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
0
0
0
Okay Why do I like the Fox outlets? The answer is simple common sense. If I have an opinion that differs from a conservative journalist I'm not called racist or homophobic or any other label that Liberals in their one sided tolerance like to put on people without engaging in intelligent conversation. MSNBC has been caught intentionally lying by cropping out certain details in video footage claiming that a white man was carrying an AR-15 at a town hall meeting. It was FOX and others that got that footage and showed that Apparently MSNBC doesn't know the difference between what African Americans and white people look like. The liberal outlets hear the name of an organization whether it be "Conservative" "TEA Party" or "Republican" and they play the race card without any intelligent conversation or any investigation. This means that if I want to be free to have my own opinion whether it is consistent or inconsistent with someone I have to got FOX.
The Liberal Networks reek of hypocrisy. Tolerance is only one sided and name calling for a different opinion is the standard. Now here's were I address the hypocrisy. When someone refuses to have a reasonable and intelligent communication about any issue and start accusing things as Racism, Homophobia (Which is used in the wrong context)simply by having maybe a different perspective - The name calling reflects their ignorance. Now check this out, Ignorance is the root to racism and oppression. So the people that preach tolerance are ignorant and oppressive? Here's a great example. Recently an NFL Player tweeted a comment about another NFL Player kissing his boyfriend. This NFL Player was disciplined and forced to take sensitivity training, but I seem to remember a player name Tim Tebow who expressed his faith and was repeatedly demonized for it. Who got sensitivity training for that one? Oh yeah that's how tolerance works. So that's why I find MSNBC and CNN both a waste of time. It's not news when you need to resort to name calling. That just tells me how limited that individual is in actually being open to hear a different perspective. In saying that I have seen people on Fox say things I felt made them look less informed. I do believe that Fox tends to be more willing to listen. Of course MSNBC and CNN will believe everything Obama says as an absolute truth as if God spoke it even when evidence exists that Obama lied. No certainly a politician wouldn't tell a lie would they? There wasn't two lists at the VA and nobody died. Benghazi was about a video not about terrorism even though key leaders said it was terrorism. Conservatives didn't get targeted by the IRS eve though an Inspector General's report says they were. Of course I'm not quoting fox here. I'm quoting the actual hearings.
The Liberal Networks reek of hypocrisy. Tolerance is only one sided and name calling for a different opinion is the standard. Now here's were I address the hypocrisy. When someone refuses to have a reasonable and intelligent communication about any issue and start accusing things as Racism, Homophobia (Which is used in the wrong context)simply by having maybe a different perspective - The name calling reflects their ignorance. Now check this out, Ignorance is the root to racism and oppression. So the people that preach tolerance are ignorant and oppressive? Here's a great example. Recently an NFL Player tweeted a comment about another NFL Player kissing his boyfriend. This NFL Player was disciplined and forced to take sensitivity training, but I seem to remember a player name Tim Tebow who expressed his faith and was repeatedly demonized for it. Who got sensitivity training for that one? Oh yeah that's how tolerance works. So that's why I find MSNBC and CNN both a waste of time. It's not news when you need to resort to name calling. That just tells me how limited that individual is in actually being open to hear a different perspective. In saying that I have seen people on Fox say things I felt made them look less informed. I do believe that Fox tends to be more willing to listen. Of course MSNBC and CNN will believe everything Obama says as an absolute truth as if God spoke it even when evidence exists that Obama lied. No certainly a politician wouldn't tell a lie would they? There wasn't two lists at the VA and nobody died. Benghazi was about a video not about terrorism even though key leaders said it was terrorism. Conservatives didn't get targeted by the IRS eve though an Inspector General's report says they were. Of course I'm not quoting fox here. I'm quoting the actual hearings.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
When Appropriate, and especially when the news is about foreign policy and events. It is good to look to outside, outside sources. I frequently look at China and Russian news, as well as many news outlets from the middle east. I cannot recall the gentleman's name, but someone mentioned that there are more dimensions in news than just two.
Foreign news outlets are no different than the news outlets here, they put their spin on us, the same we we put the spin on ourselves. No wonder I am dizzy.
I have seen it mentioned several times in this thread, to be the most objective, one must swallow their liberal or conservative pride, and look at as many angles as possible.
Lastly, to suggest a news organization is dangerous is sort of far fetched.
I will leave you with a quote that a corporal in my unit used to tell us when we complained, I can't remember his name though.
"Opinions are like assholes, we all have them, and they all stink."
Foreign news outlets are no different than the news outlets here, they put their spin on us, the same we we put the spin on ourselves. No wonder I am dizzy.
I have seen it mentioned several times in this thread, to be the most objective, one must swallow their liberal or conservative pride, and look at as many angles as possible.
Lastly, to suggest a news organization is dangerous is sort of far fetched.
I will leave you with a quote that a corporal in my unit used to tell us when we complained, I can't remember his name though.
"Opinions are like assholes, we all have them, and they all stink."
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
That was my original point. When you listen to opinion shows, that is what you get, someone's opinion, independently of what channel you listen to. It does not mean that they are right or wrong. It is their opinion or interpretation of the facts and how they want to present them.
