Fox News > Fair & Balanced

[Noomi]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

Fox News and the words 'fair' and 'balanced' should never be used in the same sentence.

 

[Pogo]

Wow, what ? I don't see anything so wow like.

It somewhat is amazing how two people can look at the same facts and see totally different things. FOX dropped Colmes, but he was at least 40% of the prior show with Sean.

The really important thing is censored news, not bias. And FOX does censor some stories, yet touchs other censored stories like Benghazi.

Censored news is the norm. Egypt today, and last 4,000 years can a reporter say the leader is corrupt or stupid and get away with it? No, same in China, same in Russia. Uncensored news is rare.

In USA you can say Obama is stupid and corrupt, and some reporters do. But FOX and all the others will not touch the evidence in lets say the case that Obama's Draft Card was declared a poor amateur forgery by a 2,200 hour police investigation. Have you heard it anywhere on TV?

No, yet either Arpaio and 10 or so police investigators committed a felony conspiracy trying to frame Obama with false evidence, or Obama committed a felony by forging his card. That is big news, no need to decide which, either way big news.

And it is 100% censored on TV news for a year plus.

Anyone here no doubt we have a censored news media?

Fox did not drop Colmes. He appears on various Fox shows, and appears regularly on the O'Reilly Factor with Monica Crowley.

Censorship in TV isn't the topic here. BALANCE is the topic. But I'll just say that Obama bashing is constant on Fox, just as Obama ass-kissing is the rule on MSNBC. OK. What else is new ?

I still think I've made my point though that Fox is far more fair, with much more balance than MSNBC, HLN, or CNN. CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou. MSNBC has about as much balance as an avalanche.

That's an interesting metaphor, since the action of an avalanche is all about balance and achieving equilibrium. So is wind. So is lightning.

CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou.

-- so your argument is a network can't be balanced if it discontinues your favorite news "personality".

'Nuff said.

 

[protectionist]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

Fox News and the words 'fair' and 'balanced' should never be used in the same sentence.

I guess the word "please" has no effect on you. Or the word "evidence". Try reading the thread, to see what you've already been refuted by (numerous times)

 

[protectionist]

It somewhat is amazing how two people can look at the same facts and see totally different things. FOX dropped Colmes, but he was at least 40% of the prior show with Sean.

The really important thing is censored news, not bias. And FOX does censor some stories, yet touchs other censored stories like Benghazi.

Censored news is the norm. Egypt today, and last 4,000 years can a reporter say the leader is corrupt or stupid and get away with it? No, same in China, same in Russia. Uncensored news is rare.

In USA you can say Obama is stupid and corrupt, and some reporters do. But FOX and all the others will not touch the evidence in lets say the case that Obama's Draft Card was declared a poor amateur forgery by a 2,200 hour police investigation. Have you heard it anywhere on TV?

No, yet either Arpaio and 10 or so police investigators committed a felony conspiracy trying to frame Obama with false evidence, or Obama committed a felony by forging his card. That is big news, no need to decide which, either way big news.

And it is 100% censored on TV news for a year plus.

Anyone here no doubt we have a censored news media?

Fox did not drop Colmes. He appears on various Fox shows, and appears regularly on the O'Reilly Factor with Monica Crowley.

Censorship in TV isn't the topic here. BALANCE is the topic. But I'll just say that Obama bashing is constant on Fox, just as Obama ass-kissing is the rule on MSNBC. OK. What else is new ?

I still think I've made my point though that Fox is far more fair, with much more balance than MSNBC, HLN, or CNN. CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou. MSNBC has about as much balance as an avalanche.

That's an interesting metaphor, since the action of an avalanche is all about balance and achieving equilibrium. So is wind. So is lightning.

CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou.

-- so your argument is a network can't be balanced if it discontinues your favorite news "personality".

'Nuff said.

Doesn't help your credibility to shift words around to how you want them to read. All it does it display your craftiness at being subjective. Fancy subjective or plain subjective. Either way, it's nothing more than subjective fraud. Everything I said stands pat. 100%.

And if you read the thread, you wouldn't have to ask stupid questions, and you'd KNOW what my argument is, and what makes or doesn't make a network be balanced (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just pretending to be ignorant)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why does the OP pretend that evidence of. FOX not being fair and balanced hasnt been presented hundreds of times? What makes the OP think intelligent people will post it again just so it can be ignored again?

What the OP wants us to believe is that those of us who have watched. FOX enough to know that they are full of shit.........are all too stupid to grasp reality. Our insistence that FOX is biased in every respect.....from the disingenous questions scrolling on the screen to Steve Douchy's smirk and rolling eyes.....is just foolish.

