Since Musket decided to invade History in the Making

Pages:
1
…
4
5
6
7

Since Musket decided to invade History in the Making
Tweet Topic Started: Jul 18 2010, 10:38 AM (4,397 Views)
Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM Post #121
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public.



gs	Jun 21 2011, 09:50 PM Post #122
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 07:45 PM Fox News is consistently rated as the most trusted, or one of the most trusted news sources in America. trusted by who?



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 09:55 PM Post #123
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 09:40 PM Does the USA not have laws prohibiting the broadcasting of false or misleading news? http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-the-media-can-legally-lie/



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Post #124
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	Fox viewers are most misinformed: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/john-farrell/2010/12/22/university-study-fox-viewers-more-misinformed http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/breaking-study-finds-fox-news-viewers-are-the-most-misinformed.php Fox and other media can legally lie: http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog/ceasespin_blogger_files/fox_news_gets_okay_to_misinform_public.html http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-the-media-can-legally-lie/



Jam	Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Post #125
Fruit Based Jam Posts: 7,945 Group: A414A Member Member #98 Joined: July 11, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through.
	Long live Carolus


DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 10:21 PM Post #126
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:38 PM DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 08:32 PM Seriously, what's wrong with you? Jesus Christ... Appeal To Popularity: Also called * Argumentum ad populum ("appeal to the people") * Quality By Popular Vote * Any relevant population figure (sixty million Frenchmen, a billion Chinese, etc) * Common Knowledge * Sheep Factor * Five Billion Flies (as in "Eat sh*, five billion flies can't be wrong!") Democratic Fallacy * Everyone Knows... The appeal to popularity is built around the belief that something is true (or false) because a lot of people believe it is. This is fallacious because it confuses whether an idea is justified with whether it is accepted. Demonstrating widespread support for something only proves it is popular, not that it is true. Alice: "Don't you know smoking's bad for you, Bob?" Bob: "Bah, it's just propaganda. If it were really bad for you, why would millions of people do it, hm?" This is the standard version; the belief that a large group is incapable of being incorrect. The fallacy can also be inverted, however, with popularity being taken as a sign something is wrong Bob: "Alice, what's that terrible noise coming out of your speakers? I thought you liked The Band." Alice: "Geez, get with the times, The Band suck since they sold out and went mainstream." You said everyone knows Fox News is biased and wrong. I told you that it's one of the most trusted news sources in America (by Americans, GS. Who else?). Seriously, what's wrong with you? And I still haven't watched that video, GS. I'll get to it soon, though.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 10:32 PM Post #127
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 10:21 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:38 PM DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 08:32 PM Seriously, what's wrong with you? Jesus Christ... Appeal To Popularity: Also called * Argumentum ad populum ("appeal to the people") * Quality By Popular Vote * Any relevant population figure (sixty million Frenchmen, a billion Chinese, etc) * Common Knowledge * Sheep Factor * Five Billion Flies (as in "Eat sh*, five billion flies can't be wrong!") Democratic Fallacy * Everyone Knows... The appeal to popularity is built around the belief that something is true (or false) because a lot of people believe it is. This is fallacious because it confuses whether an idea is justified with whether it is accepted. Demonstrating widespread support for something only proves it is popular, not that it is true. Alice: "Don't you know smoking's bad for you, Bob?" Bob: "Bah, it's just propaganda. If it were really bad for you, why would millions of people do it, hm?" This is the standard version; the belief that a large group is incapable of being incorrect. The fallacy can also be inverted, however, with popularity being taken as a sign something is wrong Bob: "Alice, what's that terrible noise coming out of your speakers? I thought you liked The Band." Alice: "Geez, get with the times, The Band suck since they sold out and went mainstream." You said everyone knows Fox News is biased and wrong. I told you that it's one of the most trusted news sources in America (by Americans, GS. Who else?). Seriously, what's wrong with you? And I still haven't watched that video, GS. I'll get to it soon, though. 49% of Americans say they trust Fox News to 37% who disagree. Predictably there is a large party split on this with 74% of Republicans but only 30% of Democrats saying they trust the right leaning network. CNN does next best because it is the second most trusted of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. 39% say they trust it compared to 41% who do not, with 59% of Democrats, 33% of independents and 23% of Republicans saying it carries credibility with them http://www.webcitation.org/5tIIvxhkK Of course conservatives are going to trust Fox news because it tells them what they want to hear, its call confirmation bias. My reference to the logical fallacy is to point out that just because a lot of people trust it doesn't mean they're correct in their reporting. Trusted doesn't = trustworthy and I said everyone except the regular viewers who can't think for themselves.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 10:34 PM Post #128
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through. oh, but anyway media can still legally misinform the public since they are protected by the first amendment. refer to the other link



