Is Fox News a Shill ?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
SHow somw proof that Fox has no regard for truth or facts.

Were you this indignant over Dan Rather’s use of a fabricated document that was planted by the left and gleefully gobbled up by Rather for use on 60 minutes?
[/quote]

Show some proof that the document you refer to, was fabricated.

And then show some proof that it was planted by the Left, like you claim.

I assume you understand the concept of proof, as opposed to speculation or opinion. Do you?

I’ll accept a mainstream media source as a reference.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
SHow somw proof that Fox has no regard for truth or facts.

Were you this indignant over Dan Rather’s use of a fabricated document that was planted by the left and gleefully gobbled up by Rather for use on 60 minutes?

Show some proof that the document you refer to, was fabricated.

And then show some proof that it was planted by the Left, like you claim.

I assume you understand the concept of proof, as opposed to speculation or opinion. Do you?

I’ll accept a mainstream media source as a reference.
[/quote]

This is silliness. Even the CBS fact checkers were suspicious that it could be phony. Dan Rather lost his job over this. Try to pay attention.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

His post gains more sense when you take into account the several cheerleaders in the political forum who claim that Fox isn’t biased and that no one can ever find any proof of their bias. [/quote]

Nobody has said that no one has shown it - they have said you haven’t.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:

Show some proof that the document you refer to, was fabricated.

And then show some proof that it was planted by the Left, like you claim.

I assume you understand the concept of proof, as opposed to speculation or opinion. Do you?

I’ll accept a mainstream media source as a reference.
[/quote]

Enjoy the whole report:

And, if the documents in question were all legitimate, why did heads roll at CBS?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
This is silliness. Even the CBS fact checkers were suspicious that it could be phony. Dan Rather lost his job over this. Try to pay attention.[/quote]

Pardon me?

You’re overreaching. I know Rather lost his job.

The document was never proven to be fake. And it wasn’t planted by “the Left”.

But if you think you have some proof, then lets see it. Otherwise, STFU.

You do know the difference between proof and speculation, don’t you? I’m not sure that you do.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Enjoy the whole report:[/quote]

Sorry, you pick out the part where it proves that the document was proven to be false. I’m not going on wild goose chase. Find me the citation. Also, what makes this report legitimate and non-partisan?

I don’t know, why did Foley resign ASAP, if he didn’t screw any pages?

Maybe because of negative publicity? Just a hunch.

The claim is that the Left “planted” fake documents. Unless you can show some proof, consider yourselves in Tin Foil Hat territory.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:

Sorry, you pick out the part where it proves that the document was proven to be false. I’m not going on wild goose chase. Find me the citation. Also, what makes this report legitimate and non-partisan?[/quote]

Non-partisan? How about that the firm that issued this report was hired to investigate and report by CBS?

And you don’t need to go on a wild goose chase - just get more informed than you are. Read the report that was conducted on request by CBS itself.

[quote]PGJ wrote:
Mad Titan wrote:
fox news is biased just like cnn to just harp on fox new and not on cnn is foolish

Yep.

However, I do feel Fox is closer to reality.
[/quote]

It’s a case of “two wrongs don’t make a right”. I think the media in general has to be held to a much higher standard than we’ve been allowing. Mind you, that’s been a complaint since news media started. When it boils down to it, our news media is probably more honest today than it ever has been due to the sheer profligation of information.

That said, I’m damned happy with the treatment I’ve seen of news issues from the CBC – particularly from Mansbridge and in the looser, more informal news program “the Hour”.

BTW, man, is that Draper in your avatar?

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Non-partisan? How about that the firm that issued this report was hired to investigate and report by CBS?[/quote]

Well you could say that, instead of making me jump through hoops.

I’m already informed about this topic, and from what I’ve already read, there is no conclusive proof that the document was actually fake, and I’ll bet you any amount of money there is no proof that the document was “planted by The Left”.

