sd'sker Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 oh, 'sker you are so silly. We knew that Saddam had WMD's since the 80's, and he never fully proved he got rid of them or the structure to build them, which we now know he never fully did. Hell he used them on his own people. Until they were proven to be fully destroyed then Fox was not misleading anyone. If anything your the one being dishonest, because you act like Saddam never had them and if he did he destroyed them before 2003, which is completely false. i am silly, i will give you that. but they were reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. during the invasion, wmd's were not found (the articles you linked to were from 2010), but people believed they were found during the invasion. that is the point. this is not an argument about wmd's in iraq, it is about the veracity of fox news. Link to comment
Ziggy Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 oh, 'sker you are so silly. We knew that Saddam had WMD's since the 80's, and he never fully proved he got rid of them or the structure to build them, which we now know he never fully did. Hell he used them on his own people. Until they were proven to be fully destroyed then Fox was not misleading anyone. If anything your the one being dishonest, because you act like Saddam never had them and if he did he destroyed them before 2003, which is completely false. i am silly, i will give you that. but they were reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. during the invasion, wmd's were not found (the articles you linked to were from 2010), but people believed they were found during the invasion. that is the point. this is not an argument about wmd's in iraq, it is about the veracity of fox news. The articles are from 2010, but the WMD's were found in 2004. Reporting one thing and leading people to believe another? not sure what that means. But your trying to say fox news lied about WMD's making people falsely believe that WMD's were in Iraq when we invaded. Which I showed you that your statement was false, that Saddam in fact never fully destroyed his stockpiles or the facilities to create those weapons. Sounds to me that is probably due to the fact your Pol. Science teacher was a little biased, I had one in college too that was a little loose with facts. Link to comment
carlfense Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 I do not disagree with you, but I would say its just as bad for people who watch the other "news" stations that are just as bad. Maybe we should see who still thinks 9/11 was an inside job. Every side has sheeple. I agree. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 oh, 'sker you are so silly. We knew that Saddam had WMD's since the 80's, and he never fully proved he got rid of them or the structure to build them, which we now know he never fully did. Hell he used them on his own people. Until they were proven to be fully destroyed then Fox was not misleading anyone. If anything your the one being dishonest, because you act like Saddam never had them and if he did he destroyed them before 2003, which is completely false. i am silly, i will give you that. but they were reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. during the invasion, wmd's were not found (the articles you linked to were from 2010), but people believed they were found during the invasion. that is the point. this is not an argument about wmd's in iraq, it is about the veracity of fox news. The articles are from 2010, but the WMD's were found in 2004. Reporting one thing and leading people to believe another? not sure what that means. But your trying to say fox news lied about WMD's making people falsely believe that WMD's were in Iraq when we invaded. Which I showed you that your statement was false, that Saddam in fact never fully destroyed his stockpiles or the facilities to create those weapons. Sounds to me that is probably due to the fact your Pol. Science teacher was a little biased, I had one in college too that was a little loose with facts. it was not her study. you can be vague and misleading with your reporting, that is what reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. here is another, more recent, study: Fox News viewers worst-informed, study finds Fox News viewers are less informed than those who watch other programmes, or no TV news at all, research has found. Link to comment
Ziggy Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 oh, 'sker you are so silly. We knew that Saddam had WMD's since the 80's, and he never fully proved he got rid of them or the structure to build them, which we now know he never fully did. Hell he used them on his own people. Until they were proven to be fully destroyed then Fox was not misleading anyone. If anything your the one being dishonest, because you act like Saddam never had them and if he did he destroyed them before 2003, which is completely false. i am silly, i will give you that. but they were reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. during the invasion, wmd's were not found (the articles you linked to were from 2010), but people believed they were found during the invasion. that is the point. this is not an argument about wmd's in iraq, it is about the veracity of fox news. The articles are from 2010, but the WMD's were found in 2004. Reporting one thing and leading people to believe another? not sure what that means. But your trying to say fox news lied about WMD's making people falsely believe that WMD's were in Iraq when we invaded. Which I showed you that your statement was false, that Saddam in fact never fully destroyed his stockpiles or the facilities to create those weapons. Sounds to me that is probably due to the fact your Pol. Science teacher was a little biased, I had one in college too that was a little loose with facts. it was not her study. you can be vague and misleading with your reporting, that is what reporting one thing and leading people to believe another. here is another, more recent, study: Fox News viewers worst-informed, study finds Fox News viewers are less informed than those who watch other programmes, or no TV news at all, research has found. Maybe there are just more idiots who watch Fox news, and not necessary the coverage. I think the bigger concern should be that most of the people tested answered less than 50% right. And the college who did the study isn't exactly a well regarded educational haven. "Fairleigh Dickinson's academic record – Forbes ranked it 585 out of 650 US colleges." Link to comment
Ziggy Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 A side bar, I know a lot of Fox news is slanted to the right. Just as MSNBC and Comedy Central are to the left. Its inevitable that everyone is biased one way or the other, its on the individual to take in all the information and make a rational determination of what the "truth" is. Link to comment
strigori Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 A side bar, I know a lot of Fox news is slanted to the right. Just as MSNBC and Comedy Central are to the left. Its inevitable that everyone is biased one way or the other, its on the individual to take in all the information and make a rational determination of what the "truth" is. At least Comedy Central makes no bones about it, they are entertainment. Fox and MSNBC both should be watched by no one. The sad fact is a great many people can't or won't come to a determination on their own. They are perfectly happy being sheep. Link to comment
Army Husker Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Not sure why the article title just has Fox New's name in it when this quote is in there... "We expect that watching the news should help people learn, but the most popular of the national media sources – Fox, CNN, MSNBC – seem to be the least informative." Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 i agree that the bigger issue is the overall lack of quality reporting. i also do not think this is an issue about ideological 'slants', the issue is that the media is lazy and sensationalist. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 i think the reaction to obama's debate performance on msnbc was very telling. they criticized him relentlessly. has fox news ever criticized a republican running for an important position? everyone talks about how all news channels are slanted, and i agree. the difference is that msnbc is biased towards their ideology, not a person or party. cnn is biased to sensationalism and laziness. but fox is biased towards their corporate interests (which obama threatens because he does not want to privatize everything). that is the difference and that is why i find fox news so egregious. there are plenty of conservative writers, blogs, podcasts/radio shows that i would probably respect and be interested in, but they are overwhelmed by the fox news narrative, which is driven by their corporate interests. they are self-censored to provide a narrative. beck made no qualms about it when he was shilling gold. you could not tell if you were watching his commercials or show. and that is a rather innocuous, although equally bad when considering journalistic integrity, compared to the larger issues where disinformation becomes truth. Link to comment
carlfense Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 This probably fits here. Unemployment rate falls below 8% for the first time in about 4 years . . . and how does Fox respond? By using a larger font to question the data than the text used to show the number. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis: Jobs Report Conspiracies 'Ludicrous' Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis: Jobs Report Conspiracies 'Ludicrous' Yeah, man, but she's just part of the Obama Machine. It's lies - all lies. Link to comment
Recommended Posts