watched all of 2 minutes. They said MUCH MUCH more than that. And had several different discussions.
Why are you making things up?

I said kept going back to the channel and then moving away. I had no interest in watching a Hillary hit job.
She’s not running for anything.

 

[Kat]

I’ve been switching over to Fox to get their take on the election.

Finally they said Democrats won a few elections in states Trump lost. That was it.

So what did they talk about the rest of the time? Hillary Clinton. Endless coverage of Hillary Clinton.

She is yesterday’s news. Anyone understand this fixation?

Then you must have watched all of 2 minutes. They said MUCH MUCH more than that. And had several different discussions.
Why are you making things up?

I said kept going back to the channel and then moving away. I had no interest in watching a Hillary hit job.
She’s not running for anything.

LOL Seriously??

Sometimes it is better to keep your thoughts to yourself.

 

[deanrd]

I’ve been switching over to Fox to get their take on the election.

Finally they said Democrats won a few elections in states Trump lost. That was it.

So what did they talk about the rest of the time? Hillary Clinton. Endless coverage of Hillary Clinton.

She is yesterday’s news. Anyone understand this fixation?

Then you must have watched all of 2 minutes. They said MUCH MUCH more than that. And had several different discussions.
Why are you making things up?

I said kept going back to the channel and then moving away. I had no interest in watching a Hillary hit job.
She’s not running for anything.

LOL Seriously??

Sometimes it is better to keep your thoughts to yourself.

Why? You think she's running for something?

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

And almost non-existent. they are almost all entertainment these days.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

And almost non-existent. they are almost all entertainment these days.

Though not a study that directly speaks to the matter of "news as entertainment," this study -- News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout -- provides some prescient insights that can be applied aptly to the transformation of many news outlets into sources of what might ostensibly be called "intellectual entertainment," which is what I call the incessantly pervasive programming that is video editorials masquerading as something akin to news.

As goes news programming used as much as possible to entertain in the most mind numbing ways possible, well, that was long ago foreseen and is now thus well understood. The question is whether viewers will show their disapprobation for the format by simply refusing to watch such programs, regardless of the extent to which they concur with the opinions aired.

Viewers can do just that and suffer no material diminution in their consumption of information; however, to do so, viewers must invest more of their own time in seeking and consuming original sources of editorial-free information and then proceed to develop their own analysis of the implications of that information. Sadly, however, I think too many people are flat out too intellectually languorous to do so.

 

[deanrd]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

And almost non-existent. they are almost all entertainment these days.

That's what Republicans say to justify watching Fox and reading Breitbart.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

And almost non-existent. they are almost all entertainment these days.

Though not a study that directly speaks to the matter of "news as entertainment," this study -- News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout -- provides some prescient insights that can be applied aptly to the transformation of many news outlets into sources of what might ostensibly be called "intellectual entertainment," which is what I call the incessantly pervasive programming that is video editorials masquerading as something akin to news.

As goes news programming used as much as possible to entertain in the most mind numbing ways possible, well, that was long ago foreseen and is now thus well understood. The question is whether viewers will show their disapprobation for the format by simply refusing to watch such programs, regardless of the extent to which they concur with the opinions aired.

Viewers can do just that and suffer no material diminution in their consumption of information; however, to do so, viewers must invest more of their own time in seeking and consuming original sources of editorial-free information and then proceed to develop their own analysis of the implications of that information. Sadly, however, I think too many people are flat out too intellectually languorous to do so.

I wish that they would but I think the reality has come to bear out the opposite. I do not think it is a matter of people being mentally languorous though. I think it is actually the opposite - people are actively engaged in seeking out similar opinions and sources that support their preconceived notions because people in general like to be vindicated in their beliefs and actions. In the past, doing so was not really an option. 100 years ago if you wanted to have your opinions vindicated you would have to actually seek out others and avoid those that challenged you. Today, technology and the plethora of sources that exist allow one to completely and utterly live in a bubble devoid of challenging views.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yes.

Conservatives are masters of the red herring fallacy.

If rightists aren’t lying they’re trying to deflect.

And Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives, the mouthpiece for the GOP, and a purveyor of lies and misinformation.

Fox isn’t ‘news,’ it’s entertainment for conservatives

I have long thought that the reason Fox's ratings are high is that it is entertainment. News, for the most part, is pretty boring, after all.

And almost non-existent. they are almost all entertainment these days.

Though not a study that directly speaks to the matter of "news as entertainment," this study -- News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout -- provides some prescient insights that can be applied aptly to the transformation of many news outlets into sources of what might ostensibly be called "intellectual entertainment," which is what I call the incessantly pervasive programming that is video editorials masquerading as something akin to news.

As goes news programming used as much as possible to entertain in the most mind numbing ways possible, well, that was long ago foreseen and is now thus well understood. The question is whether viewers will show their disapprobation for the format by simply refusing to watch such programs, regardless of the extent to which they concur with the opinions aired.

Viewers can do just that and suffer no material diminution in their consumption of information; however, to do so, viewers must invest more of their own time in seeking and consuming original sources of editorial-free information and then proceed to develop their own analysis of the implications of that information. Sadly, however, I think too many people are flat out too intellectually languorous to do so.

I wish that they would but I think the reality has come to bear out the opposite. I do not think it is a matter of people being mentally languorous though. I think it is actually the opposite - people are actively engaged in seeking out similar opinions and sources that support their preconceived notions because people in general like to be vindicated in their beliefs and actions. In the past, doing so was not really an option. 100 years ago if you wanted to have your opinions vindicated you would have to actually seek out others and avoid those that challenged you. Today, technology and the plethora of sources that exist allow one to completely and utterly live in a bubble devoid of challenging views.

I do not think it is a matter of people being mentally languorous though. I think it is actually the opposite - people are actively engaged in seeking out similar opinions and sources that support their preconceived notions because people in general like to be vindicated in their beliefs and actions.

??? Just how much mental strain do you think it takes acquiesce to confirmation-bias-compliant opinions, that is, to receive opinions that mirror one's own? I'll accord that it takes some physical activity to find folks who utter such views, but, as you noted, technology makes it very easy these days to find parrots of one's views and eschew challengers to them. Indeed, there is a pervasive apparatus in place to make doing so almost as physically effortless as it is to consume the vindicating views one seeks or encounters. The ease with which one can find such remarks and their sources is Biblical.

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
-- Matthew 7:7
​

Would that people invest equal effort in reading rigorously produced and critically reviewed research on topics that interest them. How many people do you know who subscribe to journals that have only to do with an area of interest that isn't directly related to their vocation as contrasted with, say, subscribing to HBO or "cable" television in general?