To claim this is a conspiracy theory of the Tin Foil Hat variety.


aahhh…Fox News…a beacon of truth…

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
This is silliness. Even the CBS fact checkers were suspicious that it could be phony. Dan Rather lost his job over this. Try to pay attention.

Pardon me?

You’re overreaching. I know Rather lost his job.

The document was never proven to be fake. And it wasn’t planted by “the Left”.

But if you think you have some proof, then lets see it. Otherwise, STFU.

You do know the difference between proof and speculation, don’t you? I’m not sure that you do.[/quote]

It wasn’t “proven” to be faked because there is no measure of proof that you would find acceptable.

If “the left” did not generate the fake document who did? Karl Rove?

You are blind to reality. Not worth discussing this topic with you.

Faux new caters to those that want their beliefs reaffirmed.

Unfortunately their ratings have not increased in a very long time but have been sliding.

You can leave your cable box turned to any channel you want while leaving your TV off to boost your favorite channel’s ratings.

Funny how that works.

Ailes thinks he is going to be able to negotiate sweet deals with all the cable operators when the current deals expire.

He is in for a rude awakening. It does not take much to figure out how to leave a cable box on when no one is watching TV and the cable operators track that.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
SHow somw proof that Fox has no regard for truth or facts.

Were you this indignant over Dan Rather’s use of a fabricated document that was planted by the left and gleefully gobbled up by Rather for use on 60 minutes?

Show some proof that the document you refer to, was fabricated.

And then show some proof that it was planted by the Left, like you claim.

I assume you understand the concept of proof, as opposed to speculation or opinion. Do you?

I’ll accept a mainstream media source as a reference.
[/quote]

I asked you for proof of your statement first, dicklick. But nice bait and switch.

You are not worth the gas that escapes my sphincter after a round of black beans - much less the very small effort it requires to prove that Rather reported a lie - and that it was placed by a left-wing lacky.

At least not until you can show some proof of your baseless accusation. I will accept sources from all credible news sources.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Faux new caters to those that want their beliefs reaffirmed.

Unfortunately their ratings have not increased in a very long time but have been sliding.

You can leave your cable box turned to any channel you want while leaving your TV off to boost your favorite channel’s ratings.

Funny how that works.

Ailes thinks he is going to be able to negotiate sweet deals with all the cable operators when the current deals expire.

He is in for a rude awakening. It does not take much to figure out how to leave a cable box on when no one is watching TV and the cable operators track that.[/quote]

SO let me get this straight…

Fox is number one because everyone that likes Fox keeps their cable boxes set to Fox News and then quits watching TV?

Dude.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:

Well you could say that, instead of making me jump through hoops. [/quote]

Jump through hoops? You wanted a source, I provided one.

I can lead to the water, but I can’t make you think.

[quote]I’m already informed about this topic, and from what I’ve already read, there is no conclusive proof that the document was actually fake, and I’ll bet you any amount of money there is no proof that the document was “planted by The Left”.

To claim this is a conspiracy theory of the Tin Foil Hat variety.[/quote]

No one is suggesting a grand ‘conspiracy theory’ - all that anyone is saying is that it is fake and that it was manufactured with an agenda to give a story footing. In short: an intentional fake.

And you want ‘proof’ - but after showing that the documents weren’t genuine, that was enough to discredit the authenticity. You want a history of the documents, conduct the investigation yourself.

All that was required was to show the documents were a sham - which they were - it wasn’t necessary to find out exactly where they came from (we’ll never know because there is no reason for the ‘journalists’ to give up their source).

So hiding behind this desire for ‘proof’ is silly - all you need to know is that they were bunk and that they were proven to be so on CBS’ nickel.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
emdawgz1 wrote:
Fox news is what rupert murdoch intended it to be. A media outlet for the republican party. It espouses a conservative agenda with no regard for truth or facts.

Actually Fox nes is a mis-spelling.

its FAUX News.

