|
It's OK for me to report whatever I g*d d*mn want because I have a freedom of speech and the freedom
of press.
On another note...
If I were to be an opinionated and often incorrect News company I believe that naturally I would NOT
be popular or taken seriously.
I have heard this sort of criticism about FOX News for a while. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think its OK to report news because the world needs to now about certain aspects and what people
get up to in there free time. Youths can cause crime and ruin shopkeepers lives, can break into
peoples houses, assault innocent members of society and to conclude they do not think of the
consequences of their actions therefore ruining their lives xxxxxxx this is how i roll ma homeys
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
News will always be biased and half told. They will never get the story all the way right or tell it
without adding or subbtracting whatever they think is necessary. I hate watching the news anymore,
it is not correct in its accuracy so why should I waste my time. Pick up the Time or US Weekly to
hear about what is going on in the correct fashion. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No it's not OK, because we are hearing an opinion of what is right, and we are not allowed to make
that decision for ourselves. Unfortunately, the News will always be biased/One-sided/opinionated |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I wish there was a neutral option too. I'm not really fond of the news sometimes, especially in the
Aviation department, because they always say the wrong stuff.
For example, when Speedbird 038 went down at Heathrow a couple months ago, they were first saying it
was a terrorist threat, then saying other stuff. They can never get the news right!
Another example: When Jim LeRoy crashed in Dayton, everyone said his plane had problems. It was
clear in vidoes I have seen on YouTube that he did too many snap rolls, which lead to him not having
enough time to pull out of the half cuban 8. Yet everyone said it was the plane's fault. Jim did
something wrong and let the plane snap too much.
Four words: GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
There is a clear difference between a dinner time news broadcast and a roundtable discussion where
pundits--many of whom have come out of the closet and are totally open about their Republican or
Democrat gravitations--engage in hyperbolic shouting matches. On Fox News, of course, there is
relatively little of this mud slinging among journalists, since most of the pundits are Republicans
and the ones who are not tend to be very pale blue Democrats, or independent voters. Fox does,
however, turn the heat up whenever a Democrat happens to drop by for an interview. In contrast to
this, dinner time news broadcasts do at least give the semblance of balanced reporting, although it
is clear that CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN and the BBC all do a better job than Fox.
A really big problem in the US is that many people prefer to jettison balanced reporting and nuanced
political talk shows for mud slinging matches and the "tell it like it is" reporting, because this
often make for more entertaining television. This is ultimately why Fox is doing so well when it
comes to ratings and why the measured, thoughtful programming presented on PBS only attracts a small
handful of viewers. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Fox News is clearly a propaganda channel for the Republican party, or rather the Republican
presidency, since it has taken the side of the administration when its actions provoked anger in the
party at large.
I think it's appropriate that television news channels be required by law to be impartial. This is
the case in Britain, for example. So here, Sky News, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch just like Fox
in the United States, is, broadly speaking, impartial. It may be marginally more gung-ho about the
war than, say, the BBC, but the difference is marginal and no would seriously claim that it is
politically biased. It's not biased for the simple reason that, if it was biased, it would be forced
off the air by the agencies which regulate broadcasting in the UK.
One could argue, on the contrary, that, because Fox is on cable and there is no shortage of
available slots for new channels on cable, unlike terrestrial airwaves, where the number of channels
is limited, that there should be no regulation of news; that a free market is best and, even if Fox
has a right-wing bias, there is no reas |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You have to remember that these people are not reporting the news, they are putting forward a biased
position. The news media no longer simply tells people what's going on, they tell you only what
they want you to hear and only in such a way that it makes their pre-conceived conclusions appear
valid. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No it's not okay. But there is freedom of speech which allows reporters to manipulate the stories to
say only what they agree with, It is your job as a citizen to research the truth before going to any
polls so you are truly making an educated decision |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No its not OK but that what he does |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
10 Apr 2008 04:28
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
