Study: Fox Is the Most Fair and Balanced Thus Far in Prez Campaign

[GaryC 7]

Its called critical thinking.

Thats what you call it. It's critical only in the sense of being critical of things you don't like or agree with.

What. That TV news isn't #######?

The stuff he agrees with isn't, the stuff he doesn't agree with is. I don't see any objectivity or critical thinking in his posts at all. He is just as partisan as the rest of us. That is, of course, my opinion and my observation of him though.

Edited March 17, 2008 by GaryC

[Jack and Barbara 0]

What is the post even about anymore?

Sounds like both rightwing nutjobs and left wing weiners as jibjab put it are defending both liberal and conservative media outlets as if what they are defending isn't biased in and of itself.

[HAL 9000 96]

What is the post even about anymore?

Sounds like both rightwing nutjobs and left wing weiners as jibjab put it are defending both liberal and conservative media outlets as if what they are defending isn't biased in and of itself.

What liberal media outlets? That is part of the crux of the problem. The day a media corporation goes liberal in this country as some of our brethren here describe it, is the day network executives decide to instruct all journalists to be journalists.

Its called critical thinking.

Thats what you call it. It's critical only in the sense of being critical of things you don't like or agree with.

What. That TV news isn't #######?

The stuff he agrees with isn't, the stuff he doesn't agree with is. I don't see any objectivity or critical thinking in his posts at all. He is just as partisan as the rest of us. That is, of course, my opinion and my observation of him though.

As for the observation, brother Gary... lets just say that more practice is necessary.

[Jack and Barbara 0]

It is interesting though (if you give any credit to wiki) that most of the funding from this report saying Fox News is the most fair and balanced of the major media outlets comes from conservative sources... Even the group doing the survey can't always be trusted for fairness.

[HAL 9000 96]

It is interesting though (if you give any credit to wiki) that most of the funding from this report saying Fox News is the most fair and balanced of the major media outlets comes from conservative sources... Even the group doing the survey can't always be trusted for fairness.

Interesting...

[GaryC 7]

What is the post even about anymore?

Sounds like both rightwing nutjobs and left wing weiners as jibjab put it are defending both liberal and conservative media outlets as if what they are defending isn't biased in and of itself.

What liberal media outlets? That is part of the crux of the problem. The day a media corporation goes liberal in this country as some of our brethren here describe it, is the day network executives decide to instruct all journalists to be journalists.

Its called critical thinking.

Thats what you call it. It's critical only in the sense of being critical of things you don't like or agree with.

What. That TV news isn't #######?

The stuff he agrees with isn't, the stuff he doesn't agree with is. I don't see any objectivity or critical thinking in his posts at all. He is just as partisan as the rest of us. That is, of course, my opinion and my observation of him though.

As for the observation, brother Gary... lets just say that more practice is necessary.

It is my contention (and I am not alone) that the media is very slanted left with the exception of Fox. Those that are on the left don't see it because it fits with their idea of the way the world should be. I see it very differently. And for the art of observation I would say my skills are very good. Yours could use some work as far as political ones go. But I am sure you disagree and there in lies our impasse.

[HAL 9000 96]

What is the post even about anymore?

Sounds like both rightwing nutjobs and left wing weiners as jibjab put it are defending both liberal and conservative media outlets as if what they are defending isn't biased in and of itself.

What liberal media outlets? That is part of the crux of the problem. The day a media corporation goes liberal in this country as some of our brethren here describe it, is the day network executives decide to instruct all journalists to be journalists.

Its called critical thinking.

Thats what you call it. It's critical only in the sense of being critical of things you don't like or agree with.

What. That TV news isn't #######?

The stuff he agrees with isn't, the stuff he doesn't agree with is. I don't see any objectivity or critical thinking in his posts at all. He is just as partisan as the rest of us. That is, of course, my opinion and my observation of him though.

As for the observation, brother Gary... lets just say that more practice is necessary.

It is my contention (and I am not alone) that the media is very slanted left with the exception of Fox. Those that are on the left don't see it because it fits with their idea of the way the world should be. I see it very differently. And for the art of observation I would say my skills are very good. Yours could use some work as far as political ones go. But I am sure you disagree and there in lies our impasse.

Notwithstanding a historically conservative nation? Gary... you gotta remember the very origins of conservative thought in this country whereas liberalism is misconstrued as some un-American construct of those that are out to subvert everything that is Red-Blooded and American.

You are shaped by your environment for too many things to realize the environment shapes you... Hence the observer faces a daunting reality that negates self-awareness. Now only if you could see the strings that controlled these media outlets... and realize they are all flowing from the same kind of puppeteer.

