Forum Post: Does Fox News Make You Stupid?
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 1, 2011, 7:14 a.m. EST by JadedCitizen
(4277)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
“One of the real changes that comes when you start running for president – as opposed to being an analyst on Fox – is I have to actually know what I’m talking about.” - Newt Gingrich http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=5875
Study Confirms That Fox News Makes You Stupid http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/68-68/4280-study-confirms-that-fox-news-makes-you-stupid
The more this becomes a Republican vs. Democrat thing, the more this loses its meaning. MSNBC is as bad as Fox News, which is as bad as the rest of the mainstrea media. Both political parties are corrupted. Both political parties want us fighting each other to preserve the status quo.
The stereotype of OWS is that it is a movement by Democrats. That stereotype needs to be eradicated.
This documentary shows how Fox does its (mis)reporting, comparing with other stations around the world.
http://youtu.be/h3ETBtR6HeE
,
Just be careful, even the video you just showed is from an organisation that would like to put a spin on the uprising in Libya and say Guaddafi was a great man. Yes he did help Libya economical and it flourished under him but they leave out the fact that he limited personal freedom and would resort to shooting protesters when protests occurred.
Make sure you get your news from more than one source or you are bound to only get one side of the story
It is presented by Robert Jensen, Professor of Journalism at the University of Texas in Austin. Didn't see any allusion to Qaddafi.
Today's media is a wasteland of gutless reporting with Fox at the spearhead.
I agreed with that point in the beginning. But Fox News(and all of News Corp) has made themselves, through their own smear, an enemy of OWS.
Numerous studies covering 2008, 9, and 10 show that ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS during their 6 or 7 o'clock news programs had slanted reporting with 70% positive coverage of Obama/democrats and only 40% positive stories about McCain/republicans.
FOX News' 6 o'clock news was the only station that had balanced 38% positive stories for both Obama/dems and McCain/repubs. I suspect the reason people don't like FOX is because they'd rather see 0% coverage of the Republicans.
.
By "FOX's 6 o'clock news" I'm not sure which you mean...
Either:
Brett Baier's show, which has some of the lowest ratings on Fox, despite having nothing to compete with on other networks(Mad Money?)
Or are you referring to your local Fox network's news hour?? For example, is the name of the network followed by a number, being the channel that it's on?? Because that wouldn't really surprise me. They're a completely different network that addresses local news and not national politics..
Also, can you cite the studies??
Whenever I see "Numerous" or "many" or "all the time", I'm immediately skeptical about the omission of the name of the organizations' that reported the study or their existence, or their preference to remain anonymous.
a. Who's Brett Baier? And what's the relevance of his ratings? None whatsoever. (Of course it's worth noting even the 6 o'clock news "low" ratings are still approximately 2 times higher than CNN's and 3 times higher than MSNBC.) ----- b. It's about whether or not these channels are biased. They are... all of them.
Obviously I'm referring to the nationally-produced news by ABC, NBC, FOX News, et cetera. Not the local stuff produced by WAAA, WAAB, WAAC, and so on.
Citations: There's too many to list. Just google it: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bias+on+abc+cbs+nbc - Or not..... I really don't care since I've spent the hours reading these various studies, and don't have time to go back and re-read them again. Besides I've learned that even when people are shown studies, they never believe them.
They continue to think that ABC, CBS, and NBC are honest TV channels (despite the fact they are owned by, and pushing, corporate propaganda). Hell some people don't even believe the Occupy movement destroyed windows in Oakland, or attacked republicans in the Washington Convention Center, even when shown direct video evidence from youtube.
The only "study" I could find with your search was this one:
http://www.mrc.org/realitycheck/realitycheck/2011/20111107102729.aspx
By this guy:
http://newsbusters.org/user/7
Which directly contradicts what you're saying..
Probably because it's by this organizations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Research_Center
In fact, all I find googling what you said is this ridiculous study and conservative news organizations citing this study about how the liberal media loves the occupy movements and is too lenient on them.
You are a shiftless intellectually lazy bullshit artist.
Or maybe it's because democrats and republicans are two sides of the same evil coin, and it doesn't really matter whos side gets more asspampered coverage
So why hate on only FOX? Al these TV channels (abc, cbs, nbc, etc) are corrupt.
Because by watching Fox it is only blatantly clear that it is a machine of ignorance and vile filth.
Funny. I have the same opinion about MSNBC. They are like the left-wing version of Fox, which is why I think people should hate them equally.
haha, well said! I say we all throw away our damn televisions altogether and take a trip to the local library. Well i take that back, the libraries offer a good selection dvds and audio books as well for some of us lysdexic folks. but still, pull the plug on cable and quit wasting money to be spoonfed mostly bullshit from the idiotbox.