The best part about these threads is that the people who start them actually believe that the people they call liberals are being genuine while on the air at FOX. They believe that there is no script over there. They don't know that the "debates" that they have are designed to leave the idiot viewer pumping his fist in conservative victory......or laughing uncontrollably at how the lib got "owned" or "slammed" by the host.

Dupe.

 

[protectionist]

Why does the OP pretend that evidence of. FOX not being fair and balanced hasnt been presented hundreds of times? What makes the OP think intelligent people will post it again just so it can be ignored again?

What the OP wants us to believe is that those of us who have watched. FOX enough to know that they are full of shit.........are all too stupid to grasp reality. Our insistence that FOX is biased in every respect.....from the disingenous questions scrolling on the screen to Steve Douchy's smirk and rolling eyes.....is just foolish.

The best part about these threads is that the people who start them actually believe that the people they call liberals are being genuine while on the air at FOX. They believe that there is no script over there. They don't know that the "debates" that they have are designed to leave the idiot viewer pumping his fist in conservative victory......or laughing uncontrollably at how the lib got "owned" or "slammed" by the host. Dupe.

One single viewing of the O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, or Kelly File will quickly dispatch this ludicrous post to the trash bin labeled "IDIOCY". Fox liberals say anything that want to say, and some if it is pretty outlandish. HA HA. Who can ever forget Tamara Holder (on the Hannity Show) telling Brigitte Gabriel (a true American hero) that she is "dangerous" ? Pheeeeww!! (high-pitched whistle ) Or Alan Colmes and Bob Beckel saying that "undocumented workers" are a boost for the US economy ? (despite the $123 Billion they remove from it yearly, by their remittances)
And giving liberals THEIR OWN SHOWS (Geraldo Rivera and Shepard Smith) is designed to promote conservatism ? Pheeeeeww! HA HA.

BTW, these liberals calling illegal aliens "undocumented workers", is about equivalent to calling a bank robber an "informal withdrawl agent".

 

[LoneLaugher]

Rivera and Smith are not liberals.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

In their own words:

Outfoxed - Brave New Films

Yep, it's 10 years old but still relevant today.

To be fair and honest, see all:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Outfoxed

 

[protectionist]

Rivera and Smith are not liberals.

Of course they are. Smith is queer, and Geraldo is a stauch immigrationist, among other liberal things.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Rivera and Smith are not liberals.

Of course they are. Smith is queer, and Geraldo is a stauch immigrationist, among other liberal things.

Well........when you put it that way......how can I argue?

 

[protectionist]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

In their own words:

Outfoxed - Brave New Films

Yep, it's 10 years old but still relevant today.

To be fair and honest, see all:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Outfoxed

You're making these easy for me. The link says >> "The film says this pervasive bias contradicts the channel's claim of being "Fair and Balanced".

Problem is NO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT that. ALL these cable "news" shows have bias (as I've already said 10 times in this thread). That isn't the point. The point is that Fox, loaded with liberals, has the BALANCE that the others don't have, and this makes it much more fair then them. Simple as that.

And apparently, the viewing public appreciates this balance that Fox presents >> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/07/01/fox-news-hits-milestone-50th-quarter-at-1/278783/

 

[protectionist]

Rivera and Smith are not liberals.

Of course they are. Smith is queer, and Geraldo is a stauch immigrationist, among other liberal things.

Well........when you put it that way......how can I argue?

You can argue by posting in this thread. You'd just be wrong. That's all.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

In their own words:

Outfoxed - Brave New Films

Yep, it's 10 years old but still relevant today.

To be fair and honest, see all:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Outfoxed

You're making these easy for me. The link says >> "The film says this pervasive bias contradicts the channel's claim of being "Fair and Balanced".

Problem is NO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT that. ALL these cable "news" shows have bias (as I've already said 10 times in this thread). That isn't the point. The point is that Fox, loaded with liberals, has the BALANCE that the others don't have, and this makes it much more fair then them. Simple as that.

And apparently, the viewing public appreciates this balance that Fox presents >> FOX News Hits Milestone 50th Quarter at #1 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers.Zap2it.com

Hmmm....^^^ which leads me to wonder, are you dishonest or ignorant, and if the latter, willfully so or otherwise?

 

[Pogo]

Fox did not drop Colmes. He appears on various Fox shows, and appears regularly on the O'Reilly Factor with Monica Crowley.

Censorship in TV isn't the topic here. BALANCE is the topic. But I'll just say that Obama bashing is constant on Fox, just as Obama ass-kissing is the rule on MSNBC. OK. What else is new ?

I still think I've made my point though that Fox is far more fair, with much more balance than MSNBC, HLN, or CNN. CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou. MSNBC has about as much balance as an avalanche.

That's an interesting metaphor, since the action of an avalanche is all about balance and achieving equilibrium. So is wind. So is lightning.

