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
2
2
0
Is Fox News Dangerous? no. Even if I agreed with you on how dishonest they are, but I don't, it is the voter who is or isn't dangerous. If a person is so easily fooled and gullible they are the danger, not the person fooling them. Now, if Fox was the only choice, or paid for with tax dollars, or forced on schools, then I would say it is dangerous.
I believe that a major contributing factor to the great political divide is focus and an explosion of media. People now have so many choices to get their "facts" that they choose sources that align with and reinforce their beliefs. They enjoy political porn. You like listening to Maher and Cobert because they reinforce what you already thought. It's like when people shop for a car they read only one or no reviews. Once they buy the car they read a dozen reviews to affirm their smart decision.
I believe that a major contributing factor to the great political divide is focus and an explosion of media. People now have so many choices to get their "facts" that they choose sources that align with and reinforce their beliefs. They enjoy political porn. You like listening to Maher and Cobert because they reinforce what you already thought. It's like when people shop for a car they read only one or no reviews. Once they buy the car they read a dozen reviews to affirm their smart decision.
(2)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I agree with you 106%. Seriously, I can't think of anything other than, you are correct, Sir!
(1)
(0)
SSG Jeffery Nebel
I feel a better question is; which is more dangerous, a soldier who keeps up with the news, or one who doesn't?
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Dangerous, not at all.....I prefer Fox News because I believe they do a better job of delivering the news but I have a more conservative lean. I grew up watching the evening news when the networks were actually still delivering news, prior to CNN and HLN, which I did watch for a while before I tired of their liberal agenda (thank you Ted Turner). As far as getting news from the Colbert Report or the Daily Show, please tell me that you are kidding, lol.....you have to look around and decide for yourself what news source you choose to get your news from, you can't let someone else or a particular political belief decide for you.
(2)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I ingest news headlines and I get them from Comedy Central. I watch those shows and that leads me to find out more. Of course it's not the only source I use, I read around 30-50 articles a day... and a lot of science journals. I read a lot and form my own opinions. So... I wasn't kidding!
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I completely agree. I posted that somewhere in a response. What I have seen Fox do is that they came singing hard and had a lot of money. They introduced a high degree of competition in the marketplace so much that every time Fox makes a change or addition, the other outlets follow suit. This has turned pretty much all news organizations into a product dependent on ratings. Bring back Ron Burgundy.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
I try not to make a political lean and attempt to watch as many news sources as I can (the truth has to be in there somewhere). I did run across this article which speaks to two studies speaking of the ills of Fox news and how it leads those who watch it to be more uninformed than those watching nothing at all.
I mostly try to avoid watching the major news stations and instead stick to getting the snippets from various online sources. I feel that leaning to either party and reading too much of their news can lead you to become biased and misinformed either way. So while the study above may make you think that Fox News is "dangerous" I feel that watching or reading only one source of news is dangerous no matter what it is.
Update: Fox News has responded to the story by criticizing Fairleigh Dickinson University.
Two years ago the University of Maryland created a bit of a controve
Two years ago the University of Maryland created a bit of a controve
(2)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
Listening to the baised programming can be useful as well. It helps me to develop rational, intelligent arguments for either side's vehement and passionate arguments.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
1LT Zachary D B., Hello sir! I think we get hung up on hyperbole that advances our own agendas. The term study is overused and abused. So a study or studies that implies that Fox News is inherently biased and it's listeners less educated is subjective at best.
(1)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
I agree that any such study would have to be biased and is therefore of limited assistance. However, I do find it important to understand the bias of any news source and compare it with other opposite news sources to hopefully ascertain the truth.
(1)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
CW2 Jonathen K I think we have similar tastes. I listen mostly to NPR, BBC and Al Jazeera English.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I get news from Fox, NPR, MSNBC, the Guardian, ABC, or anywhere else that reports it. They all have an agenda.
It takes some skill to despin what they are serving, but it can be done.
The only dangerous idea is the idea that ideas are dangerous.
It takes some skill to despin what they are serving, but it can be done.
The only dangerous idea is the idea that ideas are dangerous.