Said the FLAKESnews viewer.
No it just wasted billions of dollars on failed ventures like Solyndra and about ten other compaies that went bankrupt.
According to the CBO's revised estimates - YES it will. The deficit is now 1.4 trillion a year (almost three times Bush's 0.5 trillion average).
Well duh. The Euro is on the verge of collapse, which will serously damage the U.S. economy (Europe is our main customer)
Well of course it is changing. In fact it's grown cooler since 1999. But were humans responsible for that change? That's the unknown.
Most MSNBC viewers probably think the same.
According to the rollcall vote, House Republicans voted 65% against it. Then a second vote was held, but it was still opposed by 57% of Republicans.
You sound like you watch too much Fox without balancing your perspective. First, the "stimulus" legislation was primarily a borrowing by the Federal Government to provide transfer payments to the states due to precipitous declines in state revenues due to falling property and income states as a potential bridge to make the adjustment needed in state and municipal spending orderly instead of disorderly at the hieght of the financial crisis. The problem with the Health care reform law is that it only addressed access without simultaneously addressing cost and quality. We have the most expensive systems and on an outcomes/dollar basis one of the least effective. I find it interesting that neither side is willing to discuss the root issues and promote the logical solutions, opener markets and freeing consumers. Why will the FDA allow food to enter the US from around the globe with little checking so the incidence of Arsenic in Apple Juice and Salmonella in tomatoes (UNHEARD OF 30 YRS AGO) are increasing constantly while we can't but prescription drugs from Canada or Europe? Why can't young parents go to a nurse working out of her basement for earaches if they chose? Why did the AMA ask that citizen scientist not have assess to their own data? The comical thing about the free market talkers is they want free markets for businesses and regulated and limited markets for consumers. Why do hearing aids cost $4000 and an iphone $400? The Euro zone represents 16% of US exports, which are 11% of the US GDP (World Bank), 16% times 11% is 1.7% of the US GDP, the Wall Streeters and large holders of capital (Fox and all the news channels are their servants) want you to think it is bigger so you don't mind that we will now inflate ourselves not only out of the US debt mess but also the European mess. That said, the interconnectedness could have bigger implications, i.e., cause Canada or other trading partners to shrink and then indirectly affect our economy. I still don't get why TARP was done in such a way to preserve owners capital and jobs for the people who caused the crisis (at the top). Yes, if the big banks failed there would be a lot of losers, of epic proportions, but who would they be? With TARP the biggest losers were tax payers, and equity holders of banks/insurers did suffer huge dilution (so many lost 60-80 cents on the dollar rather than 100). But the money that those banks raised in the equity markets could have bought those banks assets out of bankruptcy, in a controlled bankruptcy or prepackaged with perhaps the government having to provide debtor-in-possession financing like they did for GM and Chrysler. We did avoid major disruptions to many peoples lives and livelihoods. So if Fannie Mae had failed: big shrink in residential mortage loans, therefore real estate sales, furniture, etc.., big losses by holders of MBS (mainly money market mutual funds since they rated a lot of securities AAA that were far from it. If AIG's corporate unit failed, close it down, why bail out the bettors in credit default swaps? Both sides lose due to unanalyzed counterparty risk, that probably brings you back to the MMA market and a lot of peoples short term cash and 401k's. Would you want the government to take the risk of inaction? If you review the lopsided rules that let members of a major party get on the ballot for no signatures and less money than an independent candidate, then you start to begin the rigged system.
Nope.
Bad guess. I don't even have cable (because I don't want to enrich Comcast) so don't see FOX at all. Most of my news comes from RT.com, France24.com, Euronews, and random websites.
BTW if you break-up your post into proper paragraphs, I'll go back and reread it, but my old eyes can't handle a random jumble of text. Sorry. The "gist" seems to be that corporations == bad which I agree with. (Surprise.)
BTW, I cancelled cable too, really great, we're all reading more, playing more and less tense. Sorry, I thought I had done paragraphs. I don't have corporations, just think we need to hold them accountable for more than money or we get what we pay for. I hope this works.
You sound like you watch too much Fox without balancing your perspective.
First, the "stimulus" legislation was primarily a borrowing by the Federal Government to provide transfer payments to the states due to precipitous declines in state revenues due to falling property and income states as a potential bridge to make the adjustment needed in state and municipal spending orderly instead of disorderly at the height of the financial crisis.
