Why do Fox News hate Obama?

jank

Chrsit that will be some interview but it will only last abnout 5 minutes. How do you think it will go?

Dont think Billo will go out all guns blazing cause this will be mainstream news and he will make himself look like an idiot but then again he has many times before so i dont know. Obama is too smart to be outdone by such smuck!

Good move, reps will be switching from McCains speach (zzzzz) to the factor seeing whats up.

cooker3

Hobbes wrote: »

You mean you never heard of it?

*taps in google "shepherd smith naomi wolf"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg8LhxYqBJs

So this is an example of non-opinionated?

Yeah, he went over the top there but nothing huge tbh.
Point is, there is a very obvious difference between watching the fox report and then O'Reilly, hannity & colmes.

norbert64

cooker3 wrote: »

Yeah, he went over the top there but nothing huge tbh.
Point is, there is a very obvious difference between watching the fox report and then O'Reilly, hannity & colmes.

technically the voice over for the factor says the ''#1 cable news show''.

shouldn't that be #1 cable opinion show?

BTW, there may be trouble ahead :P
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/barack-obama-to-appear-on_n_123702.html

Pocono Joe

Remember when Obama said he'll meet with the leaders of nations that support terrorism -- without preconditions?

Do you think he'll have the same policy with Bill O'Reily of FoxNews? :rolleyes:

Hobbes

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Do you think he'll have the same policy with Bill O'Reily of FoxNews? :rolleyes:

You are aware that Obama will not go on Fox News for them claiming he went to a Madrassa as a child and then inferring it was a terrorist training camp.

Why in gods name would anyone want to go on a show that was peddling that bull****?

Pocono Joe

You are aware that Barack Obama is appearing on Bill O'Reily's show tonight. Bill will be a gentleman, fair and balanced... as always.

Hobbes

Pocono Joe wrote: »

You are aware that Barack Obama is appearing on Bill O'Reily's show tonight. Bill will be a gentleman, fair and balanced... as always.

Should be interesting to watch. Might give him a chance to draw Fox up on the BS reporting.

Wonder if he will cut his mic when he realizes he is losing the argument. Or heaven forbid O'Reilly may actually ask questions rather then trying to inject his opinion into everything.

norbert64

man, it would have been so much fun if he went on Countdown first, lol.

Pocono Joe

Unlike John Kerry, Obama realizes the power and pull of FoxNews. By not appearing on it, Kerry seemed timid and weak. Obama knows better. His people approached Bill, with the requirement that he appear tonight only, and be ahead of John McCain's speech (it will be 2 hours ahead). Bill said he knows it's a shameless effort of the Obama team to steal some of the spotlight away from McCain, but in the spirit of fairness, he has to put him on.

So take your blood pressure pills. Won't want anyone here having a heart attack when you see a really good interview that is FAIR AND BALANCED (seriously, it really it will be, there will be some tough questions, but I think most here will be surprised at how professional it will be and how good it will go for both of them... I'm taking bets!)

jank

It probably will be fair and balanced that's cause there will be so much attention on it and nobody has a problem with that.
The thing is though Bill will put a spin on it afterwards.

cooker3

I didn't see it. Any links around?

Hobbes

Pocono Joe wrote: »

the power and pull of FoxNews.

ROFLMAO. Thanks for cheering up my morning.

Here is the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luA0AMP51Gc

rest is monday/tuesday/wednesday ?

A Primal Nut

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Wow… they wrote a book about me. Would I find that in the Comic Book or the Fiction sections?

You could add this to balance out your reading:

That book is hilarious. On the back is quoted this intellectual masterpiece:

“The temperature of the planet has increased about one degree Fahrenheit in the last century. So imagine a summer afternoon when it’s 63 degrees and the next thing you know it’s . . . 64 degrees. Ahhhh!!!! Run for your lives, everybody! Women and children first!”

Here's another one:

“God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’”

I think that sums up most atheists problem with religion.

You would imagine stuff like that would be embarrasing to republicans and conservatives, but obviously not.

Pocono Joe

For you edification.
Satire - n. Irony, derision or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity.

A Primal Nut

Pocono Joe wrote: »

For you edification.
Satire - n. Irony, derision or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity.

This post had me baffled for a while.. When I first read this I thought you meant Ann Coulter was being satirical and you were defending her. If you are talking about yourself, I was aware you were being satirical.So I guess my post was backing you up. You would elaborate more instead of posting random definitions.

MCMLXXXIII

irish_bob wrote: »

fox news exists soley to keep as many voters as possible voting republican so as to ensure the gop remain in power and thus ensure that the likes of rupert murdochs tax bill stays small

all murdoch outlets are identical in tone , those who work on fox are just shills , there not journalists

Fox is right wing, PBS is left, and it's extremely stereotypical of each of the sides. The Public Broadcast Service is free and broadcasts across the US with a feeling of inclusion for everyone...including the poor. Fox News is a cable/satellite station, so only those that pay an extra $50-$100 per month are able to see it. Everything else is on a spectum between the two...depending on who is on.

IMO, PBS is much more tactful when discussing Republican points compared to Fox's bombastic remarks against Democrats. PBS also has older and experienced speakers, and Fox has some experienced speakers, but there are also very many younger and drop-dead goregeous reporters. Between the sex appeal and that OMG-what-are-they-going-to-say-next appeal and addiction, Fox keeps people watching meanwhile getting their beliefs across the nation and the world in a very effective manner.

ickythump wrote: »

jeb bush owns the entire fox network doesnt he? not very surprising that it's right wing...anyone seen the skit the simpsons did on it when marge (i think) was up for election? cant find the clip but funny stuff

Fox is owned by News Corporation, out of NYC. News Corporation also owns the Dow Jones...of course it's going to lean right.

