A new national survey from Public Policy Polling (D) finds an amazing result: The most trusted name in TV news, the only one that more Americans trust than distrust, is...Fox!
Respondents were asked whether they did or did trust the various news outlets. Fox turned out to be the only one with a positive score, at 49% yes to 37% no. CNN was at 39%-41%, NBC 35%-44%, CBS 32%-46%, and ABC 41%-46%. The pollster's analysis finds a high level of polarization, with 74% of Republicans trusting Fox, and no more than 23% of Republicans trusting anybody else. Smaller majorities of Democrats trust all the other outlets and distrust Fox. Independents register negative ratings for all the news outlets, but Fox comes the closest at 41%-44%.
"A generation ago you would have expected Americans to place their trust in the most neutral and unbiased conveyors of news," said PPP president Dean Debnam, in the polling memo. "But the media landscape has really changed and now they're turning more toward the outlets that tell them what they want to hear."
So it's either trust or no trust? Isn't that question a bit black/white
People will vote on this according to their political affiliation more than "trusting" a certain news channel over another one. It's an emotional vote, not a factual one.
On January 27 2010 10:37 Foucault wrote: So it's either trust or no trust? Isn't that question a bit black/white
People will vote on this according to their political affiliation more than "trusting" a certain news channel over another one. It's an emotional vote, not a factual one.
The idea is it's the same question as the poll in the OP.
I don't know I guess I trust that the facts they do present are in indeed facts. I mean we know they will only show facts that help push a Conservative agenda, but I don't believe they out right lie about anything. Same as the NY times with a liberal agenda. I still say i trust both media outlets. You just have too read between the lines as the reader/watcher.
Isn't FOX news the one that had the U.S. laws changed so they could broadcast false information without being legally responsible when they said that the false information is correct?
Oh wait, it is. Americans are dumb, what else is new?
"A generation ago you would have expected Americans to place their trust in the most neutral and unbiased conveyors of news," said PPP president Dean Debnam, in the polling memo. "But the media landscape has really changed and now they're turning more toward the outlets that tell them what they want to hear."
On January 27 2010 10:34 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Who said U.S. was the most intelligent country in the world?
Pretty sure no one did?
I gotta say, the intelligence and academic standards at this country are very low right now, I feel you waxangel.
I can't speak much of myself because I come from a rural town, my family is quite ignorant, in fact I'm the second member of my family going to college, yet I still have my flaws and I'm learning it the hard way as time goes by. All my classmates in college all they do is party and play or talk about football, I don't get how in 4 years they'll graduate, anyway here's the thing:
the place where I work to pay for my studies, is filled by guys with MBAs, and Bachelors in this or that, and you guys won't believe the amount of stupid shit they come up with every day. I'm not in the managers board, but I hear stories from this guy I befriended who is a manager, and in fact is one (if not the only one) smart in the board. they sit in a fucking computer and they don't even know how to use excel, word powerpoint. one guy asked me one day if it was possible to edit a pdf file using word ? I mean what the heck ?? and it's not like they're 50 or 40s... they're in their MID 20s !!! some LATE 20s !! pathetic
seriously, degrees in america have lowered their standards, and this is the people that believe in Fox news, or say man never landed on the moon or stupid shit like that. hell there is even one guy in the board I was talking to with my buddy, we were having lunch the other day, and he said once that astronauts used power boosters in the moon because the moon has NO GRAVITY ! I mean I'm a fucking redneck for crying out loud, but at least I know the moon has gravity.
I'm pretty afraid, I don't know, if freaks me out that these are the people that are running my country, moreover, this is the generation to come over and run.
the reason for this is because the people who are sane are split between CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.
the extreme right wing will all vote fox news, so that's like ~25-35% of voters (i'd estimate) while the other 65-75% of americans are less conservative, sane, and have a less percentage of gun owners. i'd also like to mention i am a republican, but even I know that fox news is a joke when it comes to unbiased reporting.
On January 27 2010 10:45 InToTheWannaB wrote: I don't know I guess I trust that the facts they do present are in indeed facts. I mean we know they will only show facts that help push a Conservative agenda, but I don't believe they out right lie about anything. Same as the NY times with a liberal agenda. I still say i trust both media outlets. You just have too read between the lines as the reader/watcher.
They do. They outright lie about everything. That's what makes Fox different from other news channels. They are in full-on marketing mode a la CNBC whoring for big corporations.
On January 27 2010 10:48 Jazriel wrote: Isn't FOX news the one that had the U.S. laws changed so they could broadcast false information without being legally responsible when they said that the false information is correct?
Oh wait, it is. Americans are dumb, what else is new?
Yes. Supreme court ruled that news organizations need not report the truth. They can lie as much as they want. Fox won that case.
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
its quite obvious that the audience of fox news is a majority who sees intellect as an elitist flaw (yes i took that from jon stewart =P)
but on a more serious note: fox news tends to gather its audience by being the only news station that creates a spectacle with its lies, and some people are too stupid to think for themselves and get caught up in this spectacle. its a sad truth of life =\
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
And no other News corporation does that? rite? lmao
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
And no other News corporation does that? rite? lmao
Not the reputable ones, no. If you have evidence of this occurring elsewhere, please post it and enlighten me.
On January 27 2010 10:45 InToTheWannaB wrote: I don't know I guess I trust that the facts they do present are in indeed facts. I mean we know they will only show facts that help push a Conservative agenda, but I don't believe they out right lie about anything. Same as the NY times with a liberal agenda. I still say i trust both media outlets. You just have too read between the lines as the reader/watcher.
They do. They outright lie about everything. That's what makes Fox different from other news channels. They are in full-on marketing mode a la CNBC whoring for big corporations.
what do they lie about? I assume you have examples
It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
And no other News corporation does that? rite? lmao
Not the reputable ones no. If you have evidence of this occurring elsewhere, please post it and enlighten me.
On January 27 2010 10:45 InToTheWannaB wrote: I don't know I guess I trust that the facts they do present are in indeed facts. I mean we know they will only show facts that help push a Conservative agenda, but I don't believe they out right lie about anything. Same as the NY times with a liberal agenda. I still say i trust both media outlets. You just have too read between the lines as the reader/watcher.
They do. They outright lie about everything. That's what makes Fox different from other news channels. They are in full-on marketing mode a la CNBC whoring for big corporations.
what do they lie about? I assume you have examples
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
And no other News corporation does that? rite? lmao
Not the reputable ones, no. If you have evidence of this occurring elsewhere, please post it and enlighten me.
On January 27 2010 11:01 thezergk wrote: I think its pretty funny that everybody says that you are automatically retarded for trusting Fox News. And U all say Fox is biased . . .
You realize that Fox News has done such things as doctor the photographs of their opponents to make them appear uglier, right? There seems to be no limit to their journalistic ethics violations.
And no other News corporation does that? rite? lmao
Not the reputable ones, no. If you have evidence of this occurring elsewhere, please post it and enlighten me.
CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
it's traditional news you know with the anchor and crap that's alright it's a notable bias but over all is a trustworthy program not really top of my list on just because it has a bias, journalism needs to be fair all the time not most of it.
On January 27 2010 11:25 Virtue wrote: it's traditional news you know with the anchor and crap that's alright it's a notable bias but over all is a trustworthy program not really top of my list on just because it has a bias, journalism needs to be fair all the time not most of it.
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
This is a really good point. I just assumed that the poll was incorporating a more balanced demographic due to the reputability of the institute behind it. These are pretty shoddy stats.
On January 27 2010 11:25 ktp wrote: CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
Wow that's pathetic.
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
What i don't get is why "Fox turned out to be the only one with a positive score, at 49% yes to 37% no. CNN was at 39%-41%, NBC 35%-44%, CBS 32%-46%, and ABC 41%-46%."
Why is Fox news 49% and not a range like 39-41% etc lol this report seems to be bais imo.
personally i trust Brian Douglas Williams bitches!
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
As far as TV news, PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer is the only decent one, but PBS usually has a liberal slant as well. For written, you've got a lot more options. CSMonitor is my choice for online news, but that's largely because they've got the best international coverage, I don't go there for domestic stuff.
EDIT: I mean PBS the station does, with programs like Frontline. I don't watch enough Newshour to see how it is.
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
This is a really good point. I just assumed that the poll was incorporating a more balanced demographic due to the reputability of the institute behind it. These are pretty shoddy stats.
On January 27 2010 11:25 ktp wrote: CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
Wow that's pathetic.
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
In order for polls to be accurate, they can't pick out a certain amount of certain demographics, they just call houses randomly. If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks that is not their problem.
Please... Why would you post this after the past week in American politics. I have been feeling horrible in the light of Mass, the couple of supreme court decisions, and now this 'spending freeze' that cuts funding for social programs but not our wars. I don't understand why conservatives aren't pleased with Obama. I saw on bb today a California school district banned the Miriam-Webster dictionary because it defines oral sex...
And now you tell me this?! When I move to Japan this summer, I'm not coming back. I may not like it there and go looking for somewhere better, but this country is fucked.
Wow, they really know there geography... How does it even happen that they get their map wrong? And that nobody in the entire studio knows where Iraq and Egypt are?
As for being trusted, they are 100% reliable and consistent in their coverage.
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
This is a really good point. I just assumed that the poll was incorporating a more balanced demographic due to the reputability of the institute behind it. These are pretty shoddy stats.
On January 27 2010 11:25 ktp wrote: CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
Wow that's pathetic.
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
In order for polls to be accurate, they can't pick out a certain amount of certain demographics, they just call houses randomly. If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks that is not their problem.
PBS is a professional, unbais source.
I mostly agree, although methods and questions weren't very good. They chose a method most likely to attract that demographic. Still, it's up to the website reporting it to actually convey the rest of that information instead of just making terrible blanket statements like "Fox is most trusted news in America."
On January 27 2010 11:35 ShoreT wrote: In order for polls to be accurate, they can't pick out a certain amount of certain demographics, they just call houses randomly. If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks that is not their problem.
Well, essentially it is their problem if this skews the results. I wasn't advocating altering their phone polling so as to have certain demographics quotas; that would likely make it worse. Phone polling is flawed in and of itself due to the filter of who has a phone, who answers their phone more often, and who will participate in surveys.
