Thread: Fox news continues obvious bias against Ron Paul

That bitch just got fired.

I am from the UK so don't know who the fuck he is but i would vote for him !

He Got big bars

Wait, you mean they're not fair and balanced?

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Wait, you mean they're not fair and balanced?

They're fags and biased.

Originally Posted by troubador

That bitch just got fired.

Who?

Originally Posted by vortrit

Who?

The chick who pointed out he was spinning the results.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Wait, you mean they're not fair and balanced?

That's what I hate about them, it's obvious that they are trying to influence our votes.
Why can't these people just lay out the facts and let us decide who is the best candidate.
It was CNN I believe that did a report at how little exposure they gave Ron Paul, I didn't post it because the ultra right will dismiss all because it came from the "the very liberal CNN".
If I can see this with the little time I spend following them and others can't then there is a problem.

Originally Posted by min0 lee

That's what I hate about them, it's obvious that they are trying to influence our votes.
Why can't these people just lay out the facts and let us decide who is the best candidate.
It was CNN I believe that did a report at how little exposure they gave Ron Paul, I didn't post it because the ultra right will dismiss all because it came from the "the very liberal CNN".
If I can see this with the little time I spend following them and others can't then there is a problem.

You do realize that all news sources are biased, right? Some (Fox, NYT, Washington Post) more than other, but they're all spinning it.

Originally Posted by troubador

They're fags and biased.

WTF isn't biased?

Originally Posted by DOMS

You do realize that all news sources are biased, right? Some (Fox, NYT, Washington Post) more than other, but they're all spinning it.

I know they are all biased but Fox takes it up a notch.
They are the worst at this and most of the other media outlets chide them for their moniker. "Fair and Balanced"

"Fair and Balanced"

Former Fox reporters and producers. Even the great Walter Cronkite acknowledges Murdoch is running a conservative news media.


How Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory
The onetime Nixon operative has created the most profitable propaganda machine in history. Inside America's Unfair and Imbalanced Network


Read more: How Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory | Politics News | Rolling Stone

To watch even a day of Fox News – the anger, the bombast, the virulent paranoid streak, the unending appeals to white resentment, the reporting that’s held to the same standard of evidence as a late-*October attack ad – is to see a refraction of its founder, one of the most skilled and fearsome operatives in the history of the Republican Party. As a political consultant, Ailes repackaged Richard Nixon for television in 1968, papered over Ronald Reagan’s budding Alzheimer’s in 1984, shamelessly stoked racial fears to elect George H.W. Bush in 1988, and waged a secret campaign on behalf of Big Tobacco to derail health care reform in 1993. "He was the premier guy in the business," says former Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins. "He was our Michelangelo."

In the fable Ailes tells about his own life, he made a clean break with his dirty political past long before 1996, when he joined forces with Murdoch to launch Fox News. "I quit politics," he has claimed, "because I hated it." But an examination of his career reveals that Ailes has used Fox News to pioneer a new form of political campaign – one that enables the GOP to bypass skeptical reporters and wage an around-the-clock, partisan assault on public opinion. The network, at its core, is a giant soundstage created to mimic the look and feel of a news operation, cleverly camouflaging political propaganda as independent journalism.

The result is one of the most powerful political machines in American history. One that plays a leading role in defining Republican talking points and advancing the agenda of the far right. Fox News tilted the electoral balance to George W. Bush in 2000, prematurely declaring him president in a move that prompted every other network to follow suit. It helped create the Tea Party, transforming it from the butt of late-night jokes into a nationwide insurgency capable of electing U.S. senators. Fox News turbocharged the Republican takeover of the House last fall, and even helped elect former Fox News host John Kasich as the union-busting governor of Ohio – with the help of $1.26 million in campaign contributions from News Corp. And by incubating a host of potential GOP contenders on the Fox News payroll– including Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum – Ailes seems determined to add a fifth presidential notch to his belt in 2012. "Everything Roger wanted to do when he started out in politics, he’s now doing 24/7 with his network," says a former News Corp. executive. "It’s come full circle."

Interesting piece there...

Read more: How Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory | Politics News | Rolling Stone

Yeah, and it never, ever seems to matter that the people vote for their favorite candidates in these polls, so they always poll high. But that is very unscientific(wink), come the election, we always seem to have to choose from two shmoes nobody cares for.