The problem with the Health care reform law is that it only addressed access without simultaneously addressing cost and quality. We have the most expensive system and on an outcomes/dollar basis one of the least effective. I find it interesting that neither side is willing to discuss the root issues and promote the logical solutions, opener markets and freeing consumers. Why will the FDA allow food to enter the US from around the globe with little checking so the incidence of Arsenic in Apple Juice and Salmonella in tomatoes (UNHEARD OF 30 YRS AGO) are increasing constantly while we can't but prescription drugs from Canada or Europe? Why can't young parents go to a nurse working out of her basement for earaches if they chose? Why did the AMA ask that citizen scientist not have assess to their own data? The comical thing about the free market talkers is they want free markets for businesses and regulated and limited markets for consumers. Why do hearing aids cost $4000 and an iphone $400?
The Euro zone represents 16% of US exports, which are 11% of the US GDP (World Bank), 16% times 11% is 1.7% of the US GDP, the Wall Streeters and large holders of capital (Fox and all the news channels are their servants) want you to think it is bigger so you don't mind that we will now inflate ourselves not only out of the US debt mess but also the European mess. That said, the interconnectedness could have bigger implications, i.e., cause Canada or other trading partners to shrink and then indirectly affect our economy.
I still don't get why TARP was done in such a way to preserve owners capital and jobs for the people who caused the crisis (at the top). Yes, if the big banks failed there would be a lot of losers, of epic proportions, but who would they be? With TARP the biggest losers were tax payers, and equity holders of banks/insurers did suffer huge dilution (so many lost 60-80 cents on the dollar rather than 100). But the money that those banks raised in the equity markets could have bought those banks assets out of bankruptcy, in a controlled bankruptcy or prepackaged with perhaps the government having to provide debtor-in-possession financing like they did for GM and Chrysler. We did avoid major disruptions to many peoples lives and livelihoods. So if Fannie Mae had failed: big shrink in residential mortage loans, therefore real estate sales, furniture, etc.., big losses by holders of MBS (mainly money market mutual funds since they rated a lot of securities AAA that were far from it. If AIG's corporate unit failed, close it down, why bail out the bettors in credit default swaps? Both sides lose due to unanalyzed counterparty risk, that probably brings you back to the MMA market and a lot of peoples short term cash and 401k's. Would you want the government to take the risk of inaction?
If you review the lopsided rules that let members of a major party get on the ballot for no signatures and less money than an independent candidate, then you start to begin the rigged system.
If Europe is only 16% of world exports, where does the rest of the84% go?
FOX? I heard it on RT.com and France24. You think these european channels are also part of the republican conspiracy as Fox? ;-)
As for TARP it all goes back to Keynsian economics -- the belief that government's job is to act to avoid economic recession (or losses). In Iceland they allowed the banks to fail, which obviously hurt badly, but now Iceland is recovering rapidly.
Only 58 billion went for Member State governmental aid. That still left ~700 billion for other projects, like Highways, Healthcare, Adult education, and corporate welfare to private businesses (Solyndra, et cetera).
I don't agree. I spent just $120 on healthcare last year. How much cheaper can it get? Hell CATV plus Cellphone costs ~$2000 alone. -- Also we don't have to worry that when the government workers go on strike, that the hospitals (except E.R.s) will shutdown as is happening in Britain right now.
The Republicans did talk about doing that (allowing people to buy insurnce across state lines). As for the FDA, they just released a study showing apple juice does not violate safe levels of any poison.
Government regulation.
Not really. I'm a free market person, and I'd love if you could buy hearing aids for the same price as an iPhone.
Don't have time to look up the first right now.
Hlthcare cost,(I like to call it "sickcare") i am talking macro $/citizen versus % chronic illness, premature death, infant mortality, cost of any given procedure. At the individuall level for those of us who have good insurance we don't perceive the cost cuz it is out of sight for us.
True on insurance across state lines, but what about drugs and being able to buy care from people not under a doctor?
Free market talkers among business and government and tv cable news are the ones I meant who advocate freedom for business but not freedom from regulation among people. The recent shortage of certain drugs because the drug companies won't make them because they don't like the reimbursement rate is one, then why can't someone who needs cancer drugs buy them from Europe? The system is rigged.
That's what FLAKESnews says, anyway.
100% spin. 100% of the time.
Let's side with the lesser hypocrites, the lesser evil.
how can it be eradicated?
isn't OWS a Liberal mindset founded organization.
This short video IS either a Liberal and a Conservative talking, or a OWS protester and a Troll.
can you tell me who is who or who is closest related to which?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETr9O0x5gi4&feature=related
How could people see OWS in any other way?
Liberal = Democrat = the Sheeple of the Obamination.
Democrats and Republicans participated equally in repealing Glass-Steagall and creating the 'too big to fail' banking structure.
Obama's betrayal of his promises from the 2008 campaign did as much to incite OWS into being as the debt limit default extortion by the tea party GOP in Congress this past summer.
Political parties are canker ridden pustule oozing social diseases infecting the body politic of American democracy.
I see the tea Party and OWS as the same, both distrust both parties and want a country that works.