I honestly didn't know Fox still reported the news. I assumed they still only had talk and opinion shows from a bunch of foaming at the mouth retards who rather than talk about issues, just attack each other in allotted time frame.
edit: This is not only Fox news. So many shows have turned into this and rather than actual discuss issues and report the news, it becomes propaganda machines for whatever guests they have on these ridiculous shows.
On January 27 2010 10:48 Jazriel wrote: Isn't FOX news the one that had the U.S. laws changed so they could broadcast false information without being legally responsible when they said that the false information is correct?
Oh wait, it is. Americans are dumb, what else is new?
Yes. Supreme court ruled that news organizations need not report the truth. They can lie as much as they want. Fox won that case.
I don't trust ANY news, but I respect people like Glenn Beck because even though I might not agree with them I believe that he believes in what he says. I liked him when he was back with Headline News and I think that unfortunately a good deal of his doom and gloom type of talk is more true that I want it to be. I just think that money and power twists the nutsacks of every news organization to make exciting news rather than factual news.
On January 27 2010 12:00 starcraft911 wrote: I don't trust ANY news, but I respect people like Glenn Beck because even though I might not agree with them I believe that he believes in what he says. I liked him when he was back with Headline News and I think that unfortunately a good deal of his doom and gloom type of talk is more true that I want it to be. I just think that money and power twists the nutsacks of every news organization to make exciting news rather than factual news.
O wellskies
lol glenn beck doesn't believe what he says here's him using vaporub to practice his crying backstage
On January 27 2010 12:00 starcraft911 wrote: I don't trust ANY news, but I respect people like Glenn Beck because even though I might not agree with them I believe that he believes in what he says. I liked him when he was back with Headline News and I think that unfortunately a good deal of his doom and gloom type of talk is more true that I want it to be. I just think that money and power twists the nutsacks of every news organization to make exciting news rather than factual news.
O wellskies
Yes, I to believe that the Government has installed devices to track people down under the cover of OnStar.
Honestly, it's not a huge surprise. You have moderate and liberal votes all split up amongst NBC, ABC, CBS, and CNN. Right-wingers only have Fox. It's not a reflection of the whole nation, just that the options are larger for two groups.
Also, anyone who says they trust ONE news source, is an idiot anyway. That being said, I think that for an accurate decpiction of the real story you'd have to check CNN, FOX, and a handful of websites all covering the same story. WTF ever happened to journalistic objectivity?
ROFL, now imagine if they put him on fox news? perfect match no? lol
imo, they just made up a number for that "study" or polls or what-ever u wanna call it, in an attempt redeem fox's public image, i refuse to believe that half of the american population is retarded... even though most of time i am proven to be wrong on that.
PPP conducted a national survey of 1,151 registered voters on January 18th and 19th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-2.8%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.
who the hell did and who the hell gave the surveys anyways?
sad. Cant believe the guy said he liked glenn beck. This is the same guy who brings the guy who wrote the "Left Behind" series on his show and talks about how the world is going to end and jesus is coming back.
On January 27 2010 12:06 Piste wrote: why does america have such bad news?
fox realized they could make more money from viagra ads than responsible journalism so they made news for angry old people and once they got the most ratings other networks followed suit
On January 27 2010 12:06 Louder wrote: It's not news anyway
Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie. By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003 On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.
On January 27 2010 12:15 eshlow wrote: This is dumb... considering all of the percentages are below 50%.
It's just a way to say misleading things with statistics.
I don't trust any news outlets. Bloggers FTW.
What is misleading about it? One set of numbers is more favorable than the other sets of numbers. Why is it relevant that the leader only has a plurality?
On January 27 2010 12:00 starcraft911 wrote: I don't trust ANY news, but I respect people like Glenn Beck because even though I might not agree with them I believe that he believes in what he says. I liked him when he was back with Headline News and I think that unfortunately a good deal of his doom and gloom type of talk is more true that I want it to be. I just think that money and power twists the nutsacks of every news organization to make exciting news rather than factual news.
O wellskies
I won't say that I like Glenn Beck, but I think he gets more shit than he deserves. He's compared to the likes of Bill O'Rielly and Rush Limbaugh when he's nowhere near as mean-spirited.
On January 27 2010 12:18 meegrean wrote: This is disturbing. Fox is incredibly biased.
Well to be fair, are not all Mainstream American News corporations (CNN, Fox News, MSNBC) biased in their own respects? I would assume anybody would realize this, I always thought personally that Fox News was quite retarded because they got the most incapable people to do the jobs who absolutely nothing what they're talking about. (IE: Glenn Beck). It's not the fact that the station is biased in my mind, they all are in their own parties respect. It's more of how stupid the people they hire for the company are, and how they gloat around saying "Fair and Balanced". Yadda yadda, rant on my part.
On January 27 2010 10:44 funnybananaman94 wrote: well 49% of americans voted for geroge bush too, so yeah half our country is retarded :/ at least most of them don't live in new york..
Yeah, it's not like every other news outlet isn't biased as fuck but just the other way around. Fuck all of them. I'd be just as upset if Americans trusted MSNBC to the same extent.
On a side note, print and radio news seem to maintain the most objectivity.
On January 27 2010 13:21 Drowsy wrote: Yeah, it's not like every other news outlet isn't biased as fuck but just the other way around. Fuck all of them. I'd be just as upset if Americans trusted MSNBC to the same extent.
MSNBC gives a former Republican member of congress his own show and has a former Republican and Reform Party presidential candidate as a prominent contributor.
Please don't use dishonest false equivalency fallacies.
When liberals criticize Obama, MSNBC trots out people like Chris Matthews to call them loony whackjobs. When fat old people with misspelled signs and rascals take public transportation into DC to whine about taxes, Fox calls them "Fox News Tax Day Tea Parties" and advertises them as a legitimate political movement.
On January 27 2010 13:21 Drowsy wrote: Yeah, it's not like every other news outlet isn't biased as fuck but just the other way around. Fuck all of them. I'd be just as upset if Americans trusted MSNBC to the same extent.
MSNBC gives a former Republican member of congress his own show and has a former Republican and Reform Party presidential candidate as a prominent contributor.
Please don't use dishonest false equivalency fallacies.
Exceptions don't make rules. I realize that Fox News wouldn't give a liberal a television show under any circumstances, and I realize that MSNBC is less biased than Fox News, but overall they are a liberal network and overall fox is a conservative network.
On January 27 2010 13:26 keepITup wrote: This isn't really surprising. Being a conservative is the new fad -- it's honestly hard for me to find anyone who actually likes Obama anymore.
Actual conservatives are going to hate Obama no matter what he does and most people who voted for Obama have no reason to approve of him when he's enacted more of McCain's campaign promises than his own.
On January 27 2010 13:26 keepITup wrote: This isn't really surprising. Being a conservative is the new fad -- it's honestly hard for me to find anyone who actually likes Obama anymore.
Actual conservatives are going to hate Obama no matter what he does and most people who voted for Obama have no reason to approve of him when he's enacted more of McCain's campaign promises than his own.
On January 27 2010 13:28 Drowsy wrote: Exceptions don't make rules. I realize that Fox News wouldn't give a liberal a television show under any circumstances, and I realize that MSNBC is less biased than Fox News, but overall they are a liberal network and overall fox is a conservative network.
Here let me draw a picture of your false equivalency fallacy for you since you don't seem to realize it yet even though the first two thirds of your sentence seemed to
On January 27 2010 13:26 keepITup wrote: This isn't really surprising. Being a conservative is the new fad -- it's honestly hard for me to find anyone who actually likes Obama anymore.
Actual conservatives are going to hate Obama no matter what he does and most people who voted for Obama have no reason to approve of him when he's enacted more of McCain's campaign promises than his own.
Ok lets try not get into this.
It's true though, and relevant. Fox portrays Obama as a dangerous leftist even when he advocates for the same policies he campaigned against in 2008 ("surge" in Afghanistan, keeping Gitmo open, spending freeze). Since they are able to call what a year and a half ago were Republican policies "dangerously leftist", they (with Obama's generous help) are able to move the "center" of American politics that much further to the right.
On January 27 2010 13:34 On_Slaught wrote: You could just as easily make a poll where Donald Duck is named the most trusted news in America.
Polls mean less than nothing nowindays.
Polls that disclose their methodologies are more accurate and relevant than ever. Are you arguing that scientific progress in the field of statistics has gone backwards?
Statistics are very easy to misinterpret, and the way the questions were worded or the order they were placed in might have had an effect. The groups of people who were asked this question might have been chosen w/ a bias, and any other number of things could have happened.
And, this is just me speaking, I think that most of the people who voted "yes" don't really have that much of a say in anything. Fox can just tell all of them what to think about, and some of them what to think.
On January 27 2010 12:00 starcraft911 wrote: I don't trust ANY news, but I respect people like Glenn Beck because even though I might not agree with them I believe that he believes in what he says. I liked him when he was back with Headline News and I think that unfortunately a good deal of his doom and gloom type of talk is more true that I want it to be. I just think that money and power twists the nutsacks of every news organization to make exciting news rather than factual news.
O wellskies
lol glenn beck doesn't believe what he says here's him using vaporub to practice his crying backstage
Lol you really mean to tell me that you can't tell he is doing a photoshoot and NOT practicing crying backstage? I mean the camera and the lighting and the photographer instructing him on how to poser. It's pretty obvious.. but I guess some people only see what they want to..
On January 27 2010 10:44 funnybananaman94 wrote: well 49% of americans voted for geroge bush too, so yeah half our country is retarded :/ at least most of them don't live in new york..
Wow, yeah, you got me. It turns out the guy who spent months talking about FEMA concentration camps because no one could prove to him they didn't exist and also said that the Cash for Clunkers website allowed the government to take over your computer turned out to be not actually crazy
On January 27 2010 10:28 BlackJack wrote: Not surprising. Foxnews has 3 times as many viewers as CNN/MSNBC. I could have told you this headline before they even did the poll.
this. regardless it's still pretty annoying. i'm sure this poll will boost their viewership even more.
On January 27 2010 10:53 Bill Murray wrote: the reason for this is because the people who are sane are split between CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.
the extreme right wing will all vote fox news, so that's like ~25-35% of voters (i'd estimate) while the other 65-75% of americans are less conservative, sane, and have a less percentage of gun owners. i'd also like to mention i am a republican, but even I know that fox news is a joke when it comes to unbiased reporting.
