I hear it constantly from all my friends, "Fox news is such a propaganda outfit, I'll never watch it". They site time after time where Hillary gets attacked by some Fox news commentator. In my opinion, the comments are somewhat justified, but not for the reasons my friends give me. During the primetime hours, Fox has mostly commentary shows on, and pretty much all of the commentators on Fox are right wing guys (save Alan Combs). But commentary is commentary. I have yet to see Fox cover a story under the guys of News, and spin it right. I say I can agree with my friends because I think you can see a News outlet's spin by what they choose not to cover. For instance, a friend of mine brought to my attention that W recruited massive amounts of attorneys to work for the federal government out of an extremely underrated law school run by a well known television evangelist. Bull**** I thought. Something that big I would know about by watching the news. Well, I checked it out, and it was true. So there you have it, spin by omission.

I then find myself watching the Republican You Tube debates on CNN. While I'm watching the show, I find my jaw dropping at the questions being asked the candidates. Questions that weren't so much questions as attacks on republican stances on issues:

Would you arrest a mother who had an abortion if RoevWade got overturned?
Why wont you let gays in the military?
Why dont blacks vote for republicans?

I'm thinking to myself, jesus, this is a republican primary debate, where republicans are supposedly making decisions as to which candidate they would vote for, and here are all these questions that seem more like attacks on republican views. I'm smelling yellow journalism.

When the debate wound up, CNN went to it's undecided republican voter focus group, and asks a woman in the group if she made up her mind as to who she will vote for. She says, "Yes, im thinking John edwards". WHAT??!!!! This is CNNs idea of an undecided republican?

After the debates it turns out that several of these questioners are actively stumping for one of the Democratic candidates, and the majority of the remaining questions came from rabid Ron Paul supporters, who could hardly be considered mainstream republican. One of the questioners, the gays in the military guy, turns out to co-chair the steering committee for Hillary Clintons Gay and Lesbian supporters. This guy CNN put on a plane and flew to the debate, paying all his expenses. After the candidates answered his question, he was one of two people in the studio audience given a microphone to rebut the candidates answer. CNN gave this Hilary promoter almost a minute and a half to tell the world why none of the candidates gave a satisfactory answer and why they all sucked.

CNN naturally apologized and stated they had no idea of this man's political affiliations or any of the other questioners, but come on. His affiliations, and the others, were on page one Google, owner of you-tube. You flew his *** out, paid his expenses, handed him a microphone, and you couldn't look him up in Google? Bull****.

I've always felt I needed to watch several news outlets, including CNN, to get the whole story, but after watching CNN screen 5000 Youtube questions down to the 34 THEY wanted asked to air their political viewpoints, I really feel like having their steam tray permanently removed from my news media buffet table.

Their right about fox news! I live in Ireland I have the American news station's they tell story's completly different to what Europe and Russia say.

Take oil scares like in Iraq America gets scared that oil supply will be disrubted which it never does its only to justify war and extra profit for oil company's.

I have to laugh at fox news with the "terror alert high" scrolling accross the screen 24hrs a day when a plane crashes you get breaking news on European station's on American news station's its a suspected terror attack.

I find the whole youtube thing a bit odd all these questions have been pre answered by their pr teams that woul never happen in Ireland people would ask how this is happening.

You need to take away their writen up speach's and watch them panic all speach's ever shown on American tv have been prewriten.

Originally Posted by cbwm

pretty much all of the commentators on Fox are right wing guys (save Alan Combs)

If Alan Combs isn't a right wing guy, I'm shortstop for the New York Yankees, and you're Elvis Presley.

On the note of the Faux News's credibility, what do you think of Bill O'Reilly's two Peabody Awards? The most prestigious award in journalism, you know.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Does anyone still believe one thing the media has to say?

They're usually right about the date, and occasionally the weather, but that may just be luck.

Ummm... not really...

That's my short answer.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

what do you think of Bill O'Reilly's two Peabody Awards? The most prestigious award in journalism, you know.

I have no idea what a Peabody Award specifically says about the person who received it, but if it means journalistic integrity, I'd say it belongs on the same shelf of nonsense awards as Al Gore's Oscar and Nobel Peace prize. If the award indicates the recipient has done an exceptional job at generating record level audiences, it is likely well deserved.

Originally Posted by audiomad

I live in Ireland I have the American news station's they tell story's completly different to what Europe and Russia say.

Exactly! Its like anyone with a news outlet is using it to pump their personal viewpoints, especially, and specifically the mainstream media. My favorite example of this was when OJ was found "Not Guilty", the headline from the Oakland newspaper was "FREE AT LAST!". The headline from one of Germany's top newspapers was "WRONG VERDICT".

It is irritating I have to read three newspapers, watch two media news outlets, and then roll the web logs, and then read between the lines to be able to form a proper opinion.

Since the disater with George W, i dont believe anything FAUX has to say. As you guys have stated most of it is right wing propaganda. There arent really to many reliable sources you can get your news from now days, except for the Associated Press and REUTERS but sometimes they are wrong too..

Originally Posted by cbwm

I have no idea what a Peabody Award specifically says about the person who received it, but if it means journalistic integrity, I'd say it belongs on the same shelf of nonsense awards as Al Gore's Oscar and Nobel Peace prize. If the award indicates the recipient has done an exceptional job at generating record level audiences, it is likely well deserved.