Both should focus on 2 things: 1) campaign finance reform, and 2) ballot access reform (currently in Michigan if you are part of one of the two big political parties you don't need to gather signatures and pay a token amount to get on the ballot, if you are independent you have to gather a very large number of signatures and pay a big fee to get on the ballot, protecting the current parties and their bosses.
OWS is independent of the party system.
The TP is a tool of the party system.
The TP is a symptom of what is wrong with American democracy. OWS is the solution.
You are 100% correct and the more we go back and fourth then the more the Gov can continue to stick us behind our back. All media news outlets are guilty for the way they or they do not report certain news. I personally do not have a favorite but if you ever google the ratings on them, you can see that Fox is blowing all the rest away. So they are doing something right
No one brought up republican or democrat but you. This post is relevant because Fox and MSNBC paint very different pictures of OWS. How much more support would OWS have if Fox News Show, emphasis on SHOW, wasn't throwing insults at the OWS every night. And yes, there are people stupid enough to buy into Fox's version of reality.
I think that about every news media outlet tells a different story nowadays. Years ago they used to all be on the same playing field but no more. Because of the news media outlets, the Country is becoming for divided.
I can't argue with that.
With Fox I think you must make the distinction between the news shows and the opinion/talk shows.
It would be a good start. I think you also have to seriously consider the ramifications of the Akre vs. Fox News Lawsuit.
Does fox news make you stupid or do stupid people watch fox news? its a chicken or egg question but it does not solve the problem that people who watch fox news vote
Exactly. Just look at what posts get the most comments here; the sensationalist posts always do better than those that are well reasoned.
Sometimes I really hate it when people are right. You can take the meaning of the word 'right' two different ways and the sentence still makes sense.
I was more concerned with the msnbc devotees voting.
Right, corporations need more money and power the poor just aren't poor enough yet
Faux Nuuz does not make me stupid . . .
they make me CRAZY!!
Bad news is better than Fox News.
[Removed]
If you really want to become stupid, watch Al Gores network. It's the one that Kieth Olbermann went to.
Sure fartmowaley, whatever you say.
no
faux nuuz doesn't make me stupid
it makes me
crazy!
o wait,
I already said that.
This just in: Fox News announces 'science not out on Global Warming yet'. Shortly thereafter, Fox retracts story after the entire science community says wtf? :-)
we've gotta get some high profile repelicans making such stupid moves as this -
get these head-stuffed-so-far-in-the-sand-idiots right the fuck outa my legislature . . .
I could not make this up if I tried <giggle>
Boehner Cites Cow Farts To Downplay Global Warming (VIDEO)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/19/boehner-calls-global-warm_n_188688.html
that is just the kind of thing we are looking for.
Hold it up high, and scream for all we are worth.
No shit. This is like a bad episode of Gilligan's Island where the professor and gang have gone missing, so it's all up to Gilligan to come up with the scientific explanation for what's going on.
If we create the right kinds of pressure we can get even more of this kind of nonsense - it will be their downfall.
Yep, I won't rest 'til that happens. Peace.
It's been a long time coming.
Good luck. Carry on.
Fux News does not make people stupid it simply does nothing to alleviate stupidity that appears to be natural among their viewer base.
I read this in an article by veteranstoday about illegal bank foreclosures.
Call this “poor access to information” as is so often the case through the Pentagon Channel, the Armed Forces Network, CNN and Fox News, the only “approved” sources for information for our troops and their families.
This disgusts me.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/30/banks-targeting-military-families-for-illegal-foreclosures/
I have watched both MSNBC and FOX. MSNBC get repetitive but they still seem to have much more thought out commentaries. FOX seems to be ignorant to an absurd degree all too often and they seem to champion people that I wouldn't want watching my dog.
So, FOX may not actually make people stupid but they cater to those who are a bit challenged.
A term I recently heard somewhere fits FOX very well - "Reality Distortion" That, I think, is their goal and function as dictated by Rupert Murdoch. That bastion of morals has an agenda that even stupid people should be cautious of.
'That bastion of morals has an agenda that even stupid people should be cautious of.'
Amen.
FLAKESnews is nothing more than a republican smear machine. Ask Mr. Ailes.
Facts and truth be damned.
Who is Mr. Ailes?
He runs FLAKESnews for Murdock.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-roger-ailes-built-the-fox-news-fear-factory-20110525
Explains a lot. Thanks.
Ov korse watching that 'unFair & unBalanced' Lame FUX SNEWzzz maiks yoo stoopid ! Wot iz yoo ? Ignurrent ?! ... and see wot a 10 minute exposure did to me ?! ;-)
ROFL. Owwww....I think I busted my gut!