Thank you. I don't know how some people actually believe in fox.. it honestly makes me want to buy + Show Spoiler +
a 22 and CAP MA SELF IN THA HEAD GEE. I JUS DON KNOW WHAT IM GON DO NAM SAYIN DAWG + Show Spoiler +
IM SORRY I JUST GOTTA LET THIS OUT RIP TO MY FOO TYRON3 AND LIL KEKE
Everytime I've looked at American news they cover the most ridiculous shit. It's not even news worth listening to, let alone biased. Everyone should read The Economist, boost it's sales so it's the only profitable newspaper, and let them start up a news network.
This is just another reason why so many people hate the US, if the most trusted news network is FOX news, it really says alot of about the average American. (We can at least hope this is skewed because the non-ignorant american's are watching less TV and reading more reputable stuff.
The type of people who watch Fox News are the type of people who have unconditional trust in their political "superiors", not to mention their religious beliefs. It should be no surprise that people who will trust the bible so passionately would also have as much trust in a news network that agrees with their beliefs.
Whereas on the other hand, people who watch CNN, MSNBC and whatnot are usually a lot more cynical and hesitant to believe, well, anything. You see a lot more conspiracy theorists and whatnot on the left, and a lot more general questioning of stuff.
I'd say this reflects the nature of Fox News watchers more than anything. So this doesn't show that there are tons and tons of Fox News believers, and way less disbelievers. There are plenty of people who generally agree with the type of politics of CNN and MSNBC, yet they know better than to completely trust them. I consider myself a very left leaning person, yet I know better than to put any sort of "complete" trust in any of them.
america's future is fucked anyway lol democrats can't come together to pass any progressive legislation while republicans are actually working together
On January 27 2010 10:28 BlackJack wrote: Not surprising. Foxnews has 3 times as many viewers as CNN/MSNBC. I could have told you this headline before they even did the poll.
Its amazing that so many people can be convinced that the PROBLEM (de-regulation, religious politics, "free" trade, central banking...)
is the solution... Its a real testament to the US propaganda system. They've been getting fucked for years, and are cheering for more.
The real answer is that both parties are corporate lackeys... and that there is no real choice as to who runs the country. We need serious change to the tune of a 3rd party, instant run off voting or some kind of sick, labor oriented, uber-trade-protectionist grassroots movement or the decline has no choice but to continue.
The poll is very vague and inconclusive. Tear it down and carry on.
The thing I worry a lot about these sort of articles is the amount of American loathing it breeds. When you take your focus off of who you really should be fighting and start fighting yourself, you've lost.
On January 27 2010 12:06 Louder wrote: It's not news anyway
Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie. By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003 On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.
That seems to be working well for MSNBC, Fox should have chance to make news also.
On January 27 2010 10:45 InToTheWannaB wrote: I don't know I guess I trust that the facts they do present are in indeed facts. I mean we know they will only show facts that help push a Conservative agenda, but I don't believe they out right lie about anything. Same as the NY times with a liberal agenda. I still say i trust both media outlets. You just have too read between the lines as the reader/watcher.
They do. They outright lie about everything. That's what makes Fox different from other news channels. They are in full-on marketing mode a la CNBC whoring for big corporations.
what do they lie about? I assume you have examples
yup , probably because they were the only ones to cover the climategate scandal in any detail the public wanted more info on that story and fox was the only one willing to give them anything to chew on
At least FOX is run by Rupert Murdoch and not a government lapdog like CNN or weak like the BBC. CNN and other CNN-like media have long since stopped caring about the truth and only give news thats easiest to sell to the public. CNN is way more biased than FOX. At least they (FOX) can think for themselves and not blindly feed propaganda to a gullible public (they do it too just less)
I find Fox News more bearable to watch than CNN, BBC and most others 'cept for MSNBC and PBS. All of them are propaganda organs of the state~ Fox News is just straight up with their bullshit... it's a fun spectacle!
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
This is a really good point. I just assumed that the poll was incorporating a more balanced demographic due to the reputability of the institute behind it. These are pretty shoddy stats.
On January 27 2010 11:25 ktp wrote: CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
Wow that's pathetic.
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
In order for polls to be accurate, they can't pick out a certain amount of certain demographics, they just call houses randomly. If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks that is not their problem.
PBS is a professional, unbais source.
What? If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks, that is the VERY DEFINITION OF A BIASED POLL. Go take a stats class...
No. Really? Please no. Even if this is a dodgy poll... it's still scary.
I knew Fox had the highest viewer numbers, but I always told myself it was because of all the stoners who watched it for a laugh... not because people listen and believe what is being said.
On January 27 2010 19:43 Alethios wrote: No. Really? Please no. Even if this is a dodgy poll... it's still scary.
I knew Fox had the highest viewer numbers, but I always told myself it was because of all the stoners who watched it for a laugh... not because people listen and believe what is being said.
Who could blame them? Fox has cool dramatic music and stories that sound like something from a movie. Not only that, it is EASY TO UNDERSTAND!!!
Most trustworthy, informative, fair and balanced broadcasts in the history of mankind:
1. FOX NEWS
2. North Korean radio network receivable by pre-tuned, built in radios in everybody's home.
3. Nazi Germany's radio network
(For the sake of fairness, it has to be mentioned that all of these were slightly biased in some way. #3 was slightly biased against jews #2 is slightly biased against the US #1 is slightly biased against human intelligence and thinking in general)
On January 27 2010 22:00 ieatkids5 wrote: ok someone explain to me that donald duck comic with the hose and the motorcycle thing, i don't get it.
He's taking a bath in the sidecar of the police motorcycle. Cause he's a baller.
Anyways, another poll was done a few months back looking at this question and a few others. What it found was that Fox was the most trusted as well as least trusted
Researchers were asked which national television news organization they trusted most for accurate reporting. Fox News was named by 30.0% of all respondents – up from 19.5% in 2003 and 27.0% in 2007.
Those named most frequently as the television news organization most trusted for accurate reporting in 2009 included: Fox News (30.0%), CNN (19.5%), NBC News (7.5%) and ABC News (7.5%). Fox News was also the television news organization trusted least. Just over one-quarter, 26.2%, named Fox News, followed by NBC News (9.9%), MSNBC (9.4%), CNN (8.5%), CBS News (5.3%) and ABC News (3.7%).
Enough is enough. The only thing this poll is showing me is how stupid the average TL member is.
You're all able to go "har har, Americans are so dumb, they trust bad news" yet the vast majority of people just assumed the poll was accurately conducted (which, if you read the title, you should immediately realize how absurdly impossible it is to prove) and never bothered to look at the easily accessible information source. There's probably a good portion of you that never even clicked the first link.
On January 27 2010 19:43 Alethios wrote: No. Really? Please no. Even if this is a dodgy poll... it's still scary.
I knew Fox had the highest viewer numbers, but I always told myself it was because of all the stoners who watched it for a laugh... not because people listen and believe what is being said.
Who could blame them? Fox has cool dramatic music and stories that sound like something from a movie. Not only that, it is EASY TO UNDERSTAND!!!
ROFL. Fox is so bad even my 3 year old brother can decide to watch MSNBC over it.
Years ago for school i watched this documentary called "out foxed", basically it reveals how screwed up fox news really is. More people need to watch it. I have to believe that the poll is rigged.. i have to...
I try to watch the news on national TV and read/overview 1-3 magazins dayli. And none of them is even half as biased as Foxnews, in any direction.
The first time I saw Foxnews on Youtube I thought it was a comedy show (Bill'o'Reilly)... Then i learned that it was *real* and it got even more fun...
It's because only idiots watch 24 hour cable news networks. What MTV did to music, 24 hour cable news networks did to news. In case you don't know what that is, they pretty much shit all over them.
On January 27 2010 22:31 Jibba wrote: Enough is enough. The only thing this poll is showing me is how stupid the average TL member is.
You're all able to go "har har, Americans are so dumb, they trust bad news" yet the vast majority of people just assumed the poll was accurately conducted (which, if you read the title, you should immediately realize how absurdly impossible it is to prove) and never bothered to look at the easily accessible information source. There's probably a good portion of you that never even clicked the first link.
The reason why people would vote Fox News is because people who hate Fox News don't watch TV. Cable TV news is for older, mid-Americans. Younger people probably get most of their news from non-news shows like Stewart/Colbert/Other late night hosts. Your average teenager or 20ish American doesn't give a fuck about anything related to the government. So quite frankly, our opinions don't even matter to polls like this. Because we don't care enough to matter.
I personally grew up on PBS/NPR. I used to listen to NPR a lot when driving, and I'd always try to catch the News Hour if I had time. I knew of one other person my age who also listen/watch the news. In general, younger people just don't give a damn. And it forces news channels to cater to the audience who do watch: conservative, old, not-so-trendy people of mid-America. And these people like Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly.
On January 28 2010 00:08 Velr wrote: I try to watch the news on national TV and read/overview 1-3 magazins dayli. And none of them is even half as biased as Foxnews, in any direction.
The first time I saw Foxnews on Youtube I thought it was a comedy show (Bill'o'Reilly)... Then i learned that it was *real* and it got even more fun...
I live in America and I did the same thing... I thought the woman who is in the movie Handcock was fake until I randomly flipped through TV channels bored one night and saw her. I was completely stunned. Oh same thing with Cramer! When I saw him in Iron Man I thought that it was some part of the marvel universe being made up until I saw John Stewert covering his ridiculousness...
On January 27 2010 22:31 Jibba wrote: Enough is enough. The only thing this poll is showing me is how stupid the average TL member is.
You're all able to go "har har, Americans are so dumb, they trust bad news" yet the vast majority of people just assumed the poll was accurately conducted (which, if you read the title, you should immediately realize how absurdly impossible it is to prove) and never bothered to look at the easily accessible information source. There's probably a good portion of you that never even clicked the first link.
The reason why people would vote Fox News is because people who hate Fox News don't watch TV. Cable TV news is for older, mid-Americans. Younger people probably get most of their news from non-news shows like Stewart/Colbert/Other late night hosts. Your average teenager or 20ish American doesn't give a fuck about anything related to the government. So quite frankly, our opinions don't even matter to polls like this. Because we don't care enough to matter.
