FOX shows boths sides, not

Sand

Actually, according to a survery carried out in September 2004 (the article links to the institute that carries it out - look for the June 8th 2004 dataset), Fox News is only trusted by 29% of declared Republicans whereas it is trusted by 26% of declared Democrats. That makes it the *most* trusted Republican TV news source and the *least* trusted Democrat TV news source. The painting of Fox viewers as slack jawed yokels hanging on every word is just that - a caricature. If anything, Bush voters are far less trusting of media than say, Kerry voters are.

As for Outfoxed? Sorry, was it supposed to come up with different answers to Fox=teh evil?

cousin_borat

couldnt sleep last night and ended up watching TV. Debate on Fox News re the Democrats chances in Texas in the next election, at 3AM in the morning!! This wasnt a repeat either, very funny

The_Minister

cousin_borat wrote:

couldnt sleep last night and ended up watching TV. Debate on Fox News re the Democrats chances in Texas in the next election, at 3AM in the morning!! This wasnt a repeat either, very funny

I doubt it was 3AM in America

lili

cousin_borat wrote:

couldnt sleep last night and ended up watching TV. Debate on Fox News re the Democrats chances in Texas in the next election, at 3AM in the morning!! This wasnt a repeat either, very funny

and what are the democrats chances in texas?
don't answer, i was just jokking:)

The_Minister

zuma

You do realise that the Fox News we watch on channel 5XX is the exact same as the US version but we dont have to watch their adds, hence the weather!

3AM here would be 22:00 in New York and 19:00 in LA.....prime viewing time and probable the most "serious" time of the day at Fox News.

ISAW

Firespinner wrote:

That is a rather petty way to right off other viewpoints. They do tend to support bush but have also disagreed with him on several occasions. They have the same viewpoint in many ways but they don't follow him like some mutt.

Really? Care to list five occasions when they disagreed with Bush? Now Fox are on 24 hours a day for several years so it shouldn't be difficult to find FIVE direct contradictions of Bush policy. Should it? actually if you can I will compile a "Fox - top ten disagreements with Bush policy from it". I don't believe you will get to five though.

One exception. Fox suggesting even more extreme measures than Bush when everyone else is calling for the opposite does NOT constitute disagreement with Bush.

ISAW

Sand wrote:

Actually, according to a survery carried out in September 2004 (the article links to the institute that carries it out - look for the June 8th 2004 dataset), Fox News is only trusted by 29% of declared Republicans whereas it is trusted by 26% of declared Democrats. That makes it the *most* trusted Republican TV news source and the *least* trusted Democrat TV news source.

Your source does NOT say that it says:
Those figures make it the most trusted news source for Republicans - but among the least trusted by Democrats.

The painting of Fox viewers as slack jawed yokels hanging on every word is just that - a caricature. If anything, Bush voters are far less trusting of media than say, Kerry voters are.

I didnt paint them as that. I showed they were more loyal to a single source of news. Your refreence to the Pew Research supportsmy contention.

As for Outfoxed? Sorry, was it supposed to come up with different answers to Fox=teh evil?

I dont understand what you mean. If you mean did Outfoxed make this point too htey did. They did it not based on opinion but on objective independent research. I posted the place where the source is. If you want to suggest the research is in error then please show where. If you dont then that research and the Pew research you provided shows Fox viewers are more suseptable to propaganda since they claim not to trust news but trust Fox more than anyone else and Democrat viewers view a broader list of sources.

The_Minister

ISAW wrote:

Really? Care to list five occasions when they disagreed with Bush? Now Fox are on 24 hours a day for several years so it shouldn't be difficult to find FIVE direct contradictions of Bush policy. Should it? actually if you can I will compile a "Fox - top ten disagreements with Bush policy from it". I don't believe you will get to five though.

Bill O'Reilly repeatedly lambasted Donald Rumsfeld.

ISAW wrote:

One exception. Fox suggesting even more extreme measures than Bush when everyone else is calling for the opposite does NOT constitute disagreement with Bush.

Yes it quite clearly does.

ISAW

Firespinner wrote:

Bill O'Reilly repeatedly lambasted Donald Rumsfeld.

Really? About what and when? references please

Yes it quite clearly does.

Being more extreme than the Bush line when everone else is against the line does not constitute opposition. It is a bit like saying you oppose rubber bullets because you want them replaced by lead bullets. Quite clearly you can distort this into a claim that you opposed rubber bullets. But the underlying context is that people don;t want other people harmed. THe replacement of rubber with lead bullets create an even worse situation. Calling for Bush to be even more extreme is not the same as opposing what he does and asking him to desist.