J@dedC : I think that you'll like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxX-41fK-k0 re. 'Fox News at Occupy-London Stock Exchange' ( http://occupylondon.org.uk/ ) and it begs the question, "where does satire end and truth start", with these clowns ?! ab absurdum ;-)
Is this Don Ronson for real? He's hilarious. He should be doing stand up comedy. Every bit as funny as a late night comedy skit. I'm going to watch it again.
J@dedC : No mate, 'Don Ronson' isn't quite real but he is still a lot more real than Pill O'Really, Sean Insanity and those other jokers on Lame FUX SNEWzzz !! Stay Well and best wishes to you and yours for the forthcoming Yuletide, Solstice and New Year ;-)
"Does Fox News Make You Stupid? "
No.
It is simply the only news dumbed down enough to be understood by stupid people.
Let's be clear, neither Fox nor CNN are "news", they are propaganda shows in a news format. Next time you watch either, have a pad of paper and write down any "facts" or "sources", there are none! Occasionally they will site a D.C. think tank underwritten by the same propaganda agenda seekers. I would love to see the unemployed journalist found a NEWS and DATA online paper, with an editorial board and peer critiqueing, I really miss real journalism. Every now and then I'll take an article and highlight the "facts" and the biased tone words (those I change to the most specific and clear language I can think of)...amazing the difference. It is also fun to go to the sources and view the data. My last one was when the Detroit papers published a State of Michigan press release discussing a way to judge schools based on the graduates ability to pass one year of college courses if they went to school. It made some top high schools look less high performing. When I looked at the data the funny thing was that a school that sent 1 student to college and they finished one year was 100%, while one with 96% going to college and 90% finished a year was 86%!!!
Fact checking the fact checkers. Good idea. Love it. On the other hand, it sucks that I even need to fact check the mainstream media.
All mainstream media makes you dumber. Some may have moments of clarity but it is so rare that you do yourself a great disservice by watching it. They are all owned by corporate america and they push the corporate agenda.
Sarcasm to follow: But I have to know what the latest dirt on the Cain Train so I can gossip about it tomorrow around the water cooler. :-)
FOX News is propaganda with a fascist agenda. They helped Hitler to gain power in 1931. They protect the 0.1%.
Many of you don't know what TV news was like in the old days, prior to Murdoch's war against decent journalism
I agree with everything else, but you lost me on the Hitler thingy.
"FOX Tönende Wochenschau" was Goebbels main propaganda outlet, the weekly NAZI news for the cinemas.
Google it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w68yOvtspv4
FOX was hired by Hitlers election campaign for propaganda, to produce state of the art movietone pictures. The other parties were not that much advanced: http://stevenjohnhibbs.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/twentieth-century-fox-made-propaganda-films-for-hitler-in-1932/
Guess why Google got spammed by 'S. Spielberg fired "Megan Fox" for Hitler comparison' messages...
I think that's overreaching a bit. Not saying you're wrong. Just not enough evidence for me to draw a conclusion. Only found one hit for fox films making hitler movies. and it's not a source I trust. The megan fox thing could be just what it is, an employee/employer fight. I've certainly compared some of my bosses to Hitler (at least, under my breath)
"FOX Tönende Wochenschau" became "Deutsche Wochenschau" in 1940, aka "Wochenschau".
FOX produced hard core propaganda for Hitler. No problem with that, nothing has changed. Today they produce propaganda for WallSt 0.1% fascists.
Just search the movies and watch them. The blog post is not a premium source but the original material is out there. Google for "FOX Tönende Wochenschau" and you would find it all, pro-Hitler reporting <1940. Then it was nationalized when they went to war with the United States.
Even if it is true. I would have a hard time selling that idea to anybody. So I hate to be a prick about it, but pursuing this, in my opinion, would be a waste of time in light of all the more urgent issues at hand. Peace.
At least it shows that FOX was a Nazi collaborateur. So they are a bit hypocrite and still sell fascism.
study by who confirms Fox News makes you stupid? Please - everyone has an agenda. Stop with the self proclaimed virtuosity.
where there is smoke there is fire
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/left-rejoices-as-poll-of-612-new-jerseyans-declares-fox-news-makes-people-stupid/
http://www.alternet.org/story/149193/study_confirms_that_fox_news_makes_you_stupid/
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-12-17/entertainment/30062165_1_fox-news-study-election
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uozc6Z-rmyQ&feature=related
http://thepragmaticcenter.com/essay/how-does-fox-news-make-you-stupid
http://bigjournalism.com/epokroy/2011/11/24/fdu-poll-fox-news-makes-you-stupid-ignore-our-margin-of-error/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/
like I said - everyone has an agenda. everyone's got a link. What you don't have is common sense to sift through the spin and make up your own mind based on reason.
