Posted on Apr 9, 2014
Fox News Opinion Programming v. Everyone Else!
16.5K
442
198
8
1
7
<div>***Update***</div><div><br></div><div>I have realized that I have made a fatal flaw in this discussion. I should have only brought up the Opinion News Shows. Fox thrives on them--Fox & Friends, The Five, Hannity, McKelly, O'Reilly, etc. If you have seen opinion shows on Fox and other networks, what do you find appealing about them? Why do you watch them? They aren't strictly news programs--if that even exists anymore on cable--so what's the draw? Can you make a comparison between one of the Fox shows and any on the other networks? Admittedly, I cannot. I don't watch this stuff anymore and most of my viewing was on Fox. I don't read opinion pieces or anything like them for the most part. I don't care what other people think about the news, I just want to know what the news is. I do care what everyone here thinks though so let's continue the discussion! I am interested to see how this goes.....</div><div><br></div><div><div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div><div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div></div><div>This discussion has evolved quite nicely. We have gone around and around and here's what I find to be the main takeaways: No news organization can be trusted, they are all sensationalists, they have political agendas (Fox=conservative while MSNBC=liberal), they are looking to make ratings, and the easiest being that liberals hate Fox and conservatives like it. <br></div><div><br></div><div>So, let's take the discussion forward. Given the conclusions I just stated, do you think that any news organization, Fox or otherwise, doesn't tell the truth? Can you provide some examples of a news anchor telling a lie, or perhaps stretching the truth. I have already posted a few about Fox, but I would like to see what my comrades who are on the political right have to say on the subject. Also, do you trust a particular newscaster or news channel? Do you watch local news instead of cable?</div><div><br></div><div>This thread has been pretty active and I want to keep it going so please, discuss!!!</div><div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div><div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div><div>I imagine I may get some flack for this discussion, but I would like to have it anyways. First off, I do not like Fox News. I have a lot of reasons for this and can go into specifics, but the main reasons are: They lie, they distort facts, they make stuff up, and they are a platform for Conservatives specifically and in no way support other ideologies. They say they are fair and balanced, but to me, that sounds like the North Koreans calling their country the People's Republic of North Korea. Clearly, I am a liberal.<br></div><div><br>Why I think this is important: Many of our young Troops are impressionable and the station of choice for every office I have worked in has been Fox News. I have seen blind support from our Troops on important issues that require, in my opinion, individual scrutiny. Most people who watch the channel tend to repeat what is said without opinion. I find this to be dangerous.<br><br>Regarding other news organizations, comparing one with another doesn't take the discussion very far. I am specifically interested in discussing Fox. <br><br>I don't watch the news at all. I have removed myself from that sort of influence. I get all of my news from two sources: objective media outlets online and from the two news organizations that really matter: The Daily Show With John Stewart and The Colbert Report. It is from those shows that I see anything of Fox News. <br><br>Liberals: Do you agree with me? Why or why not?<br>Conservatives: Same question<br>Independents: Same question<br><br>I am very interested to hear everyone's thoughts on this type of media manipulation.<br></div>
Posted in these groups: 
Social Media
Social Media
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 61
26
26
0
<P>It's as simple as this...</P>
<P> </P>
<DIV class=quoteText>
<H1 class=quoteText>“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.” </H1><BR>― <A href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1244.Mark_Twain"><U><FONT color=#0066cc>Mark Twain</FONT></U></A> </DIV>
<P> </P>
<DIV class=quoteText>
<H1 class=quoteText>“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.” </H1><BR>― <A href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1244.Mark_Twain"><U><FONT color=#0066cc>Mark Twain</FONT></U></A> </DIV>
(26)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
Kind of follows that saying, "believe none of what you hear and only about half of what you see".
(2)
(0)
SPC Mikki Ekanger
If all news is dangerous let's strip away the First Amendment. Then the second ah well forget the whole constitution and the Oath you took it's only an archaic piece of paper right? Soldiers and veterans with that kind of attitude concern me.