I personally grew up on PBS/NPR. I used to listen to NPR a lot when driving, and I'd always try to catch the News Hour if I had time. I knew of one other person my age who also listen/watch the news. In general, younger people just don't give a damn. And it forces news channels to cater to the audience who do watch: conservative, old, not-so-trendy people of mid-America. And these people like Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly.
I completely agree and it's sad... I listen to NPR often as well and I get my news from simply going on google news and looking at multiple sources of coverage for whatever story I'm reading about until I feel like I can paint a somewhat unbiased picture of whatever happened. People all over the world just love to be hand fed everything and FOX does just that.
Fox's local news coverage isn't usually too bad, at least not from the philadelphia area. However, its world news and talk shows are just ridiculous right-wing circlejerks.
On January 28 2010 00:22 baubo wrote: Your average teenager or 20ish American doesn't give a fuck about anything related to the government. So quite frankly, our opinions don't even matter to polls like this. Because we don't care enough to matter.
This is even worse than watching/believing Foxnews .
On January 27 2010 22:31 Jibba wrote: Enough is enough. The only thing this poll is showing me is how stupid the average TL member is.
You're all able to go "har har, Americans are so dumb, they trust bad news" yet the vast majority of people just assumed the poll was accurately conducted (which, if you read the title, you should immediately realize how absurdly impossible it is to prove) and never bothered to look at the easily accessible information source. There's probably a good portion of you that never even clicked the first link.
The reason why people would vote Fox News is because people who hate Fox News don't watch TV. Cable TV news is for older, mid-Americans. Younger people probably get most of their news from non-news shows like Stewart/Colbert/Other late night hosts. Your average teenager or 20ish American doesn't give a fuck about anything related to the government. So quite frankly, our opinions don't even matter to polls like this. Because we don't care enough to matter.
I personally grew up on PBS/NPR. I used to listen to NPR a lot when driving, and I'd always try to catch the News Hour if I had time. I knew of one other person my age who also listen/watch the news. In general, younger people just don't give a damn. And it forces news channels to cater to the audience who do watch: conservative, old, not-so-trendy people of mid-America. And these people like Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly.
I completely agree and it's sad... I listen to NPR often as well and I get my news from simply going on google news and looking at multiple sources of coverage for whatever story I'm reading about until I feel like I can paint a somewhat unbiased picture of whatever happened. People all over the world just love to be hand fed everything and FOX does just that.
Actually, I think Fox News does a lot more than that. They're actually REALLY, REALLY GOOD at hitting people's weaknesses and their passions. I mean, I currently live in a communist country that every American think is ruled by government propaganda. Yet I find Fox News much better than the Chinese government when it comes to propaganda. It's as if the Chinese govt doesn't really work to lie to you, because it's a monopoly and don't care. Whereas Fox News has competition. So the they work hard and come up with genius methods. It's quite ironic that the best propaganda comes from a democracy.
To me, what's sad isn't that so many Americans are buying into Fox, but rather there's no a single damn thing anyone can do about it. TV is run by ratings and money. And when there's so money involved, there's no way it can be unbiased. Twisting the truth for the almighty dollar is the American way, after all.
lol, as horrible as it is, this isn't a suprise.... The particular groups of people that agree with Fox's bias are frequently also the type of people that don't know what they're talking about. And if you don't know how can you distinguish something you don't know from something you don't know but would like to hear?
I cant stand watching MSNBC because they don't report anything. Both Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow have nothing but ad hominem arguments and get destroyed in ratings because of it. Theres a reason Beck and O'Reilly crush everyone. It just seems like other news stations just put their blinders on if they are politically aligned to who is in power. Even with all the shenanigans going on in washington.
btw in case people aren't aware, (and it seems like there are more than a few that aren't), a lot of Fox News programming isn't even meant to be unbiased these days and a lot of it isn't even meant to be News. Beck/Hannity/Huckabee/ and soon Palin make no secret of the fact that they are conservative. This should not be news considering Palin and Huckabee both made runs for the white house on the Republican ticket and Hannity/Beck have been on talk radio for several years, etc. Basically, if you tune into FoxNews during primtetime expecting to find some unbiased news you're completely oblivious. Just like Olbermann/Maddow make no secret of being liberal. These are OPINIONATED SHOWS. Olbermann recently referred to Scott Brown as a homophobic, sexist, racist, supporter of violence against woman. He is just as bad or worse than anyone on FoxNews yet everyone on the left loves him, just like everyone on the left loves John Stewart. So clearly it's not about despising unbiased cable news, because if that was true Keith Olbermann would be just as hated as Sean Hannity instead of being hailed as a "truth teller." It's really all about despising unbiased cable news that don't align with people's political views. MSNBC watchers are no better than the "ignorant redneck / xbox live playing / gun owners" that watch FoxNews.
On January 28 2010 01:47 BlackJack wrote: btw in case people aren't aware, (and it seems like there are more than a few that aren't), a lot of Fox News programming isn't even meant to be unbiased these days and a lot of it isn't even meant to be News. Beck/Hannity/Huckabee/ and soon Palin make no secret of the fact that they are conservative. This should not be news considering Palin and Huckabee both made runs for the white house on the Republican ticket and Hannity/Beck have been on talk radio for several years, etc. Basically, if you tune into FoxNews during primtetime expecting to find some unbiased news you're completely oblivious. Just like Olbermann/Maddow make no secret of being liberal. These are OPINIONATED SHOWS. Olbermann recently referred to Scott Brown as a homophobic, sexist, racist, supporter of violence against woman. He is just as bad or worse than anyone on FoxNews yet everyone on the left loves him, just like everyone on the left loves John Stewart. So clearly it's not about despising unbiased cable news, because if that was true Keith Olbermann would be just as hated as Sean Hannity instead of being hailed as a "truth teller." It's really all about despising unbiased cable news that don't align with people's political views. MSNBC watchers are no better than the "ignorant redneck / xbox live playing / gun owners" that watch FoxNews.
Agreed, Beck has said many times his show is not a news program. You can listen to him rant and rave his opinions and decide if you agree with him or not. He is sensational on purpose obviously because he needs to be to draw viewers in his time slot. I don't like watching Hannity because he is a bit of a mutton head and is basically the conservation version of Olbermann (not as bad though in my opinion, Hannity doesn't come off as nasty).
This thread is depressing. Sometimes I just feel like I don't fit in America, because of ridiculous spdewed out shit like Fox News. CNN looks brilliant compared to Fox news.
On January 27 2010 11:07 blahman3344 wrote: its quite obvious that the audience of fox news is a majority who sees intellect as an elitist flaw (yes i took that from jon stewart =P)
but on a more serious note: fox news tends to gather its audience by being the only news station that creates a spectacle with its lies, and some people are too stupid to think for themselves and get caught up in this spectacle. its a sad truth of life =\
Yup. I think alot of people aren't interested in watching 'the news' so much as info-tainment. I remember reading about a study which showed that people who watched the Daily Show got as much news content from it as people who watched the major news outlets like CBS NBC etc
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
Yeah good point. I was wondering about sample size, how the poll was conducted etc. I'm glad you bothered to read the original article. Fox is awful but I don't think they're necessarily as 'trusted' as this article would imply. Good catch
What never ceases to amaze me is how US news networks don't even bother to look at the maps sometimes... Confusing countries in middle-east and Europe all the time. I mean, we live in a world where such information can be accessed within seconds, how can they go wrong with it?
On January 27 2010 11:07 blahman3344 wrote: its quite obvious that the audience of fox news is a majority who sees intellect as an elitist flaw (yes i took that from jon stewart =P)
but on a more serious note: fox news tends to gather its audience by being the only news station that creates a spectacle with its lies, and some people are too stupid to think for themselves and get caught up in this spectacle. its a sad truth of life =\
Yup. I think alot of people aren't interested in watching 'the news' so much as info-tainment. I remember reading about a study which showed that people who watched the Daily Show got as much news content from it as people who watched the major news outlets like CBS NBC etc
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
Yeah good point. I was wondering about sample size, how the poll was conducted etc. I'm glad you bothered to read the original article. Fox is awful but I don't think they're necessarily as 'trusted' as this article would imply. Good catch
This definitely speaks to the larger problem of polling America. Using 1k-2k people as your n, and using a standardized telephone survey has waaaaaaaaaaaaay too many biases. At this point, the awareness of polling is so great that people have way too many notions about the choices they are given. Another large problem I see sort of dovetails with what you said about old white conservatives being the ones who take these surveys.
While I would not say that it is just this demographic, I feel that those who do take the survey are people who "want" to respond to the survey. I usually hang up the phone when it is not someone I know or something important, and there seems to be a general trend for some people to not care about certain callers. If you asked a passionate conservative/liberal/Democrat/Republican if they would like to take a survey about their political beliefs, I would imagine that they'd be more inclined to do so than those who are blase towards the topic.
To me, a proper survey that aims at showing national trends needs at least 10k participants. Of course this seems arbitrary, but in a survey that has inherent biases I think it is important to have a alrger representation of peoples. As far as the actual results of this survey go... fuck cable news. Regardless of each stations biases, 24 hour news cheapens everything. The logistical day between news and print in the days of yore allowed the information to mature in the mind of the writer and the participants in the events. Insta-News skews the actuality of events so much, it NEEDS to go away.
Fox News has always been master of the tactic of constantly calling other networks unreliable and calling themselves the most fair, balanced, accountable, etc. You repeat anything enough, people believe it. FAIR AND BALANCED. FAIR AND BALANCED. People are suckers.
Fox News tells xenophobic, patriotic Jesus lovers what they want to hear. It gives them wars to cheer for, un-American "liberals" to hate, and good old boy faces with strong chins to tell them how honest and trustworthy the network is. It's a joke and it caters to ignorance, racism, sexism, homophobia, and Christianity, at the expense of honesty, accurate facts, and anything else of value you would expect to find in the "news".
I love the "MSNBC Response" to Fox News' bias. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC flat out lying and you'll have a point. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC showing partisan bias to the extent that it officially supports candidates while giving literally nothing but negative coverage of their opponent. Show me Hannity and O'Reilly going after Republicans in congress the way Olbermann goes after Democrats. Won't happen. Know why? Because MSNBC is barely left of center - and I mean America's center, which is quite conservative - and Fox News is so far off the charts on the right there isn't a word for it.
