Fox news discussion

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by JulesWinnfield, Jul 16, 2012.

  1. Fox News was launched in 1996. I'm just curious, how many of you out there believe that up until that point the news coverage in the United States of America, birthplace of democracy, was liberal propaganda. Really?!?!?!
  2. Not as bad as it is today. But Fox News is crushing the others in ratings because there was a demand for

  3. Tho other side. They are alone in this regard, thus their success.
  4. My friend, you are SO way off base. Journalism, as it is taught in any respected institution of higher learning, is a public service and not a ratings driven for-profit enterprise.

    Media outlets and the journalists that they employ should NEVER be concerned with which "side" they are on. This concept of biased, conspiracy-based journalism was born as an excuse for breaking what was until then the accepted tenets of impartial fact-based journalism. From a business sense this is ingenious because it creates an instant market for this strain of paranoid rooted journalism where only one side is reporting the truth while the other is actively conspiring to mislead the public. If one then subscribes to this type of journalism you then have no choice but to turn to the one and only source that is available to you thereby creating instant ratings and profit for said media outlet.

    There isn't a school of journalism in this great country that teaches this strain of journalism that you subscribe to. I've taken courses in journalism myself and have family and friends in the field of journalism and can attest to that fact.

    Remember, the great thing about conspiracy theories is that they require not a shred of evidence to perpetuate themselves.
  5. wrpNYFL

    wrpNYFL Premium Member Lifetime Supporting Member

    So, now we've morphed into an anti-Fox thread? They practice journalism in a way that the main stream media has lost touch with. They examine both sides and have voices from both sides. There are many stories you won't even hear anyplace else. Others didn't cover Fast and Furious until Holder was found in contempt of Congress.

    They are the only ones willing to point out the flaws in Obamacare. Others would rather lick O's ...........
  6. glocknloaded

    glocknloaded Click Click Boom Supporter

    I think it's no conspiracy that the news reports what gives ratings. The Zimmerman case proved that alone, shootings of the same kind happen everyday but a shooting that can be spun as racial and get people fired up produces ratings so that's the headline.

    Not in anyway looking for a fight just expressing my personal opinion
  7. jonm61

    jonm61 New Member

    You have just argued the opposite of what you're trying to claim. Let's examine:

    Very little of what is taught in school applies in the real world.
    Regardless of what is taught in Journalism Schools, jounalists work for ratings driven for-profit enterprises. Any reporter working for ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, or any other for-profit company, must write stories that capture viewers or readers and keep them. And no matter what anyone says, when you have a job with a for-profit company, you either tow the party line or you get another job. Those are the only two options.

    The ONLY way for news companies to be impartial anymore is if they are non-profit. Problem is, non-profits can't really generate the same kind of salaries and benefits that reporters get from for-profit sources, and they can't fund the kind of research and travel that is required to get the really good stories that keep people coming back.

    You're right, they shouldn't, but they do. And that's the problem. I haven't seen or heard anything from an impartial journalist on national or local television in a decade. You might find some TV journalists who remain impartial, and there are print journalists who do, but they're a small group.

    It's not just journalists. People in general have lost the ability to be objective when they should be. Decisions are more often based on emotion than on fact. Businesses, including news channels, have figured this out and they appeal to that emotion.

    It's not ingenious really, it's just business. You appeal to people's emotions, you give them a "warm, fuzzy feeling" and you get them to keep coming back for more. When you do it right, you can make people fiercely brand loyal; even those who know what's happening and are keenly aware of it sometimes fall for it.

    The problem is that almost everyone subscribes to this type of journalism. The news companies make the reporters do it and the "customers" eat it up. No matter what you're taught in school, especially when it comes to ethics, when you get out in the real work world, you find yourself either flipping burgers or going with the flow of those around you in your field. That goes for journalists, business people, doesn't matter. You have performance standards/goals that you have to meet if you want to keep your job, and everyone wants to keep their job or be impressive enough to get another without losing the one they have.

    I think I've already covered this fairly well, but I'll leave it at this; you find me examples of impartial reporting, backed up with facts, (not vague references to something someone else printed 10 months ago that was also neither fact based nor correct, like MSNBC just reported), coming from any of the major networks and examples of biased reporting coming from Fox, and then we can have an actual discussion, rather than just throwing around random BS with nothing to back it up.
  8. glocknloaded

    glocknloaded Click Click Boom Supporter

    I am not talking about what's taught in school.. What one is taught and what corporations do are different.

    When the Zimmerman case broke they immediately started calling him a White Hispanic to fuel racial tension ( I am speaking of my local station).

    I could get into this argument greatly but I am typing on a phone and font want to spend days writing how I feel. To sum it up in my eyes I don't believe half of what's reported and I believe that what is reported in most causes is for a cause other then just ALL the facts from both ends