• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Is Fox News evil or stupid?

Is Fox News evil or stupid?

  • Evil. Muahahahahahaha

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Stupid. Hurr Durr Derp Derp

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Neither. There is a resonable explanation which I will now present.

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • Stewart. Fox News is both evil and stupid.

    Votes: 13 46.4%

  • Total voters
    28

Hugh

Member
Stupid Yahoo Groups search function doesn't work worth a crap. About a year or so ago I posted a message there about how I deleted Fox from my bookmarks because of one of their news reports was actually an editorial piece, thinly disguised. They do that from time to time, but I remember that in this particular instance they were just so blatant I became disgusted with them. I'll try to find it later and post it here.
 

Hugh

Member
Ah, here we go, found it. I posted this on April 23, 2009:

I have about a dozen news sites bookmarked, I read almost all of them every day.
Seeing a bias in reporting doesn't really upset me, news is reported by humans
and humans have bias, no big deal. I've always looked forward to reading MSNBC
as much as I did Fox, even though both of them seem to be the most biased, MSNBC
to the left, Fox to the right. Lately, Fox has been getting more and more
trashy, especially since Obama won the election. Today was the last straw, they
had a picture of Bill Bradley with a cheaply made caption on the photo that said
"SPAM KING?" for some story about how he may be responsible for clogging my
email inbox. The photo looked like one of those hasitly made photos people post
on message boards, really cheap. And all of the rest of the headlines looked
like they were written for shock as well, even though that's nothing new for
Fox. I don't watch their television news, I wonder if it's as bad as their
website.
 

Peder

Well-Known Member
A million thanks, Beer Good!

I am now even more flabbergasted than I was originally when I saw that map and thought it was true. Since then my grasp of reality has been telling me nobody could be so foolish as to create a new map (and get it wrong) when the Fox archives must have a zillion that could have been called up to serve the purpose. My cynical self has been telling me it must have been a hoax. Never in a million years etc etc could such a graphic make it through the most rudimentary review and onto the screen, etc, etc.
And now through your kindness and your link I find it confirmed that it really happened.
I am flabbergasted beyond all imagining; no face palm is adequate.
:eek: :eek: :eek:
/shaking head/
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
So now I see why some people support CNN. They both make up lies to manipulate people into thinking whatever they want them to think. I studied journalism in 70s and the number one thing they kept preaching was just tell the truth, not your opinion. Rumors we were not even allowed to mention. Journalism is no longer an honorable profession, but I suppose this is no problem for dishonorable people, such as apparently some forum member. If you must make up phony map to prove your argument, does this not prove your argument is faulty. Really, I do not care if someone gets news from CNN or Fox or National Enquirer or the Daily Pervert. Do you care where I get news from, or whether I believe any of it? You shouldn't. However whoever made up the phony map: what is your problem? You need to check yourself and understand why you did this. Is it really that important to convince people CNN is better than Fox. Really, in the big picture, who gives a f***, one way or the other?
 

Hugh

Member
So now I see why some people support CNN. They both make up lies to manipulate people into thinking whatever they want them to think. I studied journalism in 70s and the number one thing they kept preaching was just tell the truth, not your opinion. Rumors we were not even allowed to mention. Journalism is no longer an honorable profession, but I suppose this is no problem for dishonorable people, such as apparently some forum member. If you must make up phony map to prove your argument, does this not prove your argument is faulty. Really, I do not care if someone gets news from CNN or Fox or National Enquirer or the Daily Pervert. Do you care where I get news from, or whether I believe any of it? You shouldn't. However whoever made up the phony map: what is your problem? You need to check yourself and understand why you did this. Is it really that important to convince people CNN is better than Fox. Really, in the big picture, who gives a f***, one way or the other?