I like O'Reilly's cantankerous stile but cannot stand Hannity. I agree with some of Hannity's points, but the way he present them, is just not deep.
People say that O'Reilly is not a conservative, but he does looks at the other side of the coin. It does not mean I always agree with his conclusions. That is what making your own mind means.
I cannot stand MSNBC or CNN's extra shallow coverage. Reporting the news also mean to go to the root of the problem and connecting the dots. Unfortunately, when you do that, it offends people because they do not want to accept that some of their positions are wrong, whether they are democrats or republicans.
(0)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I think we are all in agreement that we just aren't getting the news from any of these networks. They don't even cover the same stuff most of the time. They just appeal to their bases. I like O'Reilly but I can't stand Hannity. He's a lying scumbag piece of shit. Either that, or he's an incredibly ignorant and stupid man... but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying he is just a liar.
(0)
(0)
SPC Mikki Ekanger
I don't just go to news sources. I go to google or youtube and look for anything I can find. For example I know someone in law enforcement involved in a law enforcement shooting where the subject died. People screamed racism and they made all of these other statements like the cops executed him innocently. I found audio to the actual 9-1-1 calls from two siblings not on the location of the incident and saying things like "Murdering" "Holding Hostage" mentioning his Mental Health issues off his medication and Possibly has a warrant. That information for me was useful. Why? If I'd have just followed the local news Narrative it would have been easy to think that it was an execution. However those words above tell me something more. Murdering means there's an active commission of murder and possibly with weapons according to one caller. Holding Hostage means possible barricading. Mentioning his Mental Health condition and history as well as being off his meds revealed more. It told me there could be potentially dangerous behavior as is common with people in Mental Health emergencies. Now add that he has a warrant and I'm compelled to think he has a history of some form or fashion with law enforcement and that the call was a domestic situation which are consistently one of if no the deadliest types of calls to take for police. However I can now make a conclusion to ask myself this. Based on all of the information in two 9-1-1 calls do I feel as though this call was potentially fatal from the start? Yes I do. I think many can agree. Checkin sources and trying to find proper information or information conveniently limited to a sound bite doesn't give you all the facts. I got more in about 15 minutes of 9-1-1 calls than I did from the local network.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
To find why there is a lean in one direction or the other, simply follow the money (and the lean).
FOX - Rupert Murdoch
MSNBC - Brian L. Roberts
CNN - Ted Turner
ABC - Disney (Public), CEO Robert Iger
CBS - Columbia (Public), CEO Nina Tassler
BBC - Overseen by the BBC Trust
(0)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?
The ONLY news programming I listen to is NPR. It is the most unbiased news I have ever been exposed to. It is funded by the State and contributors/listeners yet remains impartial.
The ONLY news programming I listen to is NPR. It is the most unbiased news I have ever been exposed to. It is funded by the State and contributors/listeners yet remains impartial.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Ok why do you keep changing the title of this thread? What you are doing should just be a response. This is really bothering my OCD.
(0)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
Sorry about that. I keep changing it when I move the conversation along. It has evolved quite a bit. This is for you: [login to see] 2 [login to see] 1 [login to see] 21 111121
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
CNN,MSNBC,and FOX,are good sources of information,but their not the only source.If you want a better view you have to look into the social media realm.There you will find what their not talking about.If you want to see what your Political leaders are passing and how they are advocating for their positions,and much more news you should watch C-SPAN,1,2,3.To only look at one source and not question it you drastically limit yourself.There is always another side to a story.By taking a more broader view you connect the dots that wouldn't necessarily be there when you look through a narrow lens.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I do my best to listen to the first 30 seconds of a story, and then ignore the rest. CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, etc. Always start out with something like, "An 8 year old girl is reportedly missing since x/x/2014. Police have one suspect who looks like this (enter description, or artists drawing here), if you have any information regarding this case please call the emergency information line (or whatever fancy name the PD comes up with) at (xxx) xxx-xxxx.
Then they go on a spree sounding somewhat like this:
"....Mr. John Smith, a specialist in child kidnapping cases in the state of NY is here today. (brief good morning stuff) Mr. Smith, what is your professional opinion as to what happened to the 8 year old, Jane Doe?"
"Well, Billy I think that this is clearly a case of.........."
They begin to speculate about what so and so thinks happened, and it is no longer news. This has been especially true about the missing airliner. CNN is especially guilty of this type of "News".
Like I said before, I listen to the first 30 seconds of a story and then change the channel. Before long they are talking about what the Republicans should/shouldn't do vs. what the Democrats are doing. What the President could do to alleviate whatever, and it is all political from that point on. That is not news.
To be completely blunt, I don't like ANY main stream media outlet. They are all bought off by someone, and NONE of them are objective. Not a single one.
I would prefer to watch a news anchor who would say about 30 seconds about each story and move on.
Now if someone is congress IS trying to do something about an issue. How hard is it to say, "Senator Cruz (TX, R) introduced a bill that would make it illegal for a terrorist to enter the United States regardless of their position. This bill directly relates to the nominated Iranian Ambassador to the UN, Hamid Aboutalebi. The bill passed unanimously." Short, sweet, to the point. No speculation, No political BS, and objective.