To be clear, I vastly prefer BBC and Al Jazeera to any of the American networks. What I like about watching Al Jazeera in particular is that I never hear opinions. It's pretty crazy ... news reported as it happens without some talking head interpreting it for me.
On January 28 2010 01:47 BlackJack wrote: Just like Olbermann/Maddow make no secret of being liberal. These are OPINIONATED SHOWS. Olbermann recently referred to Scott Brown as a homophobic, sexist, racist, supporter of violence against woman. He is just as bad or worse than anyone on FoxNews yet everyone on the left loves him, just like everyone on the left loves John Stewart. So clearly it's not about despising unbiased cable news, because if that was true Keith Olbermann would be just as hated as Sean Hannity instead of being hailed as a "truth teller." It's really all about despising unbiased cable news that don't align with people's political views. MSNBC watchers are no better than the "ignorant redneck / xbox live playing / gun owners" that watch FoxNews.
Actually, I'm a fairly hard leftist (by US standards at least), and don't care for Olbermann or Maddow much either. Shultz and Matthews are sometimes tolerable but go over the top frequently. Jon Stewart is pretty amazing, because he doesn't go off on people in the same way, rather just making you laugh at the ridiculousness of it all.
I end up getting most of my news from PBS (occassionally), and sites like politicalwire and fivethirtyeight.
On January 28 2010 01:47 BlackJack wrote: Just like Olbermann/Maddow make no secret of being liberal. These are OPINIONATED SHOWS. Olbermann recently referred to Scott Brown as a homophobic, sexist, racist, supporter of violence against woman. He is just as bad or worse than anyone on FoxNews yet everyone on the left loves him, just like everyone on the left loves John Stewart. So clearly it's not about despising unbiased cable news, because if that was true Keith Olbermann would be just as hated as Sean Hannity instead of being hailed as a "truth teller." It's really all about despising unbiased cable news that don't align with people's political views. MSNBC watchers are no better than the "ignorant redneck / xbox live playing / gun owners" that watch FoxNews.
Actually, I'm a fairly hard leftist (by US standards at least), and don't care for Olbermann or Maddow much either. Shultz and Matthews are sometimes tolerable but go over the top frequently. Jon Stewart is pretty amazing, because he doesn't go off on people in the same way, rather just making you laugh at the ridiculousness of it all.
I end up getting most of my news from PBS (occassionally), and sites like politicalwire and fivethirtyeight.
I think this is how most liberals actually feel. I agree with you completely. Which is why MSNBC has only a fraction of the viewership of Fox News - liberals don't fall for the same tricks conservatives do
I hope Americans don't take this poll at its facial value and actually think a little. I know somebody who trusts everything that FOX says and we always argue whenever we see each other.
On January 28 2010 03:27 Last Romantic wrote: To be fair, in recent times fox has been factually outperforming most of the msm. I find that much sadder than this poll result.
Differentiating fox from the "msm" is part of the culture war strategy that fox has deliberately pursued. it cultivates an "us vs them" mentality which pervades the network and its programming. Fox gets the highest ratings so they are part of the mainstream media, whether they (or we) like it or not.
On January 28 2010 01:47 BlackJack wrote: Just like Olbermann/Maddow make no secret of being liberal. These are OPINIONATED SHOWS. Olbermann recently referred to Scott Brown as a homophobic, sexist, racist, supporter of violence against woman. He is just as bad or worse than anyone on FoxNews yet everyone on the left loves him, just like everyone on the left loves John Stewart. So clearly it's not about despising unbiased cable news, because if that was true Keith Olbermann would be just as hated as Sean Hannity instead of being hailed as a "truth teller." It's really all about despising unbiased cable news that don't align with people's political views. MSNBC watchers are no better than the "ignorant redneck / xbox live playing / gun owners" that watch FoxNews.
Actually, I'm a fairly hard leftist (by US standards at least), and don't care for Olbermann or Maddow much either. Shultz and Matthews are sometimes tolerable but go over the top frequently. Jon Stewart is pretty amazing, because he doesn't go off on people in the same way, rather just making you laugh at the ridiculousness of it all.
I end up getting most of my news from PBS (occassionally), and sites like politicalwire and fivethirtyeight.
Matthews doesn't have any political convictions of his own, he just chases popular narratives to look like he's with the times. Everyone who cites the "thrill up the leg" comment he made about Obama as "proof" he's somehow liberal conveniently ignores how he gushed over Bush looking heroic and manly in a flight suit during the whole Mission Accomplished thing.
On January 28 2010 04:27 Louder wrote: Fox News has always been master of the tactic of constantly calling other networks unreliable and calling themselves the most fair, balanced, accountable, etc. You repeat anything enough, people believe it. FAIR AND BALANCED. FAIR AND BALANCED. People are suckers.
Fox News tells xenophobic, patriotic Jesus lovers what they want to hear. It gives them wars to cheer for, un-American "liberals" to hate, and good old boy faces with strong chins to tell them how honest and trustworthy the network is. It's a joke and it caters to ignorance, racism, sexism, homophobia, and Christianity, at the expense of honesty, accurate facts, and anything else of value you would expect to find in the "news".
I love the "MSNBC Response" to Fox News' bias. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC flat out lying and you'll have a point. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC showing partisan bias to the extent that it officially supports candidates while giving literally nothing but negative coverage of their opponent. Show me Hannity and O'Reilly going after Republicans in congress the way Olbermann goes after Democrats. Won't happen. Know why? Because MSNBC is barely left of center - and I mean America's center, which is quite conservative - and Fox News is so far off the charts on the right there isn't a word for it.
To be clear, I vastly prefer BBC and Al Jazeera to any of the American networks. What I like about watching Al Jazeera in particular is that I never hear opinions. It's pretty crazy ... news reported as it happens without some talking head interpreting it for me.
This is a joke right, hahahahaha. Both O'Reilly and Beck have heavily criticized Bush with his management of hurricane katrina, rising oil prices and all of his spending to name a few. MSNBC just does not cover anything of substance. Everytime I flip through without fail they are smearing Palin for who knows what reason since she isn't even holding office anymore.
Olbermann is a mutton head spewing whatever he can to save his sinking ship. He has nothing but foaming at the mouth ad hominem arguments. The recent race for Ted Kennedy's seat in mass sums this up nicely when he said.
“in Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude-model, tea-bagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”
He only attacks conservative democrats to fall in line with MSNBC's agenda. MSNBC is further left then Fox is right.
Fox will continue to dominate until other networks get off their knees for washington.
On January 27 2010 10:19 theKOT wrote: Wow that's funny I'm a Conservative without a party and I can't stand or trust FOX.
Are you over 40 years old?
If your young, why are you a conservative?
Is conservatism a phase your going through, or is it to piss off your parents, college, friends?
I take your a conservative but not a republican,right?
I just don't understand why kids choose to be conservative? The best part of being young is to explore and rebel against the old ways (if, of course they are wrong)
If I could say a few words about Fox and MSNBC, CNN is not worth the mention since they pander to both sides and fail to be a unbiased news channel. Except for their Sunday shows with Zakaria and Amanpour which are excellent and on par with PBS.
MSNBC has three liberal shows. Countdown, Rachel Maddow Show, Ed Schultz. These three shows are pretty liberal in their view and the hosts make no effort to hide their bias. They explain their points and trash the other side, no doubt about that. Sometimes they go over the line but that's it.
One thing about MSNBC is they are never demagogues or outright support a group.
Fox's entire lineup is conservative, that is except for Special Report with Brett Beuer which is pretty solid.
Fox is outright propaganda from the republican party. You now have 2 republican candidates working for FOX, Palin and Huckabee.
Their Primetime starting from beck to hannity is outright batshit insane. Beck is a demagogue and probably believes the shit he spews every day. His show is full with racist conspiracy theories.
He often and I mean very often compares the administration with Mao, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot. He invites radical right wingers on his show. The equivalent to MSNBC having Noam Chomsky for an interview.
Hannity is also batshit insane, he calls the president so many names it's hard to keep up.
Kids, Obama is not a socialist. Read a History book or political science book or google political compass to see where our president's views compare to an actual socialist.
At best Obama is a left of center Democrat. Hardly a social democrat and far from a real socialist
A social Democrat would be someone like Dennis Kucinnich or Feingold
On January 28 2010 04:27 Louder wrote: Fox News has always been master of the tactic of constantly calling other networks unreliable and calling themselves the most fair, balanced, accountable, etc. You repeat anything enough, people believe it. FAIR AND BALANCED. FAIR AND BALANCED. People are suckers.
Fox News tells xenophobic, patriotic Jesus lovers what they want to hear. It gives them wars to cheer for, un-American "liberals" to hate, and good old boy faces with strong chins to tell them how honest and trustworthy the network is. It's a joke and it caters to ignorance, racism, sexism, homophobia, and Christianity, at the expense of honesty, accurate facts, and anything else of value you would expect to find in the "news".
I love the "MSNBC Response" to Fox News' bias. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC flat out lying and you'll have a point. Show me the endless examples of MSNBC showing partisan bias to the extent that it officially supports candidates while giving literally nothing but negative coverage of their opponent. Show me Hannity and O'Reilly going after Republicans in congress the way Olbermann goes after Democrats. Won't happen. Know why? Because MSNBC is barely left of center - and I mean America's center, which is quite conservative - and Fox News is so far off the charts on the right there isn't a word for it.
To be clear, I vastly prefer BBC and Al Jazeera to any of the American networks. What I like about watching Al Jazeera in particular is that I never hear opinions. It's pretty crazy ... news reported as it happens without some talking head interpreting it for me.
This is a joke right, hahahahaha. Both O'Reilly and Beck have heavily criticized Bush with his management of hurricane katrina management, rising oil prices and all of his spending to name a few. MSNBC just does not cover anything of substance. Everytime I flip through without fail they are smearing Palin for who knows what reason since she isn't even holding office anymore.
Olbermann is a mutton head spewing whatever he can to save his sinking ship. He has nothing but foaming at the mouth ad hominem arguments. The recent race for Ted Kennedy's seat in mass sums this up nicely when he said.
“in Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude-model, tea-bagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”
He only attacks conservative democrats to fall in line with MSNBC's agenda. MSNBC is further left then Fox is right.
Fox will continue to dominate until other networks get off their knees for washington.