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
I have heard that before about Fox News Listeners but I could imagine any conservative college could say that Fox News watchers are smarter. But one really has to question why this study would even matter. An objective truth or an attempt to marginalize people who consider themselves to be conservative.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I have to agree with MSGT Huffman it is an the persons responsibility to keep up with the news.
I am a conservative and I am constantly looking to other news outlets to compare and make my own opinion.
So foxnews,cnn,msnbc they are all just as bad as they other.
I am a conservative and I am constantly looking to other news outlets to compare and make my own opinion.
So foxnews,cnn,msnbc they are all just as bad as they other.
(2)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
Not to most, for sure. Now whether it's from Fox, MSNBC, CNN, or Comedy Central, they are still exposed to it and that gets at the crux of this discussion. Is it dangerous?
(0)
(0)
MSG Jose Colon
Hey, don't call me old. Moses used to tell me to stand up to people calling me that. LOL.
Seriously, the old maxim might have a bit of truth: "If you are young and are not a liberal, you have no heart, if you are old and are not conservative, you have no..." I'm trying not to be too much of a cynic.
I believe you do need to be a critical thinker, especially on what you believe to be true. You might be proven wrong.
(2)
(0)
SSG Gerhard S.
Dangerous? I say no. Information is only dangerous to those who lack critical thinking skills....Though I will concede, that quality seems to be lacking in a great many recent graduates, a product, I fear of being told WHAT to think in school, and in College, rather than being taught HOW to THINK CRITICALLY.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Chief Kantor. I agree with many of your points. Fox news jumped the Credibility Shark during the last General election when they knowingly distorted the Republican Primary numbers and failed to report on the successes of Congressman Ron Paul, who, were it not for some "emergency" Republican rule changes would likely have received the requisite number of delegates to win the Republican Nomination. Their distortion through omission, I found despicable.
That being said, take a moment to peruse the other Cable networks, or for that matter the Broadcast networks and look for an opposing opinion. FOX, with all their faults, DOES put people on from the other side, on their opinion shows, and during elections actually runs a clock to ensure equal time (between guests). ALL the remaining networks are clearly on the other side of the political spectrum, and like Fox, they all have their scandals, whether they be Dan Rather pushing a phony fitness report on Pres Bush, or MSNBC with their can't-help-themselves Progressiveness, it is rare to find ANYBODY from the right on those networks.
In conclusion, they're all flawed models, but ignoring the opinions of others particularly in the absence of any reliable news, because the news is anything but reliable, or accurate, regardless the source, leaves one in an information vacuum, AND shelters one from various perspectives from which incidences can be viewed or perceived.
That being said, take a moment to peruse the other Cable networks, or for that matter the Broadcast networks and look for an opposing opinion. FOX, with all their faults, DOES put people on from the other side, on their opinion shows, and during elections actually runs a clock to ensure equal time (between guests). ALL the remaining networks are clearly on the other side of the political spectrum, and like Fox, they all have their scandals, whether they be Dan Rather pushing a phony fitness report on Pres Bush, or MSNBC with their can't-help-themselves Progressiveness, it is rare to find ANYBODY from the right on those networks.
In conclusion, they're all flawed models, but ignoring the opinions of others particularly in the absence of any reliable news, because the news is anything but reliable, or accurate, regardless the source, leaves one in an information vacuum, AND shelters one from various perspectives from which incidences can be viewed or perceived.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
CW2 Kantor,
Although I may disagree with your political affiliation, it is yours and I respect that. I also used to watch Fox News, and before that, MSNBC. However, they are all mainly opinion, and very little news.
I am studying to be a journalist,and am in no way interested in writing as these news outlets report. It is not only the cable news outlets that are giving journalism and objective reporting a bad name, the mainstream media, including the three major networks have become unreliable.
As a future journalist, I have watched all of them, and although they may not lie, per say, they tend to be more subjective in what the report.
The fact that the media has become so actively involved in Washington politics discredits everyone of them. Scandals about the NSA abusing it's authority to spy on reporters, news casters caught distorting stories, and countless other allegations has made it nearly impossible for the educated viewer to know what is going on.
