Cheers to you, and while what you write may be true in the UK (I will be the first to admit I am clueless there), I dont think it holds in the US. After all, the media (plural and I am speaking major outlets) has had a liberal bent for at least the last 40 years. And in that time, we have had several conservative presidents (Liberal and Conservative used in the sense of American politics, not UK).

I find it very interesting that you chose to basically "pick" on Fox News and completely disregard all other news station that basically "do the same thing". There is no denying that Fox tends to lean Republican when it comes to the poeple who report the news. But lets not ignore the fact that by the same token, stations like CBS News and CNN also do the same for Democrats. And personally I have to believe that considering all the sources one has now a days (several news stations, the internet, several news papers) Fox does give you the option of deciding your own opinion of what they report. If people are too lazy to do the research, to change the channels, to read the newspaper, and simply go by what Fox news (or any other news source for that matter) says then the real problem is not Fox News and their style of serving up information to the masses, it's the people who eat it up no questions asked.

The reason i highlighted Fox was because of Rupert Murdoch's involvement (ownership) with them.

Unfortunatley Charles, people do not go out and research issues like they should. Have you ever considered what News Service means to people? It's like their gas, electricity and water. Some people are not aware that Fox is a Republican/Conservative channel, and could of spent their entire life believing litterally everything that was spouted.

There is nothing wrong with having an opinion and even broadcasting it. There is something wrong with saying your broadcasting an entire issue not formed on an opinion, when you are in fact doing the exact opposite.

Liberal stations doing the exact same thing are just as bad, agian however i the Murdoch factor was something i wanted to come down on. Essentially the point behind my post was to state that whatever political opinion/agenda Murdoch has, Fox Viewers are then directley exposed to it under the guise of objective-information.

The simple arguement of 'Well they should do their own research' is irrelvant when we are talking about reporting that is labelled as non-biased, being biased.

Dr Guy - As i said to Charles, even if it was a Liberal media company doing it, it's just as bad. I think the reason for the correlation not existing in America is probably due to the lack of unification throughout the news companies on their agenda. As i said already, in the UK Murdoch owned 7 news papers.

 

I really don't understand what obsessive hatred the left has for Fox News.  They run around all day complaining about how Fox News is so biased (although they really can't provide good examples), but completely ignore the other 99% of the media which has a liberal bias for a very long time.

Could you provide some examples of that?

 

Ok Island Dog, i'll give you a fairly recent example.

I don't spend much time watching fox anymore, i spent a good while watching clips of it during my research for this article however and one that was apparent (and recent) was it's report on China drilling in Cuba for oil underneath Florida.

Dick Cheney's office released a statement saying something in that effect, Fox reports it as major news, Dick Cheney retracts the statement, Fox fails to report on the retraction.

That's an example of misleading people by only reporting a proportion of what is going on.

It is very hard to find factual and unbiased news sources.  I don't think that means that they should be called a criminal enterprise though.  You just have to read or watch knowing the philosophy that influences that source.  I live near DFW.  The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is liberal and the Dallas Morning News is conservative.  The bias is extremely obvious to me by the main headline of the day.  The top story is many times the same wire story but you wouldn't know that by the headline.  The smartest thing to do is get your news from more than one source. 

hee hee! Well you are right about one thing- FOX news isn't alone in being guilty of being biased. In fact, all news is going to be biased one way or t'other. I do have issue with the statement that the "other" 99% of the media is all left wing, that is ridiculous. CNN has two primetime slots for conservatives, one of whom rails against Iran and Global warming (Beck) and the other who spends an hour trying to scare you with stories of lurkers waiting in the bushes to grab your kids on their way home from school (Grace) and how clearly the nation needs tougher laws and harsher punishment for the millions of such slimy predators just waiting around every corner and in every closet!

Two things:

1) In a perfect world, there would be no such thing as "liberal" or "conservative" media, there would just be news told by reporters with holes in their shoes from doing too much walking around in their investigations. Instead most reporters rarely leave their desks, getting the news via e-mail from corporate headquarters (or equivalent) and then regurgitating it.