gs	Jun 21 2011, 10:35 PM Post #129
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	rich hits nail on head. trusted =/= trustworthy.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 10:36 PM Post #130
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	I know trusted =/= trustworthy. It's just you said everyone distrusts Fox, and I simply pointed out that it's one of the most trusted news sources in the country, regardless of its trustworthiness. PS: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/



Jam	Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Post #131
Fruit Based Jam Posts: 7,945 Group: A414A Member Member #98 Joined: July 11, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:34 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through. oh, but anyway media can still legally misinform the public since they are protected by the first amendment. refer to the other link There's no first ammendment in Canada.
	Long live Carolus


gs	Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Post #132
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	honestly just because it's trusted by americans doesn't even mean it's trusted. or does the rest of the world not count? pretty sure the majority of dutch people don't trust fox... guess why, because they weren't told what they wanted to hear... people are that simple.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Post #133
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	gs Jun 21 2011, 10:35 PM rich hits nail on head. trusted =/= trustworthy. Fox is as legitimate a news source as CNN, the NYT, LAT, and the rest of the mainstream media, if not more so. Whenever people point out Fox News bias and lies, it's always... an opinion show. That's like pointing to an op-ed by Sarah Palin on the Washington Post and using that as evidence that WaPo is right-wing.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 10:48 PM Post #134
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:34 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through. oh, but anyway media can still legally misinform the public since they are protected by the first amendment. refer to the other link There's no first ammendment in Canada. what? im referring to america in the second post lol



Jam	Jun 21 2011, 10:51 PM Post #135
Fruit Based Jam Posts: 7,945 Group: A414A Member Member #98 Joined: July 11, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:48 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:34 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through. oh, but anyway media can still legally misinform the public since they are protected by the first amendment. refer to the other link There's no first ammendment in Canada. what? im referring to america in the second post lol Ok. On that note I think it's rediculous that an organization should be given the same freedoms as an individual. A corporation is not a person.
	Long live Carolus


Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 10:52 PM Post #136
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 10:36 PM I know trusted =/= trustworthy. It's just you said everyone distrusts Fox, and I simply pointed out that it's one of the most trusted news sources in the country, regardless of its trustworthiness. PS: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/ "Do you happen to know which political party has a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives?" "Can you tell me the name of the current U.S. Secretary of State?" And "who is the current prime minister of Great Britain?" Anyone who went three-for-three earned the high knowledge designation wow look at those challenging questions. seriously those surveys aren't even legitimate those are general knowledge questions you don't even need to watch the news to know that. whereas the survey I linked to asked real questions: MSNBC took some hits, but it was the daily viewers of Fox News who were significantly more misinformed about healthcare, climate change, and Barack Obama. They were 14 points more likely to mistakenly believe that "the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts," and 13 points more likely to erroneously believe that "the auto bailout only occurred under Obama," and 12 points more likely to hold the incorrect belief that "when TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it." By 30 points, they mistakenly believed that "most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring. And of course, they were 31 percent more likely to believe the Birther whopper that "it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States." and from other survey: The study found that daily Fox News viewers, regardless of political party, were "significantly" more likely than non-viewers to erroneously believe that: Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely) Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points) The economy is getting worse (26 points) Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points) The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points) Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points) The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points) When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points) And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 11:09 PM Post #137
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:51 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:48 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:39 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 10:34 PM Hyperactive Jam Jun 21 2011, 10:05 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 09:44 PM CRTC only prohibits media that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. Um, no. That was a proposal to change the regulation that did not go through. oh, but anyway media can still legally misinform the public since they are protected by the first amendment. refer to the other link There's no first ammendment in Canada. what? im referring to america in the second post lol Ok. On that note I think it's rediculous that an organization should be given the same freedoms as an individual. A corporation is not a person. lol funny you should say that because the supreme court here also rules that corporations are now allowed to fund political campaigns because technically they are people. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html �If the First Amendment has any force,� Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, which included the four members of the court�s conservative wing, �it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 11:22 PM Post #138
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	GS, I watched the video and it was one big straw man. The segment was mostly about Amsterdam, with mention of the Netherland's drug and prostitution policy, while the maker of the video kept claiming it was "Fox News vs the Netherlands" and proceeded to compare the Netherlands' cannabis use rate, homicide rate, and drug-related death rate to America's, for some reason. Amsterdam does have high crime rates, and there is a lot of drug/prostitution-related crime. Quote: The Netherlands is listed by the UNODC as a top destination for victims of human trafficking.[22] Countries that are major sources of trafficked persons include Thailand, China, Nigeria, Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine,[22] Sierra Leone, and Romania.[23] Currently, human trafficking in the Netherlands is on the rise, according to figures obtained from the National Centre against Human Trafficking. The report shows a substantial increase in the number of victims from Hungary and China. There were 809 registered victims of human trafficking in 2008, 763 were women and at least 60 percent of them were forced to work in the sex industry.[24] [25] [...] Many victims of human trafficking are led to believe by organized criminals that they are being offered work in hotels or restaurants or in child care and are forced into prostitution with the threat or actual use of violence. Estimates of the number of victims vary from 1000 to 7000 on a yearly basis. Most police investigations on human trafficking concern legal sex businesses. All sectors of prostitution are well represented in these investigations, but particularly the window brothels are overrepresented. [28] [29] [30] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_Netherlands#Human_trafficking Quote: Despite the high priority given by the Dutch government to fighting illegal drug trafficking, the Netherlands continue to be an important transit point for drugs entering Europe, a major producer[14] and leading distributor of cannabis, heroin, cocaine, amphetamines[15][16] and other synthetic drugs, and a medium consumer of illicit drugs.[17] Despite the crackdown on traffic and illicit manufacture of temazepam by Interpol,[18] the country has also become a major exporter of illicit temazepam of the "jelly" variety, trafficking it to the United Kingdom and other European nations.[19] The Netherlands' special synthetic drug unit, set up in 1997 to coordinate the fight against designer drugs, appears to be successful.[citation needed] The government has intensified cooperation with neighbouring countries and stepped up border controls. In recent years, it also introduced so-called 100% checks and bodyscans at Schiphol Airport on incoming flights from Dutch overseas territories Aruba and Netherlands Antilles to prevent importing cocaine by means of swallowing balloons by mules. [...] On 27 November 2003, the Dutch Justice Minister Piet Hein Donner announced that his government was considering rules under which coffeeshops would only be allowed to sell soft drugs to Dutch residents in order to satisfy both European neighbors' concerns about the influx of drugs from the Netherlands, as well as those of Netherlands border town residents unhappy with the influx of "drug tourists" from elsewhere in Europe. [...] The liberal drug policy of the authorities in The Netherlands especially led to problems in "border hot spots" that attracted "drug tourism" as well as trafficking and related law enforcement problems in towns like Enschede in the East and Terneuzen, Venlo, Maastricht and Heerlen in the South. [...] The higher levels of the active ingredient in cannabis in Netherlands create a growing opposition to the traditional Dutch view of cannabis as a relatively innocent soft drug,.[31] Supporters of coffee shops state that such claims are often exaggerated and ignore the fact that higher content means a user needs to use less of the plant to get the desired effects, making it in effect safer.[32] Dutch research has however shown that an increase of THC content also increase the occurrence of impaired psychomotor skills, particularly among younger or inexperienced cannabis smokers, who do not adapt their smoking-style to the higher THC content.[33] Closing of coffeeshops is not unique for Rotterdam. Many other towns have done the same in the last 10 years. [...] In May 2011 the Dutch government announced that tourist are to be banned from Dutch Coffee shops, starting in the southern provices and in the end of 2011 in the rest of the country. "In order to tackle the nuisance and criminality associated with coffee shops and drug trafficking, the open-door policy of coffee shops will end," (the Dutch health and justice ministers in a letter to the Dutch parliament)[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands So, O'Reilly and the girls were generally right. But I do believe that, from a liberty perspective, drugs and prostitution should be legal.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 11:23 PM Post #139
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Richard, I'll reply to you, but only if you promise not to be like last time and respond with insults and ignore my posts. OK?