What are you babbling about? Are you keeping up here? Nobody made up a phony map, it is a screen shot of what the goofs at Fox news put up during a broadcast. The point is to show the level of competence at Fox.
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
What are you babbling about, and what is your avatar photo supposed to be, by the way. it seems somebody took a map and stuck it on the fox news thing on computer. At least that is what I think it is. And who cares anyway? What is people's obsession with the Fox news anyway. if you do not like it, then do not watch it. This is a simple concept to understand. Turn off Fox news, take some valium or something, and go outdoors away from tv and computer and get a life.
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
This cartoon is confusing.Where did the yellow haired guy come from? Who is he? Is this about Fox news or CNN or neither? Is this a cartoon from Sweden? Must be they have different sense of humor. But it is in English so maybe not. Do they have comic strip Hagar the Horrible there? What about Beetle Bailey?
 

pontalba

Well-Known Member
It appears that CNN is not exactly the font of accurate reporting either. Here are two "CNN Breaking News" emails I've received only this morning.....

At 10:43 a.m. CST this was received:
-- Members of leadership of Egypt's ruling party, including President Hosni Mubarak, submit resignations, state TV reports.

*Get more from CNN International*
Whoops........! Um.....
Less than two hours later at 12:40 p.m. CST I've received:
-- Clarification: Key members resign their posts in Egypt's ruling party. Hosni Mubarak remains head of party and president.

*Get more from CNN International*

Right, get more from CNN..... :rolleyes:
 

Polly Parrot

Moderator
Staff member
The news about Mubarak resigning was on Arabic news channels for a while but it was retracted shortly after, so I guess CNN (and probably other news agencies with it) copied the Arab news but then retracted once it disappeared there.
 

beer good

Well-Known Member
That is clumsy, but on the other hand it's an unavoidable hazard of a world in which we get news reports as they come in, 24/7. You can't have immediate reporting and 100% certain fact-checking at the same time. The problem only becomes huge when you, for whatever reason, don't correct your errors and stick with "news" that you know are wrong, but match what you want rather than what actually happened.
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
It is better not to speak in cartoons. Beer good. Too much beer not so good. Maybe this explains the situation. CNN is ignoring the basic rules of journalism. Instead of reporting everything they hear as soon as they hear it, a professional journalist will verify this information through other sources and also give attribution for information. This was drilled into our heads in first year of school. If you watch these people you will see they are amateurs. They are young and usually nervous and out of breath. They exaggerate every little thing that happens into a major event, probably hoping to get the Pulitzer prize.
This whole business of reporting Mubarak resigned before they verified it is inexcusable in journalism. I once worked for a tiny little newspaper on Long Island, and I would have gotten fired for doing something like that.
 

pontalba

Well-Known Member
The news about Mubarak resigning was on Arabic news channels for a while but it was retracted shortly after, so I guess CNN (and probably other news agencies with it) copied the Arab news but then retracted once it disappeared there.

That is clumsy, but on the other hand it's an unavoidable hazard of a world in which we get news reports as they come in, 24/7. You can't have immediate reporting and 100% certain fact-checking at the same time. The problem only becomes huge when you, for whatever reason, don't correct your errors and stick with "news" that you know are wrong, but match what you want rather than what actually happened.
Copied. Exactly my point, they just took what came along and immediately sent it out as a "breaking news bulletin". Granted, there are of course circles that need to know that asap. The general public is not in that group/circle that needs to know within the hour something of that sort. It seems way too eager to beat the next news agency to the punch, when accurate news would be far better, the first time around.


CNN is ignoring the basic rules of journalism. Instead of reporting everything they hear as soon as they hear it, a professional journalist will verify this information through other sources and also give attribution for information. This was drilled into our heads in first year of school. If you watch these people you will see they are amateurs. They are young and usually nervous and out of breath. They exaggerate every little thing that happens into a major event, probably hoping to get the Pulitzer prize.
This whole business of reporting Mubarak resigned before they verified it is inexcusable in journalism. I once worked for a tiny little newspaper on Long Island, and I would have gotten fired for doing something like that.
Verify, verify, verify. Used to be the rule. Now it seems to be the exception.

Sloppy "journalism".
 