Those are my personal thoughts CW2 Kantor. Now I'll get off my soap box.
V/R
SPC Needham
Then they go on a spree sounding somewhat like this:
"....Mr. John Smith, a specialist in child kidnapping cases in the state of NY is here today. (brief good morning stuff) Mr. Smith, what is your professional opinion as to what happened to the 8 year old, Jane Doe?"
"Well, Billy I think that this is clearly a case of.........."
They begin to speculate about what so and so thinks happened, and it is no longer news. This has been especially true about the missing airliner. CNN is especially guilty of this type of "News".
Like I said before, I listen to the first 30 seconds of a story and then change the channel. Before long they are talking about what the Republicans should/shouldn't do vs. what the Democrats are doing. What the President could do to alleviate whatever, and it is all political from that point on. That is not news.
To be completely blunt, I don't like ANY main stream media outlet. They are all bought off by someone, and NONE of them are objective. Not a single one.
I would prefer to watch a news anchor who would say about 30 seconds about each story and move on.
Now if someone is congress IS trying to do something about an issue. How hard is it to say, "Senator Cruz (TX, R) introduced a bill that would make it illegal for a terrorist to enter the United States regardless of their position. This bill directly relates to the nominated Iranian Ambassador to the UN, Hamid Aboutalebi. The bill passed unanimously." Short, sweet, to the point. No speculation, No political BS, and objective.
Those are my personal thoughts CW2 Kantor. Now I'll get off my soap box.
V/R
SPC Needham
(0)
(0)
SPC Mikki Ekanger
I don't think it's appropriate to call any news network "Dangerous" Fox or otherwise unless they openly advocate and encourage violence towards others. By joining in the narrative that any news network is "Dangerous" it makes it easy for you to forget the Oath you swore by demanding they be censored. I tend to think American Media as a whole fails to do the job to report. Instead one group tells a story and everyone else repeats it. I've tried to compare notes between CNN, MSNBC and Fox and if you're looking at facts, Fox is more accurate. MSNBC has been caught manipulating news to follow a certain agenda. This was revealed by Fox and corroborated by other networks including PJTV which is an internet based program. Now days in order to be informed you can't "Just" watch the news. You need to honestly look up both sides yourself.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I am really enjoying this conversation and appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts. I have a follow-up question, which sprouted from some of these posts:
Does social media make for a good outlet for breaking news?
(0)
(0)
MSG Jose Colon
Sort of, because usually first impressions are not 100% accurate. As new information comes out, of course, the picture gets clearer. But again, that is why we need to listen to the position of those who agree with us, and also those who disagree, even Fox and MSNBC.
(1)
(0)
CW2 Jonathan Kantor
I prefer Google News as my source for news. From there, I read local papers surrounding an event, Fox News articles, CNN, etc. That being said, I still get my headlines from Stewart and Colbert as well as Facebook.
(0)
(0)
SSG Jeffrey Spencer
"The problem with internet quotes is that you can't always depend on their accuracy" -Abraham Lincoln, 1864
(1)
(0)
1
0
1
Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all equally dangerous and helpful. None of the mass-news outlets really provide "news" anymore. They spend too much time marketing public interest material to be concerned about news. If your young soldiers are buying into the swill touted by any of the outlets without thinking critically for themselves then you're not doing your job as a leader to help them develop as soldiers. The ability to think critically is a skill that they will need to be good NCOs, etc. some day.
That said, Fox, CNN and MSNBC are dangerous to an extent because every once in a while they report real news that is accurate and truthful. For example, there were all sorts of leaks prior to Operation Just Cause that arguably put the Noriega forces into a higher state of alertness than they otherwise might of been.
On the other hand, they are helpful because they often mis-report what the military is actually doing. We all know that the bad guys are watching the same new we are, so if the media is incorrectly reporting locations, operations, etc. then my boys are safer. The historians can sort out what really happened down the road.
(1)
(1)
0
-1
1
As a conservative, I will tell you that FOX News is terrible. They play circus about serious issues. They need to be serious and report real issues with the conservative slant. That is there niche. But they act like buffoons in front of the camera. The idiots that make the Fox News agenda make people who are very smart and very likable, like Loren Green look like racist idiots. Fox News helped Obama win in 2012. If they keep acting like idiots, they will give the election to Hillary in 2016. Then we will all be forced to accept that socialism has taken over and will ruin America.
Those of you who complain about MSNBC, CNN or whoever. Let them be the idiots. Never compare Fox News to those channels. We want to make FOX NEWS the channel that freedom loving Americans watch. Just by saying that the other news channels are liberal and they suck does not mean that Fox News is good. Fox News is a reality TV program. When Fox News gets serious, they can help all of America love freedom again and more people will see that conservative views make all Americans better.
How many of you think that Ronald Reagan or Howard Taft would approve of the clowns at Fox News? Doocy's boy is the most mature person there.
(0)
(1)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google