Now where are those examples of where Fox OPPOSED Bush policies.

Another exception - do not include the occasional token opposition that Fox sometimes bring on as representative of "the opposition" as being a Fox news line.

ISAW

Firespinner wrote:

Bill O'Reilly ...

Is this "fair and balanced" free speech O reilly who wants everyone else he doesnt agree with to "shut up".

http://www.slate.com/id/2087706/?0si=-


He is so "fair and balanced" (let us not forget how we came into this - I asked you to show examples of Fox criticisms of the Bush line as part of a general claim to "fair and balanced") that he even said on his show that he probably only once told anyone to "shut up".

I can't believe you can show the O Reilly Factor is anything but pro the Bush line, or indeed more extreme like the neo-cons libraterians who have disbanded in order to take over the GOP.

ISAW

Originally Posted by ISAW
One exception. Fox suggesting even more extreme measures than Bush when everyone else is calling for the opposite does NOT constitute disagreement with Bush.

Firespinner wrote:

Bill O'Reilly repeatedly lambasted Donald Rumsfeld.
...
Yes it quite clearly does.

Which is why I closed that door before you tried the trick of opening it by making it an EXCEPTION to what I asked.

The_Minister

ISAW wrote:

Being more extreme than the Bush line when everone else is against the line does not constitute opposition .

Of course it does! That is complete rubbish! Bush is not at the top of any extremist scale. Therefore more extreme views than his still count! Besides not everyone is against the line. Some US citizens think he is soft.

ISAW wrote:

Really? About what and when? references please.

The what is easy. He was giving out about the war in Iraq.


I am having difficulty finding specific examples so could anyone tell me where i could get transcripts of the show?
I know that they do deviate from Bush as i sit up straight whenever they do it.

*Gaijin*

speaking of fox news lines...


>>>"After 3 seasons, FOX producers are considering their options for the Paris >>>Hilton reality vehicle 'The Simple Life'. The TV show, which stars Paris >>>Hilton, heiress to the Hilton Hotels fortune, and Kimberly Stewart, >>>daughter of rock star Rod Stewart, was due to start filming for its 4th >>>season early this year. Stewart was brought into the show at the end of >>>the 3rd season, following the well publicised bust-up between long-time >>>pals Hilton and Nicole Richie, daughter of music legend Lionel.
>>>As part of a deal with Hilton's Hotel Group, the 2006 series was due to >>>start filming in Dublin, Ireland, where a new Hilton Hotel opened last year. >>>Paris and Kimberly were to be hired as housekeeping staff and sent to live >>>in an average Irish home near the hotel.
>>>>>>However, the deal seems to have struck a rock in the form of Ireland's >>>Justice Minister, Michael McDowell, who is refusing to issue visas >>>to the pair. A spokesperson for McDowell, who is no stranger to >>>controversy in Ireland, stated that visas for persons wishing to be >>>employed in the hotel industry "would not be issued under any >>>circumstance, as there are many Irish and European citizens available for >>>those jobs", but refused to comment on the specific case.
>>>The shows producers are now looking at other scenarios and locations for the 2006 series"

The_Minister

*Gaijin* wrote:

speaking of fox news lines...


>>>"After 3 seasons, FOX producers are considering their options for the Paris >>>Hilton reality vehicle 'The Simple Life'. The TV show, which stars Paris >>>Hilton, heiress to the Hilton Hotels fortune, and Kimberly Stewart, >>>daughter of rock star Rod Stewart, was due to start filming for its 4th >>>season early this year. Stewart was brought into the show at the end of >>>the 3rd season, following the well publicised bust-up between long-time >>>pals Hilton and Nicole Richie, daughter of music legend Lionel.
>>>As part of a deal with Hilton's Hotel Group, the 2006 series was due to >>>start filming in Dublin, Ireland, where a new Hilton Hotel opened last year. >>>Paris and Kimberly were to be hired as housekeeping staff and sent to live >>>in an average Irish home near the hotel.
>>>>>>However, the deal seems to have struck a rock in the form of Ireland's >>>Justice Minister, Michael McDowell, who is refusing to issue visas >>>to the pair. A spokesperson for McDowell, who is no stranger to >>>controversy in Ireland, stated that visas for persons wishing to be >>>employed in the hotel industry "would not be issued under any >>>circumstance, as there are many Irish and European citizens available for >>>those jobs", but refused to comment on the specific case.
>>>The shows producers are now looking at other scenarios and locations for the 2006 series"

Good riddence to that pair.

