It seems as though yet another left-wing site is trying to take a cheap shot at Fox News. And, as usual, they completely fail. This is their evidence of Fox’s nefarious “propaganda machine:”
Yes, that evil Fox News, trying to delude everyone into believing that Scooter Libby was acquitted on a charge of lying to FBI investigators when everyone knows that…
Oh wait, Mr. Libby was found not guilty of lying to the FBI:
The count that accused Libby of lying to the FBI about his conversation with then-Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper troubled jurors for days. They asked the judge five questions about it as they deliberated, and they ultimately acquitted Libby of the charge.
We have an article that accuses Fox watches of being “zombified” and calls Mr. Hume a “Pundo-fascist talking blockhead” that’s based out of a single screen capture that so happens to be completely true. And naturally, they’ve closed their comments so that no one can correct their blatant factual error.
Fox may not always be “fair and balanced,” but it certainly appears that some of their more vociferous critics may be fairly unbalanced.
The very idea that Fox News is somehow a “conservative” cable news network is itself a misnomer. It is not. Neither is it “fair and balanced.” Its reporters are certainly not truly conservative, its selection of news worth reporting varies very little from what CNN produces, and its sponsorship is basically identical to every other cable news channel. Even the format for Fox’s “Special Report” is little different from the “News Hour” on PBS. All Fox News has done is use some slick marketing and fancy graphics to position its content to fill a segment of the consumer news market that would not otherwise be served. Good for them, but it’s not a conservative news channel. It’s just not a blatantly liberal news channel, as is the norm.
When Juan Williams, Mara Liasson, Nina Easton and Alan Colmes are an integral part of the Fox News line-up and the so-called conservatives include Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, Morton Kondracke and Sean Hannity, it might be a collegial forum for competing journalistic opinion, but it is certainly not representing anything even remotely close to a conservative viewpoint on what passes for “news” these days. It’s just more junk.
All television news is about selling advertising. Nothing else. If you watch it and believe you are being adequately informed about anything, whether it be FOX News, PBS, or CNN, you aren’t thinking.
Indeed.
I do think Fox News leans conservative, however. Especially their daytime lineup, which is mainly business news mixed in with conservative political commentary. Certainly John Gibson is a conservative host as much as Lou Dobbs is a liberal one. Fox’s “hard” news coverage isn’t all that bad, it’s just that most of what Fox runs is fluff.
It is, however, interesting the level of anti-Fox hysteria among the left – it’s as though the government had banned all other news networks, forced everyone to watch Fox, and shot Keith Olbermann for treason. Then again, finding hysteria among the left is about as easy as finding cheese in Wisconsin…
Only Eracus could find Sean Hannity insufficiently conservative. Who has acceptable enough right-wing credentials for you, my friend? Tim McVeigh?
Thank you, Mark, for demonstrating once again what an ignorant, sick, cowardly jerk you really are –as if anyone had any doubt.
Sean Hannity is not a conservative; he’s just a journalist outside the usual liberal fold. That you think he represents true conservatives merely proves my point that people who learn their politics from watching TV are a bunch of suckers living in a fantasy world. You’re the perfect example, Mark. Poorly educated, you can’t think critically about anything; you’re incapable. Instead, you just parrot what you see your heroes say on TV that you already happen to agree with. That’s why whenever anyone points out the fallacy of your many silly arguments, your only recourse is outrage and personal insult. That is what you, as an ignorant person, must resort to when you are confronted with the realization that you don’t even understand your own argument enough to defend it. All you know how to do instead is pitch a fit and cast aspersions, which only more proves your ignorance.
See above.
you guys crack me up.
Eracus, huh? For an unwavering streak of posts stretching over the past six weeks or so, you have proceeded to use every derogatory adjective imaginable to describe my detachment from reality. my derangement, and my “incoherence”. Yet now, you’re suggesting that I am merely parroting the talking points of “the liberal media”? So am I an unhinged lunatic pulling conspiracy theories out of my ass or am I a puppet on the strings of the institutionalized evil of Big Media (who, ironically, are owned by the world’s largest corporations and whom the Republican-dominated FCC moved to strengthen their media oligopoly a few years back). Which is it, Eracus?
It never ceases to amuse how easy it is for you neanderthals to back yourself into a corner.
Only someone detached from reality and deranged would constantly parrot Democrat talking points they learned from the liberal news media. You don’t know your history, so you can’t place what you’ve learned in context. That is why your arguments, while passionate, are frequently incoherent and easily de-constructed. You really don’t know what you’re talking about and it shows.