(0)
(0)
20
19
1
Modern liberals are notorious for attacking that which disagrees with them. If you want real, proven lies and really bias look to MSNBC. You claim Fox News is a bunch of liars and they are biased but it is the only news channel where you will ever hear a real opposing view from a reputable source. You won't get a well-respected liberal given equal time on MSNBC. <div><br></div><div>That something doesn't support your view doesn't make them or it a liar. It means they have a different belief. That you are unwilling to see that says much more about you than it does about Fox News and Conservatives. </div><div><br></div><div>It also says a lot that 70% of liberals say they get their news from Comedy Central...</div>
(20)
(1)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I agree with you on MSNBC; it is definitely a liberal news outlet. The facts; however, are not on your side when it comes to made up stories and blatant lies on Fox. Just Google it. There are websites (Liberal of course) that track this stuff. I know there are some for MSNBC, seeing as it is the main target for conservative criticism pointed towards Fox--just check out the other responses; it's the main counter-point.<div><br></div><div>I just posted a comment about Comedy Central's late night programming. When I say I get my news from it (And a lot of people do), I get the headlines and the issues that appeal to my demographic. From there, I do my own research and really find out what is going on. It's a running joke that liberals watch Fox News on the Daily Show and it has a lot of truth to it.</div>
(1)
(2)
TSgt Scott Hurley
Actually, Fox tells more of the story than the other outlets. So I trust FOX news over the others any day. MSNBC lies their collective A** off. And have very liberal individuals that if they hear the other side they refute it as lies instead of hearing. I like what Paul Harvey said at the end of each of his broadcasts, "Now you know the rest of the story." I want to hear both sides and make my decisions after hearing them. With all due respect CW2 Jonathan K., if you listen to the lies long enough, they become true in your eyes. And as far as I am concerned, the majority of the lies have come from liberals.<br>
(15)
(1)
(3)
(0)
19
19
0
<p>I don't think FOX News is any more dangerous than any other main station news channel such as CNN, MSNBC, etc. They all do what you claim FOX NEWS does. The only difference being, to me, is that you are by your own statement a liberal. Obviously, as a liberal, FOX NEWS is going to stand out to you since they lean conservative. However, on the opposite end a right wing conversative is probably feeling the same way you do about MSNBC. </p><p> </p><p>I do not think any of the main news channels are unbiased and agenda free, and I think they all lie or distort truth.</p>
(19)
(0)
MSG Wade Huffman
Well said. It is an individual responsibility to be informed. Unfortunately, it seems that each major news outlet spins whatever story in order to achieve the desired outcome. To be truly informed usually requires following the same story through several different media outlets (multiple broadcast stations, news articles, etc.) I think we can all agree that when it comes to simply reporting on an issue without spin, journalism as we once knew it, is dead. <div><br></div>
(5)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I agree and I do admit that, being a liberal, I would gravitate negatively towards Fox News. Honestly, it wouldn't bother me if they didn't oppose the issues I am most ardently in support of. Climate Change being one of the main issues currently going around and the other being the Affordable Care Act. They clearly don't like that one. I guess it's a red flag because they are not only transparent about their agenda, but it is clear to me that their agenda is more important that reporting the truth. As such, I see them as a media outlet, not a news outlet.
(0)
(0)
SPC Mikki Ekanger
Any news network can be dangerous, but the question is how informed do you want to be? Are you seeking news that fits within your personal views or do you want to seek out truth? I find myself often times going to youtube and watching various congressional hearings. Yes there's a lot of political games being played, however if you can cut through that you'll find that there are a lot of people from either side of the aisle that are seeking out the truth. Second do research. In the area of "Gun Control" for example, compare gun violence statistics in communities where jurisdictions have less restrictive gun laws vs those with more restrictive. Don't go to Fox or CNN to check it out go to what the DOJ reports. Be willing for that information to challenge your beliefs. The same thing applies to various scandals. The IRS Targeting, Benghazi and Fast and Furious are great examples. You can actually hear testimony and perspectives from either side of the aisle and to be able to hear the exact context of what is said. To ask if any news network is dangerous, I would say that no news network is dangerous. An overreaching government that tries to silence these networks is dangerous. What I find dangerous is when you have politicians calling us a threat to national security.
I'm compelled to say this, Extremism from either side is more dangerous than the press. It is extremism that closes lines of communications and plays on the fears of their audiences. The link I posted gives one such example.
I'm compelled to say this, Extremism from either side is more dangerous than the press. It is extremism that closes lines of communications and plays on the fears of their audiences. The link I posted gives one such example.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning ...
