foxnews

Post Reply New Topic

i actually watch foxnews occasionally because i like bill o'reilys hands. the man has beautiful hands and i like checking them out. however, i noticed that when ever anyone attacks foxnews, they always say: well we beat out the compatition with more viewers. does that mean they are right just because more people watch? wouldnt that just mean there more popular? and not necessarily right? and to be fair i hate all news stations equally. keith olberman is just as annoying as glenn beck. but sometimes i like watching anderson cooper just because hes so pleasing to look at. anyways, i guess another part to my question would be what media channel do you perfer to watch if any?

Here in Finland we can catch O'reilly on occasion and the most fascinating thing about him is a small bump on his left ear. No one bothers with what he says but it is somewhat interesting to look at the fingernail on the ring finger of his left hand. Ring finger fingernails are most peculiarly neglected with most news commentators and of course we are never privileged to look at their big toes. Middle toes simply do not compare. Women, of course, have other convex surfaces which can catch the light in a peculiar manner but the way sound reflects from these surfaces is peculiarly distracting. Aside from their noses, that is.

Most people watch Bill-O to see the veins on his head bulge .... but that doesn't happen often. He is an actor and usually he is faking his outrage. In other news, wrestling is fake.

I only watch Beck on Fox News. I actually like him, even though he is way to hawkish on foreign policy issues. He has it absolutely right on monetary and spending issues. He also is the only anchor on Fox that is just as critical to the right as he is of the left, except on foreign policy of course.

Fox also does a web broadcast called freedom watch on Wednesday at 2pm est that I never miss.

Other than that I don't watch any cable news broadcasts, I get all my news from the internet.

I prefer FOX.

is it because its fair and balanced?

I am glad you started this topic Richardbenson. I have been noticing for a while now that everytime someone posts something, citing Fox News as a source, someone else will post that he shouldn't be watching Fox News. I am wondering why. Their slogan (as you point out) is "fair and balanced," which sounds like a good slogan. Are people saying they don't live up to it, or would they prefer unfair and unbalanced?

Fascinating that a statement or slogan is accepted as valid without question. What a wonderful market source for advertisers.

As someone once pointed out Sand, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. The question of whether or not Fox News lives up to their slogan has been asked but not answered. Would you like to answer it rather than imply someone else's answer?

And you should think a bit about the implications of your statements.

"Fair and balanced" would be a good slogan if it were true. All news sources have bias, some more than others... Having bias in and of itself is okay (within acceptable journalistic parameters, anyway), but it's Fox News's blatant attempts to claim they have no bias that I see as incredibly self-aggrandizing and hypocritical...

That said, anyone notice how CNN and Fox News flipped in ideologies after Obama was sworn in? Fox News used to proclaim "This is America", "Love it or leave it", and the "America is the greatest nation on earth", while CNN kept talking about the "revolution" against the powerful (at that time the Bush administration)... nowadays Fox News is trying to promote re-enactments of the Boston Tea Party, while CNN is practically using Fox's own "Love it or leave it" mantra... To me, this is proof that both networks are incredibly biased (CNN being the mouthpiece of the democrats, Fox News the mouthpiece of the republicans)...

It's kind of ironic, really... even though we live in a so-called "enlightened" information age, we're still victim to the suppression of free thought that existed in medieval times... only the court jester can tell the truth without getting his head cut off...


Yes, I know the Daily Show isn't an actual news source. But, unlike actual news sources, the Daily Show makes no claim to be a legitimate news source (in fact they actively dispute it when other people claim they are one)... My problem lies not with the bias, but the hypocrisy...

The only Fox News segment I saw was making a factual error and no one seemed to notice it. Someone put it up on Youtube where I checked for zimbabwe-related videos. Neither the person who put it up, nor any commenter before me realized that they showed a 50 Million Reichsmark banknote Reichsmark and called it a 50 Million Deutschmark (which BTW is wrong also insofar that it is a Deutsche Mark and the e is pronounced).

From my perspective this was a serious screwup!

I tend to agree with you ToadOfSteel. In their defence, it may be that by being in the field Fox News makes the aggregate fair and balanced.

Fair and balanced may be too much to hope for in any given source, we need to consider all sources.

Somewhat on the same theory that it's good to take in a bit of arsenic with a healthy meal to balance out the health consequences.

tell me about it. i wonder if people actually think they are unbiased. i hear all dick cheney watches is foxnews

They are balanced -- remember Hannity and Colmes before Colmes left? They usually have at least one liberal in their panel type stuff, and even all the conservatives tend to disagree a lot.

And they're fair -- always looking at both sides of an issue, instead of pretending to be objective and only mentioning their own viewpoint as fact.


The Boston Tea Party was a patriotic thing in the revolutionary times, and the re-enactments are a patriotic thing now. They're trying to say "this is wrong", not "we should leave America".


I rather like the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. Regular news networks could learn a lot from them, if they weren't too stupid.


I don't watch that much TV, but I recently watched a whole afternoon's worth of fox news on the end to the pirate standoff and rescue of the boat captain. Almost all of them said that Obama had done the right thing, the only holdout being Hannity, who argued with his guest, who happened to have written a book about America's "slobbering love-affair with Obama". The guest thought Obama had done the right thing and should get credit for having done so. I think they've been more fair to Obama than the rest of the media was to Bush.

I don't think most of the criticism of fox news is rationally based, I think it stems from some people who disagree with them strongly and can't emotionally handle someone telling them that they're wrong.