ISAW

Firespinner wrote:

Of course it does! That is complete rubbish! Bush is not at the top of any extremist scale. Therefore more extreme views than his still count! Besides not everyone is against the line. Some US citizens think he is soft.

It doesn't! But I don't mind discussing that. As long as you admit it is seperate to the original question about Fox criticising Bush since I asked you to give examples EXCEPT when they called for more extreme measures.

The what is easy. He was giving out about the war in Iraq.

Where with the above exception does O reilly criticisr Bush policy?

I am having difficulty finding specific examples so could anyone tell me where i could get transcripts of the show?

So
1. You can't support your own claims. You are so sure they are true but you havent gone back to look BEFORE you made the claim. This is actually a good thing since you now are prepared to go and look for evidence rather than accept the proaganda line.

2. You want others to do your research for you. This is NOT good since YOU made the claim. Fair enough if you want to withdraw the claim and then go looking or ask someone to look but like Fox News YOU made a statement as if it was fact and it was just your opinion! That is exactly what I suggested they do!

As for references I have given in this thread the link to outfoxed. In the linked transcript are the seperate objective sources. You can go and xheck out these sources yourself. Furthermore you will be aware that Outfoxed used Fox itself as their primary material. They taped six months or so of Fox so the claims they make are backed up by Fox footage. Including the LIES O Reilly told such as claiming that he only once told people to "shut up".

I know that they do deviate from Bush as i sit up straight whenever they do it.

But you can't provide ANY evidence to this? Why don't you keep a notebook and note the show time and date and list how they opposed Bush and who did it. Outfoxed does indeed show where people departed from the Bush line (see the transcript I referenced or watch the DVD - you can get it in the library if you are not prepared to spend $10). Those "experts" in spite of being regulars before that and on contract for another year of so were quickly dropped from commentary!

cousin_borat

Firespinner wrote:

I doubt it was 3AM in America

I live in America.

The_Minister

ISAW wrote:

It doesn't! But I don't mind discussing that. As long as you admit it is seperate to the original question about Fox criticising Bush since I asked you to give examples EXCEPT when they called for more extreme measures.!

If they criticise he for being weak and holding back than it is criticism.

ISAW wrote:

Where with the above exception does O reilly criticisr Bush policy?!

He gave out about how it was handled (organisation ie guns and armour for soldiers.)

ISAW wrote:

So
1. You can't support your own claims. You are so sure they are true but you havent gone back to look BEFORE you made the claim. This is actually a good thing since you now are prepared to go and look for evidence rather than accept the proaganda line.!

I know that i'm right i heard him say it, i just can't remember the dates or how to find the verbatim quotes. I will try and find them though. Remember im not saying fox is unbiased im saying that they do depart from bush policy.

ISAW wrote:

2. You want others to do your research for you. This is NOT good since YOU made the claim. Fair enough if you want to withdraw the claim and then go looking or ask someone to look but like Fox News YOU made a statement as if it was fact and it was just your opinion! That is exactly what I suggested they do!!

I asked if anyone knew where i could find transcripts as i need them for proof. Thats different then asking them to trawl through it.

ISAW wrote:

As for references I have given in this thread the link to outfoxed. In the linked transcript are the seperate objective sources. You can go and xheck out these sources yourself. Furthermore you will be aware that Outfoxed used Fox itself as their primary material. They taped six months or so of Fox so the claims they make are backed up by Fox footage. Including the LIES O Reilly told such as claiming that he only once told people to "shut up".!

I know he is biased and while he has never done it while i was watching im sure he has done that.

ISAW wrote:

But you can't provide ANY evidence to this? Why don't you keep a notebook and note the show time and date and list how they opposed Bush and who did it. Outfoxed does indeed show where people departed from the Bush line (see the transcript I referenced or watch the DVD - you can get it in the library if you are not prepared to spend $10). Those "experts" in spite of being regulars before that and on contract for another year of so were quickly dropped from commentary!

I always ment to watch outfoxed but i live in ireland so it would be more than $10. I don't know a library that has it our libraries only have books and sometimes music.

ISAW

Firespinner wrote:

If they criticise he for being weak and holding back than it is criticism.

If it is it is a type I EXCEPTED from the examples I asked you for.

He gave out about how it was handled (organisation ie guns and armour for soldiers.)