(2)
(0)
14
14
0
<p>I find that I get my best news on global events from outside media outlets like the BBC. Al Jazeera can actually be pretty ok, if you can get over the stigma. </p><p> </p><p>As far as Fox goes. Does it have a conservative lean....yes. I still don't find that it misrepresents the news as frequently as MSNBC. CNN is a news source that I really seem to have trouble with. If it goes against certain politicians, they will blatantly ignore it. They also seem to be slow to follow news, or look for things that can be sensationalized. There have been many times where I read a story on Fox, and I want to see what another news source has to say about it to try to get a more balanced view, and CNN will not post anything about it at all. An example: the other day I read a story about an event that took place in regards to the Ukraine/Russia situation. It felt like big news to me. MSNBC had it. Fox had it. BBC had it. It was completely missing from CNN. However, the latest celebretard gossip was on there! </p><p> </p><p>CNN is also slow to update anything over the weekends which is where I get the majority of my in-depth news coverage. </p><p> </p><p>However, I do admit...I like HLN for a quick view in the morning as I get dressed. It misses a lot of what I care about, but usually catches most of the major headlines. </p>
(14)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
It's strange because CNN was THE news outlet of the 90s. It was so on top of world events, they would often beat us in reporting something. I wonder what happened to cause the massive decline in quality. I wonder if it's the fear of competition from outlets like Fox and MSNBC, which may have led to overcompensation...?
(5)
(0)
MSG Jose Colon
I think that as society has changed, and so called journalists have become freer to express their opinion and call it news, all outlets, to include CNN had over-hired liberals, especially as editors. If your editor is a partisan liberal, obviously all left leaning articles will go through and right leaning ones, if any, will be edited to reflect the stations majority view.
CNN has lost the ratings game to FOX for years, so the new powers that be have made a 180 degrees change toward supposed entertainment.
***Disclaimer: I do not know the editors of the news stations, but, for the content expressed, I can only infer.***
Fox does hires some pretty active liberals, to include Dennis Kucinich. Kristen has being turning to the right of lately, even though she still calls herself a liberal, and has being attacked for doing so.
(1)
(0)
10
10
0
<p>Personally, I rather watch Fox News than CNN. Reason, over the last few weeks over 90% of their programming was the missing plane while there were many more news worthy topics out there. Totally unbalanced.</p><p> </p><p>But, I believe here is where we might agree. All so called news stations have opinion shows. If you just listen to opinion shows alone, you would go nuts, because they are just that, opinions.</p><p> </p><p>We differ on our dislike of Fox news. Who is right? We both are, it is our opinion, and opinions are based on our believes, right or wrong.</p><p> </p><p>I am currently living in PR and the local Direct TV does not carry it, I found out too late to break the contract.</p><p> </p><p>I read news aggregators. Drudge gets or aggregates news from the full spectrum to include Huffington.</p><p> </p><p>The Blaze gathers news from everywhere but they lean right (so do I).</p><p> </p><p>I also read the Huffington, and they lean left.</p><p> </p><p>It is not that Fox makes up stuff, it is that they report their opinions as MSNBC and the likes. The anchors can be unhinged but it is up to you to figure out where they are right or wrong. </p><p> </p><p>I like balance in my life, and that is why I read the aggregators and the Huff.</p>
(10)
(0)
MSG Jose Colon
Who was it that miss cut the bit about George Zimmerman to make it sound that he brought race in the conversation with 911? NBC.<div><br></div><div>Pics, I really have not paid attention to photos. Substance is another story, and that is why I check different sources, since everyone reports according to their biases.</div>
(6)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Anyone can alter a photo anytime. Who's to say that wasn't done by someone to make Fox News look bad. Maybe whoever took the picture had their color settings messed up. If the internet is the only reference you're going to for your attack on Fox News I'm sure finding plenty to satisfy your liberal agenda keep up the great work.
(2)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
First off, thank you for posting something! You downvoted me a lot on here but hadn't commented. I like to discuss opposing views and just downvoting a reply doesn't let me engage with the opposition, which is the whole point of this thread--having a nice discussion.
The photo that is altered was aired on Fox News. They most certainly aired it--I watched them do it. Within minutes, the internet was abuzz with talk about it. There are many other examples online but if you don't accept the Internet as a source, I don't know of another way to solidify my point.
Lastly, I don't have a liberal agenda here. I am not interested in changing your mind. I think I have been very clear that my interest is to have a nice discussion about a topic I knew would evoke and interest from the vast majority of conservatives in the military.
One more point, I was a registered Republican for 12 years. I was never conservative but I do agree with a lot of the core tenets of the party. I have never been a member of the Democratic party. I am more of a social libertarian and a member of the Centrist party. I left the party because I saw it degrade from what it was. Being a historian, I agreed more with the party of the 19th century than what it has become. I despise the way the party has gone so incredibly to the right and I see it being held hostage by the fundamentalist Evangelical Christians. Religion should not only be left out of politics, it's the basis of our secular government. Ok, I am done. Please reply since I am pretty sure I am going to get a thumbs down from you :)
(1)
(0)
MSG Jose Colon
As long as we can exposed our ideas and respectfully agree to disagree, I do not have a problem with liberals or republicans.