Of course you believe my political skills need tuning- you don't agree with me or my style and therefore you must find ways to analyze what is not there. Yet you fail to connect that the ability to think critically as one that is developed and applied to everything in life, unfortunately for those that can't stand to have to substantiate what they claim is true. I'll leave it at that for those that want to ponder its meaning a little deeper than what is written.

[Jack and Barbara 0]

kinda sounds like we're back in grade school with people saying I'm right, you're wrong. I'm smart, you're dumb... (not literally though).

Those on the left think FoxNews (and the other companies owned by Newscorp's Murdoch) are too conservative (both on tv, in print, and over radio), just as those on the right think CNN, NBC are too liberal. I think debating which group is more biased it is just as pointless as continuing the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality.

If 100 people think you're right and 1 person thinks you're wrong, does it make you right? On the contrary, if 100 people think you're wrong, but 1 thinks you're right, are you necessarily wrong?

[HAL 9000 96]

kinda sounds like we're back in grade school with people saying I'm right, you're wrong. I'm smart, you're dumb... (not literally though).

Those on the left think FoxNews (and the other companies owned by Newscorp's Murdoch) are too conservative (both on tv, in print, and over radio), just as those on the right think CNN, NBC are too liberal. I think debating which group is more biased it is just as pointless as continuing the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality.

If 100 people think you're right and 1 person thinks you're wrong, does it make you right? On the contrary, if 100 people think you're wrong, but 1 thinks you're right, are you necessarily wrong?

I prefer to be a little more optimistic in that people actually do have the ability to think things through once they detach themselves from their traditional sources of prejudice (not to be confused with hate but rather discriminating information to form personal conclusions). The problem is that we as a society pride ourselves in being naive enough to believe what is told to us without giving ourselves the privilege of critical thought as long as it comes attached with doing so in the context that surrounds us 24/7.

[SaadBell 0]

Does anyone think Bush is doing a good job? Just interested to see what everyone here thinks.

[kaydee457 13]

What is the post even about anymore?

Sounds like both rightwing nutjobs and left wing weiners as jibjab put it are defending both liberal and conservative media outlets as if what they are defending isn't biased in and of itself.

What liberal media outlets? That is part of the crux of the problem. The day a media corporation goes liberal in this country as some of our brethren here describe it, is the day network executives decide to instruct all journalists to be journalists.

Its called critical thinking.

Thats what you call it. It's critical only in the sense of being critical of things you don't like or agree with.

What. That TV news isn't #######?

The stuff he agrees with isn't, the stuff he doesn't agree with is. I don't see any objectivity or critical thinking in his posts at all. He is just as partisan as the rest of us. That is, of course, my opinion and my observation of him though.

As for the observation, brother Gary... lets just say that more practice is necessary.

Mav. Your're ignorance is simply astounding! Put the comic books down and do some serious reading....

"

Claims of media bias are not new, but increasing claims of bias, especially a perceived liberal media bias, have led to diminishing credibility ratings among news outlets, and an increased level of skepticism of all news coverage."

"Bias is defined in one study as a "perceived attribute of a news source whereby the individual news source, or the group the news source represents, has a clear vested interest in a cause or action relative to maintaining or changing the status quo… (and) a biased journalistic perspective, then, would mean only one side, not two or more sides, of an issue is presented."

"only the Fox News Channel has seen a growth in viewership, mainly from a growing Republican audience, while other news and cable outlets have seen their audience share go flat if not decline. Most notable is CNN, whose credibility rating among Republicans dropped from 33% in 2000 to 26% in 2004, and the percentage of people watching CNN dropped from 35% of the U.S. population in 1993, to 22% in 2004.

Fox Vs. CNN

By comparison, the Fox News Channel's credibility rating moved up from 26% in 2000 to 29% in 2004, and the percentage of people who watch Fox News rose from 17% in 1998 to 25% in 2004, giving the Fox News Channel a larger audience than CNN. The Fox News Channel has become Republicans' most credible source for the news among television and cable news outlets, and CNN is now Republicans' second most trusted source.

"Conservatives justify their belief that a liberal media bias exists by arguing that journalists are liberal, and that their ideology affects how journalists cover the news. For example, a survey in 1992 showed that 89% of Washington, DC, journalists voted for President Clinton in the 1992 Presidential election. These results may explain why throughout 1992, the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) found that more than 70% of the networks' sound-bites about President Bush were negative, whereas the majority of sound-bites about Governor Clinton were positive.

Before the 2004 election, the CMPA released a report which showed that on broadcast TV networks and weekly news magazines, evaluations of Sen. Kerry were positive by a 2-to-1 margin, and that over 60% of evaluations of President Bush were negative."