Olbermann is a mutton head spewing whatever he can to save his sinking ship. He has nothing but foaming at the mouth ad hominem arguments. The recent race for Ted Kennedy's seat in mass sums this up nicely when he said.
“in Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude-model, tea-bagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”
I remember when Keith did that bit. It was a riff on a previous joke about Brown. And it was valid criticism presented in a funny way. That's the entertainment part of Keith's show.
I would think Undisputed is Aegraen too. However, I have known Undisputed- over the internet for a few years as he was at one time one of my best friends roommates and I can sure you they are different people. I can also assure you that he loves Glenn Beck...
I honestly don't trust any of the news channels in general. I feel like they all are pushing an agenda. Fox just does it in a way that is way over the top and insane. And it works as they crush the other channels in ratings by 3-4X. Probably at least 1/3 of foxes viewers only watch to see the ridiculous shit they are spewing.
Sometimes products are popular but harmful. Crack cocaine. Fox News. Probably laws should be used to curtail their popularity and fix those who abuse them to destroy their lives and those around them.
Is it really unfair to use the law to require news organizations to not knowingly lie and distort; to make them liable for the damages from doing so? To count the air time as campaign ads where it clearly supports a party or candidate?
The runaway success of this fascist-like "right" is the real crisis in the U.S. It could very well tear down all pretenses of democracy if it keeps going the way it has been. It's foaming lunatic foot-soldiers are readily programmed to believe any position to the point of streaming tears and shotguns wielding. Neighboring countries are advised to beware.
On the other hand, no one should be surprised by this poll. Fox News beats other stations hands down. Fox News wins over real news (and things at least closer to it than Fox) the way Pokemon would win against a visit to the dentist. It's the worst kind of corruption; the kind that disrupts our very ability to know (as a nation) the world around us. Money was already buying votes quite successfully before we had Fox News. Fox puts the "bought" votes over the top.
On January 28 2010 11:08 old times sake wrote: The runaway success of this fascist-like "right" is the real crisis in the U.S. It could very well tear down all pretenses of democracy if it keeps going the way it has been. It's foaming lunatic foot-soldiers are readily programmed to believe any position to the point of streaming tears and shotguns wielding.
On January 28 2010 11:08 old times sake wrote: Sometimes products are popular but harmful. Crack cocaine. Fox News. Probably laws should be used to curtail their popularity and fix those who abuse them to destroy their lives and those around them.
Is it really unfair to use the law to require news organizations to not knowingly lie and distort; to make them liable for the damages from doing so? To count the air time as campaign ads where it clearly supports a party or candidate?
The runaway success of this fascist-like "right" is the real crisis in the U.S. It could very well tear down all pretenses of democracy if it keeps going the way it has been. It's foaming lunatic foot-soldiers are readily programmed to believe any position to the point of streaming tears and shotguns wielding. Neighboring countries are advised to beware.
On the other hand, no one should be surprised by this poll. Fox News beats other stations hands down. Fox News wins over real news (and things at least closer to it than Fox) the way Pokemon would win against a visit to the dentist. It's the worst kind of corruption; the kind that disrupts our very ability to know (as a nation) the world around us. Money was already buying votes quite successfully before we had Fox News. Fox puts the "bought" votes over the top.
Actually, curtailing opinions the way you feel is against the 1st amendment.
Everyone's protected by the Constitution to spew any opinion they like. It's just unfortunate that so many people think people like Beck and Rush has good ones.
On January 27 2010 11:13 Jibba wrote: It's interesting that no one in this thread has asked about sample size, sample demographics, polling methods, etc. I think everyone is pretty stupid, not just Americans.
1,151 voters (74% white, 63% 46 and older, 9% 18-29) and it was an automated phone survey (Do you trust ABC? Press 1 if yes, 2 if no, 3 if unsure, etc.) Within that, 14% Liberal, 47% Moderate (self-reporting Moderate means absolutely nothing), 39% Conservative, with just 36% Dems, 35% Republican and 29% Independent (most Independents are right-leaning.)
So it's a poll comprised mostly of white, old, conservatives who actually have the free time to complete a ridiculous phone survey. What did you think the outcome would be?
This is a really good point. I just assumed that the poll was incorporating a more balanced demographic due to the reputability of the institute behind it. These are pretty shoddy stats.
On January 27 2010 11:25 ktp wrote: CBS's 60 minutes had a incident last year where they not only used photo's from an unreliable source, but doctored the photo to make the people in it look more menacing. They apologized for the source of the photo, but never explained why they decided to make their heads and arms all giant and bloated. The segment was on internet hacking, and these kids are obviously a deadly "cyber gang."
Wow that's pathetic.
I used to watch CNN for my dose of American news, but the quality of their reporting seems to have really deteriorated in the last few years (twitter feeds, anyone?). What would you guys recommend for a professional and neutral news source?
In order for polls to be accurate, they can't pick out a certain amount of certain demographics, they just call houses randomly. If the only people who answer the polls are old, white folks that is not their problem.
PBS is a professional, unbais source.
I mostly agree, although methods and questions weren't very good. They chose a method most likely to attract that demographic. Still, it's up to the website reporting it to actually convey the rest of that information instead of just making terrible blanket statements like "Fox is most trusted news in America."
I can't remember the last time I've seen a news source present statistics like that. There's ALWAYS a bias, if not in the statistics themselves, then in the way they are delivered. Even if they did use more "professional" methods, most Americans wouldn't recognize unbiased reporting if they found it in their soup.
Edit: they only recognize biased reporting when it disagrees with them... e.g. Republicans trusting Fox, Democrats trusting just about any other TV network.
On January 28 2010 11:08 old times sake wrote: Sometimes products are popular but harmful. Crack cocaine. Fox News. Probably laws should be used to curtail their popularity and fix those who abuse them to destroy their lives and those around them.
Is it really unfair to use the law to require news organizations to not knowingly lie and distort; to make them liable for the damages from doing so? To count the air time as campaign ads where it clearly supports a party or candidate?
The runaway success of this fascist-like "right" is the real crisis in the U.S. It could very well tear down all pretenses of democracy if it keeps going the way it has been. It's foaming lunatic foot-soldiers are readily programmed to believe any position to the point of streaming tears and shotguns wielding. Neighboring countries are advised to beware.
On the other hand, no one should be surprised by this poll. Fox News beats other stations hands down. Fox News wins over real news (and things at least closer to it than Fox) the way Pokemon would win against a visit to the dentist. It's the worst kind of corruption; the kind that disrupts our very ability to know (as a nation) the world around us. Money was already buying votes quite successfully before we had Fox News. Fox puts the "bought" votes over the top.
Actually, curtailing opinions the way you feel is against the 1st amendment.
Everyone's protected by the Constitution to spew any opinion they like. It's just unfortunate that so many people think people like Beck and Rush has good ones.
Fox News can say whatever they want. Just not on television. Do you have a right to be on television? Because I don't. Also, lying to the public en masse for your own ends could be made a crime, no conflict with the 1st admendment. You don't have a right to do harm intentionally via your false speech, which is what Fox News does on a daily basis.
On January 28 2010 03:27 Last Romantic wrote: To be fair, in recent times fox has been factually outperforming most of the msm. I find that much sadder than this poll result.
Factually outperforming? What does that mean exactly?
On January 28 2010 11:08 old times sake wrote: Sometimes products are popular but harmful. Crack cocaine. Fox News. Probably laws should be used to curtail their popularity and fix those who abuse them to destroy their lives and those around them.
Is it really unfair to use the law to require news organizations to not knowingly lie and distort; to make them liable for the damages from doing so? To count the air time as campaign ads where it clearly supports a party or candidate?
The runaway success of this fascist-like "right" is the real crisis in the U.S. It could very well tear down all pretenses of democracy if it keeps going the way it has been. It's foaming lunatic foot-soldiers are readily programmed to believe any position to the point of streaming tears and shotguns wielding. Neighboring countries are advised to beware.
On the other hand, no one should be surprised by this poll. Fox News beats other stations hands down. Fox News wins over real news (and things at least closer to it than Fox) the way Pokemon would win against a visit to the dentist. It's the worst kind of corruption; the kind that disrupts our very ability to know (as a nation) the world around us. Money was already buying votes quite successfully before we had Fox News. Fox puts the "bought" votes over the top.
Actually, curtailing opinions the way you feel is against the 1st amendment.
Everyone's protected by the Constitution to spew any opinion they like. It's just unfortunate that so many people think people like Beck and Rush has good ones.
Fox News can say whatever they want. Just not on television. Do you have a right to be on television? Because I don't. Also, lying to the public en masse for your own ends could be made a crime, no conflict with the 1st admendment. You don't have a right to do harm intentionally via your false speech, which is what Fox News does on a daily basis.
You do realize that the bullshit spewed at Fox News are basically misleading opinions, right?
For example, the following statement is not techincally lying:
"Old times sakes may or may not be a murderer and a terrorist, but you know who's a terrorist? Bin Laden. You know who's a murderer? Hitler. I'm not saying old times sakes is Hitler or Bin Laden, but just something I want to throw out there."
See? True statements. Pure BS and very vicious, but not lying.
I should know, I am in the most oppressed minority in this country -- Misesian/Rothbardian Libertarian.
There is only one person on any of the major News networks that is a Natural Law libertarian and that is Judge Andrew Napolitano. Stossel is pretty good, but he is weak in many areas.
Those who lampoon Fox, but pass on NBC, or CNN, or MSNBC are clearly one and the same to those who lampoon NBC, but pass or laud Fox. You guys are no different. Reactionaries the lot of you.
As for Old Time's Sake. The world writ large is largely, Socialist, with a mix of Corporatism (We call this Mussolini Fascism). Man is not egalitarian. Man is not malleable. Have you learned nothing from the Classical-Liberal tradition? Have we forgotten all of history and economics beyond 1922? This intellectual malfeasance, morass, and languish to elevate the State to omnipotence is leading us to our peril. Liberty, is new. Tyranny is old.
I must also let Old Time's Sake know that we are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Of course, no one even thinks about or follows the Constitution, and the Constitution does not itself have an enforcement wing. Indeed, Lysander Spooner destroyed the Theory of Social Contract and Thomas Hobbes. We do not need the State. The utopians are the ones who believe that State power can be corraled. Those who do not heed Lord Acton.