So I do not offend anyone, let me explain my use of "Educated Viewer." An educated viewer does try's to look beyond the words to actually what is being said. Simply put, they can read beyond the rhetoric. News casts are full of leading reports and emotive language designed to enrage emotions in the direction they want them to go.
The danger is not the news channel tuned in on the office wall, the danger is uninformed viewers that tend to believe anything they hear, as long as it sounds good to themselves.
You mention that young troops are young and impressionable, many adults are impressionable also when the proper, emotive, language is presented to them.
The news you mentioned that you watch, it's biased also. I have observed in your statement that you seem to be more concerned that someone may watch something you disagree with. I am not trying to be disrespectful, just pointing out an observation.
So I will answer your question from a conservative point of view. I partially agree with you, all news outlets are biased. Too many want to base their opinion on soundbites and buzz-words. To quote Yoda, "Dangerous, Very very Dangerous." This is what is driving news today.
Even the shows you watch are biased, but wait the problem gets worse. With the internet, it is easy to go straight to the source of the news. C-Span one and two both show live broadcasts of public hearings and debates in the House and Senate. Her is the bigger problem. Many of the politicians speaking, are just feeding the news people their soundbites.
Most documents, laws passed, as long as they are not classified, executive orders, and other public records can easily be accessed. I suggest that people begin looking as close to the source for their news and turn off all news.
Although I may disagree with your political affiliation, it is yours and I respect that. I also used to watch Fox News, and before that, MSNBC. However, they are all mainly opinion, and very little news.
I am studying to be a journalist,and am in no way interested in writing as these news outlets report. It is not only the cable news outlets that are giving journalism and objective reporting a bad name, the mainstream media, including the three major networks have become unreliable.
As a future journalist, I have watched all of them, and although they may not lie, per say, they tend to be more subjective in what the report.
The fact that the media has become so actively involved in Washington politics discredits everyone of them. Scandals about the NSA abusing it's authority to spy on reporters, news casters caught distorting stories, and countless other allegations has made it nearly impossible for the educated viewer to know what is going on.
So I do not offend anyone, let me explain my use of "Educated Viewer." An educated viewer does try's to look beyond the words to actually what is being said. Simply put, they can read beyond the rhetoric. News casts are full of leading reports and emotive language designed to enrage emotions in the direction they want them to go.
The danger is not the news channel tuned in on the office wall, the danger is uninformed viewers that tend to believe anything they hear, as long as it sounds good to themselves.
You mention that young troops are young and impressionable, many adults are impressionable also when the proper, emotive, language is presented to them.
The news you mentioned that you watch, it's biased also. I have observed in your statement that you seem to be more concerned that someone may watch something you disagree with. I am not trying to be disrespectful, just pointing out an observation.
So I will answer your question from a conservative point of view. I partially agree with you, all news outlets are biased. Too many want to base their opinion on soundbites and buzz-words. To quote Yoda, "Dangerous, Very very Dangerous." This is what is driving news today.
Even the shows you watch are biased, but wait the problem gets worse. With the internet, it is easy to go straight to the source of the news. C-Span one and two both show live broadcasts of public hearings and debates in the House and Senate. Her is the bigger problem. Many of the politicians speaking, are just feeding the news people their soundbites.
Most documents, laws passed, as long as they are not classified, executive orders, and other public records can easily be accessed. I suggest that people begin looking as close to the source for their news and turn off all news.
(1)
(0)
LCpl Steve Wininger
Just one more thing. I too was once young and impressionable. I served in a time when the internet did not exist, at least publicly. The only cable news was CNN headline news, which at that time, only reported news, no commentary.
Me, and most of my young and impressionable friends were conservative in our views. Had there been a television on every office wall, or in every shop, it would not have changed our views. we thought and formed our own opinions based on our own beliefs.
To suggest that removing a channel because you do not agree with it and it may affect a young impressionable service member, is crossing the line from leadership to parenthood.