SHow somw proof that Fox has no regard for truth or facts.

Were you this indignant over Dan Rather’s use of a fabricated document that was planted by the left and gleefully gobbled up by Rather for use on 60 minutes?

Somehow I doubt that you can be intellectually honest enough to admit that ALL news outlets shade their reporting with bias of from one side or another.

They stopped teaching onjectivity in journalism school right after Watergate. [/quote]

It’s been proven that FOX viewers are the most likely to believe untrue things. In other words mis-informed.

Witness:
yourself.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Faux new caters to those that want their beliefs reaffirmed.

Unfortunately their ratings have not increased in a very long time but have been sliding.

You can leave your cable box turned to any channel you want while leaving your TV off to boost your favorite channel’s ratings.

Funny how that works.

Ailes thinks he is going to be able to negotiate sweet deals with all the cable operators when the current deals expire.

He is in for a rude awakening. It does not take much to figure out how to leave a cable box on when no one is watching TV and the cable operators track that.

SO let me get this straight…

Fox is number one because everyone that likes Fox keeps their cable boxes set to Fox News and then quits watching TV?

Dude. [/quote]

The ratings of FOX news do not speak to its values anymore than ratings for Desperated Housewives do. Why do you guys keep citing ratings?

In fact isn’t kind of a negative that so many people are being serially misled by FOX news?

[quote]100meters wrote:
rainjack wrote:
emdawgz1 wrote:
Fox news is what rupert murdoch intended it to be. A media outlet for the republican party. It espouses a conservative agenda with no regard for truth or facts.

Actually Fox nes is a mis-spelling.

its FAUX News.

SHow somw proof that Fox has no regard for truth or facts.

Were you this indignant over Dan Rather’s use of a fabricated document that was planted by the left and gleefully gobbled up by Rather for use on 60 minutes?

Somehow I doubt that you can be intellectually honest enough to admit that ALL news outlets shade their reporting with bias of from one side or another.

They stopped teaching onjectivity in journalism school right after Watergate.

It’s been proven that FOX viewers are the most likely to believe untrue things. In other words mis-informed.

Witness:
yourself.[/quote]

Kinda hard to include me in the Fox News camp when I don’t watch cable news - except for election nights.

But - being “likely to believe untrue things” and Fox News reporting lies (see Dan Rather) is not the same thing. I know you want it to be true.

I guess if you want to extend it to opinion based entertainment ala Olbermann/Hannity/O’Reiley then you might have a point. But - I would suggest that that is more a commentary on the shittiness of the other networks programming/hosts and the reason Fox is Number 1.

I think that until you can prove that Fox reptorts lies - then it is nothing more than a pissing contest. Other than the faking of a story for readership - the WaPo does not report lies - tey are just biased in their reporting of the “facts”. Same goes with Fox.

I looked at the study you cited - and it is a funny study.

[quote]Northcott wrote:
I remember an interview with Coulter, conducted by CBC’s Evan Solomon about a year back. Solomon’s an utter softie. He couldn’t get to the hard heart of a story if you gave him a roadmap, so of course he went really, really easy on Coulter and let her get away with all kinds of blatant inaccuracies. He only called her on it a couple times, and it was all soft-shoe when he did it. She was basically given leeway to run the interview as she wanted.

And yet she managed to come across as an utter raving loon. When he asked her a question about the policies coming from the White House, and her stance on one of Bush’s decisions in particular, she went off on a tirade where she slipped into referring to Bush as “we” – as if she were part of some bizarre group mind. It was surreal. I thought it was just a slip of the tongue, but then she did it over and over again. “We think”, “we feel”, “we don’t like”…

The woman’s certifiable.[/quote]

Agreed, and she’s got an adam’s apple

Would somebody please link to the outrage posted by the lefties (including canadians) when cnn had an X over the face of Cheney and we were treated to the bathroom mike during one of Bush’s speeches.

Thanks in advance.

JeffR