CNN lost its balance credential when they dropped Lou Dobbs. No better way to balance a liberal-leaning network than with Lay Down the Law Lou.

-- so your argument is a network can't be balanced if it discontinues your favorite news "personality".

'Nuff said.

Doesn't help your credibility to shift words around to how you want them to read. All it does it display your craftiness at being subjective. Fancy subjective or plain subjective. Either way, it's nothing more than subjective fraud. Everything I said stands pat. 100%.

And if you read the thread, you wouldn't have to ask stupid questions, and you'd KNOW what my argument is, and what makes or doesn't make a network be balanced (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just pretending to be ignorant)

I "shifted" nothing; I quoted you verbatim. And I didn't ask you a question. Dream on.

 

[protectionist]

In their own words:

Outfoxed - Brave New Films

Yep, it's 10 years old but still relevant today.

To be fair and honest, see all:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Outfoxed

You're making these easy for me. The link says >> "The film says this pervasive bias contradicts the channel's claim of being "Fair and Balanced".

Problem is NO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT that. ALL these cable "news" shows have bias (as I've already said 10 times in this thread). That isn't the point. The point is that Fox, loaded with liberals, has the BALANCE that the others don't have, and this makes it much more fair then them. Simple as that.

And apparently, the viewing public appreciates this balance that Fox presents >> FOX News Hits Milestone 50th Quarter at #1 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers.Zap2it.com

Hmmm....^^^ which leads me to wonder, are you dishonest or ignorant, and if the latter, willfully so or otherwise?

Even orangatangs can "wonder". As for whether you are dishonest or ignorant, ....who cares ?

Fox has many liberals. Many more than other stations. Fox has a lot of balance (relatively so) Read the thread (which refuted you 10 times before you ever posted here)

Bob Beckel, James Carville, Alan Colmes, Susan Estrich, Tamara Holder, Dennis Kucinich, Leslie Marshall, Kirsten Powers, Geraldo Rivera, Julie Roginsky, Joe Trippi, Lis Wiehl, Juan Williams, Lanny Davis, Doug Schoen, Geraldine Ferraro, Sally Kohn, Shepard Smith.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You're making these easy for me. The link says >> "The film says this pervasive bias contradicts the channel's claim of being "Fair and Balanced".

Problem is NO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT that. ALL these cable "news" shows have bias (as I've already said 10 times in this thread). That isn't the point. The point is that Fox, loaded with liberals, has the BALANCE that the others don't have, and this makes it much more fair then them. Simple as that.

And apparently, the viewing public appreciates this balance that Fox presents >> FOX News Hits Milestone 50th Quarter at #1 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers.Zap2it.com

Hmmm....^^^ which leads me to wonder, are you dishonest or ignorant, and if the latter, willfully so or otherwise?

Even orangatangs can "wonder". As for whether you are dishonest or ignorant, ....who cares ?

Fox has many liberals. Many mire than other stations. Fox has a lot of balance (relatively so) Read the thread (which refuted you 10 times before you ever posted here)

Bob Beckel, James Carville, Alan Colmes, Susan Estrich, Tamara Holder, Dennis Kucinich, Leslie Marshall, Kirsten Powers, Geraldo Rivera, Julie Roginsky, Joe Trippi, Lis Wiehl, Juan Williams, Lanny Davis, Doug Schoen, Geraldine Ferraro, Sally Kohn, Shepard Smith.

Has anyone ever accused you of being a simpleton? You are naming people who you claim are liberal and are paid to appear on the network. That is not in any way proof that the network is either fair or balanced. You present a list of names as proof. A simpleton.

I'll tell you what. Let's watch dome FOX News together sometime. In real time, we will view it critically looking for instances of unfairness and or bullshit.

You up for that?

 

[protectionist]

That's an interesting metaphor, since the action of an avalanche is all about balance and achieving equilibrium. So is wind. So is lightning.-- so your argument is a network can't be balanced if it discontinues your favorite news "personality".'Nuff said.

Doesn't help your credibility to shift words around to how you want them to read. All it does it display your craftiness at being subjective. Fancy subjective or plain subjective. Either way, it's nothing more than subjective fraud. Everything I said stands pat. 100%.

And if you read the thread, you wouldn't have to ask stupid questions, and you'd KNOW what my argument is, and what makes or doesn't make a network be balanced (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just pretending to be ignorant)

I "shifted" nothing; I quoted you verbatim. And I didn't ask you a question. Dream on.

You shifted words around to how you want them to be read and understood. That's called subjective fraud. Verdict: GUILTY. Now go sit in the corner.

As for the question you asked, it had to be a question, because it was false, indicating you didn't know what you were talking about, and you therefore must have been trying to extract information from me, being more knowledable than you. Got it ?

PS - next time, use a question mark.

