FOX news sensationalist journalism - worrying trend?

ixoy

I'm sure if anybody here has ever tuned into FOX News on Sky Digital, they'll have realised it's a militant hardcore outlet for right-wing America. However, look at this latest clip from Fox News' My Word program - a blatant attack on anybody who dares attack the US' motivation with a horrific smugness that the BBC got done for their reporting. Does anyone else find the fact this sort of irresponsible media is being beamed into the houses of millions, warping their world view?

Rock Climber

Oh typical Fox.

It's just as well they only get into a minority of homes in America.

Anyone see qustion time on BBC one last night?
Rod Liddle editor of the today programme was on and very caustic towards Peter Hain.

At one point he said " I can't believe it I'm sitting beside lewis carroll... "

magick

FOX NEWS Fair and Biased

Zombrex

ROFL

oh mercy ... that was one of the funnest things I have ever seen

Even if you know about the story and realise that the BBC did mess up, the way FOX present it is so stupid and OTT and makes it so clear that they know absolutely nothing about what is really going on or even what the basic facts of the story are.

And that thing at the end about the flag in his jacket ... priceless

Cork

If ye don't like Fox News - why watch it?

Vote with your remote control. If ye have objection with Fox News - don't watch it.

mike65

"frothing at the mouth"???????? Thats Fox News job.

Mike.

jank

that stuff is so dangerous
and to think most of the good ol USA are watching that ****e!
bill o reilly is an other wanker who talks through his ass with his "no spin zone" ****e!!

its a good thing i dont have digital other wise id probably have thrown some thing through the screen by now!

Hobbes

Orginally by Marge Simpson
You know, Fox turned into a hardcore sex channel so gradually, I didn't even notice. Yeesh!

Cake Fiend

What a childish tirade.
Also, I wonder if, while he's up there blah-blahing about the BBC's lack of honesty, all the while he's satisfied that Dubya is a saint?

Akrasia

"if you don't like it, don't watch it"

I take the opposite stance, if you don't like it, if you think they're lying, watch it and then publically disprove what they say so that people who do like it might have to think twice about the jingo-istic "news" that they are being brainwashed with

Cork

But are people not being brainwashed with "touchy feely" liberal based news stations?

Today - people are getting news from a variety of sources.

For instance - internet, newspapers, 24 News Channels etc.

Fox News is one source of news. They are many others.

Let people vote with their zappers.

Look at the news content of tabloid newspapers - tittle tattle, entertainment news,sports & gossip.

But if people want these products - the choice is theirs.

Atreides

since when does unbiased equate to being liberal cork?

Gerry

The majority of the great american public, Cork, are not getting their news from a variety of sources. They are mainly getting it from Fox and CNN, and tabloid newspapers. What they accept as gospel affects how they vote in the US presidential election, which affects the whole world. Its only a little bit important.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Cork
But are people not being brainwashed with "touchy feely" liberal based news stations?

A liberal based news station in the US .... thats a joke right :rolleyes:

Cork

Many media organisations have been accused of bias. Over in the UK - you have papers that support the Conservatives & others who support New Labour.

They report the same news but from differant prospectives.

You now find the sme on the internat and on TV.

People can now get get news from a variety of sources. This is a positive development.

Hopefully SKY News will make inroads into the Irish TV market.

It is up to each & every consumer to decide on where he or she decides to get their news. (or if they are bothered to get any news at all).

since when does unbiased equate to being liberal cork?

What media organisations are independant & don't have their own agendas?

Singling out Fox News is unfair.

Cork

Originally posted by Gerry
The majority of the great american public, Cork, are not getting their news from a variety of sources. They are mainly getting it from Fox and CNN, and tabloid newspapers. What they accept as gospel affects how they vote in the US presidential election, which affects the whole world. Its only a little bit important.

They are many in this country who rely on tabloid newspapers & RTE for their news.

Look at the news content of the tabloids or RTE's talk radio?

Gerry

Maybe they do, but Joe Duffy and the Star/Sun/Whoever are hardly right wing cheerleaders, now are they? The media in this country may be biased in some ways, but it lacks the hard, military edge of Fox. Thats why I watch Fox.

bus77

Sure didnt Dev Valera own the Idependent and a few other papers, goin a bit far back I know, but that type of thing has been goin on since day one.

DeVore

I think someones been reading my journal

DeV.

mike65

Sure didnt Dev Valera own the Idependent and a few other papers, goin a bit far back I know, but that type of thing has been goin on since day one.

The Irish Press group was FF in print for decades.

Mike.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Cork
What media organisations are independant & don't have their own agendas?

Singling out Fox News is unfair.

But Fox News continually markets itself as not having a biased agenda ("fair and balanced" anyone) while critizing organisations such as the BBC for being anti this and pro that. It is the blatent bias and opion lead "news" (constantly much much worse than anything the BBC or CNN has ever been) while at the same time the continual "we are the only non-bias news source" crap that really pisses people off about Fox News.