Hobbes

so no one comment on the interview. Overall Obama was keeping control reasonably well despite as usual O'Reilly interrupting. Also the loaded question about asking Obama to apologize but not giving him time to finish as to why shouldn't.

Obama was also using some negotiation techniques on O'Reilly to control the conversation. What words you use can control the conversation.

For example agreeing with the question regardless of what it is and then defining what the answer is, rather then giving the definition. Also comments like "Here is where you and I agree" and then explain where they don't agree. Avoiding the word but and other negative loaded terms. Some terms were changed to target a republican audience as well.

As for O'Reilly, it wasn't an interview. If it was he wouldn't go on talking after Obama has made his points. People came to listen to Obama.

... Ann Coulter satirical? Might be possible to take her more seriously if she was.

Davywalshy

O'Reilly is an egoist who doesn't care what he says. Fox make their money by providing entertainment not because they are an impartial news broadcaster. That's the cruel nature of a capitalist world

utick

Dudess wrote: »

So he's not too pushed with the idea of women being in positions of power like a country's vice president, or of feminism... as long as they are certain TYPES of women and feminists.

Gotta love the inconsistencies of staunch conservatism...

would it make you happier if they put in a woman for the sake of putting in a woman rather than for her viewpoints?

Dudess

Yes. Of course that's what I'm saying...

brianthebard

utick wrote: »

would it make you happier if they put in a woman for the sake of putting in a woman rather than for her viewpoints?

Isn't that what they are doing? Your post confusses me.

Lirange

Dudess wrote: »

Yes. Of course that's what I'm saying...

I knew it!! Why don't you go burn a bra?!! For shame.

Sand

As for O'Reilly, it wasn't an interview. If it was he wouldn't go on talking after Obama has made his points. People came to listen to Obama.

Of course not. Obama wasnt there to talk to Fox News, he was there to try divert attention away from McCain.

O'Reilly wasnt there to listen to Obama. He was there to give him a hard time.

Obama and O'Reillys agendas coincided briefly, but you most likely wont see Obama on Fox News again when theres plenty of media outlets that will listen respectfully as he speaks and give him an easy time.

Thats politics.

Oh and for the record I thought Obama did extremely well in the interview with O'Reilly. He is a very polished performer. Its just amusing that O'Reilly questioning Obama, challenging his viewpoints [ whilst agreeing with him on others] is viewed in some circles as somehow low or poor journalism, whereas the very same people would dimiss the concept that questioning a government or representive is unpatriotic as being ridiculous. I suppose it depends on which representitive is questioned...

norbert64

OMGosh, it's liberal bias on Fox
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sharon-hughes/2008/09/07/sarah-palin-shakes-fox-news-liberals

Hobbes

Sand wrote: »

Thats politics.

It's politics, but it is not journalism.

challenging his viewpoints [ whilst agreeing with him on others] is viewed in some circles as somehow low or poor journalism,

It is how you challenge those viewpoints. The Richard Dawkins is interview is a very good example. O'Reilly doesn't counter the viewpoint or challenge it, he just stops him from talking.

Likewise with Obama, he uses a loaded question and the tries to stop Obama explaining his answer rather then a simple yes/no answer.

whereas the very same people would dimiss the concept that questioning a government or representive is unpatriotic as being ridiculous.

?? who or what is this then ??

whitey1

And here is one of a Fox News presenter suggesting someone kill Obama (which I believe is a crime, as runners get same protection as President during that time).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjYpkvcmog0

Her apology for that comment was pretty sarcastic as well. [/I][/I][/I]


Hobbbes, it was Hillary Clinton who suggested that Obama may be the target of an assassination attempt. In the clip, Fox was discussing Hillary's flap-they were not suggesting someone assassinate Obama!! I cant believe you would post something like this.

Fox is a reaction to the liberal bias of the mainstream media. Period end of discussion. Fox just reinforces the opinions of people who already ascribe to right wing beliefs. Its a cable channel-you have to pay to watch it.

As evidence of the liberal bias of MSNBC-Chris Matthews and Keith Overbloom just got relieved of their duties this morning. I rest my case your honor

Ruskie4Rent

whitey1 wrote: »

As evidence of the liberal bias of MSNBC-Chris Matthews and Keith Overbloom just got relieved of their duties this morning. I rest my case your honor

They are only taking olbermann and matthews off the anchor chairs for the election coverage, they havn't been completely 'relieved of their duties'. I think it's good that MSNBC are taking a stand against their percieved bias, unlike fox they are showing that they care about journalistic integrity.

norbert64

well, they were also fighting like children too, lol.

while it makes good car crash tv, it doesn't exactly shine the best of light on a supposedly professional news outlet.

In other news, what do you think Fox will make of this. :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKGdkqfBICw

Hobbes

whitey1 wrote: »

Hobbbes, it was Hillary Clinton who suggested that Obama may be the target of an assassination attempt.

Did you even watch the clip???? She says "Well both if we could". You also probably didn't see her sarcastic apology for saying it afterward either.

In her apology she didn't mention she was channeling Hillary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plrcs0J2BpQ

Its a cable channel-you have to pay to watch it.

Most people have a TV have cable and you get it on basic cable (least I did when I lived there).

As evidence of the liberal bias of MSNBC-Chris Matthews and Keith Overbloom just got relieved of their duties this morning.

If there was liberal bias wouldn't they leave Olbermann alone? Actually I agree with his comments. Using the 9/11 tragedy for political reasons is nasty. If Democrats had done it you would expect the likes of fox news wailing for someones head on a stick.

Anyway he isn't relieved of his duties, just moved off the political night coverage.

norbert64

technically Liz Trotta was just a guest speaker/analyst/talking head on Fox.

although, one could certainly argue, that Fox should take better care of what they allow on their airwaves.