 |
| |
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gatekeeper
I prefer getting my news from the newspapers, raw news wires (AP, Knight Ridder, Reuters, et al.) and maybe the occasional Web site.
That said, I find FOX to be aggravating. This is a network that makes a point of *preaching* just how "fair and balanced" they are, which instantly raises warning flags. This is a network that goes on and on about how they "report and you decide," and then go on to have nothing but opinionated talk shows where pushing buttons (i.e., being anything but fair and balanced) is the norm because, gosh sakes, ratings mean more than journalism. Finally, this is a network that is so notoriously thin-skinned that if an outside group or person criticizes it, said group or person can expect to be skinned alive (and that's putting it mildly) by Bill O'Reilly and his fellows.
Sorry, but I'm sticking with newspapers and wire services as my primary news sources. FOX has made cable TV news mostly unpalatable.
Gatekeeper |
................... !!!!!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
Well I think that is a result of 24 hour news. They have to fill the time with something that will make people want to watch, and one way is to push people's buttons. Allthough I dont think Bill O'Reilly is as bad as you think he is.
Like you said gatekeeper news papers and news wires and such are better. Again I watch FOX not for news really, but for entertainment.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jack_www
Well I think that is a result of 24 hour news. They have to fill the time with something that will make people want to watch, and one way is to push people's buttons. Allthough I dont think Bill O'Reilly is as bad as you think he is. |
There's been a few times where he made sense, and I have no problem admitting that. But those moments have become rarer and rarer, it seems.
quote:
Like you said gatekeeper news papers and news wires and such are better. Again I watch FOX not for news really, but for entertainment. |
To each their own, IMO. I mainly tune in to cable TV news to get visuals to go with the "meat and vittles" I get from real news sources, such as newspapers and news wires. The newspapers and wire services maintain Web sites (not all accessible to the general public) where photos are included with the text, though, so maybe even tuning into the likes of FOX, CNN, et al., will be unnecessary in the future.
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:27
|
|
I watched FOX NEWs once during the war, and I really enjoyed their interviews with the soldiers. The reportre on the scene was very laid back, and the troops actually said something interesting. On CNN, the reports from the field with the soldiers was very formal and all you got were two word answers from the soldiers. On CNN, it looked like they got the stupidest, dumbest soldiers who had spend too much time around artillery, and/or DU. On FOX, they seemed like realy people. Other then that, you can just see from the on screen presentation of FOX where they stand: red, white and blue colors, with the US flag in one corner. I like the BBC .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Demerzel
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gsmoove23
Isn't the Sun or the Daily Mail the most popular British paper? What astounds me is that Fox doesn't have Page 3 girls and still manages to be winning the ratings. |
depressingly so. the sun is the best selling tabloid - i believe the best selling paper is still The Telegraph. half the reason people buy the sun is that it only costs 10 or 20p. the other half must just like reading the biggest pile of shite in existance.
i think i'd rather watch Fox News 24/7 than have to read The Sun ever.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
In Iraq, CNN always sought out bad or negative news to report, while our troops were moving fast through light resistance, freeing people all the way. FOX captured that well, we were winning, and our enemy wasn't there to fight big battles, just skirmishes.
I heard somewhere of a guy that turned from CNN to FOX and went from losing the war to winning it. Funny, exagerated sure, but also true. The THUTH of the war in Iraq could be found on FOX, as well as the best inbeds. People watched FOX for the truth, the... NEWS.
Regarding the newspapers, the local rag, the 'Register Guard', was the same. US troops were always 'meeting stiff resistance' or 'getting thrown out of Baghdad airport'. We call that paper the Red Guard here abouts. These people WANTED the news to be bad because why? Because this was a REPUBLICAN war.
With such anti American spin, FOX news is a breath of fresh air to the majority who have had enough leftist spin.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:27
|
|
lancer, you admit that you want to hear what you like rather than what is happening.
you wanted to hear american destroying iraq's army with no resistance, and thats what you got from Fox.
The problem you have lancer is you place your complete trust in something without questioning why. and then when presented with differing opinions obviously they must be wrong, rather than yourself.
i beg of you to stop your hard on for self satisfying right wing news and try to question it, for once.
Last edited by MRT144 on 30-04-2003 at 15:30
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
Well I pay 20% of my charge, the insurance I get through work pays the rest. The cost for one root canal plus a cap over the tooth after is $1400 plus, so I still have to come up with $280.
What are you out?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
270 euros was the visit to the other butcher dentist. For 5 fillings with a white stuff called synthetic rytine (on the front of the teeth) plus a replacement of a normal filling and cleaning.
The new one, I shiver to think how much he will charge me as he seems to be (and according to trusted reports is) very very good at his job. We will see as he will have to determine which of the butcher's filling are to go and be replaced and which to stay and be processed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
GePap, #2 always has such a fixation. Now that they are #1, expect it to ease up. They may put in their advert, 'the #1 cable news program, or something, not mentioning CNN at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bosh
|
 |
Taehan Mingook
Jan 1970
time: 00:27
|
|
just gotta repost this:
http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/iraqwarcoverage.html
Since this is what most people are watching these days anyway, let's catch up on how the television news networks are faring in week one of Gulf War II.