People wouldn't mind so much if they just came out and said we were right-wing, pro-republican in our views and wish to present a republican news outlet.

jank

one of the problem is that there are so much more sources of news out there that they they try and sell the news to people

foxnews are always on about ratings and how the american public vote with their so called zappers and how fox wins out all the time. news reporting isnt a commercial commodity that should be sold to someone
It should be based on the facts, the truth and delivered in a unbiased way, something fox news seems incapable of, and then go off and attack the left wing loonies like the bbc :rolleyes:

anytime someone critises fox their comback is always "well just look at out ratings!!"(bill o reilly always loves to compare the sales of his book to others like hillary clinton and other lefties, his comes out on top so that means he is right the most time about topics that come under discussion!!!?? logic anyone)

news reporting in general is becoming more tabloidy and trashy so to catch the public eyes and to attact better ratings! and sales

Cork

Originally posted by Wicknight


People wouldn't mind so much if they just came out and said we were right-wing, pro-republican in our views and wish to present a republican news outlet.

But newspapers don't come out & state their favoured agendas or political partys.

Look at the campaign that was launched aganist property tax?

Was this balanced, fair & unbiased?

No media source is balanced, fair & unbiased.

We even had a political party in Ireland bemoaning that they did not get "Charlie Bird" to cover their election campaign.

You have Fox news & web sites - for an alternative slant on events - I find them interesting. But you should not shoot the messanger - if you disagree with the message.

news reporting in general is becoming more tabloidy and trashy so to catch the public eyes and to attact better ratings! and sales

I agree. Standards on TV news & newspapers have fallen. When I see soft focus "touchy feely" tabloid stories being covered by news organisations - It makes me switch off.

Maybe certain demograpics like these storys.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Cork
But newspapers don't come out & state their favoured agendas or political partys.

Well should they not at least stop saying they are unbiased and non-paritisan in their oppions then?? It is like the Guardian stating it represented the true face of Conservative England.

Originally posted by Cork
No media source is balanced, fair & unbiased.

Exactly, so would it not be a good idea for them to stop saying they are, and then viciously attacking other organisations for not being fair and balance. You would never get any "opion" attacking FOX News, like the one attacking the BBC above, on any other major news station (RTE, BBC, CNN). It is a joke.

Originally posted by Cork
You have Fox news & web sites - for an alternative slant on events - I find them interesting. But you should not shoot the messanger - if you disagree with the message.

But FOX News is the message, not the messanger. Thats the point. They are not presenting news as someone elses message, they are making the message up in the first place. The attack against the BBC is Fox's crusade, because Murdock hates the BBC. So FOX News takes any chance to attack them. Ironically Murdock dropped the BBC News service from his China stations because the Chineses government didn't like the BBC reporting on human rights in China. I would love to hear FOX News response to that. You would laugh if it wasn't so serious.

Cork

Fox news is not unbiased and it does offer a pro us & conservattive view on the news.

There is nothing wrong with alternative openion.

I won't rely on Fox News as my daily source of news.

But - do ye not find having an alternative view on world events interesting.

Joe Lee once offered an openion that all is not black or white - but parts of history are grey.

Can't people get views from many media sources & then make up their own mind.

(Point of information: I don't regularly watch Fox News. I've watched about an hour of it in the last year.)

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.netfeed.com/~jhill/RupertMurdoch.htm

On February 14, a Florida Appeals Court ruled that there is absolutely nothing illegal in a major media organisation lying, concealing or distorting information. The court reversed the US$425,000 jury verdict of 2000 that was in favour of journalist Jane Akre, who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information.

On August 18, 2000, a six?person jury was nanimous in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted or slanted" story about the widespread use of Monsanto's rBGH, a genetically engineered growth hormone given to dairy cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers.

Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there there is no hard, fast and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued that the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.

flogen

the fact is fox, like many stations, are Blatantly bias. they claim to be fair etc, but are not, and so should not say they are. if they sold themselves as a right wing look at the news it would be a bit better.
The reason why they can get away with it is because the liable laws in the US are much more lenient that here and the UK, and any change in that by anyone will be met by huge critisism and claims of censorship etc. Can you imagine how stations like CNN, NBC or Fox would react if they were told they had to steer clear of comment on the news. If Fox was UK based they would be sued every day, which is why their english sub, Sky News, is alot less sensational than Fox, but is still very dodgy.
Also, remember that the US dont have any (or many) PSBs (such as BBC or RTE, everything is corporate).
Look at who owns Fox, Murdock is in serious cahoots with the Republicans, and it is in his interest to do what he can to keep them in power. Its no coincidence that Fox, the Sun, Sky etc were all pro-war and pro-bush, and failed on numerous levels to criticise him, and even now as the inquireys are being set up they still do what they can to dodgy questioning him.

Flogen

ixoy

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
http://www.netfeed.com/~jhill/RupertMurdoch.htm

Eek! Horribly interesting. I can't believe they can lie and their right to lie is protected?! Well it helps promote the self delusion some Americans live under...

sovtek

Originally posted by jank
its a good thing i dont have digital other wise id probably have thrown some thing through the screen by now!

I get that urge just about everytime I turn on the TV when I'm visiting the parents in America.
CBS, CNN, ABC and CBS aren't much better.
Even PBS can be pretty bad...
Ever heard of Charlie Rose?

Zombrex

Originally posted by Cork

Can't people get views from many media sources & then make up their own mind.

Yes but it is important to criticise the "reporting" FOX News does, otherwise people would assume it is true.

If no one ever said "hang on a minute" to the reports FOX puts out, then people watching it would assume it is true rather than what ever proaganda the Fox management want to push today.