The very thing you covet, is the very thing that will destroy you. Will you listen to John Locke, JB Say, J.A.R. Turgot, Gustave De Molinari, Ludwig von Mises, De Tracy, and Thomas Jefferson?
On January 29 2010 01:21 Rothbardian wrote: Every News Outlet is a Propaganda Machine.
I should know, I am in the most oppressed minority in this country -- Misesian/Rothbardian Libertarian.
There is only one person on any of the major News networks that is a Natural Law libertarian and that is Judge Andrew Napolitano. Stossel is pretty good, but he is weak in many areas.
Those who lampoon Fox, but pass on NBC, or CNN, or MSNBC are clearly one and the same to those who lampoon NBC, but pass or laud Fox. You guys are no different. Reactionaries the lot of you.
As for Old Time's Sake. The world writ large is largely, Socialist, with a mix of Corporatism (We call this Mussolini Fascism). Man is not egalitarian. Man is not malleable. Have you learned nothing from the Classical-Liberal tradition? Have we forgotten all of history and economics beyond 1922? This intellectual malfeasance, morass, and languish to elevate the State to omnipotence is leading us to our peril. Liberty, is new. Tyranny is old.
I must also let Old Time's Sake know that we are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Of course, no one even thinks about or follows the Constitution, and the Constitution does not itself have an enforcement wing. Indeed, Lysander Spooner destroyed the Theory of Social Contract and Thomas Hobbes. We do not need the State. The utopians are the ones who believe that State power can be corraled. Those who do not heed Lord Acton.
The very thing you covet, is the very thing that will destroy you. Will you listen to John Locke, JB Say, J.A.R. Turgot, Gustave De Molinari, Ludwig von Mises, De Tracy, and Thomas Jefferson?
State propaganda is state propaganda.
Hah HAH!! good chap!!! We are underrepresented here at TL! Next thing you know you'll have some mathematical economics college student reigning down on you 'cause he equates praxeology with creationism ^^
On January 29 2010 01:21 Rothbardian wrote: Every News Outlet is a Propaganda Machine.
I should know, I am in the most oppressed minority in this country -- Misesian/Rothbardian Libertarian.
There is only one person on any of the major News networks that is a Natural Law libertarian and that is Judge Andrew Napolitano. Stossel is pretty good, but he is weak in many areas.
Those who lampoon Fox, but pass on NBC, or CNN, or MSNBC are clearly one and the same to those who lampoon NBC, but pass or laud Fox. You guys are no different. Reactionaries the lot of you.
As for Old Time's Sake. The world writ large is largely, Socialist, with a mix of Corporatism (We call this Mussolini Fascism). Man is not egalitarian. Man is not malleable. Have you learned nothing from the Classical-Liberal tradition? Have we forgotten all of history and economics beyond 1922? This intellectual malfeasance, morass, and languish to elevate the State to omnipotence is leading us to our peril. Liberty, is new. Tyranny is old.
I must also let Old Time's Sake know that we are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Of course, no one even thinks about or follows the Constitution, and the Constitution does not itself have an enforcement wing. Indeed, Lysander Spooner destroyed the Theory of Social Contract and Thomas Hobbes. We do not need the State. The utopians are the ones who believe that State power can be corraled. Those who do not heed Lord Acton.
The very thing you covet, is the very thing that will destroy you. Will you listen to John Locke, JB Say, J.A.R. Turgot, Gustave De Molinari, Ludwig von Mises, De Tracy, and Thomas Jefferson?
State propaganda is state propaganda.
Hah HAH!! good chap!!! We are underrepresented here at TL! Next thing you know you'll have some mathematical economics college student reigning down on you 'cause he equates praxeology with creationism ^^
Oh shi--- I'm not alone! :p
As a matter of fact, I have Rothbard's Two Volume History of Economic Thought in front of me. I'm on the second book. I do enjoy his take on the French Laissez-Faire liberals. We have forgotten so much. I bet I could ask 500 people and maybe out of these 500 two may understand the Broken Window Fallacy, or even know who Frederic Bastiat is.
Praxeology/A Priorism -- Human Action is Economics as Astronomy is to Astrology. IS-LM Keynesianism/Monetarism/Neo-Classicism is not Economics as Astrology is to Astronomy.
Oh, have you seen the video "Fear the Boom and Bust"? It just geeked out my Econ and Philosophy senses. Hayek was pretty good on international trade and Prices and Production, but I did not like Constitution of Liberty.
Its funny when people say Fox News shouldn't be on the air or have the right to broadcast. If you believe that you should go move some where more oppressive.
On January 29 2010 02:16 Undisputed- wrote: Its funny when people say Fox News shouldn't be on the air or have the right to broadcast. If you believe that you should go move some where more oppressive.
They shouldn't when their a fucking 3 year old can sense their bias.
On January 29 2010 02:16 Undisputed- wrote: Its funny when people say Fox News shouldn't be on the air or have the right to broadcast. If you believe that you should go move some where more oppressive.
They shouldn't when their a fucking 3 year old can sense their bias.
Just like every other news station. Its fine if you agree but man if a station says what you don't like their the only one that does.
you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
I have watched fox and I can attest that they are a upstanding and neutral news orga...naw just kidding i read fox news everyday and they are everything everyone says they are...except fair and balanced.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
I have watched fox and I can attest that they are a upstanding and neutral news orga...naw just kidding i read fox news everyday and they are everything everyone says they are...except fair and balanced.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
What?
I assume you are implying that no one hear watches fox news and only thinks its horrible based on what other people are saying
Good post.
In response to your non-question; Yes, I have watched many hours of Fox news and have confirmed my own suspicions that it is a news network with an obvious agenda. Anyone who has watched an hour of BBC news followed directly by an hour of Fox news, should be able to point out some inconsistencies.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
I have watched fox and I can attest that they are a upstanding and neutral news orga...naw just kidding i read fox news everyday and they are everything everyone says they are...except fair and balanced.
yet you still read them?
I read it specifically because they represent the conservative viewpoint. I dont just read news that validates my own beliefs.
For all those who bash American intelligence, get over yourselves. Propaganda is everywhere. And masses in every country can get riled up over the stuff Fox says. Don't speak as if your country's conservative people would never fall prey to the type of ideologies spewed by Fox News.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
Why are you so sure we're not speaking from knowledge?
I rarely watched Fox News because my "tv watching" has pretty much switched to the internet since I moved to China. But I did listen to hours of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity on the radio a while back. I did so out of curiosity, and listened more to analyze why they're so successful. In the end, I had a begrudging respect for these personalities. They're very good at using pathos. I was always in awe of how they know how to hit people's buttons. But that's what makes them so evil, because they're so good at what they do.
Anyway, they reason no one here is for Fox News is because, well, if there is a polar opposite to the Fox audience, it would be the teamliquid audience. So it's not about "no one watches fox and shouldn't comment", but rather "people who agree with fox news would never post on tl.net".
I must point out the only two programs I watch on Fox, and on TV in general is Freedom Watch, which is fucking outstanding and the Judge should immediately be given a show, and Stossel.
Olbermann is a State tool. Maddow is a State tool. Matthews is a State tool. Couric is a State tool. O'Reilly is a State tool. Hannity is a State tool. Shephard Smith is a State tool. Krauthammer is a State tool. Stephano--don't care is a State tool.
They all have obvious bias'. I mean come on. Matthews saying he has a tingle down his leg? O'Reilly sucking the Police States nipples?
On January 29 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote: cable "news" is not news, fox and msnbc have obvious agendas, cnn is over-sensationalized (the "hologram", "magic wall", "best news team")
Fox does have news where they do just report facts (As I'm sure MSNBC does too if I ever watched it). But yes Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity is not news. They are opinion shows for entertainment. Same as MSNBC has Countdown and shows like that. If you agree with their opinion great if not don't watch it. What show on MSNBC is worth watching that doesn't involve spitting venom (serious question)? The only show on MSNBC I can stand watching atm is Morning Joe.
On January 29 2010 11:01 StarsPride wrote: you know curiousity killed the cat but, everyone hear knows fox so damn well. How many of you have actually watched fox and just not go off on what someone else says? im really curious. I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
Funny that you mention this. I've been hearing tons of shit about fox for a long time, but I simply couldn't believe that it is as bad as everybody tends to describe it. At least not until I actually spent an year in the US and watched fox news. It really is political propaganda mixed with some hatespeech and often enough plain lies...
I'd be happy to find atleast one person who can think for them self.
There is no need to think for yourself. fox news does the thinking for you!
On January 29 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote: cable "news" is not news, fox and msnbc have obvious agendas, cnn is over-sensationalized (the "hologram", "magic wall", "best news team")
Fox does have news where they do just report facts (As I'm sure MSNBC does too if I ever watched it). But yes Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity is not news. They are opinion shows for entertainment. Same as MSNBC has Countdown and shows like that. If you agree with their opinion great if not don't watch it. What show on MSNBC is worth watching that doesn't involve spitting venom (serious question)? The only show on MSNBC I can stand watching atm is Morning Joe.
nah even the "news shows" like greta are biased, they frame subjects to a conservative standpoint and have skewed guest lists, during the mass. elections they had karl rove, sarah palin, and rick santorum as their guests.
i still watch election results coming in on fox, having a live report is nice and it's not as over-the-top as cnn.
i'm sure msnbc's "news shows" are biased in the same way, i just never watch that channel
On January 29 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote: cable "news" is not news, fox and msnbc have obvious agendas, cnn is over-sensationalized (the "hologram", "magic wall", "best news team")
Fox does have news where they do just report facts (As I'm sure MSNBC does too if I ever watched it). But yes Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity is not news. They are opinion shows for entertainment. Same as MSNBC has Countdown and shows like that. If you agree with their opinion great if not don't watch it. What show on MSNBC is worth watching that doesn't involve spitting venom (serious question)? The only show on MSNBC I can stand watching atm is Morning Joe.
You mean the only shows you can stand is the one that agrees with your preconcieved notion of reality.
On January 29 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote: cable "news" is not news, fox and msnbc have obvious agendas, cnn is over-sensationalized (the "hologram", "magic wall", "best news team")
Fox does have news where they do just report facts (As I'm sure MSNBC does too if I ever watched it). But yes Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity is not news. They are opinion shows for entertainment. Same as MSNBC has Countdown and shows like that. If you agree with their opinion great if not don't watch it. What show on MSNBC is worth watching that doesn't involve spitting venom (serious question)? The only show on MSNBC I can stand watching atm is Morning Joe.
