Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56
  1. #21  
    [QUOTE=johnbdh]This is what makes discussing politcs with my liberal friends so frustrating. It seems to me that they are incapable of listening objectively to an arguement. They only respond to what stimulates their emotions, ignoring the logic of my arguement.

    John, I am sorry you did not understand, but my analogy between Fox and pro wrestling was my response to your argument.

    I sincerely believe that Fox manipluates the variables to make is seem like there is a fair discussion, but decides in advance who is going to win and who is going to lose. Sure once in a while they bring in a person who makes a strong liberal argument who wins, but the vast majority of the time, the conservatives outnumber the liberals, or the topic is so ridiculous that they have to bring in some real crackpot liberal to support it.

    It is not the amount of time that each guest is given that is important, it is how the discussion is brought forward by the moderators and how the guests are selected. I give Hannity (a good debater) and Coomes (a wimp) as just one example, of many such disparities. If the moderator shifts the discussion so that the part of the argument that the conservative can win is focused on, and the part that the liberal can win is avoided, then that is another form of manipulation. In short, there are many subtle ways that TV programmers can provide the illusion of fairness. And the more convincing the illusion, the more believable it is.

    So I honestly believe these things and I am just trying to provide my viewpoint here. I am not trying to be negative, and really it is not much fun for me, getting pelted by overgeneralizations about me and liberals being "overstimulated" or can't hold an argument", makes me sound like being liberal means I have ADD or something. Lets try to keep the discussion civil, OK?

    I mean
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    Politely disagreeing. I've had this discussion before on different threads and said this: I will call on any liberal whom I think is being unfair with his/her remarks. And I have. Please stop shoving all liberals into one bottle with the label: "Bunch of Insulters and Complainers." I admitted before of being wrong, and also told a conservative Treo-Colleague on TC that I have agreed with him on one occasion. Focus on the discussion at hand, present your opinion, but please stop categorizing all liberals as ONE.
    Back at you chick, the politely disagreeing part. I was wondering if you actually read my post. Specifically the part where I said and YOU quoted "most liberal/conservative discussions. ".

    That is why I didnt say all liberal discussions are this way. Because they arent all that way. It has however been MY experience, and I am not just talking of conversations on these threads, that MOST are that way.

    I hate to point this out, but this is another classic liberal move. Twist what is said so as to make the conservative point of view look wrong or malicious or something. Just read the words. I got an A in English class. I am saying just what I mean. It's not worded to trap anyone ok.
  3. #23  
    CellMatrix,

    All of what you stated in your last post is true, but it does not support your arguement that Fox is in no way "fair and balanced". That was the arguement.

    I sincerely believe that Fox manipluates the variables to make is seem like there is a fair discussion, but decides in advance who is going to win and who is going to lose.
    The point is that there is discussion and both sides are presneted. You don't like the presentation. That's fine, but you cannot deny that it is presentated. It's up to you the viewer to come to your own conclusions. I have never thought of fox discussions has having winners or losers. Perhaps that is the real problem you have with Fox. You expect a winner and because the host is always conservative you perceive, understandably so, that the host wins everytime. It's not a contest. The host is not a contestant. In the end it is just news, no winner, no loser. The right or wrong of it can only be determined by the consequenses of the event and that is often up for debate as well.

    Now, the question remains who presents the fair and balanced reporting of the news, Fox as they claim or the mainstream media.

    If you were to lock yourself in the house and watch Fox exclusively for the life of an event and at the same time record the reporting of the event on ABC/NBC/CBS. After the event became history, if you watched your recordings of the network news you would learn absolutely nothing new and wonder if the mainstream media had left the event early.

    An excellent example of this is the daily reporting of events in Iraq. All that is reported in the mainstream media is the negative, the bombings, deaths, bad deeds of americans, etc. Fox reports all of these same things as well, but they also report the good things happening over there, the schools being built, the women being educated, the economy rebounding, good deeds of americans etc,. In this case which would you call "fair and balanced".

    John
  4. #24  
    What these people are confusing is Fox News news, and their opinion shows. O'Rielly and Hannity are commentators, doing opinion shows. Yes they are conservative, just like we know that King and Koppel are liberal. So what- watch the one you like.

