As part of my Job working in Command Centers for the Navy and Coast Guard I end up watching up to 48 hours of news in a 12 hour period because we have 4 42" screens usually on news channels (some times VH1, or Food Network). During the day the TVs are usually CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and a local News, such as NWCN (North West Cable News).

So....
Riddle me this, Batman; when is a News Channel not a News Channel?
How about when it reports stuff that isn't news because it never happened?
Fox news has been using so many Question Marks in headlines to report things that may or may not happened it makes me wonder if they have Mathew Lesko informercials on ways to get money from the gov't or the Riddler behind the scenes making riddles that the Bat Computer is trying to detect and solve.

Usually these things are about the current administration and more often than not even remotely true. But hey, you heard about the possibility of screwed up potential stuff first at fox news and their sponsors thank you.

Yeah yeah, Fox News, we get it. You are the conservative/republican/religious right-wing voice, ears and possibly self proclaimed brain. You cater to your audience and what you think your audience would like to hear. You can generate interest by picking apart speeches and claiming to hear something else that isn't there.

Fox News, you are all characters of what you may think you are. You probably know this on some level. Hell, you probably get in to character before you come on because you think this is good for ratings. Do you not find it odd that the Character of Stephen Colbert has more credibility than you when it comes to reporting the news and doing interviews? You are pretty much whores. Speaking of which, having a pretty blonde girl say something to make it better only worked for GW Bush (with Dana Perino) and Dave Chappel (with that pretty girl that sang his thoughts). On the other hand, I am sure that Carrie Prejean is looking forward to collecting a paycheck from y'all.

Everytime you insist on something being there that is not, everytime you put a question mark at the end of a headline that the other news channels wouldn't even touch, everytime you make much ado about nothing, you are one step closer to Tabloid Journalism with out the fascinating stories about El Chupacabra, Sasquatch or pictures of celebrities in bikinis (which sometimes look like Chupacabra and Sasquatches).

On the brightside, its nice to know that with Fox News reporting things the way it does, there is no chance of the Daily Show not having any material to work with.

_________________

I find the Onion more credible.

_________________

(foxnewsticker)Did Obama eat a baby?(/foxnewsticker)

I'll be honest back when I was watching more cable news I heard Fox was getting good ratings and I figured it was worth a try. After ten minutes of Bill O'Reilly I changed the channel and never looked back.


Fox news disturbs me greatly ... While freedom of speech is one of the hallmark's of America I'm shocked that Fox news is allowed on the air while calling themselves a news channel. There are laws that require equal coverage right? I don't think it counts if you just call your self fair and balanced then shout over anyone with a dissenting opinion. I guess the only thing that scares me more than Fox news is the people that believe everything they say. I loved the interview on Letterman though where Dave just told O'Reily that he just didn't believe the horseshit he was spewing.

I like switching to CNN and whoever is talking is like "LETS HEAD ON OVER TO MYSPACE AND SEE WUT OUR VIEWERS THINK"

Those are three distinct groups, which, to some extent, cannot stand one another. According to you, an objective person is apparently supposed to believe that Fox News soeaks for a monolithic voting bloc, all of whom are too stupid to think on their own. Moreover, all Republicans are conservative "religious right" people (which is apparently understood to be Christians, but is conveniently undefined by you); that all conservatives are Republicans who are "religious right"; and all "religious right" people are conservatives and Republicans. Many conservatives are atheists or agnostics; many Republicans climbed into bed with the Messiah before he was elected to the White House; and polling information after the last election showed that some people identified as "religious right" voted for McCain, while others supported the Messiah. How does Fox News speak and think for a monolithic group, when the group you've described isn't truly monolithic?

Oops.

As opposed to every other media outlet, correct? Keith Olbermann never plays fast and loose with current events, and CNN would never dream of being anything other than morally upright and honest (whatever the hell that means). And you're saying Fox News essentially lives in a fantasy world? Besides, you're ignoring the fact that a good many people believe (probbaly correctly) that the "approved" news media constantly put out distorted, biased, and possibly even -- dare I say it? -- false information due to their own beliefs, and in order to cater to their audiences and advertisers? Are the people who disagree with the "approved" information supposed to listen to it anyway, even if they find it morally repugnant if not plainly wrong? Or, do they have a right to go elsewhere?

(BTW, in a free society, who decides which sources of information -- much less opinions, beliefs, customs, and ideas -- are acceptable, and which are not? I thought everone is supposed to be able to believe, say amd do as they please. By your words, aren't you really saying that people's freedoms should be limited by the government or another entity for their (and society's) own good?)



Not exactly.