2) The real issue here isn't so much bias, as the OWNERSHIP of media. In the past 20 years we have seen MASSIVE conglomeration of multiple media outlets, with local newspapers and TV stations getting snapped up by giant media chains which are owned and directed by a small number of people. This is a very, very dangerous thing and we have only ourselves to blame for allowing it to happen. When you have a monopoly on commodities like oil or a utility the government steps in to ensure fairness (remember the breakup of MA bell in 1984 cause they were too big and all encompassing??) Same thing should go for media. But unfortunately we've allowed concentration of ownership into a few hands in the name of corporate mergers!

When this happens, the potential for abuse of power is astounding. And to set the record straight on "liberal" bias in the media, most of the concentration of ownership in the media is actually in conservative hands.

In the end this kind of argument does nothing but bring the Conservatives or Republicans out to bash the Liberal or Democratic media and then the Liberals or Democrats do the same to the Conservative or Republican media. I do think it's a shame that we wanna cling to our political affiliations so much that we don't even know if we agree on a particular issue.

Is it possible for anyone on this site (or outside this site for that matter) to be able to have a discussion without slamming the other persons opinion simply because they are of the opposing party as oppose to because they don't agree with a particular issue? I mean, seriously, do you, as a liberal, have to dislike me and my ideals just because I am Conservative? And vis verse? I can blame the political parties (both) for the incredible divide that currently exist in this (once great I am sad to say) country but I have to blame the people themselves, if not more, for making it personal.

I don't think it's irrelevant because people are suppose to be, by nature, smart enough to question everything. We don't live in a single option society where we only have 1 brand of any product to chose from. Dam, I have to believe if you can make it to adulthood regardless whether you're rich or poor, it tells me you were smart enough to survive thru a normal day in live, that somewhere along the line you were smart enough to make decisions that did not kill you sooner. So how is it we are not able to question the news we get, especially when if you are able to get information from one news source (newspaper, TV, radio, internet) then you should be able to get more info from other options of the same source. No 1 store sells only 1 newspaper brand, anyone with a TV that can watch at th least local channels can see at least 3 different news channels, anyone with a radio has several radio stations to choose from. Regardless who owns what news source not all have the same stiry word for word so options do exist.

I can't blame gun makers for people killing other people with guns if those who are killing are irresponsible with the guns. The same can be said about the media.

Classic elitist liberal condescension, based on the underlying belief that the "average joe" is a dolt (the corollary being that the condescender is "enlightened" and knows better what is good for the "average joe" than Joe does). No respect for any opinion but their own.

Not really apples to apples, there. There are many days I wish Ma were still alive & kicking.

Classic idealistic pie-in-the-sky pontificating, all theory and no proof for their assertion that the average Big Brother-watching, celebrity-chasing person is actually a virtuoso at research and would never think of letting someone else do the heavy thinking.

(See, other people can do your schtick too!)

On the article...

First of all, a spellcheck would be nice. It takes a lot of weight from any argument if it looks like it was typed into the computer by the miraculous intervention of a swarm of angry bees. That's all I'm going to say about that though.

On your main point:

I think you can take Fox News a different way. Sure, it's a ferociously one-sided news service. Sure, it's populated by airheads and the boringly angry. But watch it for a little while and you'll start to see what it's really all about.

You see, Fox News is a comedy. It's the Onion on a 24/7 news cycle. Every story, every feature, every personality thrust onto its network is presented in the most ludicrous way imaginable. Those who work for it are masters of the deadpan, participants in a farce so unimaginably complex that it transcends mere satire and becomes a whole new level of humour.

Once you see Fox News for what it is, you'll think of it as less of a threat. It's like what any advertising person will tell you - if people are dumb enough to believe it, they deserve to be fooled.

I agree - I was just pointing out the difference. It is a fact of life here in the states that most of the MSM is liberal. But it does not appear to have a major impact on elections. Minor? Sure. It can tip a close election. But as we saw in 04, it cannot win for a candidate even when using fraud to try to accomplish it.

Uh, Cacto -

What the classic liberal elitist thinks of Fox News and the people who might watch it does not mean the people who watch it think the opposite. You're stringing together two unrelated statements & claiming an intent that was never there.