Originally Posted by min0 lee

I know they are all biased but Fox takes it up a notch.
They are the worst at this and most of the other media outlets chide them for their moniker. "Fair and Balanced"

"Fair and Balanced"

NYT is close. The Guardian is on the same level as Fox.

Originally Posted by DOMS

You do realize that all news sources are biased, right? Some (Fox, NYT, Washington Post) more than other, but they're all spinning it.

Fox news is real I thought is was a more conservative version of Colbert, only not funny...

One might argue that world news organizations like the BBC are significantly less bias...

Originally Posted by min0 lee

That's what I hate about them, it's obvious that they are trying to influence our votes.
Why can't these people just lay out the facts and let us decide who is the best candidate.
It was CNN I believe that did a report at how little exposure they gave Ron Paul, I didn't post it because the ultra right will dismiss all because it came from the "the very liberal CNN".
If I can see this with the little time I spend following them and others can't then there is a problem.

I could say the same thing about CNN or MSNBC. I could easily argue and provide proof that they're biased towards Obama or ANY democrat. Honestly though, if you flip on the tv, there's really no news shows anymore, they're all "talk shows" or "panels" with biased opinions/views.

Originally Posted by vancouver

Fox news is real I thought is was a more conservative version of Colbert, only not funny...

One might argue that world news organizations like the BBC are significantly less bias...

Do you guys even get Fox news? I thought Fox news was a no go in Canada because of a law you guys have about lying on the air waves.

Originally Posted by min0 lee

This should be required viewing for all 1st year university students. We can't help the idiots who watch fox religiously (pun intended), but maybe we can educate their children...a big maybe...

Originally Posted by vancouver

Fox news is real I thought is was a more conservative version of Colbert, only not funny...

I've tried to watch Fox news on a few occasions to see how they do things. It's glaringly obvious that what they serve is poison.

Originally Posted by vancouver

One might argue that world news organizations like the BBC are significantly less bias...

The Beeb is highly biased. They're pro-Muslim and anti-American, for example.

They're also known for making significant changes to stories on their website with making it known they've made changes.

Before you try to defend the Beeb - just to spare you some embarrassment - they've admitted to their biases.

Originally Posted by hoyle21

Do you guys even get Fox news? I thought Fox news was a no go in Canada because of a law you guys have about lying on the air waves.

LOL!!! yes, there should be a law to ban Fox news . Fox America can be viewed in Canada, but a Canadian verson cannot be established due to facts not being allowed to be misrepresented in Canada.

Fox News' Lies Keep Them Out of Canada

Canada's Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast ... any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right-wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage, including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987.

Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the US airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish the anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non-partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio. Harper's proposal was timed to facilitate the launch of a new right-wing network, "Sun TV News" which Canadians call "Fox News North."

Harper, often referred to as "George W. Bush's Mini Me," is known for having mounted a Bush-like war on government scientists, data collectors, transparency, and enlightenment in general. He is a wizard of all the familiar tools of demagoguery; false patriotism, bigotry, fear, selfishness and belligerent religiosity.

Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television are a stark admission that right-wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. Since corporate profit-taking is not an attractive vessel for populism, a political party or broadcast network that makes itself the tool of corporate and financial elites must lie to make its agenda popular with the public.

In the Unites States, Fox News and talk radio, the sock puppets of billionaires and corporate robber barons, have become the masters of propaganda and distortion on the public airwaves. Fox News' notoriously biased and dishonest coverage of the Wisconsin's protests is a prime example of the brand of news coverage Canada has smartly avoided.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

WTF isn't biased?

I was ok with Fox having the talk show type programs that were biased because those were obviously opinion pieces. It's different when they pretend to be reporting the news and try to down play his importance, field interviewers try to focus on trying to make him look bad, selectively finding guest who'll say the right thing,etc. It didn't even bother me that they gave Glenn Beck an hour to go ape shit but when the network as a whole has an obvious, not only a slant but an actual agenda, that's bad. I'm not defending the other news networks either.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Before you try to defend the Beeb - just to spare you some embarrassment - they've admitted to their biases.

LOL!!! You've got us Canucks pretty well figured out eh! We're less obvious than you think, unless you get your new from Fox

I'll give everyone the recepie for future referrence.

Take an Educated American, mix them with a Brit (any Brit), add a dash of French and Irish, sprinckle with humour, reduce ignorance on low heat by 50%; immediately refrigerate. There you go, perfectly prepared Canadian

Originally Posted by vancouver

LOL!!! You've got us Canucks pretty well figured out eh! We're less obvious than you think, unless you get your new from Fox

I'm fairly certain I'm not getting my "new" from Fox.