SFG75

Well-Known Member
That is clumsy, but on the other hand it's an unavoidable hazard of a world in which we get news reports as they come in, 24/7. You can't have immediate reporting and 100% certain fact-checking at the same time. The problem only becomes huge when you, for whatever reason, don't correct your errors and stick with "news" that you know are wrong, but match what you want rather than what actually happened.

Right on, it is one thing to admit mistakes like CNN did(and has done in the past) and what FOX continues to do about death panels and continuing to float inuendo out there about our Kenyan president.
 

beer good

Well-Known Member
Copied. Exactly my point, they just took what came along and immediately sent it out as a "breaking news bulletin". Granted, there are of course circles that need to know that asap. The general public is not in that group/circle that needs to know within the hour something of that sort.
So why have you signed up to receive "Breaking news bulletins" from CNN if you don't want them?

Parallel: In the first hours and days after 9/11, there were a lot of theories and bodycounts being thrown around. I remember the first officially reported bodycount was somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000 - that was in the first couple of hours. Should everyone simply not have reported on it until the dust settled and everyone was accounted for?

CNN's (and every other news source determined to release news as they come in - people do realise there are other news sources than either FOX or CNN, right?) problem is that they don't give themselves time to verify news. FOX' problem is a different one: that they invent news, which can of course never be verified or contradicted any more than the events of any other fiction.
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
I think some people are missing the point. Apparently the CNN policy is just report everything they hear as soon as they hear it, because if it is wrong they can just correct it later. Journalists in the past would throw up if they heard this. A reporter did not report news until they had done everything thoroughly possible to verify its validity. This is why the famous case of newspapers reporting Dewey won presidential election was such a big deal. Appartently today it is not. CNN would just go ahead and announce it and say after, "oops! We made a mistake. No big deal, we do it all the time", which apparently they do.
Often people do not ever get to hear the correction, so they go on believing the incorrect news. This can have serious consequences in some instances. I do not get Fox news here, and I do not know what a death panel is. CNN says nothing about president of Kenya at all and apparently are not interested in the subject so I cannot comment about that. However, I saw firsthand the redshirt demonstrations in Thailand and also saw the CNN reports and I can tell you without a doubt CNN was totally biased, unprofessional and just plain wrong about that situation, and they have yet to admit this, as far as I know.
 

pontalba

Well-Known Member
So why have you signed up to receive "Breaking news bulletins" from CNN if you don't want them?

Parallel: In the first hours and days after 9/11, there were a lot of theories and bodycounts being thrown around. I remember the first officially reported bodycount was somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000 - that was in the first couple of hours. Should everyone simply not have reported on it until the dust settled and everyone was accounted for?

CNN's (and every other news source determined to release news as they come in - people do realise there are other news sources than either FOX or CNN, right?) problem is that they don't give themselves time to verify news. FOX' problem is a different one: that they invent news, which can of course never be verified or contradicted any more than the events of any other fiction.

Comedic relief.
No, seriously I'd registered to receive a general newsletter comparable to the NYT, CBS etc. Somehow that never arrived, but the special bulletins started arriving. I expect I checked something incorrectly, and haven't gone back to rectify that error.

OTOH, comedic relief might not be too far from the truth, some of the items they consider "breaking news" boggle the mind.

The point really is that CNN along with other news organizations are competitive to the point of not caring about accuracy, all they care about is getting anything out onto the air, to the public....and pox on accuracy.
The louder, the more shocking, the glitzier the better.
Edward R. Murrow is not simply turning in his grave, he must be spinning.
 

chiangmaifalcon

New Member
Yes beer good they should have waited until the body count was verified before they reported any number of deaths on 9/11. That is exactly what I am trying to say here. Do not report rumors. The news media should simply have said there are an unknown number of casualties, instead of their usual fearmongering and sensationalism. not only Edward R. Murrow but every single reporter from every small-town newspaper in country is probably turning in grave now.
Give it up already with the Fox news. Do you really think they make up news any more than the liberal news? The New York Times is known to fabricate more news Than Fox news ever thought of. I do not know if Fox news is always accurate, but they are certainly no more inaccurate than all the rest.
 
Top