I too was a registered republican, but, change to conservative. I am more of a social libertarian and an economic conservative. Regarding foreign policy, I believe in having the mightiest Nation we can, "Peace through strength".
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
In my opinion Fox News is no more dangerous than MSNBC, it's extremely liberal-minded counterpart. CNN has become my go to for one-station watching of the news because they generally seem to hate everyone which seems to be the most "fair and balanced" of any network. What is starting to worry me more than Fox, though it may be heading this way, are websites and channels that I have started to call "conservative tabloids", basically the same idea as the national inquirer except they are politically motivated and attempting to spread dissent and misinformation to the American public. But CPT M. said it, you have to view multiple sources, process the info yourself, and come up with your own opinion.
(9)
(0)
SSG Matt Murphy
....warmmongering now? too much....climate "change"? ....why the "change" from global "warming" to climate "change"? ....can't stand the heat? oh, wait, there is no heat.....funny...but sad...(that's my comment for my down vote.....
(2)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
Warmongering? When did I write that? Just because you don't understand global warming and climate change doesn't mean that it isn't real. Go ahead and down vote that one as well since you have nothing to contribute other than abject negativity.
(1)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
SSgt Olson,
I will try to address each or your points.
The Koch Brothers could give a shit about this country and care only to continue lining their pockets. That's their right and they have paid for enough corrupt politicians to do so legally, but that doesn't mean I am going to sit silently by and say nothing.
I am by no means a meteorologist, but I have studied the weather on Mars and Venus extensively. Two perfect examples of what happens when you trap too much gas and not enough. Climate change is a natural process in our climate and always has been. The evidence does stack up to show that all of the shit we have been burning into the atmosphere the past 150 years isn't helping and is speeding up the process. I defer to the experts and can only parrot what I have read and been told. You may not have come to the same conclusion as the majority of your peers, but I go with the majority when the field is not my specialty.
Sunspots are slightly cooler spots on the sun, which are actually extremely bright... just not so compared to their surrounding. Do you mean Coronal Mass Ejections?
I'm afraid I don't know anything about Bob Sheets.
If I'm wrong, I won't say my heart is in the wrong place. If I am wrong, and I hope I am, the worst thing we would have done (At least in America) is cut down on pollution, which isn't healthy for any living organism on this planet. And if I'm right, we are all screwed anyways.
I don't know nearly as much about the weather as you do so if you can cite something I can read, I would be more than happy to do so. I have read more than a few headlines about this and many other areas of study though. I read the science journals and review others' works on this and many other subjects. Perhaps we should move this conversation to a different thread. This one seems to have gotten away from me. I knew it would... but not this much. My problem is that I came into it with a biased statement (Of course my POV is biased). That brought around too much negative attention, which is why I changed the name and the restatement.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
CW2 - Thanks for your reply but if you want to bolster your ideas then do not use the Koch Brothers either way and especially in a hyperbolic way. Likewise we could go on about Al Gore but he is really way off too and that is all that I will say on the matter of Mr. Gore.
As far as hastening our demise that too is subjective. What is not subjective is making a desert like they are now doing in China. That is a cautionary tale about raping the environment to sell a widget.
As far the self-proclaimed experts, there will always be those who wish to tell you how things are. As Max Planck said, we are not here to convince anyone of anything. Ultimately our progeny will either validate or not any thing.
(4)
(0)
9
8
1
One darn network and you can't stand it. Ok, you are a liberal, big whoop, I am happy for you. The problem however is that many want to silence those you disagree with. Why is that? Jon Stewart is dangerous and even moreso Bill Maher. Dangerous indeed.
(9)
(1)
SFC (Join to see)
SSgt Olson,
Well, Carlins' act was very much anti-institutional in nature (please revisit his numerous comments on the GOP, Reagan, Republican ideologies, etc) as are those of Stewart, Colbert, and Maher. All of the aforementioned are in the business of comedy. How did you conclude one or two of them are dangerous and not all?
Well, Carlins' act was very much anti-institutional in nature (please revisit his numerous comments on the GOP, Reagan, Republican ideologies, etc) as are those of Stewart, Colbert, and Maher. All of the aforementioned are in the business of comedy. How did you conclude one or two of them are dangerous and not all?
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SSG Chris. Maher and Stewart are mean-spirited, condescending partisan hacks. Carlin's humor was not political.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I have 18 different Carlin albums. Here's an example in which you'll see Carlin being very political-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6O3rKQfCF0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6O3rKQfCF0
Parte 1 de 2 sketches den Show What am i Doin in New Jersey de 1988 donde se hace una Excelente descripción de la cultura política Estadounidense expuesta po...