Name three positions I have taken on issues. Prove to everyone how smart you are and that you really have this uncanny psychic ability to know my mind.
I have no idea what you are talking about
It just make you believe them.
How do fox and msnbc report the same story? Fox: Today a member of OWS was caught defecating in the bushes at Zuccotti Park MSNBC: Today a member of OWS organically fertilized the plants at Freedom Park thus showing their support for the environment and demonstrating renewable farming techniques.
The bias doesn't bother me so much. It is the intentional fabrication of facts. See Akre vs. Fox News.
perhaps i missed something, but is that not a local affiliate that did this (which I do not agree with)?
perhaps you did miss something. I never saw this in any of the dozen reports I read. It always said Fox News. As in the lawsuit is named Akre vs. Fox News.
She is best known for the whistleblower lawsuit by herself and her husband, Steve Wilson, against Fox Broadcasting Company station WTVT in Tampa, Florida. -Fox Affiliate
Back in December of 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida.
again, it is an affiliate. that is the same as the local affiliates of nmc, cbs, abc. they have their own news teams and are independent of the network.
again. they were employed by Fox News. -hired by Fox.
Semantics. That is like comparing a Fox affiliate in Massachusetts with one in Dallas/Fort Worth. Yes, they are fox, but they have their own crew. I am not saying I agree with what happened, but you are making a blanket statement that is just not reasonable. It would be like me saying OWSrs are smelly, ignorant, homeless junkies. It is a partially true statement, but there are those that do not fit that description (misguided would be 100% accurate though).
Fair enough. We'll leave it at semantics.
Thanks for the conversation. Have a nice day.
I'm guessing you have watched a lot then.
I made a website and called it 'thetotallyrealnewsthateveryoneshouldbelievebecauseimtheonlyonetellingthetruth.org' Please go to it because its the only totally real news that everyone should believe because Im the only one telling the truth.
Just because someone can register a domain doesn't make them newsworthy. Just because someone can buy a camera doesn't make them a photographer. Just because someone picks up a scalpel doesn't make them a doctor. Im sure you're getting the picture and I can stop. Ah, heck, probably not.
Just because you can borrow your neighbor's wrench doesn't make you a plumber. Just because you have teeth doesn't make you a dentist. Just because your mom bought a piano doesn't mean you can play it.
Just because someone can post a comment doesn't make them genius enough to stay on topic. So did you have something to say on the topic of Fox News or not?
It was pertinent but it requires a stretch of imagination I guess. IN other words, these are news items, why?
http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=5875 http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/68-68/4280-study-confirms-that-fox-news-makes-you-stupid
I wish people learned the one thing in college that they DO teach..that sources and references should be expert and verifiable. Not joe blow does his own website because he has an opinion he wants to share.
There is a saying: where there is smoke there is fire. That story was one out of hundreds I could have pulled to support my topic question, including the Akre vs. Fox News lawsuit. But it probably wouldn't matter to you which source I pulled because you would discredit any of them.
Fox News LIES. That is my opinion based on the evidence I've seen. Love it or leave it.
then pull up something credible. Pretend a professor is grading you on your paper and part of your grade is on your references. I can't discredit sources like Time magazine, or Nature (the scientific journal, not the tv show), the New York Times or the Washington Post, or even Rolling Stone magazine.
I don't really care what sources of news you find credible. I'm not sucking up to you for some kind of grade. I'm pointing out to you and everybody else an ever increasing trend. This kind of stuff about Fox News is all over the web. Hundreds and hundreds of references to Fox Lying/Distorting and/or their viewers having mis-perceptions and being ranked the most under informed viewers.
Its a trend, but its a trend like on 'twitter' because kids like you are writing these 'hundreds and hundreds of references'. No real news or facts. Just because someone can buy a domain doesn't make what they post on it, valid. Look, I can write FOX LIES. Does that make it true, correct or verifiable just because Im an average guy who knows how to type?
I really hate it when people stoop down to the level of trying to discredit a viewpoint by making ridiculous and unknowable claims of a person's age. This is an anonymous post, jerk! To all you dopey knee-jerk reaction people on this forum claiming psychic abilities. You have no credibility. Go away!
Its not hard to recognize teenage angst or vernacular or reactions when you have raised a few of your own. You know how your mom can always tell something's wrong? All the times your dad found out about something and you didn't know how he did? Its like that. But its more than that, its also the words you use. This is teen talk: jerk, i don't really care, Im not sucking up to you, I really hate it when, dopey and go away. Its not anything psychic, its just spotting a kid because we have one. Like knowing a car is a volvo just by seeing the tail lights.