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 11:57 PM Post #140
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	those "problems" the netherlands is facing is not because they legalized soft drugs, but because others haven't. A lucrative illegal market in the rest of europe where people pay high prices for drugs like marijuana is nothing new. same thing here in the US. we take no blame for the drug wars in mexico but in fact we are absolutely at fault because the government hasn't legalized marijuana so the illegal market still exists. the demand won't go away and as long as the suppliers have to be criminals, the violence won't either. and dragon you ignored those links i posted earlier



DragonLegend	Jun 22 2011, 02:40 AM Post #141
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	I believe my link addresses that study, Richard (about Fox), and I'd ask how those allegedly erroneous views really are erroneous, but that's probably not relevant here.



Big Richard	Jun 22 2011, 02:58 AM Post #142
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	because those questions aren't a valid test. its like if I asked: who won WWII? Who is Nicolas Sarkozy? are strawberries red? 3/3 = VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE lol wtf? like compare the questions in your survey compared to the surveys I found and tell me which is more legitimate



gs	Jun 22 2011, 03:01 AM Post #143
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	i only knew the answer to the third one tbh then again, i don't live in america



DragonLegend	Jun 22 2011, 03:37 AM Post #144
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	No, Richard, I mean read the entire article (commentary accompanying studies' findings, conclusion, the whole thing), not just the poll's questions. They talk about your study.



Big Richard	Jun 22 2011, 06:55 AM Post #145
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-june-21-2011-cameron-diaz skip to the second part of the episode (middle of buffer bar) to hear about fox news. this was on today haha its really relevant and convenient. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-20-2011/fox-news-channel---fair---balanced that too in truth no media is trustworthy but fox is the worst of them all



Ichigo1uk	Jun 22 2011, 08:57 AM Post #146
Huh? Posts: 9,838 Group: A414A Member Member #10 Joined: December 14, 2007	I would of thought Onion News was more trustworthy then Fox. Oh and Wikipedia as the only source? Edited by Ichigo1uk, Jun 22 2011, 08:59 AM.
	Incog Jan 19 2012, 05:34 PM I think unicorns have a higher chance of existing than gods do. I mean, if a mare fell into the ocean and a narwhal raped it, then the mare might just give birth to a unicorn.


The_Fry_Cook_of_Doom	Jun 22 2011, 11:14 AM Post #147
:OOOOOOOOOOOOMAAANN Posts: 18,587 Group: A414A Member Member #35 Joined: January 11, 2008	Well the virtue of this thread diminished fast.
	Jam It's okay to be mad at your fiends sometimes


DragonLegend	Jun 22 2011, 06:52 PM Post #148
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Big Richard Jun 22 2011, 06:55 AM http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-june-21-2011-cameron-diaz skip to the second part of the episode (middle of buffer bar) to hear about fox news. this was on today haha its really relevant and convenient. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-20-2011/fox-news-channel---fair---balanced that too in truth no media is trustworthy but fox is the worst of them all First one is about PolitiFact's fact-checking of Fox News' opinion shows (Beck, et al). Second one is Michael Moore material. Wallace said MSNBC has a liberal agenda, while Fox presents the other side of the story. Whether that's true or not, he didn't say Fox had some sort of nefarious right-wing agenda. He most likely meant Fox tries to present both the left-wing and right-wing points of view, unlike the leftist echo chamber that is MSNBC. Fox has countless leftist personalities, such as Kirsten Powers. That's "fair and balanced." I don't think they're interested in ideology. Fox is a business, and they'd hire anybody who could bring in ratings, be they leftist or right-wing, and they do. Your last sentence shows your true colors, Richard. You don't have a problem with bias, as long as it's not right-wing. You're clearly biased against the Right. Edited by DragonLegend, Jun 22 2011, 06:53 PM.



