"Fair and Balanced" NOT!

[Deleted]

Excerpted from the Rex Smith editorial (True words, false words, 'family time') in today's TU.

'Not that journalism is immune to such marketing by language distortion — and you can guess, I'll bet, that I'm thinking of the "fair and balanced" slogan of Fox News. Every journalist I know laughs at that, not because Fox doesn't sometimes produce solid reporting — it does — but because the network was founded with the expressed purpose of presenting news with a bias, not a balance.

Still, you have to be troubled by survey findings released last week by PunditFact, an arm of the Tampa Bay Times that monitors truth-telling in the media. Half of the reviewed statements made by Fox News pundits and their guests in commenting on public affairs, researchers concluded, were mostly false, outright false, or "pants on fire" lies. Even in presenting analysis, not straight news reporting, it's wrong for an organization that creates journalism to push lies.

But are you shocked? We've come to expect that when cash and clout are at stake, words will be used to cover up reality as much as explain it.'

Here is the link to the entire article:

www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Rex-Smith-True-words-false-words-family-time-5631804.php

[indian82]

Well, thanks to our fair and balanced Muckraker Rex. Yet, he doesn't provide a link to this survey or give the full story. (Correct me if I missed it.) He chooses to provide the part he wants to tell. Why wouldn't he mention the story below that those on MSNBC 'lie' about all the time? Isn't cherry-picking a form of lying as Rex defines it? I say he is just as guilty.

www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jul/17/jason-riley/black-voter-turnout-exceed-white-voter-turnout-eve/

There's much on that website that identifies 'lies' from both sides. Lie is a strong term that implies they do it intentionally, as opposed to inaccuracies or finding data that fits your agenda. Both sides do this. Do you think MSNBC or even the 3 networks tell the truth all the time?

[Deleted]

Jul 19, 2014 8:19:10 GMT -5 indian82 said:

Well, thanks to our fair and balanced Muckraker Rex. Yet, he doesn't provide a link to this survey or give the full story. (Correct me if I missed it.) He chooses to provide the part he wants to tell. Why wouldn't he mention the story below that those on MSNBC 'lie' about all the time? Isn't cherry-picking a form of lying as Rex defines it? I say he is just as guilty.

www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jul/17/jason-riley/black-voter-turnout-exceed-white-voter-turnout-eve/

There's much on that website that identifies 'lies' from both sides. Lie is a strong term that implies they do it intentionally, as opposed to inaccuracies or finding data that fits your agenda. Both sides do this. Do you think MSNBC or even the 3 networks tell the truth all the time?

I honestly, despite what CellarRat would say, never watch MSNBC, ever. I do think FOX deliberately shades the truth (I would say lie but don't want to push your buttons) on many occasions. I also think that the major networks do "misspeak" early in a breaking story but I think it is only to get what they know (or think they know) out to feed the 24/7 cable monster. There is definitely a rush to air a major story first. The difference, as I see it, is that the major networks (CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN) will correct their errors when discovered and they do it on air. FOX does not and perhaps MSNBC falls in the same boat. I don't believe there is an all-but--FOX media conspiracy to report stories one way - they all see and report the same story with slight variations but the overall story has the same basic content. I always watch at least two outlets (CNN and NBC) and will also throw in CBS (their 700PM show fits nicely after the 630 NBC show and the headline story gets covered before the first pitch on home Yankee games!) when a major story breaks, i.e., Malaysian Flight 17, Israel's invasion of Gaza, etc.. FOX has an admitted agenda and it is swallowed by those that want to hear only negative stuff about the left. FOX's technique works with those folks - if you tell a lie enough times it becomes "truth" is a famous axiom that plays here. JMO.

[indian82]

I don't disagree that FOX has an admitted agenda and it bugs me that they use the 'Fair and Balanced' slogan. It also matters little to me if you watch MSNBC (I would hope you don't because of their admitted agenda as well). I would also think it would bother you that they allow a 'community organizer' (don't know what else to call him)' with a very sketchy past and documented racist remarks to host the prime 'news' slot at 6:00 PM. I could go down the list of their hosts after that (Hayes & Maddow come off as academic snobs looking down, constantly chuckling, at the rest of us. Just grating.) And FOX has their issues as well, with Hannity & the local Megyn Kelley leading the list. O'Reilly does have his conservative slant, but I think he comments on things objectively. He often takes both sides.