Might I respectfully suggest that, you give them credit. They have already made a decision to fight, and if needed, die for their country. Let them form their own opinions. Most of them are pretty intelligent and can probably distinguish between fantasy and reality.
Me, and most of my young and impressionable friends were conservative in our views. Had there been a television on every office wall, or in every shop, it would not have changed our views. we thought and formed our own opinions based on our own beliefs.
To suggest that removing a channel because you do not agree with it and it may affect a young impressionable service member, is crossing the line from leadership to parenthood.
Might I respectfully suggest that, you give them credit. They have already made a decision to fight, and if needed, die for their country. Let them form their own opinions. Most of them are pretty intelligent and can probably distinguish between fantasy and reality.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Unfortunately, it would wind up like Congress with nothing getting done and no winner.
The problem here is the far left represents the extreme 10%, and the far right represents the extreme 10%. The 80% in the middle (which is most of us) are left unrepresented.
I tend to be more right based on my patriotism, knowledge of the Constitution, and love of liberty. There are instances where being more liberal is needed in the case of helping others and public safety. But don't go too far as I believe in a hand up not a hand out. I think guns are needed because a bullet responds in .016 seconds. A cop responds in about 10 minutes and takes a report.
(1)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
You are right about the large group of Americans who are unrepresented. You know, I didn't have too much issue with Fox until the Tea Party came along. Once they took over the GOP, Fox became much more far right than it was. The reason for that is money. In my opinion, their product declined and I can't stand it anymore... much like the current manifestation of the GOP.
I don't believe that one can be right or left-leaning in constitutional analysis. It's a document, which is plainly written. You read it and move on.
I have a problem with the hand up/hand out issue and Fox is a good example of what causes the problem. Republicans aren't against social programs even though the House votes like they do. Fox has portrayed those taking handouts as nothing more than lazy, useless people. What they don't tell you is that those folks make up a very tiny percent of the population receiving aid. They do the same thing for voter fraud when it comes to the laws that supposedly make voting free from fraud, but in effect, keep a lot of people from voting--mostly minorities and women (In some places). Fox sensationalizes the small stuff to make it seem like more of a problem than anything. I know that all media outlets do this, but being liberal, I am going to focus on Fox. That's the point of the discussion anyways.
I don't have a problem with gun ownership, I just think it needs to be regulated with newer background checks in every instance of a gun purchase. This is another thing Fox has sensationalized. The President isn't going to take away your guns. That's just a marketing ploy by the NRA and producers/distributors to sell more guns. And it works very well. The President isn't about to erase a freedom guaranteed in our Bill of Rights--what's more, he can't do that. It has to go through Congress. His EO authority doesn't even remotely extend that far.
I don't believe that one can be right or left-leaning in constitutional analysis. It's a document, which is plainly written. You read it and move on.
I have a problem with the hand up/hand out issue and Fox is a good example of what causes the problem. Republicans aren't against social programs even though the House votes like they do. Fox has portrayed those taking handouts as nothing more than lazy, useless people. What they don't tell you is that those folks make up a very tiny percent of the population receiving aid. They do the same thing for voter fraud when it comes to the laws that supposedly make voting free from fraud, but in effect, keep a lot of people from voting--mostly minorities and women (In some places). Fox sensationalizes the small stuff to make it seem like more of a problem than anything. I know that all media outlets do this, but being liberal, I am going to focus on Fox. That's the point of the discussion anyways.
I don't have a problem with gun ownership, I just think it needs to be regulated with newer background checks in every instance of a gun purchase. This is another thing Fox has sensationalized. The President isn't going to take away your guns. That's just a marketing ploy by the NRA and producers/distributors to sell more guns. And it works very well. The President isn't about to erase a freedom guaranteed in our Bill of Rights--what's more, he can't do that. It has to go through Congress. His EO authority doesn't even remotely extend that far.
(0)
(0)
SSG Jeffrey Spencer
News is about ratings. It is an entertainment venue and we should all keep that in mind when watching or listening. They pander to their market and sensationalize to get reactions and gain better ratings.
Your passionate comments are proof of that.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google