A commentator who yells down anyone who disagrees with him is not a journalist and shouldn't receive a journalism award.

Originally Posted by joder

A commentator who yells down anyone who disagrees with him is not a journalist and shouldn't receive a journalism award.

I couldnt agree more, although you have to admit his antics are hilarious at points..

Originally Posted by GeekRack

I couldnt agree more, although you have to admit his antics are hilarious at points..

You would think until you realize there are a lot of people that think he is right about everything. I used to watch Oreilly, Hannity and Beck just to see what the far-right was listening too. I had to shut it off. I can't sit around and listen to lies all the time.

Bill O'Lielly must have the highest blood pressure ever recorded. Every time I look at him, I think he's going to fall over and die of pure rage.

The man doesn't have any Peabody awards, by the way. He just really likes telling people he won 2 of them. A TV show he used to work for won a Polk award several years after he left, and it "evolved" if you will, from a Polk award he didn't have anything to do with, to a Peabody award "it's the most prestigious award in journalism, you know" to 2 Peabody awards. When cornered, he says "well, they both start with the same letter, and a Polk is just as prestigious as a Peabody" and sort of ignores the part about him having nothing to do with the 1 Polk, not to mention that he seems to be saying there are 2 most prestigious awards in journalism.

Originally Posted by joder

I used to watch Oreilly, Hannity and Beck just to see what the far-right was listening too.

/Cough. Perhaps you should go check out the Nielson ratings. If only the far-right listens/watches Oreilly, Hannity, and Fox, that would make 70% of the viewing public far-right. If there were that many far-right out there, the republicans would still control congress. More than likely, the extreme left make up a large share of Fox's viewers. How funny/kinky is that.

Originally Posted by cbwm

/Cough. Perhaps you should go check out the Nielson ratings. If only the far-right listens/watches Oreilly, Hannity, and Fox, that would make 70% of the viewing public far-right. If there were that many far-right out there, the republicans would still control congress. More than likely, the extreme left make up a large share of Fox's viewers. How funny/kinky is that.

I can change that to what the far-right is SAYING. If you look at news from various sources, it's telling the news and events that shows on FOX news will never mention.

Ah yes, what the far right is SAYING, which reiterates the point of my original post. Bias by omission. CNN and most network broadcast outlets omit information in favor of the left, Fox omits in favor of the right. Given that Hannity and ORielly don't try to present their commentary under the guise of News, perhaps Fox is more honest about it's Bias. It seems the folks at CNN, and more specifically CNNI really have yet to come out of the closet.

CNN has a lot of commentators in the evenng. But I have yet to see them when "reporting" on something a republican has done, run a scoller across the screen referring to them as a Democrat like FOX has done. Glenn Beck is on CNN and is as crazy and right as they come. Of course, he is CNN's attempt to get conservative viewers.

What, in your opinion, is CNN omitting?

I don't look at any TV news outlet to get the details. Look at the Terry Shivo case for instance. Both CNN and FOX interviewed a chiropractor as a medical expert in the case.

Originally Posted by cbwm

/Cough. Perhaps you should go check out the Nielson ratings. If only the far-right listens/watches Oreilly, Hannity, and Fox, that would make 70% of the viewing public far-right. If there were that many far-right out there, the republicans would still control congress. More than likely, the extreme left make up a large share of Fox's viewers. How funny/kinky is that.

You need to revisit your stats. Keith Olbermann has been wiping the floor with Bill O'Reilly's ratings. The only people who watch O'Reilly are in their 70s - every time you hear an ambulance go by, there's an O'Reilly fan.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Ah yes, what the far right is SAYING, which reiterates the point of my original post. Given that Hannity and ORielly don't try to present their commentary under the guise of News, perhaps Fox is more honest about it's Bias.

Now there's blind following if I ever saw it. Honest about it's bias? "Fair and balanced - we repute you decide?" Not under the guise of news? Tell me what's the second word in the name of the channel those hacks are on?

Next we'll hear about how Bush really does have a 130 % approval rating. And how we already won the civil war in Iraq, how Saudi Arabia is some how a moderate Islamic state, and Pakistan is a model democracy.

What does CCN omit? Read the post that started the thread. Funny that the blogsphere lit up with the clear incompetence and prejudice shown by CNN, yet MSNBC and a few others didn't even find it newsworthy. Obviously Fox did.

I'll never forget Wolf Blitzers interview with Zell Miller after his speech at the RNC. Look it up on Youtube, its worth a re-watch. CNNI was busy trying to claim that the military wasn't honest, in an "Expose" with the death toll in Iraq, as they did not include deaths from training accidents. Funny how deaths from training accidents happen in time of peace as our military is constantly training, yet it wasn't an issue then.

I'd say CNN goes a bit beyond omission and steps daintily across the "Yellow Journalism" line quite a bit. The political viewpoints of their "Newscasters", not their commentators, is made clear in almost every story.

Originally Posted by cbwm

What does CCN omit? Read the post that started the thread. Funny that the blogsphere lit up with the clear incompetence and prejudice shown by CNN, yet MSNBC and a few others didn't even find it newsworthy. Obviously Fox did.

CNN = Contains No News

I don't know where you got the idea that a channel with 3 viewers is a liberal bastion?