FOX News

[Good Sir Knight]

i'd like nothing more than to kick his ass.

 

It's also amazing that liberals who advocate peace instead of violence can resort to violence on such a whim.

 

This is why I can respect a pacifist's views and not a liberals.

 

 

Peace activist 'laughed after assault'

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=264&objectid=10390126

 

 

 

Besides with Murdoch's profits surging, I think there must be a clear demand for fair and balanced reporting. : )

 

It's supply and demand baby.

[Good Sir Knight]

Well, it's true. If more people knew all about the Downing Street Memo,the PATRIOT ACT, the Gitmo torture and torture in general, etc., they'd very likely not support Bush.

 

Are you claiming that I haven't heard the reports? That I haven't heard the conjecture?

 

Mr. Eagle, I can assure you that our media is just as or far more free than yours.

 

I can access any information in the world and I do.

 

Unlike France and Canada where you're not even allowed to own a satellite dish and that's pretty sad.

 

Keep on hiding behind the "They're dumb" defense, it'll only solidify the opposition.

 

 

Oh and I do apologize for three posts in a row, I'm a little frazzled today.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Heard about editing posts rather than triple-posting:p?

 

Welcome to the forums sugarpiece89

That's what I thought:D! Swedish then, eh?

 

Yes, his username is "sugar bit" or "sugar piece".

 

That said, I'm certain he would own you in a debate. I do love it how he leaves liberals in a sputtering impotent rage.

I hate that debate tactic in people. Ridicule them and provoke them from your high horse until they lose their temper with you, then walk away claiming high ground. I had a friend of mine who was just like that, and it drove me nuts.

 

It's also amazing that liberals who advocate peace instead of violence can resort to violence on such a whim.

Or maybe, just maybe, he was joking (see def. 4a).

 

Peace activist 'laughed after assault'

Wow, had I only known that one guy was representative of all of us, I'd have flown down there and stopped him:eek:!

 

Besides with Murdoch's profits surging, I think there must be a clear demand for fair and balanced reporting. : ) propaganda.

Sure is. There's also a high demand for land-mines, cluster-bombs and child porn. I assume that means those two are OK, too, then? After all, let's not impede the free market!

 

Seriously, though, just that something's wanted doesn't mean it's OK.

 

Are you claiming that I haven't heard the reports? That I haven't heard the conjecture?

No. I'm saying the Neo-Conservatives haven't. And if you have seen it, please post a thread where you address them (in here it'd be off-topic). Tell me how you can support Bush after reading on the Downing Street Memo and how you can support FOX News when we've proven in this thread that they're unreliable liars (that'd go in this thread;)).

 

Mr. Eagle, I can assure you that our media is just as or far more free than yours.

Except for its routines of self-censorship (news anchor of "liberal" CNN fired for critizising Bush, FOX News employees fired for refusing to air false news story, right-wing media failing to report on Bush Admninistration scandals such as the DS Memo and how Bush&Co. was behind the Gitmo torture), that's probably true.

 

I can access any information in the world, unlike France and Canada where you're not even allowed to own a satellite dish.

Source, please:confused:?

[Good Sir Knight]

No. I'm saying the Neo-Conservatives haven't. And if you have seen it, please post a thread where you address them (in here it'd be off-topic). Tell me how you can support Bush after reading on the Downing Street Memo and how you can support FOX News when we've proven in this thread that they're unreliable liars (that'd go in this thread;)).

 

I'm sure you saw me in the Gitmo thread. I thoroughly explained that people caught on the battlefield without papers and without a uniform are not protected by the Geneva Convention.

 

The very fact that they weren't lined up and shot (like EC's in WWII) is a testament to America's mercy.

 

Of course this is meant for another topic but you brought it up.

 

Also you're assertion that FoxNews Corporation is in the business of outright lieing is false.

 

No one would watch it and the only reason why you hate FoxNews is because it differs in perspective than the sources you're use to.

 

Oh and I'd love some sources on all these flagrant lies, as well as this CNN correspondent that was fired for criticizing Bush.

 

Do you mean the CNN guy that was embedded with the Fedayeen in March of 03? Well not only was that disgraceful but he was deciminating false information to both Iraqi's and Americans.

 

He was giving hope to a dictatorship that was clearly crumbling.