    Meanwhile, Fox News, as in their regular NEWS coverage and Brit Hume's news show, are very even and balanced in their NEWS coverage, and have the research studies to back it up. This is what people like about Fox News, even the ones like me who don't watch news/opinion shows.
    MTT
    Handspring Visor, Palm V, HS Treo 180, HS Treo 90, P1 Treo 600, P1 Treo 650, Palm Treo 700p... still hanging tough with Palm OS
  5. #25  
    John, you make a good point. In the news discussions, I think Fox makes the statement "we let you decide". But if the entire presentation is manipulated to make the conservative side win most of the time, then the viewer is more likely to "decide" the way Fox wants them to. I do not have any personal feelings for or against their technique, I think it is pretty slick, and it obviously makes for good ratings.

    As for the reporting of the news, obviously you are the most receptive to news which complements rather than conflicts with your political views. I agree with you, I think it would be good to explore exactly what the US is doing to help the people of Iraq. Also, I for one would be interested in further exploring why the majority of Iraqis want the US out, right now, despite all of what we are doing. I think if we can explore the reasons why they feel this way, we might better understand how to improve our foreign policy with the Arab world.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    Woof, here's your quote to which I referred to:

    Nuff said?
    No not "nuff said" because you took it out of context. That statment was related to the first part. the two parts of my statement are related and are not meant to stand alone. Please refrain from playing fast and loose with the quote tool.

    Again, another fine example.
  7. #27  
    But if the entire presentation is manipulated to make the conservative side win most of the time, then the viewer is more likely to "decide" the way Fox wants them to.
    There is that word "win" again. Unfortunately I think the majority of those on either side of the aisle who watch Fox News are news junkies and already come to the table with their minds made up. For those with open minds, Fox News is by far the best source of balanced news coverage. I like to think of myself as part of this group. I make up my mind based on what I hear from both sides of the arguement and fox is the only place where it is physically possible to hear both sides of an arguement from the comfort of my home.
    I think if we can explore the reasons why they feel this way, we might better understand how to improve our foreign policy with the Arab world.
    Hmmmmm..... Not going to go there. Your sentiment is fodder for a whole new thread. Woof, have you stopped bouncing off the walls yet?
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbdh
    ..... Woof, have you stopped bouncing off the walls yet?
    John your breakdown of Fox news is spot on.

    Not yet I am waiting for some people to get a clue.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbdh
    An excellent example of this is the daily reporting of events in Iraq. All that is reported in the mainstream media is the negative, the bombings, deaths, bad deeds of Americans, etc. Fox reports all of these same things as well, but they also report the good things happening over there, the schools being built, the women being educated, the economy rebounding, good deeds of Americans etc,. In this case which would you call "fair and balanced".
    Right on - and it goes along with something I read recently on one of the Political blogs (maybe instapundit or Andrew Sullivan). Fox News reports with an American viewpoint. They aren't afraid to report good news for America (and the whole of humanity) as good news, to show regret when bad things happen, and to call out terrorists and thugs as such, rather than trying to be so politically correct as to treat all sides as equal. The facts of life are, that although there is a lot of injustice in the world today, terrorism, homicide bombing, vandalism, etc. are wrong.

    BTW Chick-dance, whose picture is that in your avatar?
    MTT
    Handspring Visor, Palm V, HS Treo 180, HS Treo 90, P1 Treo 600, P1 Treo 650, Palm Treo 700p... still hanging tough with Palm OS
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by mtt
    Fox News reports with an American viewpoint. They aren't afraid to report good news for America (and the whole of humanity) as good news, to show regret when bad things happen, and to call out terrorists and thugs as such, rather than trying to be so politically correct as to treat all sides as equal.
    I have never thought about it that way, but that is one of the reasons I like Fox News.

    I think that for the most part, journalists on all major networks make good attempts to present a fair presentation. However, these journalists are people with their own beliefs, and their work is always affected by the journalist's own bias from experience and background. Since the large majority of journalists identify themselves as liberals, their news stories reflect, at least to a small extent, a liberal slant. Fox has tried to break away from that liberal slant, and has discovered that millions of people are refreshed by the approach.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbdh
    There is that word "win" again. Unfortunately I think the majority of those on either side of the aisle who watch Fox News are news junkies and already come to the table with their minds made up. For those with open minds, Fox News is by far the best source of balanced news coverage. I like to think of myself as part of this group. I make up my mind based on what I hear from both sides of the arguement and fox is the only place where it is physically possible to hear both sides of an arguement from the comfort of my home.
    The problem is, while Fox might show both sides (or at least appear to show both sides), they are very definitely biased (we all agree on that, I think). The real solution is to not try to get both sides of the argument from Fox, which is why this is such a problem. As others have said, they present the liberal side of the argument very badly, in order to try to show the conservative side is correct. I think Fox would be much more useful as a news channel if it only showed the conservative side, and you went elsewhere for the liberal side.

