[Pseudonym]

romanP wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

You just can't pick and choose what bias you acknowledge. That is disingenuous.

I never said that any other news agency isn't biased. All news is biased. The problem with FOX is that the bias is so bad and blatant as to make it nothing more than a mouthpiece for Republican Party policy.

Well excellent. We agree that all new is biased.

Now my second point that I wish to contend is that Fox News is not the most biased party in the mainstream media. Recall Dan Rather, CNN, and very dubious fact checking. Consider NPR, a publicly funded radio program that is prominent in its left wing bias. Refer to Reuters and their photo fraud in the post I made above.

EDIT: I want to emphasize that I am not exculpating or diverting the blame for bias from Fox News in any way. They are most certainly biased, although I am contending that they are less so than the examples I gave above.

[Zipperfish]

Pseudonym wrote:

romanP wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

You just can't pick and choose what bias you acknowledge. That is disingenuous.

I never said that any other news agency isn't biased. All news is biased. The problem with FOX is that the bias is so bad and blatant as to make it nothing more than a mouthpiece for Republican Party policy.

Well excellent. We agree that all new is biased.

Now my second point that I wish to contend is that Fox News is not the most biased party in the mainstream media. Recall Dan Rather, CNN, and very dubious fact checking. Consider NPR, a publicly funded radio program that is prominent in its left wing bias. Refer to Reuters and their photo fraud in the post I made above.

EDIT: I want to emphasize that I am not exculpating or diverting the blame for bias from Fox News in any way. They are most certainly biased, although I am contending that they are less so than the examples I gave above.

To an extent we're all prisoners of our own biases. We don't have the option of seeing anything "objectively." What I consider "objective" reporting would probably appear slanted left or right to those with differing perspectives.

I really wouldn't classify CNN or FOX News as "news," anyway. Really they are just a parade of various opinionists commenting on the news.

[Pseudonym]

Ya, maybe I shouldn't get into a "your bias is worse" debate, but I am having trouble controlling my argumentative urges.

[romanP]

Pseudonym wrote:

romanP wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

You just can't pick and choose what bias you acknowledge. That is disingenuous.

I never said that any other news agency isn't biased. All news is biased. The problem with FOX is that the bias is so bad and blatant as to make it nothing more than a mouthpiece for Republican Party policy.

Well excellent. We agree that all new is biased.

Now my second point that I wish to contend is that Fox News is not the most biased party in the mainstream media. Recall Dan Rather, CNN, and very dubious fact checking.

You mean one instance, which could easily be considered a smear, out of a 54-year career of outstanding, quality reporting is all you have?

Quote:

Consider NPR, a publicly funded radio program that is prominent in its left wing bias. Refer to Reuters and their photo fraud in the post I made above.

You may consider their bias to be left-wing, but they are not a party mouthpeice. NPR has never been instrumental in tampering with election results. FOX News declared George Bush the winner before the 2000 election was over.

Quote:

EDIT: I want to emphasize that I am not exculpating or diverting the blame for bias from Fox News in any way. They are most certainly biased, although I am contending that they are less so than the examples I gave above.

Hardly. Your examples hold about as much water as a seive.

[Zipperfish]

Pseudonym wrote:

Ya, maybe I shouldn't get into a "your bias is worse" debate, but I am having trouble controlling my argumentative urges.

Oh I think that it's pretty clear some are biased one way or the other. FOX News is right of centre, clearly. CBC is left of centre. But I think the only way you could really find out is by polling a statitistically large and demographically representative sample of the population as to their impressions of various media bias.

[Pseudonym]

romanP wrote:

FOX News declared George Bush the winner before the 2000 election was over.
...
Hardly. Your examples hold about as much water as a seive.

I am not going to dignify this smear with debate. Mayhaps we can discuss some other subject some other time, cause I think we're done here.

Zipp, I could see that working, but I doubt you could get a poll of that scale orgnized to the point where everyone is satified, so everyone is left to pick and choose which form of bias they indulge, as it should be.

[Taospark]

romanP wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

You just can't pick and choose what bias you acknowledge. That is disingenuous.

I never said that any other news agency isn't biased. All news is biased. The problem with FOX is that the bias is so bad and blatant as to make it nothing more than a mouthpiece for Republican Party policy.

As someone who thinks FOX is one of the worst excesses of journalism and a media failing the mandate given it by the Supreme Court in US v. New York Times, I'd still have to disagree somewhat with your statement. FOX isn't so much a mouthpiece as it is catering.

It's really an issue of the money they get from marketing to what they see as an underserved demographic and the fact that their stance disarms politicians enough to give them a statement that CNN or MSNBC might not be able to get. There were a lot of voters in the Republican Party, religious and small government especially, who felt jilted by the White House's ongoing contravention of what were thought to be traditional Republican values.

This isn't to say that many of the reporters at FOX don't have a considerable pro-Republican bias, but that they were hired after the fact, by smarter and more apolitical people who saw an opportunity to create a market niche.