I'm 42 years old. My birthday was May 21, 1970. My angst is directed at your lowball, bullshit attack on discrediting me by writing me off as some kid. As to your argument - It's true that anybody can write Fox Lies. But my question is why do they? What's the motivation for so many people to write Fox Lies? Is it just merely left-wingers attacking them? Probably a lot is. But why do so many scientists agree that climate change is real, yet so many people tied to Fox News say it is not? For me, that is the one issue that I most dislike Fox News for.
You're behind the times. Look up climategate...those scientists fudged the figures. Its a joke now, son.
Do the emails show that climate change science is a sham and that the world is not warming?
No they don't. The claims made by Sarah Palin, among many others, have been comprehensively debunked.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/09/climategate-bogus-sceptics-lies
Joke's on you.
Its not just Fox its ALL of main stream media. Yes that includes NPR. If you don't see this yet you are just being suckered into the VERY OBVIOUS left vs right divide and conquer tactic that is being played against the people. Looks like most in this movement continued to be suckered. I am starting to wonder if there is any hope for you at all....
The left and right divide existed well before mainstream media got bought out by big money, and will always exist - people just think differently. I do agree that today's media plays a big role in fostering the left vs right war.
I'm one of those rare birds who watches both Fox News AND MSNBC. I like to hear opinions from various sources, even if I disagree with the commenter.
I don't think Fox News is quite as dumbed down as it's critics make it out to be. Yes, they can simplify and dumb down criticisms of the left in simple sound bites. But they also have more intelligent analysis.
That they get a large audience is because many of their viewers have felt alienated by the mainstream media.
Consider the case of Sarah Palin. Granted, she is no enlightened technocrat and not the sharpest knife in the drawer. But the intelligentsia in the MSM snickered and called her stupid, thus reinforcing the meme that the MSM hates them (because Palin's supporters identify with her).
Consider the question: "What kind of newspapers do you read?". I myself might have to take a pause, because I hardly read newspapers--I mostly gather my news and commentary from the internet.
Anyway, does Fox News make you stupid? Not anymore than any other news outlet or source of opinion if you only glean information from a singular source.
Dylan Ratigan is the only guy I've seem on TV who has a good grasp of the financial board games that have been played in America since this crisis started. Since this entire mess is based on financial boardgames it's pretty important to understand it. It's pretty awful to watch fox trying to blame poor home buyers or freddie mac for this mess when the blame falls right on wall street's derivative bets and over leverage in the banking system.
However, I don't think that foisting $500,000 homes on people who could barely afford them was a good thing to do either.
The problem with the housing bubble is that it caused prices to reach unsustainable levels. George Bush's "ownership society" was a disaster.
I'd get rid of the tax breaks for mortgage payments (because if you look at that honestly, it's a subsidy to the housing industry).
I am a staunch advocate for letting housing prices drop, let the banks take the hit for their stupidity, and then the remaining inventory becomes affordable housing for those who were priced out of the market.
$500k homes were sold to people who could barely afford them because wall street was making a killing turning them into frankenbonds and selling them off. Wall street and banks made a cut when they sold the homes, they made another cut when they sold the bonds and even more when the sold insurance on those bonds in the form of credit default swaps. They got these POS bonds rated AAA by rating agencies so that they could use them as collateral to get more money to make more loans to sell more houses to get more mortgages to make more frankenbonds to sell. All this was done with 30 to 1 leverage and the 1(the collateral) in that 30 to 1 leverage was quite often frankenbonds. It was a deregulated wall street greed orgy.that seems to have cost about 14 trillion in bailouts and fed loans--------I keep reading different numbers. The banks without the bailouts and fed loans would be gone so you need to ask how much would that have cost the FDIC if we hadn't made the loans and bailouts. I'd just like to see regulations in place so it doesn't happen again. the MF Global bankruptcy tells me we have not done enough yet.
I'm not in disagreement with you at all regarding the cause of the problem.
HOWEVER, all this talk of helping out homeowners are are underwater is just a scam to bail out the banks.
Do you think this woman should be bailed out? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lQtBzq7CdI
She's a sucker obviously. The really evil ones are her enablers. There should be a special circle in HELL for these traitors to humanity.
Oh it's layer on layer of scams for sure. Wall street used the panic to encamp themselves firmly in our banking system so they could keep their hands in the public till. We could have used the fed to give every sub prime mortgage holder a zero percent loan for 1.4 trillion and given out another 1.4 trillion in zero percent loans to small businesses to make sure all those folks had jobs for 1/4 the cash we let wall street pillage.
That's a good summary!
a little music and it could be a song : > )
It's a misuse of the term stupid.
What FLAKESnews does is make you ignorant.
There is no "Main Stream Media". 2/3 of all US print, TV and radio media is owned by six corporations.
Ownership Chart: The Big Six
Then let them be owned by six corporations.
