The 2008 Presidential Campaign: What Happened and Why?

Post by **halplm** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:42 pm

I'm not asking you to present the whole article here, I wouldn't read it then either. I'm not asking you to quote anything from the article in fact. I'm asking you to prove a point that you claim the article proves, with facts you can get from anywhere... the article or elsewhere. I will not believe the conclusion of the article. You have to convince me.

You are refusing to do so.

Post by **halplm** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:44 pm

Dave_LF wrote:I think what hal must mean is that all the media in the world except Fox News are liberal compared to him. Which I suppose might actually be correct. For the record, I also might as well say that bias does not imply falsehood and lack of bias does not imply truth.

Well, since I'm only slightly right of center, you may be right.

But I can't really stand watching FOX either, they have so many left wing people on there spewing the talking points of the day it gets annoying.

Post by **JewelSong** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:51 pm

halplm wrote:yov, popularity is awful in judging quality, but is entirely appropriate in knowing what people want to watch.

Which I don't think is unbiased reporting. People want to watch "news" that in entertaining and many don't care about it's accuracy. Don't underestimate the willful ignorance of the general population. I think a news organization has an obligation to give people the NEWS - whether they "want" it or not.

FOX is to the far right of the media, but is centrist to the political spectrum in the US. Thus, the rest of the media is biased to the left.

I do not think that FOX is centrist to the political spectrum. It seems quite right-leaning to me. Why do you think it is centrist?

Post by **halplm** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:57 pm

JewelSong wrote:
halplm wrote:yov, popularity is awful in judging quality, but is entirely appropriate in knowing what people want to watch.
Which I don't think is unbiased reporting. People want to watch "news" that in entertaining and many don't care about it's accuracy. Don't underestimate the willful ignorance of the general population. I think a news organization has an obligation to give people the NEWS - whether they "want" it or not.

FOX is to the far right of the media, but is centrist to the political spectrum in the US. Thus, the rest of the media is biased to the left.
I do not think that FOX is centrist to the political spectrum. It seems quite right-leaning to me. Why do you think it is centrist?

Um, the study I linked for one reason... but also becuase when I wach it, they tend to have one person from each side discuss stuff. They also don't look extremely upset (or extremely happy, but that doesn't happen anywhere) when republicans win on election day. They don't have anchors talk about "tingly" feelings when they talk about Obama... etc.

Post by **JewelSong** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:04 pm

halplm wrote: They also don't look extremely upset (or extremely happy, but that doesn't happen anywhere) when republicans win on election day. They don't have anchors talk about "tingly" feelings when they talk about Obama... etc.

Well, as I said, I am in the UK and haven't watched FOX for a while - so I will give it a go when I am home again in December. But, in the past, I have found the FOX news programs very over-the-top and as, I said, sensationalist. Like watching a soap opera or something. I do not find the reporters to be calm or subdued at all. And again, they seem to focus on one or two small things and make that the entire story.

But part of why I prefer to get my news in print is this very thing. It is harder to appear unbiased on the TV, I think.

PS: Which anchor(s) talked about "tingly" feelings? And when?

Post by **halplm** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:09 pm

Chris Matthews

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:09 pm

Chris Matthews of MSNBC said something like that during the talking-heads segment after an Obama speech last February. He was widely mocked for it on the left as well as on the right, BTW.

Link with video

He's not an MSNBC anchor, he's the host of Hardball.

Edit to correct month

Post by **River** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:27 pm

JewelSong wrote: But, in the past, I have found the FOX news programs very over-the-top and as, I said, sensationalist. Like watching a soap opera or something. I do not find the reporters to be calm or subdued at all. And again, they seem to focus on one or two small things and make that the entire story.

I've noticed that in a lot of televised news. It doesn't matter which network it is. It even infects the websites. Infotainment drives me nuts.

Post by **Erunáme** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:35 pm

I find Fox News to be quite biased and fairly annoying to watch mostly for the reason Jewel stated...too sensationalist. Fox certainly does distort truths and more. One only has to tune into the Daily Show, Colbert Report or Keith Olberman to see that. Yes I realise they're all liberal, but when you play actual clips from Fox News, it shows itself for what it is.

Post by **halplm** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:39 pm

Proving something is distorted by known distorters who pull things out of context for the purpose of comedy?

And no one is claiming there aren't biased people ON Fox news, there are lots, on both sides. Thus balance is achieved.

Post by **Erunáme** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:46 pm

Last time I checked, Countdown wasn't a comedy show.

Whilst Stewart and Colbert are funny, I think they do a great service by exposing the lies and utter ridiculousness of TV news and politicians.

And no one is claiming there aren't biased people ON Fox news, there are lots, on both sides. Thus balance is achieved.

Funny, anytime I've seen it, I've not noticed much of a liberal viewpoint.

Thank God for the BBC which seems to do a much better job of reporting the facts without much slant.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:57 pm

What are the liberal shows on FOX?

Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:03 am

hal, I don't think that you read the study that you linked which I pulled quotes from. It does not find Fox centrist, it even says a particular show is right of center.

I think this debate is going nowhere. If a person making a claim isn't backing up the claim, but asking that others prove his or her claim wrong, then it isn't honest debate.

I couldn't name a liberal show on Fox, but then I couldn't name a conservative show on MSNBC.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:09 am

Morning Joe.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:10 am

Exactly Prim. And how many hours is that on from Monday through Friday?

Post by **yovargas** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:15 am

*can't name any show on any TV news channel*

*is proud of self*

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:24 am

"Morning Joe" - the conservative show on MSNBC hosted by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough, in on for three full new hours each day from Monday through Friday for a total of 15 individual hours.

Chris Matthews - a liberal on MSNBC - is on for five new hours each week and is repeated the same day for five hours.

Keith Olbermann- probably the most liberal on MSNBC - is on for five new hours each week and is repeated the same day for five hours.

Rachel Maddow - a liberal - is on for five new hours each week and her show is repeated the same day for another five hours.

The proportion between liberal and conservative shows is perfectly balanced at 15 new hours each.

What does FOX have in that regard? Who balances Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity with their own liberal show?

Post by **River** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:25 am

**joins yovargas in the Happy Corner

Post by **nerdanel** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:27 am

sauronsfinger wrote:The proportion between liberal and conservative shows is perfectly balanced at 15 new hours each.

Am I missing something really obvious (I don't watch any TV, like yov), or does your description say that the three liberal pundits actually receive twice as much airtime (30 hours, collectively) as the single conservative pundit (15 hours) on MSNBC? I don't really feel too invested in the discussion on this point, and I am liberal, but it seems somehow less than accurate to describe such a thing as "perfectly balanced."

Post by **yovargas** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:31 am

I think he was saying that there are three liberals with one-hour-a-day shows and one conservative with a three-hours-a-day show so each "side" (cuz, you know, there's exactly two sides to anything in the world) gets three hours. I know nothing about this (nor do I care) just clarifying how I read it.