 

 

 

As for the satellite ban:

 

Canada: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1024898755601_20307955

 

You can in fact own a satellite dish in Canada, just not one that recieves foreign signals. How cute.

 

As for France it's really the same thing accept it's directed towards Lebanese/Middle Eastern news. ---> http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=10370

 

So I was incorrect to say that you can't own a satellite dish, you just can't access foreign channels in Canada and Muslims in France can't access their favorite Lebanese news.

 

.... I love bringing this up when Canadian's criticize our media.

[TK-8252]

It's interesting how a higher percentage of Faux viewers believe that Saddam was making WMD's and had links to 9/11 than non-Faux viewers.

 

Oh, and here's how Faux News might have looked during the colonial days:

 

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I'm sure you saw me in the Gitmo thread. I thoroughly explained that people caught on the battlefield without papers and without a uniform are not protected by the Geneva Convention.

Oh yeah, I remember that! And then ShadowTemplar, I think it was, showed up with the Geneva Conventions detailing how they were protected, and then you... Went strangely silent.

 

Oh, and no, torture is not mercy, as I already wrote. "We could do this horrible thing, but we're just doing this horrible thing instead, oh, how good we are!". Nah, doesn't cut it.

 

And yes, what's being done at Gitmo is torture. It can, quite litterally, drive you insane. If you'd watched the movie I linked to in the last post (search for security post-9/11), you'd know that. You'd also have the argument about torturing for national security debunked.

 

There's also this (I got 5/5 correct, how about you).

 

Also you're assertion that FoxNews Corporation is in the business of outright lieing is false.

Not so. It reported, for example, that WMDs had been found in Iraq. Patently not true.

 

No one would watch it (...)

But of course not! Who ever heard of liars with a following?!

 

(...) the only reason why you hate FoxNews is because it differs in perspective than the sources you're use to.

A strawman? How cute.

 

... I love bringing this up when Canadian's criticize our media.

But of course you do. Two wrongs make a right, after all.

[Good Sir Knight]

Oh yeah, I remember that! And then ShadowTemplar, I think it was, showed up with the Geneva Conventions detailing how they were protected, and then you... Went strangely silent.

 

Actually it was ET Warrior that posted after me and I left this forum entirely after my Galloway debacle, I was so overrun by relativists that I gave up on this forum. Then came the genocide thread and I decided on another go.

 

 

Oh, and no, torture is not mercy, as I already wrote. "We could do this horrible thing, but we're just doing this horrible thing instead, oh, how good we are!". Nah, doesn't cut it.

 

I thought we weren't discussing this topic in this thread?

 

Maybe you should follow your own advice and post this in the Gitmo thread.

 

But of course not! Who ever heard of liars with a following?!

 

Of course that piece of propaganda comes from your camp. Please show me where Fox News has told such a lie.

 

Oh and chemical weapons were found in Iraq, not all of them... just a couple hundred artillery shells.

 

FoxNews didn't say that a substantial stockpile was found, they were careful to note all the VX and Mustard gas still missing. Please site evidence of them embellishing this, educate me if I'm so blinded by the Faux.

 

I was watching FoxNews when they reported on it and they were careful to state that what was found was a fraction of Saddam's supposed WMD's.

 

Of course you don't watch FoxNews because:

 

1. You're convinced it's propaganda

2. It's probably not in your country.

 

 

For the record alot my news comes from Fox News, in addition to antiwar.com, the BBC, Drudgereport and PBS.

 

I occasionaly go to Al Jazeera for amusement.

 

 

 

EDIT:

 

But of course you do. Two wrongs make a right, after all.

 

Oh that's right, the only country we can criticize is the US. I just like to remind people where they're coming from.

[sockerbit89]

It's also amazing that liberals who advocate peace instead of violence can resort to violence on such a whim.

 

This is why I can respect a pacifist's views and not a liberals.

 

 

Peace activist 'laughed after assault'

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=264&objectid=10390126

 

 

 

Besides with Murdoch's profits surging, I think there must be a clear demand for fair and balanced reporting. : )

 

It's supply and demand baby.

 

 

My god it's a figure of speace. If you'd really need to know i've always considered myself a pacifist and I'd never lay hand on a weapon. There for I have just recently said no to doing military service even though it led to my entier family now sees me as some sort of crazy person.

 

So you do respect pacifists and not liberals that's intresting because i wonder how much you do respect republicans who have a whole lot more lose view on war than liberals.

 

 

Thanks for the welcome people : )

[sockerbit89]

You know it's called an indipendant news source. Since FOX is basicly controlled by the gouverment it should not exist even if it wasnt a pile of stinking bull****.

 

And don't make so kind of asumption of my political integrity it's real lame.

 

(Sorry for double postin my internet is f- up.)

[toms]

GSK's assertion that nobody would watch a news channel that provided innacurate or misleading news is mildly humourous.. as its been proven time and time again to be the exact opposite of truth.

 

The biggest newspapers are the tabloids that print unsubstantiated rumour and thinly disguised editorial. The same goes for news channels.

 

For all their claimed desires for freedom of speech and thought, its clear that the majority of people don't actually LIKE having to figure things out for themselves.. they like to be told what to think. - And once they have got that thougt embedded in their brain and are comfortable with it, they don't like to to be challenged, or the boat to be rocked.

 

Thats why more people will watch a tv station that says "al quaida is responsible for all the trouble in the middle east, but we will defeat them" than a tv station that says "there are numerous, complex, deep seated, interrelated causes of the conflicts in the middle east, many related to UK and US policy, internal feuds, ethnic and historical hatreds and its likely that no-one will ever be able to entirely get to the bottom of all of these root causes"

 

Or why politicians that stand up and say "the violent video games industry is responsible for the rise in violence among children" are going to get more airtime and more votes than ones that say "well bill, its a complex issue. Maybe repeated exposure to video games might increase someone's tollerance of violence, but there are a number of other factors to take into account, plus a freedom of speech issue, etc.."

 

Fox news is popular because all it's news is presented with a ongoing "bias" that continually reenforces the views of its viewers and makes them feel that they are right. It never admits mistakes, or presents opposing viewpoints that might challenge the views of its viewership and make them feel the discomfort of doubt.

 

to be fair to Fox News, its true that many other news outlets also present news with their particular "bias" to fit comfortably with the views of their audience.. but for a US news network, its definately pushing way beyond the others in terms of it's willinness to twist the truth to it's needs, embed editorial in its news, and lie by omission.

 

Wasn't there a study sometime back that showed viewers of fox news, on average, knew far less correct information about recent events than any other news outlet? Combine that with it's growing popularity and that can't be a good thing for the US or the world.

[TK-8252]

Wasn't there a study sometime back that showed viewers of fox news, on average, knew far less correct information about recent events than any other news outlet? Combine that with it's growing popularity and that can't be a good thing for the US or the world.

 

I know that there was, like I said, a study done that said that more Faux viewers believe in Saddam's non-existant WMD and links between him and 9/11 than viewers of other stations...

 

That is indeed disturbing. When a propaganda station, disguised as a "fair and balanced" news channel, under the leadership of a political party, misleads the public to believe something like that, what does it lead to? War?

 

While the rest of the channels have acknowledged that the WMD and 9/11 links were misleading, Faux continues to cheer on WMD. When those degraded, pre-Gulf War chemical munitions were found buried and forgotten near the Iranian border, the neocons like Hannity and O'Reilly came out demanding that all liberals must "apologize for misleading the country" because now they had proof that Iraq had WMD.

 

Oh. My. God.

 

Like they'd ever demand that Bush and his cronies apologize for lying to get the country into a war that is getting worse by the day.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Wasn't there a study sometime back that showed viewers of fox news, on average, knew far less correct information about recent events than any other news outlet?

Oh yes. It's in this thread, actually. Search page one for "this report" or "scholarly report".

While the rest of the channels have acknowledged that the WMD and 9/11 links were misleading, Faux continues to cheer on WMD. When those degraded, pre-Gulf War chemical munitions were found buried and forgotten near the Iranian border, the neocons like Hannity and O'Reilly came out demanding that all liberals must "apologize for misleading the country" because now they had proof that Iraq had WMD.

 

Oh. My. God.

Yeah, some neo-cons started a thread over at the Pub [debate forum] at Gaming Forums titled "WMDs found in Iraq", calling for an apology from those who doubted Bush and branded him a liar.

 

Makes me sick to the stomach.