That's part of natural law, which are rights granted to humanity by what Jefferson called "Nature's God" -- as opposed to rights granted to individuals by the government, which could be revoked by the next leader. In any case, to address your comments....

1) Equal coverage of what, exactly?
2) What constitutes "equal coverage?"
3) If you believe "equal coverage" means "everybody gets to say what they believe without interference from anyone else so that I can make up my own mind, and the facts of a story shall be presented without any bias at all," then you should make sure that all media outlets everywhere, not just Fox News, are held to those standards, all day, every day.
4) Prohibiting the airing of different opinions violates the First Amendment (see above).
5) Shutting down dissenting viewpoints or opinions with which you disagree is a hallmark of fascism. not "fairness," "accuracy" or "truth," and again is a violation of the US Constitution.



As opposed to the twin assholes of MSNBC, Chris Matthews and Keith "You, Sir!" Olbermann. Although, to be fair, they don't pretend to be fair and balanced about a damn thing -- but they still think anyone who disagrees with them is an ignoramus.



The same can be said of any news organization. Every newspaper, bloger, and broadcast company is biased -- partly for marketing reasons, partly for a desire to make money, and partly because their employees are all biased in one way or another. So, saying Fox has some bias is correct, particularly due to its commentators. However, the implication that Fox alone is biased is incorrect. For example, NBC and its cable affiiliates give the Messiah glowing coverage because their people pretty much all voted for him, and because NBC's parent, General Electric, is desperate for government contracts, particularly for wind turbines. ABC is turning over a newscast and 2 or 3 hours of prime time to the Messiah this coming week in order to convince Americans that it's good for the government to decide which doctor you can see, when -- while not allowing dissenting opinions to be heard. And so on.

Basically, the best advice here is the same advice people give for not listening to other programming they find offensive: If you disagree with Fox News, don't watch it! There's nobody forcing you to watch that network, or any other. Too bad that, apparently, there are people who simply cannot allow other people to have views that are counter to their own. And you guys bitch about a lack of freedom and integrity?

(For the record, I don't watch Fox. I just think it's a horrific idea to limit free speech, or to determine what people can or cannot think, say, or believe, simply because one person is different from another.)

While it's true that O'Reilly isn't half as smart, talented or forthright as he seems to think he is, it's also true that Letterman himself is a horse's ass, too -- that's been his schtick for his entire career.

_________________
"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

-- Marcus Tullius Cicero

Just turn on BBC America.

Bale - Agreed on many points. No one is forced to watch it. But objective reporting is critical to a free society imo. I'm tired of propaganda spin machines on ALL sides. Fox and MSNBC are both particularly egregious to me, but Fox slightly moreso because I'm a Goldwater Republican and the retards calling themselves Republicans that get quality airtime sicken me. CNN is equally worthless now, as I'm sorry, but Robin Meade, while an amazing piece of ass, is not exactly the best journalist out there, and I don't give a flying fuck about her, or her readers, tweets.

Solution? Watch BBC America.

Note: Nancy Grace needs to die in a fucking fire using her twins as kindling.

Bale, you remind me of my girlfriend in the way that you try to pick a fight with me where there is no argument. You are annoying. Shut up.

Elessar, I don't think I am being forced to watch Fox News, but considering the nature of my job and that at one of the command centers it is specifically written in the orders that one of the TVs will be on Fox news its hard to avoid it.

As for Nancy Grace, I am more worried about her hair.

_________________

Agreed. I hate that woman.

_________________

Sorry for the double post.

http://nancygracemustdie.com/

_________________

Great post Bale.

Damn, Bale...think you got a little defensive there?

You can usually determine which people use Fox News as their sole source of information. The same Kool-Aid drinking drones that had the "Rush Is Right" bumper stickers back in the 90s.

And that's not to say all Republicans fall in that category. Just some.

CNN is fine, but they often post stupid news stories ("Governor Palin Is Angry at Media, Video at 11").

I agree with you Elessar, BBC News seems the most balanced, fact-based news source on TV.

_______________________
______________________________________________
_______________________

Well I checked really quick and what I was referring to was the Fairness Doctrine which was repealed by the FCC under Reagan. Although there have been a few attempts to bring something like it back.

Also I never said anything about MSNBC being better.... neither did anyone else. This post was about Fox news. I also have no issue with those with a differing opinion. I do however have a problem when that opinion is labeled as "news" and broadcast out to the world. There are a lot of very dumb people in the world and I'm pretty sure a good majority of them have issues discerning an opinion from news when it's broadcast as such.

Oh and of course Letterman is a horse's ass ..... he's also a comedian, but that doesn't make Bill O'Reily anything other than a tired blowhard.