Originally Posted by vancouver

I'll give everyone the recepie for future referrence.

Take an Educated American, mix them with a Brit (any Brit), add a dash of French, sprinckle with humour, reduce ignorance on low heat by 50%; immediately refrigerate. There you go, perfectly prepared Canadian

Look what you've done! You've ruined the recipe. You forgotten the very essential ingredient of flaming gay. Nice job.

However, we can save the recipe by using some manly to drown out (essentially remove) the French. We'd have Australian.

Originally Posted by DOMS

I'm fairly certain I'm not getting my "new" from Fox. .

Clearly I was joking

Originally Posted by DOMS

Look what you've done! You've ruined the recipe. You forgotten the very essential ingredient of flaming gay. Nice job.

Canadian labeling laws state that if the amount is less than 0.5% of the total ingredients list, it can be averaged down to zero. Of course we do fuck up the recepie from time to time, we send the rejects south of the 49th...

Originally Posted by DOMS

However, we can save the recipe by using some manly to drown out (essentially remove) the French. We'd have Australian.

Yes very true, but then we'd have an even harder time uderstanding what the fuck they're saying...

Actually there are a shitload of Aussies in Vancouver, most recognizable accent on the North Shore. They mostly work in the resort industries. I think 50% of the staff at Whistler are from Australia and Quebec. Now there's a party you want to go to...

Originally Posted by vancouver

Clearly I was joking

I was making fun your typo, man.

Originally Posted by vancouver

Yes very true, but then we'd have an even harder time uderstanding what the fuck they're saying...

I watch quiet a few Aussie shows. I can understand them better than some of the British dialects.

Originally Posted by vancouver

Actually there are a shitload of Aussies in Vancouver, most recognizable accent on the North Shore. They mostly work in the resort industries. I think 50% of the staff at Whistler are from Australia and Quebec. Now there's a party you want to go to...

I did not know that.

Did they expatriate or are they on some sort of work visa?

Originally Posted by DOMS

I did not know that.

Did they expatriate or are they on some sort of work visa?

Most Aussies travel 2 years before going to University (I think some may do it after instead), it's like a right of passage. So I think many make Vancouver a distination since there are sooooo many here; than a lot stay permanently. The Aussies at our 3 local mountains pretty well run the ski schools.

BC is also very British, it attracts a lot of people from the UK, I guess our climate is very similar. I can say that of all the people who live on the North Shore, maybe 50% were born in Canada, these are all middle class professionals...lots of Americans too. Every morning I drop my kids off at school, there are plates from WA, Cali and Utah, I guess they must maintain properties in the U.S. or an address, car insurance is expensive here, we pay 3K per year and are at the maximum discount. We paid 50% less in Alberta...

I live in the United Nations...another reason for my broad liberal points of view...

Originally Posted by vancouver

Most Aussies travel 2 years before going to University (I think some may do it after instead), it's like a right of passage. So I think many make Vancouver a distination since there are sooooo many here; than a lot stay permanently. The Aussies at our 3 local mountains pretty well run the ski schools.

BC is also very British, it attracts a lot of people from the UK, I guess our climate is very similar. I can say that of all the people who live on the North Shore, maybe 50% were born in Canada, these are all middle class professionals...lots of Americans too. Every morning I drop my kids off at school, there are plates from WA, Cali and Utah, I guess they must maintain properties in the U.S. or an address, car insurance is expensive here, we pay 3K per year and are at the maximum discount. We paid 50% less in Alberta...

Why is auto insurance so expensive? I pay way less than that and I only have a $250 deductible.

Originally Posted by vancouver

I live in the United Nations...another reason for my broad liberal points of view...

When you've crossed over into farm animals, I daresay you've gone too liberal.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Why is auto insurance so expensive? I pay way less than that and I only have a $250 deductible.

It's provincial insurance (provincial corporation). Everyone pays the same and your rate is based on years driving experience and claims history. There is no competition and you cannot be turned down no matter how many claims, so the good drivers pay through the nose. It's not like this in every province. ICBC is a huge employer, it's not going anywhere anytime soon...one of the few forms of Communism we have

Do any states have state insurance? I'm thinking no, but I'm sure at one time it was the case.