But FOX gets the Emmy for attractive new women Oops - was that sexist?

My main point was that most media outlets have an agenda (some display it more than others) and that Rex falls right into that category with that 2 paragraph, somewhat off-topic comment on FOX. And you took his bait.

[th24]

As for as I can see, fox news has some some smartest liberals in the media-Kerstin Powers, Juan Williams, Bob Beckel, Patrick Caddel and James Carville are perfect examples. And unlike some other media outlets can say what they want and question the policies of Obama when they cross the line!

[indian82]

That's a good point. They do have a number of regulars (not major hosts) that are liberals. I don't watch MSNBC a lot, but most of it seems to be everybody singing the same song. Although, I do like Morning Joe. Not saying it's the best news show, but they do have some different viewpoints, plus it's entertaining.

[th24]

Jul 19, 2014 11:46:36 GMT -5 indian82 said:

That's a good point. They do have a number of regulars (not major hosts) that are liberals. I don't watch MSNBC a lot, but most of it seems to be everybody singing the same song. Although, I do like Morning Joe. Not saying it's the best news show, but they do have some different viewpoints, plus it's entertaining.

It was recently reported on Fox News that hosts Shepard Smith, Bret Baier and Greta Van Susteren are liberals!

[CellarRat]

Msnbc is an extreme left network with very little unbiased news content.

Fox News is a legitimate news station with a bias similar in degree with CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS. That's four against one.

Fox has it's talking heads like hannity, oreilly, kelly, Greta , etc.. This is not news, I know MP doesn't understand this, but he can talk and google us all to death, lord knows he has the time. Talk about the Brit humes' or the Brett Baers' of Fox News - those gentlemen report the news.

Remember Katie kouric and her days interviewing Sarah Palin? Not exactly an unbiased interview, I wonder if MP had any objection to that. Abc, cbs and nbc are all left leaning news stations.

Fox does lean right and for the most part they are right. MP likes to quote liberal fools like himself to prove his points. Most liberals, MP included, are angry and bitter folks. That part doesn't bother me they can bathe in piss and vinegar for all I care, but I take exception when they want to drag everyone down with them.

[CellarRat]

Jul 19, 2014 10:52:58 GMT -5 th24 said:

As for as I can see, fox news has some some smartest liberals in the media-Kerstin Powers, Juan Williams, Bob Beckel, Patrick Caddel and James Carville are perfect examples. And unlike some other media outlets can say what they want and question the policies of Obama when they cross the line!

They do have some decent liberals. I like Juan Williams, he is pretty moderate as far as liberals go. Kirsten powers has really come down on the president and his administration on a number of occasions and it shows that she is a clear thinker. even though I personally don't agree with her ideology I find her very credible and value her opinion. Patrick caddell is another credible liberal who is honest about the incompetency of the present administration. With regard to bob beckel I would disagree, I think he is a buffoon, the quintessential liberal, piss and vinegar included.

[Deleted]

Up until the CR and th24 posts on this thread, I was under the impression that there were only evil liberals and now I find there are good and decent liberals - I guess they are good and decent because they have a conservative bent! But that gives me pause since the mere existence of these good liberals was referenced to demonstrate that FOX was "fair and balanced"! Since FOX is the Club-Med for the rabid right, wouldn't a balanced staffing include some "bad" (keeping in the CR, th24 view of the world) liberals? Just sayin'!

[CellarRat]

They have rabid liberals, i.e., Alan colmes. I didn't mention him because I don't like him. There are at least 2 more that come to mind that the names escape me.

The people that complain about Fox clearly don't watch it.

On the other subject of news men, Chris Wallace is another standup guy who I respect. Brit Hume unfortunately took a smaller role at fox following his "retirement". As much as I like Baer, he is no Brit Hume.

In the end it's not so much the bias in telling the story, it is in choosing which story to report.

This is a subtle distinction, but I think it is by far the most important factor in determining bias. This is why I don't watch or read just one source.