[The Source]

I just saw the movie Outfoxed today, it's a documentary/examination of Rupert Murdoch's "media empire". Besides being funny as hell (Bill O'Reilly needs to take a f***in' pill or something), it also reveals various memos and policies of FOX News regarding it's journalistic integrity (or lack thereof).

 

My question: what's your stance on journalism and the integrity of FOX News, or the media in general at this point in time?

Every Sunday, I turn on 'Fox News' and 'Meet the Press'. I need my conservative and liberal balance for the week. If you were to watch both shows, the 'Fox Round-Table' and 'Meet the Press', you can read between the lines. I think they both put a twist on national events, but they also have some useful insights. I don't understand the logic of chosing a side. Democratic or Republican veiws are very agenda based. I think anyone who is running for office has an agenda. One agenda is for the public to know, and the other is what they want to get done.

 

I work for two newspapers, graphic design department, and I could smell the liberal snooping from miles. Unlike the rest of the people I work with, I have a balance between both parties. One of the newspapers hated my conservative perspective on certain topics: My veiws on war, and how I felt about tax breaks. I refuse to take a solid side, for I believe the real truth is somewhere in the middle.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

It's also amazing that liberals who advocate peace instead of violence can resort to violence on such a whim.

 

This is why I can respect a pacifist's views and not a liberals.

 

 

Peace activist 'laughed after assault'

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=264&objectid=10390126

 

 

 

Besides with Murdoch's profits surging, I think there must be a clear demand for fair and balanced reporting. : )

 

It's supply and demand baby.

Technically liberals don't have to advocate pacifism or any of the crap you assume they do.

 

Every Sunday, I turn on 'Fox News' and 'Meet the Press'. I need my conservative and liberal balance for the week. If you were to watch both shows, the 'Fox Round-Table' and 'Meet the Press', you can read between the lines. I think they both put a twist on national events, but they also have some useful insights. I don't understand the logic of chosing a side. Democratic or Republican veiws are very agenda based. I think anyone who is running for office has an agenda. One agenda is for the public to know, and the other is what they want to get done.

 

I work for two newspapers, graphic design department, and I could smell the liberal snooping from miles. Unlike the rest of the people I work with, I have a balance between both parties. One of the newspapers hated my conservative perspective on certain topics: My veiws on war, and how I felt about tax breaks. I refuse to take a solid side, for I believe the real truth is somewhere in the middle.

The Bush administration/Fox News aren't conservatives by definition, and the stuff Fox News broadcasts isn't news by definition.

[TK-8252]

Every Sunday, I turn on 'Fox News' and 'Meet the Press'. I need my conservative and liberal balance for the week.

 

Except that Meet the Press is by no means liberal.

 

Nothing you'll find on CNN or MSNBC is as liberal as Faux is (neo)conservative.

[toms]

From where i sit (in the UK) ALL the US news channels seem very conservative. But that might just be because I only see little bits oof them.

 

(They also seem very religously infulenced.. very editorialising.. and very overdramatic. I love how they make every tiny news story sound and look like a trailer for a new action movie!!)

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

From where i sit (in the UK) ALL the US news channels seem very conservative. But that might just be because I only see little bits oof them.

 

(They also seem very religously infulenced.. very editorialising.. and very overdramatic. I love how they make every tiny news story sound and look like a trailer for a new action movie!!)

They are... which is why I watch BBC News and the Daily Show.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

True, that. They're entertainment more than news. Bah.

[sockerbit89]

I just got of watching FOX news right now and it was that program (no idea what's it called) with the round faced white guy in glasses. To begin with I was laughing at how they were cuting of people who were talkning against Isreals massive bombing over Libanon. Then the topic came to Iran buying weapon from Russia and China and all of sudden I hear this: (basicly what they said) "Basicly this war is about the fight of the civiliesed countries of the world with USA and Israel versus the communist countries and middle eastern terror countries".

 

I nearly chocked to death on my coffe. W.T.F?!!! You can't say a thing like that!!! "Cvivilised countries of the world" i was ready to throw my tellie out of the kitchen window. I don't watch FOX often so I have to ask is this sh1t normal?? They actually say thing like this?

 

If anyone said that in swedish news they'd lose there jobs. I mean for real, there would be freakin riots.