    Getting your news from multiple, varying sources is the only way to get all sides of it. This is why I get most of mine from Google. There are no biases there, and humans don't even intervene in which of the particular articles about any topic get brought to the top. When I click on a link there, I usually don't look at where it's taking me, so I don't know which way it's slanted until I get there. I also read more than one article about each topic (of course, this is annoying when I go to three different places that just have the AP article, or something, but in general it works).
    Units - Unit conversion for webOS!
    Treo 180->270->600->650->Blackberry Pearl->Palm Pre
  12. #32  
    The problem is....
    Problem, what problem. Fox is biased but I think has been shown here to be balanced at least more so than the main stream media. Fox makes no excuses for it's bias. This is not a problem but a clear choice that you the viewer can make with the channel changer.
    The real solution is to not try to get both sides of the argument from Fox
    What are you afraid of. Watch Fox in addition to your other choices for news. Or are you afraid of what your freinds might say or worse that you might become a convert??
    Getting your news from multiple, varying sources is the only way to get all sides of it.
    Agreed! I choose to include Fox in my news mix and I think I am better informed because ot it.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by metsfan
    ...... This is why I get most of mine from Google. There are no biases there, and humans don't even intervene in which of the particular articles about any topic get brought to the top.
    That works great until you read the article. It was of course written by a human with a bias. And I dont buy the fact you dont look to see where youve gone for your article.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    I think it would be good to explore exactly what the US is doing to help the people of Iraq. Also, I for one would be interested in further exploring why the majority of Iraqis want the US out, right now, despite all of what we are doing.
    Another classic example of mis-information perpetrated on the masses by the mainstream media. There is no real proof that I am aware of that backs up the statement that the majority of Iraqis want the US out. Sure there are sound bites on the nightly news but I hardly consider that real proof. If you look you can find reports about Iraqis that say favorable things about America. Something I think all of us sitting here (wherever here is) in our nice safe homes forget is that the Iraqi people are not used to being able to speak thier mind for fear of reprisal. That situation has not changed all that much since they were liberated. There are still plenty of factions in Iraq that will punish their fellow Iraqi for making pro-American statements. It is going to take time for this situation to settle down and I'm certain that the media outlets will move on after George W. Bush is re-elected in November.

    It's great to see so many neo-conservatives putting forth well thought out arguments. I am of course being facetious about the neo-conservative crack. That's what Chick-Dance referred to some of us over on the mytreo.net board. It seems these days anyone who even leans right is labeled as being neo-conservative. That's OK with me though because I freely admit I have my own set of labels for my liberal friends. See there, just like Fox I'm fair and balanced.
    Treo 600 on T-Mobile since March 2004
  15. #35  
    And to date Chick has still not defined neo-conservative for me as requested.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    OK Woof, the whole quote. Same thing: I am politely disagreeing with you that in MOST discussions the liberals are the way you have described them.
    Sorry Chick but based on my experience I am correct in my assessment of liberals. You can disagree all you want. You may not be that way, but you are not most liberals are you?
  17. #37  
    And to date Chick has still not defined neo-conservative for me as requested.
    Pretty much anything you want it to mean....

    http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Neo...ited_States%29
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbaldon
    There is no real proof that I am aware of that backs up the statement that the majority of Iraqis want the US out. Sure there are sound bites on the nightly news but I hardly consider that real proof.
    I am just quoting the results of a scientific poll that was reported by USA today hardly a tool of the left.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...ll-cover_x.htm
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    That works great until you read the article. It was of course written by a human with a bias. And I dont buy the fact you dont look to see where youve gone for your article.
    I look AFTER, but I don't choose which article to read based on the bias that I'm looking for. And I read multiple ones, as I said, which somewhat makes up for the bias in each one.

    It's not perfect, but it's better than just watching Fox (or any other single news channel).
    Last edited by metsfan; 07/13/2004 at 10:59 PM.
    Units - Unit conversion for webOS!
    Treo 180->270->600->650->Blackberry Pearl->Palm Pre
  20. #40  
    I guess Fox news forgot to cover this one very well.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 07/14/2004 at 10:07 AM. Reason: clarification
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions