Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Jon Stewart on his 'error' about Foxnews viewers last night. He copped to the error while pointing out some pretty good reasons why he can't really be blamed for believing what he articulated to Chris Wallace on Sunday. I think Jon didn't really give any thought to the idea that Foxnews viewers don't get their news from just Foxnews, and what he meant to say was that Foxnews fucks up a lot...which is true, not just for Foxnews, but for almost every new organization.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

When I was growing up, "fucking up" meant that you made a mistake, not deliberately distorting the truth to advance your worldview.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

I would like you to read this article by Politifact that addresses their investigation of his statement:

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/art ... n-stewart/


Uninformed, and Misinformed are two completely different things.


John Stewart said Fox News viewers are consistently misinformed. The Politifact article looked at polls that dealt with the question of "Are Fox News viewers uninformed" which of course they are not.


I'll give you an example:

Someone who doesn't know that the President of the United States is Barack Obama is uninformed.

Someone who thinks that Barack Obama is Kenyan is misinformed.

Fox News gives a significant amount of biased misinformation, and it is reflected by their viewership, who are often grossly misinformed on a variety of topics. Want another example?

How about this:



The Fox news anchor, who had never even played the game, claimed that full digital nude alien sex is portrayed in the game. The Fox News pundit also didn't understand that you don't have to have sex with an alien in the game...and that it's an outcome of a great number of choices by the player. Obviously, in the game it's not full-nude...i think you see the side of an ass if I remember correctly.

A Fox News viewer could watch that segment, then see the Mass Effect box in a store the next day and tell their child "I'm not buying that for you, it shows full nude alien sex"

They are misinformed.

considering its rated mature, they shouldn't be buying it for a child anyway, but i doubt anyone here is going to defend fox news.

Anything you can say about Fox you can say about any other news agency, and can probably find just as many glaring examples of idiocy over a given span of time. The thing that pisses everyone on that side of the aisle off about Fox is their ratings, and what those ratings represent...otherwise this is just another, 'you guys need to clean up your yard, never mind the broke down washing machine that's been sitting in mine for the last six years.'

In fact, for a recent example, I don't think we need to look much farther than the 'man purposely gets arrested for healthcare' story that I already debunked in another thread for examples of advocacy journalism run amok on the other side of the aisle. It doesn't make it right, but if you're not going to complain about those that represent your opinions, don't expect me to get worked up about the people that represent mine.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Well, if you watched that interview with Jon Stewart, he touches on the fact that all media has a problem with sensationalism and it's driven by the effort to get people to watch the news and be interested when no newsworthy items are happening.



Personally, I've said before that there is bias in every news station. However, the fundamental difference is that on so-called "liberal-biased" networks like ABC, CBS, CNN (basically everything but Fox)....the bias is with individual anchors and the individual stories they report.

With Fox News the bias comes from the top, and the entire network is directed to present stories in a certain way. That type of corporate-wide bias is what pisses me off (ESPECIALLY when they have the audacity to use "Fair and Balanced" as a tagline. If nothing else, the so-called "liberal" networks don't blatantly lie about their so-called bias in their taglines.)...and yes it has translated into great ratings for Fox...which is why MSNBC is starting to have more of a network-wide liberal bias. They are trying to replicate the successful ratings formula that Fox News has.


Fox News fans like to proclaim that it's an important counterweight to an overwhelmingly liberal media. Truthfully, I think Fox News IS an important counterweight when it comes to differing opinions. However, when it spreads misinformation, and has a corporate-wide bias designed to present stories from a myopic viewpoint...THAT's when I have an issue.

Other networks may have many more liberal-leaning anchors/pundits...but they don't have a top-to-bottom agenda that presents itself in the same way that Fox News does.

Hi NPR, Air America, Current TV and MSNBC... how are you guys doing?

Yet even trying to copy Fox, MSNBC can't get shit for ratings...which is what really pisses off people on the left. They realize the power of groupthink and how it causes people to gravitate to sources that share their bias, meaning that more people who watch news and are at least partially informed prefer a viewpoint that is not their own.

You might not like the 'top-down' approach at Fox, but I don't buy that "it's just individual reporters" bit. There's a reason reporters at other organizations report the way they do, and it's probably not very different from why they report the way they do at Fox: because that's what their boss (the top) want them (the bottom) to do. The only difference you can really point out is that Fox cops to their bias, whereas news organizations on the other side of the spectrum claim they're being 'objective,' despite the incredible similarity between their reports on a given story and the lack of questioning things that would be obvious to anyone who hasn't already accepted the premise/theory they're trying to put forward in their journalistic endeavors. You know, like "you don't have any choice but to get sent to jail to get healthcare."

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

But see, Fox really doesn't admit their total bias...because their tagline is "Fair and Balanced" which implies that they are objective. This allows viewers to watch and think they are getting the whole story...when they really aren't much of the time.

Think about O'Reily and the "No Spin Zone" which implies that there's no political spin on what he says...which is laughable.



I'd like to see numbers. In any case, I don't think people who lean left politically are sitting around their bongs and saying "MAN I'M SO MAD MSNBC's RATINGS AREN'T RISING EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE TRYING TO BE MORE BIASED LIKE FOX"



I'm not sure what you mean here - I might be reading it wrong, but it sounds like you're saying two different things. People most definitely gravitate towards sources that will affirm their viewpoints rather than challenge them...I think that's just the nature of humanity. It is the sole reason Fox News has been so successful.

I consider myself partially informed and I have very little interest in Fox News. In fact, I have very little interest in most news outlets because they all have biases, and no matter what the network...it's a large amount of shoddy reporting, out of context clips, and sensationalism (again, the exact things Jon Stewart was trying to point out). I find digging around on the internet is the only way to find out the unbiased truth of most stories. But people in general (both sides of the political spectrum) are lazy....so they prefer to watch a 5 minute news story, get a talking point, and develop their entire opinion on an issue based on that.


My beef with Fox is not that it's a right wing news network...that's fine. My beef is that they try to play it off that they are "fair and balanced" and rather than simply sticking to right-wing opinions, they often spread misinformation, talking points, and half-truths designed to disparage the left.

They could just report stories as they are and have their right wing pundits say "blah blah I disagree with Obama because of X", but in the interest of ratings, they construct sensationalized stories and rely on talking points (OBAMA IS FROM KENYA MAN HAR HAR! UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE IS THE GOVERNMENT TRYING TO CONTROL THE POPULATION! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE).

Like I said, all news networks sensationalize...it's how you get ratings...but none do so in such an organized, biased, and unfortunately effective manner as does Fox. Fox news blurs the lines between commentary and objective reporting. They were the first network to do this so blatantly and effectively....now others (MSNBC) are trying to jump in. It's killing journalism imo.

Anyway:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 434902428#

I know you'd hate it...but try to watch a little. Start at 11 minutes in.

Screaming about how much you hate Fox News because of their bias, despite their tag line... but then you link something regarding Fox News from fucking OUTFOXED and expect it to be eye-opening (while knowing damn well there is a bias and agenda there, which is to discredit Fox) is pretty funny.

Also, Fox News isn't the only news station that enjoys blurring the line between commentary and reporting.

Fox News (for commentators) in the evening has Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity while Sheppard Smith talks about the national and world news (at 7pm) and Bret Baier has his DC Politics show (which often has democratic analysts and democrats on the panel). Gretta van Sustern doesn't really talk about anything of importance other than current affairs. You can also thank her for beating the Holloway case to death.

MSNBC, on the other hand, has Lawrence O'Donnell (who replaced Keith Olberman), Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz as commentary. MSNBC also has that TYT guy, Cenak, and if you've ever seen TYT or his segment(show?), you'll know that he's hard left and is highly commentary. Chris Matthews does a good job acting as the MSNBC counter to Fox's Smith and Baier. Both Fox and MSNBC have their fair share of commentary, reporting and bias... the only difference is MSNBC has blatantly labeled their bias as 'Lean Forward', to appeal to progressives while Fox will contend that they're fair and balanced.

I think the issue isn't that EVIL FOX IS SAYING THEY'RE FAIR AND BALANCED HUR HUR HUR... but it's that they're the only conservative news station and everyone knows it. That's the problem. It's a conservative station and all the liberals and progressives don't like that. What do they do about it? They start groups like OUTFOXED to try to cut Fox News down a notch, appealing to those who think Rupert Murdoch is some member of the Illuminati and he's secretly brainwashing the masses with his right-wing propaganda machine.

It's not working very well.


Source

I guess the liberal/progressive message isn't that strong if no one wants to hear it. I guess that's the same reason Air America folded but conservative talk radio is doing extremely well.

It's because liberals got with the millennium and read/watch all their news on the internet.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

I guess using more than one medium of communication is too taxing.

There's plenty of conservative presence on the interwebs, but we don't think we're special, groovy, hip, with-it, and happening little snowflakes because we figured out how to use an Ipad. Most of us can afford cable because we have real jobs and don't stand around picketing things all day, fucking hippies (the bulk of this paragraph is written in jest...patchouli stinking dorks).

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

If you think there's anything approaching parity between what other news channels do and what fox does it doesn't matter what you have to say for the rest of this topic, you are so fundamentally flawed in your thinking it is impossible for you to add anything of substance.

Your lone example, the health care guy, that's a news story. It happened, they reported it. You might not agree with him and his motives, but that is a different issue. You're comparing reporting something that happened to Fox's death panel lie or health care reform is a government take over of healthcare. These things didn't happen. Ever. Fox made them up. People don't dislike Fox because of the ratings, people dislike fox because what they do is exceptionally unethical and extremely damaging to the nation.

Dvergar /
Quisling

I read, "You're probably right but I don't want to believe it so I'm going to throw this out here as a fair warning: I'm holding my hands over my ears and I refuse to hear anything more you have to say because I don't agree with you. Also, I'm right, you're wrong."

Good dialog. Glad we had this talk.

Is this you admitting that Fox is a right-wing propaganda machine? Because that's what it sounds like, considering that you're talking about how liberals are butthurt because MSNBC can't copy Fox's lock-step chain reporting/fear mongering.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]