Print

Author Topic: I wouldn't hit that.  (Read 24625 times)

« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2009, 04:33:00 PM »
Also, why does science get only one percent of the coverage on the major TV and Cable news networks? 

Beer drinking, cheeto munching coach potatoes (otherwise known as the majority of the United States) are far more interested in gossip/celebrities who get drunk and have sex with football stars than science.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2009, 04:34:36 PM by PaperLuigi »
Luigison: Question everything!
Me: Why?

Chupperson Weird

  • Not interested.
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2009, 08:19:05 PM »
No, the american government media is much more interested in cultivating a race of pliable couch potatoes. Thus they do as much as possible to make you sit in front of your TV getting fat with diabetes, distracted enough by non-news drivel not to notice.
That was a joke.

Luigison

  • Old Person™
« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2009, 09:20:04 PM »
I hate how news shows spend more time repeatedly telling you about an upcoming story then they actually spend telling you the story. 
“Evolution has shaped us with perceptions that allow us to survive. But part of that involves hiding from us the stuff we don’t need to know."

Trainman

  • Bob-Omg
« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2009, 02:25:39 AM »
I hate how news shows spend more time repeatedly telling you about an upcoming story then they actually spend telling you the story. 

Comment of the year.
Formerly quite reasonable.

Forest Guy

  • Anything else?
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2009, 09:44:16 PM »
I find it disturbing how many people flat out hate Fox News. In terms of actual news coverage, it's the least biased news on television. I find it even more disturbing how the same people have never actually watched Fox News and as such have no idea what they're talking about. Simply because it's earned the reputation of RARGH VAST RIGHTWING CONSPIRACY OMG  they instantly, blindly hate it.

In other fun news, a recent poll following Walter Cronkite's death showed that the majority of people polled consider Jon Stewart their most trusted man in "journalism". Ew. Just... just ew.
= = = = = = =
Agender, curry fan, Top 10 lister, indie dev, gym hitter, musician, et al.

« Reply #20 on: July 26, 2009, 10:22:18 PM »
Part of the issue is that Fox has become synonymous with its most, err, "outstanding" journalists, folks to the likes of O'Reilly and Coulter who should be fired in the sake of human decency. For instance, the former newscaster's labelling of 4chan as the "Internet Hate Machine" and its users as "Hacker on Steroids" exemplifies an unfounded sense of stubbornness. Anyway, I would argue that the degree of liberalism considered the norm in today's society has warped our concept of neutrality. While Fox is indeed indisputably somewhat right-of-centre, if viewed in perspective, its conservativity is far less than many other stations' degree of liberalism.

On your second note, FG, did that poll directly regard Cronkite? Jon Stewart is more of a political commentator than a news anchor, so the two are hardly comparable.
YYur  waYur n beYur you Yur plusYur instYur an Yur Yur whaYur

« Reply #21 on: July 26, 2009, 11:07:37 PM »

Forest Guy

  • Anything else?
« Reply #22 on: July 27, 2009, 12:27:28 AM »
Ann Coulter isn't a journalist, and she doesn't have a job at Fox. Occasionally she makes guest appearences on Hannity and stuff, but she doesn't have a show. And honestly, I have no problem with O'Reilly.
Up and down the lineup, they've got all straight news during the day, and then at 3pm Sheppard Smith is on, who's actually a democrat. After him is Neil Cavuto who deals more with economic stuff, and isn't all that opinionated. Glenn Beck is on at 5pm, and he's not a conservative, he's actually a libertarian. 6pm is just generic news without any commentary, then 7pm has Sheppard Smith again. 8pm is O'Reilly who, contrary to popular belief is insanely fair if you watch him on a regular basis. Hannity at 9pm who's just... blatantly right-wing. Finally, 10pm has Greta Van Sustren who's not only whose views are somewhat to the left, but is also a Scientologist.

Honestly, the only thing that officially ties them to the conservative/republican side of the spectrum would be Hannity. I can't stand Hannity anymore though... after Colmes left the show, it's just detrimented into an hour of Hannity whining about Obama. He's essentially turned himself into the right-wing equivalent of Keith Olberman. Hannity really has just become a stereotype of himself, giving fodder to people on the left, just playing country music and tossing around the word "liberal" like he gets $100 everytime he says it.
= = = = = = =
Agender, curry fan, Top 10 lister, indie dev, gym hitter, musician, et al.