Some scholars contend that journalists seek a more activist role in reporting, and that this, combined with a liberal slant, produces a liberal media bias.

A new survey confirms that liberals and Democrats dominate the major media.

The website of the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) reports the findings from a new book, "The American Journalist in the 21st Century: US News People at the Dawn of a New Millennium." It finds that 40 percent of journalists described themselves as being on the left side of the political spectrum and conservatives were only 25 percent. Moderates made up 33 percent.

In terms of political party affiliation, 36 percent of journalists said they were Democrats, but only 18 percent said they were Republicans.

source

And, if this isn't enough proof here's some more links......

source

Harvard study concludes media bias in favor of Dems

rise and shine on Democrats

Study: media bias in presidential race

[HAL 9000 96]

All coming from what kind of "unbiased" sources??

Right wing sources and those groups founded solely for the purpose of debunking and discrediting those people out there that think differently than those that remember the days when people accepted, submitted, and celebrated being told what to do by their superiors.

You seem to be pretty quick to point the ignorant finger while continually making a fool of yourself. Funny how things turn out when once again the brown stuff starts to hit the fan against your point of view.

[kaydee457 13]

All coming from what kind of "unbiased" sources??

Right wing sources and those groups founded solely for the purpose of debunking and discrediting those people out there that think differently than those that remember the days when people accepted, submitted, and celebrated being told what to do by their superiors.

You seem to be pretty quick to point the ignorant finger while continually making a fool of yourself. Funny how things turn out when once again the brown stuff starts to hit the fan against your point of view.

Thank you. You just reinforced my notion that you don't even bother reading the sources.........Why respond to these threads, mav? Just to cheerlead for Number6?

You never have anything substantive to say, nor do you appear to have an informed opinion on any of these subjects. I don't believe that I've ever seen you post a link to a source. I'll bet I can't find one in this thread either, can I?

Take my advice and push the Nintendo aside, along with the comics and try to keep up with the rest of us.

Edited March 17, 2008 by kaydee457

[Cassie 8]

Kaydee, These people here are not interested in fair and balanced. They are more interested in the drive-by medias pot shots at the GOP. That is what they like.

this is what I was talking about earlier, Gary. (in post #51)

I am now including all the recent posts by kaydee in my list.

[HAL 9000 96]

All coming from what kind of "unbiased" sources??

Right wing sources and those groups founded solely for the purpose of debunking and discrediting those people out there that think differently than those that remember the days when people accepted, submitted, and celebrated being told what to do by their superiors.

You seem to be pretty quick to point the ignorant finger while continually making a fool of yourself. Funny how things turn out when once again the brown stuff starts to hit the fan against your point of view.

Thank you. You just reinforced my notion that you don't even bother reading the sources.........Why respond to these threads, mav? Just to cheerlead for Number6?

You never have anything substantive to say, nor do you appear to have an informed opinion on any of these subjects. I don't believe that I've ever seen you post a link to a source. I'll bet I can't find one in this thread either, can I?

Take my advice and push the Nintendo aside, along with the comics and try to keep up with the rest of us.

Seems to be your opinion. As for making yet again a fool of yourself... its not surprising. As for thinking you're somehow telepathic... well, on top of making a fool of yourself that's just simply freaky and nutty.

Spelled out- your sources reek of right winger groups- that is, since you're accusing me of not looking at the sources, maybe we can look at who writes these "objective" reports:

1. http://www.aim.org/about/who-we-are/

2. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2...aign-bias-study

(Funny how their slogan is "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias" aka http://newsbusters.org/about, or in other words a staunchly anti-liberal blog of the MRC:

Media Research Center

The Media Research Center's mission is to bring balance and responsibility to the news media. The MRC was founded on October 1, 1987 by a group of young, determined conservatives headed by L. Brent Bozell III who set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that this bias exists, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. NewsBusters.org is a project of the MRC's News Analysis Division, led since 1987 by Brent Baker, the MRC's Steven P.J. Wood Senior Fellow and Vice President for Research and Publications. The division produces daily, weekly and special reports that document and counter liberal bias from television network news shows and major print publications. Tim Graham serves as Director of Media Analysis and Rich Noyes is the Director of Research. )

3. Another blog... http://www.deadfishwrapper.com/node/115, with yet another attack slogan: "Exposing Liberal Bias In The Oregonian"

4. MRC again.

5. CBN... right wing Christian news source. Wow... really objective there, K.

I don't know, maybe its your style to make a continuous fool of yourself... that's OK I guess.

Finally... science is correctly done via hypothesis-driven experimentation, not by asserting a conclusion before entering a biased observation.