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SSG Taylor - That was in the context of comedy, those other two are mean-spirited hacks and only a partisan hack could disagree
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
<p>A couple quotes from Walter Cronkite:</p><p>"In seeking the truth you have to get both sides of a story." </p><p>"Our job is only to hold up the mirror-to tell and show the public what has happened." </p><p> </p><p>http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/walter-cronkite/about-walter-cronkite/561/</p><p> </p><p>I grew up with Walter Cronkite on the news. I trusted him and he expected all of us to get the rest of the story and understand the issues and facts in order to have a more well round and informed perspective.</p><p> </p><p>When he retired, we lost the true essence of truthful reporting. Ego and personality entered first and then the ratings became driving factors. I would venture to say, that if all of our news agencies embarked on an approach to emulate Walter Cronkite, we would be much better off.</p><p> </p><p>Today, the news is not the central driving factor. In many respects it is how well entities market themselves and their particular organization for ratings. In many respects its who best can manipulate the emotional buttons as they present information (not news) and how they do so to sway opinion. Just look at the question and responses.</p><div class="pta-link-card"><div class="pta-link-card-picture"><img src="http://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/files/2008/10/thumb-waltercronkite-about.jpg"></div><div class="pta-link-card-content"><div class="pta-link-card-title"><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/walter-cronkite/about-walter-cronkite/561/" target="_blank">Walter Cronkite ~ About Walter Cronkite | American Masters | PBS</a></div><div class="pta-link-card-description">He was the man who told us that President Kennedy had been shot, the man who told us that we had put a man on the moon, and the man who told us that we couldn't win the Vietnam War.</div></div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div class="pta-box-hide"><i class="icon-remove"></i></div></div>
(6)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Sir, I couldn't agree more. Modern "news" is garbage; lacking fact, diligent investigation, and objective reporting.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
With all due respect, you admit you do not watch the news? You get information from the "Daily Show & the Colbert Report"? I hope you are joking as those are comedians. <div><br></div><div>I have no problem with Fox, I have watched everything from BBC, ABC, CNN and even MSNBC. I do think MSNBC is so progressive/liberal that it is amusing. Its funny that while liberal leaning news vastly outnumber Fox News, Fox News beats all of them constantly in the ratings.</div><div><br></div><div>I think if you want to be informed, you should learn to read between the lines of any news report. </div><div><br></div><div>Its our responsibility as citizens to be informed of what is going on so we can make a proper choice when we vote for our elected leaders. <br><div><br></div><div><br></div></div>
(6)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
First off, I love the "With all due respect" and thought one might pop up in here. No, I don't watch the news anymore. I did watch nothing but Fox News for about 15 years though.
I agree with you on every point save one. Comedy Central late night programming is definitely a source for news (and commentary). When I hear John Stewart go through his lines about an issue, it usually draws my attention to the actual issue. The show is liberal so it appeals to me and I enjoy the Fox-bashing, but it's a good source nonetheless.
Taking it a bit further, Facebook has become a very good news source. When Bin Laden was taken out, I didn't get the news on TV as a breaking news story. Facebook beat every media outlet I had available to me, though it must have been reported somewhere.
***Followup question:
Does social media make for a good outlet for breaking news?
(3)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
You have a great point about social media!
I think it is a good outlet for breaking news. Look at Boston bombing and Ukraine to a much lesser extent. Very "frontlinish".
Heck a LTC told me one of my snipers was wearing a un-authorized patch on his Multi-cam while on a mission 50 Km from the TOC. Gotta love those E-4s and FB :(
At least you admit you are a liberal, I respect that. I'm such a "Tea-party, Constitutionalist", that Democrats and RINOs have been known to burst into flame when walking within 20 meters of me.
(5)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
You brought up a great topic. I am a liberal Constitutionalist. How do you think we could both be Constitutionalist, but be on opposite sides of the political coin. Incidentally, I should mention that I am a member of the Centrist party, was a Republican for 12 years, and a Social Libertarian for about 15 (Some overlap there).
(3)
(0)
(3)
(0)
6
6
0
<font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">I personal like Fox new, I do admit that Fox does at time
bully on certain people. However no matter what side your on I will say that
Fox asks the question that other news companies will not ask. Also there are
other news companies that do the same things as Fox and sometimes take it a
little more extreme then Fox.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></font></font></font></p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font>
</font><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">I personal like Fox new, I do admit that Fox does at time
bully on certain people. However no matter what side your on I will say that
Fox asks the question that other news companies will not ask. Also there are
other news companies that do the same things as Fox and sometimes take it a
little more extreme then Fox.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></font></font></font></p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font>
(6)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google