Big Richard	Jun 22 2011, 09:23 PM Post #149
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Jun 22 2011, 06:52 PM Big Richard Jun 22 2011, 06:55 AM http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-june-21-2011-cameron-diaz skip to the second part of the episode (middle of buffer bar) to hear about fox news. this was on today haha its really relevant and convenient. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-20-2011/fox-news-channel---fair---balanced that too in truth no media is trustworthy but fox is the worst of them all First one is about PolitiFact's fact-checking of Fox News' opinion shows (Beck, et al). Second one is Michael Moore material. Wallace said MSNBC has a liberal agenda, while Fox presents the other side of the story. Whether that's true or not, he didn't say Fox had some sort of nefarious right-wing agenda. He most likely meant Fox tries to present both the left-wing and right-wing points of view, unlike the leftist echo chamber that is MSNBC. Fox has countless leftist personalities, such as Kirsten Powers. That's "fair and balanced." I don't think they're interested in ideology. Fox is a business, and they'd hire anybody who could bring in ratings, be they leftist or right-wing, and they do. Your last sentence shows your true colors, Richard. You don't have a problem with bias, as long as it's not right-wing. You're clearly biased against the Right. "While Fox News and parent company News Corporation have long been criticized cheerleading Republican causes and conservative-allied business interests, it has been under more intense criticism of late over high profile donations to Republicans, deceptive video editing on multiple programs and even on-air GOP fundraisers." http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/ those facts and these surveys aren't related to opinion shows, they're talking about the actual "news". and no what are you talking about? he said MSNBC is liberal and they are the OTHER SIDE as in strictly the other side. Opposite of liberal doesn't mean liberal + its opposite..? wtf? Fox opinion shows constantly ridicule the left and the news (see above link) is profoundly misinforming the public on issues. Quit using words like "whether thats true or not" and "he probably meant" to dodge the truth. I like how easily you portray MSNBC as completely liberal but defend Fox as some kind of bastion of balance and truth. rofl. "bringing in good ratings" is the spot on. That's what they are: entertainment. Journalism doesn't exist to them, thats why the opinion shows talk about elaborate conspiracies and the news spreads lies and exaggerates statements/facts. What do you mean I don't have a problem with bias? I said no media is trustworthy, that means left and right. But Fox isn't just hard right conservative, they are insane and their "opinion" shows are completely moronic which makes them a lot worse than the others. Especially because people here are retarded enough to listen and agree with Bill O' Reilly and Glen Beck. At least CNN doesn't try to scare its viewers or rudely and unprofessionally bash their guests. also, fyi I don't watch MSNBC or CNN or any other media you may think I do. I'm not picking on the Right, Fox is the topic here and I'm making fun of Fox. What you're doing here is the equivalent of calling a critic of Obama a racist by calling me, a critic of Fox, a liberal. And while I am a political independent I do notice quite often that liberals are more reasonable and intelligent compared to conservatives. For example I recently watched the Republican leadership conference as well as the democrat conference which is similar and the Rep. one was full of white, extremely religious, illogical men and women. They talked about God and sanctity of life and saying they're "pro-marriage" (meaning against gay marriage..lol) and all this other bullshit. Then I watched the Dem. conference and they talked about Obama going back on promises and future political goals and things that matter. The questions they asked were a lot more sane and reasonable compared to the Rep. conference. Just mentioning that btw.



gs	Jun 22 2011, 09:26 PM Post #150
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	DragonLegend Jun 22 2011, 06:52 PM Big Richard Jun 22 2011, 06:55 AM http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-june-21-2011-cameron-diaz skip to the second part of the episode (middle of buffer bar) to hear about fox news. this was on today haha its really relevant and convenient. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-20-2011/fox-news-channel---fair---balanced that too in truth no media is trustworthy but fox is the worst of them all First one is about PolitiFact's fact-checking of Fox News' opinion shows (Beck, et al). Second one is Michael Moore material. Wallace said MSNBC has a liberal agenda, while Fox presents the other side of the story. Whether that's true or not, he didn't say Fox had some sort of nefarious right-wing agenda. He most likely meant Fox tries to present both the left-wing and right-wing points of view, unlike the leftist echo chamber that is MSNBC. Fox has countless leftist personalities, such as Kirsten Powers. That's "fair and balanced." I don't think they're interested in ideology. Fox is a business, and they'd hire anybody who could bring in ratings, be they leftist or right-wing, and they do. Your last sentence shows your true colors, Richard. You don't have a problem with bias, as long as it's not right-wing. You're clearly biased against the Right. lol at the right with capital R



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)

Create a free forum in seconds. Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General chat · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
4
5
6
7