We have the internet -- where we can get informed outside the corporate media.
Everything I watch on TV I take with a grain of salt, by the way.
Well said.Thank You.
Are you aware of the Akre vs. Fox News lawsuit?
I was not, so I read the Wikipedia entry.
So now I know :)
Not just they think we stupid but retarded
[Removed]
i think it makes uninformed people unenlightened, but entertains during some hours and informs during other hours, those that are enlightened. The business community sees it as no different than watching the daily show for most of the day, and watching Bloomberg during the news hours. IMO.
Are you saying Fox News is no different than the daily show during some hours and that what they call fair and balanced news is really nothing more than political satire?
yes sir. they have even been known to admit it. not so much satire as opinion pieces.
[Removed]
No, but msnbc does. That slobbering stuttering freak show Chris Matthews does makes me stupid.
google msnbc makes you stupid and it brings back only Fox, no msnbc. I guess not many people agree with you.
You're probably correct as nobody watches msnbc.
Probably nobody listens to people named fartmowaley.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
abccbsnbccnnmsnbc,...................they're job is to make you stupid.
very nice Bill O'reilly-esque comeback.
I dont' watch Bill O'Reilly.
Do you have a point to make about the topic of Fox News or not?
I watch Fox business channel, not their opinion programs.
Fox News owner, Rupert Murdoch, isn't he engaged in some phone-hacking scandals?
Only all around the World.
You're asking a question of which you know the answer so tell us all about it.
In London Saturday, Rupert Murdoch issued full-page apologies for the phone-hacking scandal that has hit his media empire. Critics say his free-wheeling and politically conservative approach may have affected US journalism as well.
“Along with the transformation of a great paper (Wall Street Journal) into a mediocre one came a change that was both more subtle and more insidious. The political articles grew more and more slanted toward the Republican party line,” Nocera writes. “The Journal was turned into a propaganda vehicle for its owner’s conservative views.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0716/Rupert-Murdoch-phone-hacking-scandal-US-connections-grow/(page)/1
Sorry, sorry, sorry.
Now can I go back to hacking phones and political systems?
Right after you take a bath.
So help me, that man IS the anti-Christ.
I don't believe in the anti-Christ, but if I'm wrong and he exists, Rupert fits the bill.
I don't either, but it was the nicest way to say that he ranks as one of the most vile.
And how is that different than CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, etc. being a propaganda vehicle for the left. Go search Siga Technologies and see what you get. You will find stories on Fox but not the rest (ABC did have a mention). Then explain to me where Fox is lying about this story. It is sicking what Obama is doing to our system, paying back his supports with the taxpayers money, but most of the main stream media doesn't report it.
I don't really need to search. I don't trust either party. I just wish we could all work together to break up the big business grip in Washington and then we, the people, can sort things out from there.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-only-issue-the-only-issue-get-money-out-of-pol/
I agree about not trusting either party, but my point is that you can not make valid decisions/formulate valid opinions unless you listen to all points of view, not just listening to what you want to hear. If you get all your information from MSNBC (not accusing you of that, just making a point), you will be extremely misinformed, just as you will if you only get news from Fox.
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true. I value looking at different sides of the story and wary of favoring one news source over another. But in my opinion, Fox has such a bad reputation. They have lost all credibility with me when they've shown a penchant for outright lying if it suits their agenda. See Akre vs. Fox News.
Just read the Wiki. information about this.Don't see that much different then the rest of the media not having one mention of Siga Technologies, not even the fact that Sen. McCaskill has requested an investigaton. Who is preventing this from being reported (ABC did have a mention of this). Fox is one of the few sources presenting the other side (other than talk radio, which is commentary and not news). I believe the left has been brainwashed into the view that nothing on Fox is true simply because it doesn't fit their agenda.
Do you see how ironic your belief is? You think we been brainwashed to distrust everything Fox says and we think you've been brainwashed to believe everything Fox says. So how do we find a way to work together as people and fix our country?
I disagree, I did not say I believe everything Fox says. What I said was that I look at all sources and then make a determination. When I see that a liberal senator has called for an investigation (as in the Siga story) and Fox is the only one reporting on it, it leads me to believe there is a bias in the media that does not report on it. Then I read all the comments here complaining about Fox News and wonder how they can be so uninformed. Does Fox have a bias in the stories they choose to report, of course they do. Does CNN, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, NPR, ABC have just as much bias, of course they do.
How do we fix things, by having real discussions like this rather than shouting at each other and calling each other demeaning names. We can differ, but we have to look at the other point of view also. We can get involved and elect reasonable representatives that can work together to solve our problems. We can quite demonizing each other. I've worked with many of the so called 1% and they are not evil, most contribute a great deal to charities that do far more for people than the sink hole that is our federal government.