[Windu Chi]

I just got of watching FOX news right now and it was that program (no idea what's it called) with the round faced white guy in glasses. To begin with I was laughing at how they were cuting of people who were talkning against Isreals massive bombing over Libanon. Then the topic came to Iran buying weapon from Russia and China and all of sudden I hear this: (basicly what they said) "Basicly this war is about the fight of the civiliesed countries of the world with USA and Israel versus the communist countries and middle eastern terror countries".

 

I nearly chocked to death on my coffe. W.T.F?!!! You can't say a thing like that!!! "Cvivilised countries of the world" i was ready to throw my tellie out of the kitchen window. I don't watch FOX often so I have to ask is this sh1t normal?? They actually say thing like this?

 

If anyone said that in swedish news they'd lose there jobs. I mean for real, there would be freakin riots.

 

Yes FOX NEWS

do say those things. They gratified the republicans and they portray United States as supperior to the rest of the planet.

[Good Sir Knight]

Technically liberals don't have to advocate pacifism or any of the crap you assume they do.

 

Thank you jmac for proving my point better than I possibly could! Please reevaluate the point you were responding to, here it is again.

 

It's also amazing that liberals who advocate peace instead of violence can resort to violence on such a whim.

 

This is why I can respect a pacifist's views and not a liberals.

 

Do you see that? I do see a difference between pacifists and liberals and that was my point!

 

A pacifist is against all types of violence, a liberal simply roots for another team.

 

That's why I can respect a pacifist's point of view and not a liberals. Thank you so much for that contribution jmac, thank you.

 

 

Fox News broadcasts isn't news by definition.

 

Prove it.

 

 

GSK's assertion that nobody would watch a news channel that provided innacurate or misleading news is mildly humourous.

 

Nice try Toms but Dagobahn and TK both said that FoxNews has outright lied. In addition to this, Dagobahn sited "Spare Change" as evidence of a lie but no direct evidence of Fox News lying.

 

I call upon Dagobahn and TK to back up their earlier statements of Fox flagrantly lieing.

 

I want to see how FoxNews has lied as bad as the creaters of "Spare Change".

 

Though the Spare Change folks would hide behind the banner of open-mindedness...as so many others do....

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Loose Change, mate.

 

I call upon Dagobahn and TK to back up their earlier statements of Fox flagrantly lieing.

What, the report we posted (and that you have yet to address) isn't enough for you?

 

I do see a difference between pacifists and liberals and that was my point!

A pacifist is against all types of violence, a liberal simply roots for another team.

They're no mutually exclusive. Jmac's post didn't prove otherwise the very least. He wrote that liberals can be pacifists, while you seem to regard liberals and pacifists as always being two different things.

[Good Sir Knight]

They're no mutually exclusive.

 

Give me a break Dagobahn, my point was that I can respect a pacifists views and not a liberals.

 

A pacifist believes in non-violence totally and unequivicaly. Most liberals do not, especially here in the states.

 

...and I know left wingers can put on the pacifist hat when they're protesting a war they don't agree with.

 

Also....Dagobahn, this is the medium in which we converse. Please specify where FoxNews has flagrantly lied.

 

Pull it from the report if you have to.

 

Oh and sorry, I've never really looked into 911 conspiracy theories...

[toms]

being liberal has nothing to do with being a pacifict.. some liberals are probably pacificts, some aren't. I think i;m still missing your point.

 

Didn't Fox news go to court and win the right to lie?

[Good Sir Knight]

being liberal has nothing to do with being a pacifict..

 

This was my point.

 

Oh and it's spelled pacifist. Don't you hate it when someone points out spelling/grammatical errors on a forum? I just did it because everyone else does it to me...which makes me worse I guess.

 

 

some liberals are probably pacificts, some aren't. I think i;m still missing your point.

 

Correct in that some liberals can be pacifists and correct that you missed my point.

 

Didn't Fox news go to court and win the right to lie?

 

That would be unprecedented in the pointed vernacular you employed.

 

 

Oh and toms, I thank you and your nation for saving our ass last week. God save the Queen. : )

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm still waiting Mr. Eagle, I'm still waiting for proof that FoxNews lied. There's been a lot of talk of FoxNews misleading (little proof) but both you and TK stated that FoxNews has lied.

 

Please do post some evidence in the same thread you made those accusations.