SAying "our boys arent well equipped2 is not saying "we shouldnt be there"
The policy is not to equip soldiers the policy was to occupy Iraq.

I know that i'm right i heard him say it, i just can't remember the dates or how to find the verbatim quotes. I will try and find them though. Remember im not saying fox is unbiased im saying that they do depart from bush policy.

Not good enough. Provide the evidence or WITHDRAW what you suggest is a fact until you do. Aeeopt it is your OPINION and NOT a fact.

I asked if anyone knew where i could find transcripts as i need them for proof. Thats different then asking them to trawl through it.

A simple search on "fox news transcripts" yielded serveral for me.
There is also abundant references in the outfoxed transcript for which I posted a reference.

I know he is biased and while he has never done it while i was watching im sure he has done that.

I.e. you dont know at all! you sound more like Fox all the time!

I always ment to watch outfoxed but i live in ireland so it would be more than $10. I don't know a library that has it our libraries only have books and sometimes music.

You are wrong! Ever heard of inter library loans? If you cant find it in the catalogue

By the way outfoxed.org sell it for $7.95
you can watch it online here:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7798.htm

thewillow

*Gaijin* wrote:

speaking of fox news lines...


>>>"After 3 seasons, FOX producers are considering their options for the Paris >>>Hilton reality vehicle 'The Simple Life'. The TV show, which stars Paris >>>Hilton, heiress to the Hilton Hotels fortune, and Kimberly Stewart, >>>daughter of rock star Rod Stewart, was due to start filming for its 4th >>>season early this year. Stewart was brought into the show at the end of >>>the 3rd season, following the well publicised bust-up between long-time >>>pals Hilton and Nicole Richie, daughter of music legend Lionel.
>>>As part of a deal with Hilton's Hotel Group, the 2006 series was due to >>>start filming in Dublin, Ireland, where a new Hilton Hotel opened last year. >>>Paris and Kimberly were to be hired as housekeeping staff and sent to live >>>in an average Irish home near the hotel.
>>>>>>However, the deal seems to have struck a rock in the form of Ireland's >>>Justice Minister, Michael McDowell, who is refusing to issue visas >>>to the pair. A spokesperson for McDowell, who is no stranger to >>>controversy in Ireland, stated that visas for persons wishing to be >>>employed in the hotel industry "would not be issued under any >>>circumstance, as there are many Irish and European citizens available for >>>those jobs", but refused to comment on the specific case.
>>>The shows producers are now looking at other scenarios and locations for the 2006 series"

Yeah, I heard that on the radio the other day. McDowell is such a tosser. He does everything to the letter of the law when it suits him. A couple of spliffs would sort him out.

Cork

ISAW wrote:

Is this "fair and balanced" free speech O reilly who wants everyone else he doesnt agree with to "shut up".

Where is the obligation to be "fair and balanced"?

Is Daily Ireland "fair and balanced"?

Where was the "fair and balance" on "Rip Off Republic"?

But instead of looking at Irish Media - Fox News is being bashed.

Nobody is being forced to watch it.

ISAW

Cork wrote:

Where is the obligation to be "fair and balanced"?

1. It is their registered Trade Mark
2. It is the subject of this discussion thread.

Is Daily Ireland "fair and balanced"?

so what? That is a fallacy!
Just because someone else might also be unbalanced does not mean FOX are! and Fox is the subject of the thread not daily Ireland not Al Jazera.
Even if Daily ireland are not fair two wrongs do not make a right.

Where was the "fair and balance" on "Rip Off Republic"?

Ditto!
Look. I am not claiminf all media is fair and balanced FOX are claiming that they are!
It is pointless even if you prove all other media are unfair and unbalanced. the point is whether or not FOX are as they claim!

But instead of looking at Irish Media - Fox News is being bashed.

It is the subject of this thread!
I am quite happy to discuss the wat the Sindo has a go at the dead Liam Lawlor on another thread if you wish. But Fox is the subject of this discussion.

Nobody is being forced to watch it.

As it happens I don't watch it. except sometimes for entertainment since it is not news.

Nor is anyone being forced to express any opinion on the occupation of Iraq or the starving in africa,asia. Nor are you forced to do or say anything about crime or the economy or to vote. The people who do watch happen to believe it and believe that it is fair and balanced. It isn't!

Cork

Fox News is poor.

It is one view of news.

I am not defending fox and I prefer to to watch such stuff, but news is full of spin anyway.

DublinWriter

Feux News.