CrossEyed7

  • i can make this whatever i want; you're not my dad
« Reply #23 on: July 27, 2009, 01:05:35 AM »
From what I've seen, O'Reilly is pretty fair, though I might be biased because he has the same last name as my best friend. Overall, I agree with myself when I said that most of the programming on Fox, like most of the programming on CNN and MSNBC, is formatted like a newstalk station, with opinionated commentators/personalities taking up most of the time and occasionally being interrupted by brief news headlines. The main difference is that Fox mostly has conservative/libertarian commentators, with a couple of exceptions that FG pointed out, and the other two have mostly liberal/progressive commentators (there's probably some exceptions there too, but I don't watch them, so the only one I know of is Lou Dobbs); for me, the question is which ones you think are right. Personally, I like how Fox seems to embrace the opinionation of their opinionated guys. Yes, their slogan is 'fair and balanced,' which might seem to contradict that, but the other networks imply the same promise, not in so many words, and are just as opinionated, just more subversively. The opinion on Fox shows is so over-the-top that you can't miss it, while CNN's opinions look enough like objectivity that you might miss them. MSNBC is a bit closer to the over-the-top end, especially Olbermann, who's pretty much insane. Also, Weegee is right, Fox's bias stands out more because conservative biases are less common on news stations. CNN and MSNBC and HLN and most newspapers and lots of school textbooks sound the same as each other, while Fox sounds different, so they're more noticeable.

I think on principle I prefer more opinionated news, maybe in a kind of pragmatic way. I don't think we can ever be truly objective, so I'd prefer it if they're unobjective in a way that people will notice. Walter Cronkite certainly wasn't neutral, and though he didn't show his opinion outright as often as the average Fox or MSNBC host, he showed it enough to be very influential. Since everyone lets their opinions slip into their reporting whether they try to or not, I'd rather have news guys that people instantly recognize as being opinionated, so they can critically think about whether they're right or wrong instead of just outright accepting it.

Ann Coulter can be pretty funny if you don't take her too seriously, but she usually can't hold a candle to the cast of Red Eye (3 AM EDT on Fox News). If you're going to do conservative shock comedy, you might as well go all the way. It's basically like the Daily Show, except conservative, more open-ended, and pronouncedly edgier (into CrossesTheLineTwice/RefugeInAudacity territory).
"Oh man, I wish being a part of a Mario fan community was the most embarrassing thing about my life." - Super-Jesse

Chupperson Weird

  • Not interested.
« Reply #24 on: July 27, 2009, 01:36:31 AM »
Man you guys who think Fox News (or any corporate news source) is "fair" crack me up. Also, most of the stuff on those networks is ridiculous quasi-philosophical debates about stuff that if you were smart you would have made your own determination about and gone on with your life instead of sitting there watching TV.
That was a joke.

« Reply #25 on: July 27, 2009, 02:33:23 AM »
Man you guys who think Fox News (or any corporate news source) is "fair" crack me up.

I agree. Fox News and "fair" do not belong in the same sentence.
Luigison: Question everything!
Me: Why?

SolidShroom

  • Poop Man
« Reply #26 on: July 27, 2009, 09:01:42 AM »
As long as a human being is collecting and announcing the news, it will never truly be "fair." And then they just make it worse by commenting on it.

ShadowBrain

  • Ridiculously relevant
« Reply #27 on: July 27, 2009, 09:06:16 AM »
Well, yeah, there's always going to be a bias and you'd be a fool for thinking otherwise. Still, who's up for robots reading the news?
"Mario is your oyster." ~The Chef

Glorb

  • Banned
« Reply #28 on: July 27, 2009, 09:08:38 AM »
How about aliens? I'm all up for Morbo taking O'Reilly's place.
every

Rao

  • Arr! Ay! Oh!
« Reply #29 on: July 27, 2009, 10:41:38 AM »
What's your problem, Cambodian?

Print