CNN:
CNN has probably done the best job of exposing the more tragic aspects of this war -- namely the fact that its reporting crew got kicked out of Baghdad over the weekend. The resulting 72 hours of nonstop coverage of the crew's tearful group hugs at the Jordanian border and ceaseless "how did you feel?" line of questioning from Atlanta made me think I had stumbled on an episode of Oprah. The fact that this had suddenly become "the story" in CNN's eyes, even as U.S. and Iraqi soldiers were getting immolated across the border, illustrates the inward focus that has played a primary role in the network's downfall. If "sexy" Paula Zahn doesn't up the ante and start adopting a more aggressive interview style soon (think Sharon Stone in "Basic Instinct"), CNN is pretty much toast.
This Baghdad eviction has left the network in such a state that all it can do when the ratings-boosting pyrotechnics light up the Baghdad skyline is have sexy Wolf Blitzer narrate it from his suite at the Kuwait City Hilton, where the thundering in the background is just room service bringing up some fresh shrimp cocktail. Don't blame Fox News for your misfortunes, CNN -- blame AOL Time Warner. Things fall apart.
MSNBC:
What could be freakier than Lester Holt's botox permagrin as he recites the growing body count from the commander in chief's latest wacky misadventure? Maybe it wasn't botox -- maybe he was born with his mouth frozen like that. Regardless, it's trademark of MSNBC's robotic news delivery, which drones on for long sing-songy stretches only to be eventually shattered by Chris Matthews's hyperactive barking as he gnashes and hurls himself like a crazed Lhasa Apso at the heels of some unsuspecting liberal peacenik lured into the studio with the promise of some free government cheese.
One interesting feature of MSNBC's coverage is the huge map of Iraq laid down on the studio floor like a supermarket advertisement for Empire Flakes. All that's missing is the little toy tanks and planes being pushed around by generals on their hands and knees making zoom-zoom noises. MSNBC does claim frequent contact with an actual Baghdad correspondent, CNN refugee Peter Arnett, but Pete is suspiciously quick to note that he's actually a National Geographic correspondent, ostensibly left behind on a Mesopotamian excursion gone horribly awry.
FOX NEWS:
Like an Iraqi soldier dressed in civilian clothes, Fox News has crept in under the false cover of objectivity to unleash a blitzkrieg of bias so right wing that channel-surfers often mistake it for a eugenics infomercial. The only nod at an actual exchange of ideas is Hannity *****-slapping the hapless Colmes while slobbering permaguest Bill Bennett slowly undoes his belt buckle in anticipation of giving that liberal ****er his final comeuppance. It's enough the scare the teeth right out of Ann Coulter's vagina.
On Fox News, it's not "Attack on Iraq," it's not "Gulf War II," no, it's "Operation Iraqi Freedom, ANY QUESTIONS, *****ES?" I'm surprised **** Cheney doesn't call to tell them to tone it down a bit. Fox News also takes the prize for being "most indignant" that the Iraqis have decided they have nothing to lose by not fighting fair. All I know is that it must drive the audio technicians nuts to keep having to pod down all that goose-stepping in the background. If you work at Fox News, this isn't Gulf War II -- it's Christmas.
AL-JAZEERA:
It's so obviously the Jews. While the Bush administration swims in hypocrisy with virtually every statement it makes, are there any Arabs who recognize that if they just had a news service that countered this with anything approaching objectivity, somebody might take them seriously? After all, this is a television station that still insists all the Jews got out of the World Trade Center before the planes hit despite the fact that this rumor was proven to be your basic email hoax. If email is Al-Jazeera's source du jour, why haven't they reported on the ease with which any man can lengthen his penis two inches? They would surely rule the world within days! Here's the truth: Until the Arab world gets a mouthpiece that generates information that doesn't read like headlines out of the Weekly World News Paranoid Edition, nobody will take their concerns seriously.
ABC, CBS, NBC:
Who gets home in time to watch the news at 5pm every day? The elderly and the unemployed, that's who. The traditional network news operations are so irrelevant it's a wonder the U.S. military still bothers to send them press releases.
THAT SAID, a lot of the failings of the war coverage are shared ones. Whether you're a war supporter or a war protester, there's a lot of information that's been withheld from you like you're a five-year-old, because American news coverage has self-censored itself to the point of irrelevance. We see when the pyrotechnics light up Baghdad, but we haven't seen the POWs, the civilian casualties, or the details of Halliburton's brazen and immediate lunge at the profit piñata. We haven't explored the curious absence of any evidence of weapons of mass destruction despite the fact that coalition troops now control large swaths of the country. We haven't explored the increasingly disturbing evidence that George W. Bush has turned over the day to day decision making to a little voice in his head he calls "God." No one asks the hard questions, which is why Donald Rumsfeld can wave the Geneva Conventions in the air with one hand while the other pushes the button to send electricity into the genitals of some innocent Afghani taxi driver rotting away at Guantanamo Bay, and not worry about being challenged by assembled reporters shaking in front of him like raw meat in front of a hungry lion.
This failure of American news coverage has its roots in the 1980s, when the corporatization of America's news media really got underway and professional worriers worried that if the process was allowed to continue, one day we wouldn't have a credible fourth estate when we really needed one. Like now.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-04-2003 00:04
No one trusts the news unless it comes fromt the government.
You should talk, you spelled numbskull wrong. 
)
|