 

[Pogo]

That's it! Fox News is Fair and Balanced. And this could be questioned. But by whom ? And how ? In what way ? ???????????

Please present evidence of whatever you present.

In their own words:

Outfoxed - Brave New Films

Yep, it's 10 years old but still relevant today.

To be fair and honest, see all:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Outfoxed

You're making these easy for me. The link says >> "The film says this pervasive bias contradicts the channel's claim of being "Fair and Balanced".

Problem is NO IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT that. ALL these cable "news" shows have bias (as I've already said 10 times in this thread). That isn't the point. The point is that Fox, loaded with liberals, has the BALANCE that the others don't have, and this makes it much more fair then them. Simple as that.

And apparently, the viewing public appreciates this balance that Fox presents >> FOX News Hits Milestone 50th Quarter at #1 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers.Zap2it.com

Audience ratings have nothing to do with "appreciation" or any other measure of approval or disapproval. They measure attention. That's the reason for the maxim "if it bleeds it leads" -- nobody "approves" of that apartment fire in some obscure part of town, but they'll damn sure watch it just in case they can catch a glimpse of some bodies.

That's what Fox Noise does -- mongers fear and paranoia at every turn. Because that keeps viewers tuning in. It's a gossip channel that gossips about politicians instead of movie celebrities. And it's always about politicians (the personal) rather than policy (the abstract).

Gossip sells. It always has. That's why Rupert Murdoch had the money to start up Fox Noise in the first place-- a planetful of tabloid newspapers.

And that's what ratings are made of: sensationalism. Fake wrestling; people stranded on an island forced to eat bugs; paternity tests; hidden cameras catching adulterers or child molestors; angry white guys pounding on tables about politicians. It sells. As a famous media observer observed, "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public".

Audience ratings have one meaning and one purpose: to establish how much a broadcast outlet can charge for its advertising time. That's it. That's why they have all those demographics attached (18 to 49; female; likely to go to sporting events, high school educated, etc) -- it tells the advertiser who they can SELL to and how much it's worth to advertise there. It's never about content; it's entirely about money. And if you can draw an audience using a camera trained on a monkey lying in his own shit, you're a "winner". In the ratings war that is.

 

[Pogo]

Doesn't help your credibility to shift words around to how you want them to read. All it does it display your craftiness at being subjective. Fancy subjective or plain subjective. Either way, it's nothing more than subjective fraud. Everything I said stands pat. 100%.

And if you read the thread, you wouldn't have to ask stupid questions, and you'd KNOW what my argument is, and what makes or doesn't make a network be balanced (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just pretending to be ignorant)

I "shifted" nothing; I quoted you verbatim. And I didn't ask you a question. Dream on.

You shifted words around to how you want them to be read and understood. That's called subjective fraud. Verdict: GUILTY. Now go sit in the corner.

As for the question you asked, it had to be a question, because it was false, indicating you didn't know what you were talking about, and you therefore must have been trying to extract information from me, being more knowledable than you. Got it ?

PS - next time, use a question mark.

I shifted NOTHING, liar. You catch me editing your quote, you report me. Hell, I'll report myself. Take your false accusations and cram them up your ass.

And if I asked a question, there would have been a question mark. GOT IT?

 

[protectionist]

Hmmm....^^^ which leads me to wonder, are you dishonest or ignorant, and if the latter, willfully so or otherwise?

Even orangatangs can "wonder". As for whether you are dishonest or ignorant, ....who cares ?

Fox has many liberals. Many mire than other stations. Fox has a lot of balance (relatively so) Read the thread (which refuted you 10 times before you ever posted here)

Bob Beckel, James Carville, Alan Colmes, Susan Estrich, Tamara Holder, Dennis Kucinich, Leslie Marshall, Kirsten Powers, Geraldo Rivera, Julie Roginsky, Joe Trippi, Lis Wiehl, Juan Williams, Lanny Davis, Doug Schoen, Geraldine Ferraro, Sally Kohn, Shepard Smith.

Has anyone ever accused you of being a simpleton? You are naming people who you claim are liberal and are paid to appear on the network. That is not in any way proof that the network is either fair or balanced. You present a list of names as proof. A simpleton.

I'll tell you what. Let's watch dome FOX News together sometime. In real time, we will view it critically looking for instances of unfairness and or bullshit.

You up for that?

Sure. why would I have anything to shirk away from ? And you seem to have gone off on a strange tangent in your post. You said >> "You are naming people who you claim are liberal and are paid to appear on the network. That is not in any way proof that the network is either fair or balanced."

Well, of course they are paid. They have jobs there, and they get paid. They're not philantropists. The point is that they are LIBERAL, and they speak the liberal talking points (until blue in the face) Get it ?

An NO. NO ONE has ever accused me of being a simpleton. And you ?