You mean the only shows you can stand is the one that agrees with your preconcieved notion of reality.
Morning Joe is 2 hours of democrat bashing.
I like Morning Joe when he has Ron Paul on. In fact, I like Ed Schultz when he has Ron Paul on. In fact, I just like getting Ron Paul on to get out the libertarian message even though they patronize the man all day long. ;p
On January 29 2010 11:34 baubo wrote: For all those who bash American intelligence, get over yourselves. Propaganda is everywhere. And masses in every country can get riled up over the stuff Fox says. Don't speak as if your country's conservative people would never fall prey to the type of ideologies spewed by Fox News.
One thing that makes me bugs me about this is how can such a news station become popular? Imma talk from my own viewpoint which is of course Sweden. We have some random news stations that is bad, but no one watches these. Why? Because everyone know they suck.
it's popular because the US has a large conservative, religious contingent. and it's not like every one of them are insane, obama-hitler sign-bearing maniacs, they're mostly good, moral people. and for the most part, the values fox news preaches speaks to their sensibilities. the crazy stuff on FN is crazy stuff, probably mostly ignored except for liberals grasping at controversy
On January 29 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote: cable "news" is not news, fox and msnbc have obvious agendas, cnn is over-sensationalized (the "hologram", "magic wall", "best news team")
Fox does have news where they do just report facts (As I'm sure MSNBC does too if I ever watched it). But yes Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity is not news. They are opinion shows for entertainment. Same as MSNBC has Countdown and shows like that. If you agree with their opinion great if not don't watch it. What show on MSNBC is worth watching that doesn't involve spitting venom (serious question)? The only show on MSNBC I can stand watching atm is Morning Joe.
You mean the only shows you can stand is the one that agrees with your preconcieved notion of reality.
Morning Joe is 2 hours of democrat bashing.
How is that any different than the rest of the people here who can only stand watching channels like MSNBC and CNN?
None of the major news networks are "neutral and unbiased conveyors of news". This poll mainly shows that the majority of republicans can't handle any 'liberal bias' of reality. People who claim otherwise should realise that all the networks are owned by huge corporations. This includes Fox. None of them should therefore have too much of a leftist agenda. The differece is that Rupert Murdoch conciously and purposefully uses his news channel as a political weapon. This means that the rhetoric on Fox is more directed and internally consistent, which in turn results in a simpler (more easily understood) portrail of reality/events. There is certainly something to be said for ideologically motivated news channels. Unfortunately Fox is not open about its clear single-minded partisan agenda. Its viewers are unfortunately too dumb or too partisan to notice or care about the vile deception of 'fair and balanced'... or any of their gross misrepresentations of facts..
What amazes me about reports like this one is that my general experience of americans (I've had the privilege of visiting about a dozen cities in the u.s.) and americans online is that they for the most part come off as rather intelligent. More so than people of many other nationalities.
Sadly there seems to be a certain percentage of the US population that no matter what will manage to refuel the idea among europeans that americans are all just stupid.
On January 30 2010 02:35 hifriend wrote: What amazes me about reports like this one is that my general experience of americans (I've had the privilege of visiting about a dozen cities in the u.s.) and americans online is that they for the most part come off as rather intelligent. More so than people of many other nationalities.
Sadly there seems to be a certain percentage of the US population that no matter what will manage to refuel the idea among europeans that americans are all just stupid.
I don't think anyone rational really thinks americans are stupid, I'd rather say like you that there is a certain percent (and this percent seems to be bigger than in other western countries) which are "stupid".
On January 30 2010 02:35 hifriend wrote: What amazes me about reports like this one is that my general experience of americans (I've had the privilege of visiting about a dozen cities in the u.s.) and americans online is that they for the most part come off as rather intelligent. More so than people of many other nationalities.
Sadly there seems to be a certain percentage of the US population that no matter what will manage to refuel the idea among europeans that americans are all just stupid.
I don't think anyone rational really thinks americans are stupid, I'd rather say like you that there is a certain percent (and this percent seems to be bigger than in other western countries) which are "stupid".
Or we could stop with the typical left argument of calling people stupid if they don't agree with you.
On January 30 2010 02:35 hifriend wrote: What amazes me about reports like this one is that my general experience of americans (I've had the privilege of visiting about a dozen cities in the u.s.) and americans online is that they for the most part come off as rather intelligent. More so than people of many other nationalities.
Sadly there seems to be a certain percentage of the US population that no matter what will manage to refuel the idea among europeans that americans are all just stupid.
I don't think anyone rational really thinks americans are stupid, I'd rather say like you that there is a certain percent (and this percent seems to be bigger than in other western countries) which are "stupid".
I can't tell you I'm certain but I know for a fact that my own experience is a pretty commonly held perception amongst europeans that americans are in fact stupid, and not jokingly at that.
This definitely cannot be true nor right... IT'S IMPOSSIBLE!!!! HOW CAN YOU CALL FOX NEWS, NEWS?!?!?! It has been proven Fox News isn't exactly NEWS as they claim to be!!!!!
On January 30 2010 02:35 hifriend wrote: What amazes me about reports like this one is that my general experience of americans (I've had the privilege of visiting about a dozen cities in the u.s.) and americans online is that they for the most part come off as rather intelligent. More so than people of many other nationalities.
Sadly there seems to be a certain percentage of the US population that no matter what will manage to refuel the idea among europeans that americans are all just stupid.
I don't think anyone rational really thinks americans are stupid, I'd rather say like you that there is a certain percent (and this percent seems to be bigger than in other western countries) which are "stupid".
Or we could stop with the typical left argument of calling people stupid if they don't agree with you.
On January 30 2010 09:43 QuickStriker wrote: This definitely cannot be true nor right... IT'S IMPOSSIBLE!!!! HOW CAN YOU CALL FOX NEWS, NEWS?!?!?! It has been proven Fox News isn't exactly NEWS as they claim to be!!!!!
On January 30 2010 09:43 QuickStriker wrote: This definitely cannot be true nor right... IT'S IMPOSSIBLE!!!! HOW CAN YOU CALL FOX NEWS, NEWS?!?!?! It has been proven Fox News isn't exactly NEWS as they claim to be!!!!!
On January 27 2010 10:23 HuskyTheHusky wrote: Yeah, its sad how stupid a lot of America is.
Like.... really, really sad.
yea...whatever....keep playing starcraft, that will change things a bit...oh btw tell me what have u done so far in order to change all those things that make u feel sad as a U.S citizen. I mean, seriously, Im trying to find out what u guys do, or is it that u just feel sad but do nothing about it.
On January 27 2010 10:44 funnybananaman94 wrote: well 49% of americans voted for geroge bush too, so yeah half our country is retarded :/ at least most of them don't live in new york..
No, but all of them that live in NY certainly qualify. (Note: I did not read the thread at all, I just can't stand NYers, in general)
On January 27 2010 10:44 funnybananaman94 wrote: well 49% of americans voted for geroge bush too, so yeah half our country is retarded :/ at least most of them don't live in new york..
No, but all of them that live in NY certainly qualify. (Note: I did not read the thread at all, I just can't stand NYers, in general)
Hey! What do you have against us?? You you new york hater!!!
Disclaimer: I don't watch Foxnews or any other TV network for news.
This doesn't surprise me that much actually. For the last few decades, the press has developed a bad reputation for its liberal bias. Foxnews came around and is clearly conservatively biased but a lot of people find it refreshing after decades of one sided bias.
"On average in the last 20 years, Democratic presidential hopefuls received coverage that was fairly balanced: about half positive and half negative. However, over the same period, Republicans received 34 percent positive and 66 percent negative press."
"President-elect Barack Obama has received the most positive campaign news coverage on the main network news shows in the 20-year history of such studies by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA). Mr. Obama received 68 percent positive evaluations from the four major networks, according to the study released Friday. By contrast, his Republican rival almost set the record for hostile press coverage. Just 33 percent of the stories on Sen. John McCain were positive in nature -- "the worst showing" since former President George H.W. Bush received only 29 percent positive press in 1988, Mr. Lichter said."
"NBC was the most Obama-friendly of the four networks, with 73 percent of the coverage being favorable. Fox News was the sole network to mix it up with Mr. Obama, with only 37 percent of the stories on him positive in tone, although that was only slightly less favorable than the 41 percent favorability of the network's McCain coverage."
"A Pew Research Center survey released in late October found, for example, that 70 percent of voters agreed that journalists "wanted" Mr. Obama to win the White House; the figure was 62 percent even among Democratic respondents.
A Harvard University analysis in early November revealed that 77 percent of Americans say the press is politically biased; of that group, 5 percent said it skewed conservative."
Anyway, I think that most Americans realize that Foxnews is biased but since it is the only network to be biased to the Right it is trusted more (to at least offer a different viewpoint).
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.properlychastised.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/fox_news_view_of_the_world1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i50.tinypic.com/b6akbp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826609115.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826394826.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826428885.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826463427.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826499425.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826531202.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826571202.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826749387.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826846589.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4chanarchive.org/images/179175797/1259826890331.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2880/60minutes.png)
![[image loading]](http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/loligee.png)
![[image loading]](http://i45.tinypic.com/20qj4wh.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i47.tinypic.com/x4ns61.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://regretfulmorning.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/fox-news-retarded.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://corvedacosta.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/fox_news.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://disinter.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/faux-news-debate.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://weinterrupt.com/wp-content/uploads/do-it-live.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://animalnewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/glenn-beck.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/afflictor/Random/conspiracy_foxnews.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/7/2008/07/foxfriends.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://hyerstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/edhill.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2008/06/13/ObamaFist460.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/images/weekinreview/20081221_BUZZWORDS/txt_terror_fistjab.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BVGz7lWZUIY/R2y9T8zWeAI/AAAAAAAAJGA/v__danpd8AY/s400/Faux%2BWe%2Bdistort%2Byou%2Bcomply.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/O'Keefechart.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/images2005/MBBChar2D.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/images2005/MBBChar2C.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.totaler-fun.de/fun-pics/Kurios/iraq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.totaler-fun.de/fun-pics/Kurios/landkarte.jpg)
