FOX News.

[antiquity]

Ah, it's a vast left-wing conspiracy. That's the answer to everything in life the right wing can't face.

No conspiracy. Air America failed not because of conservatives, it failed because their message was so far left even the left didn't buy it. If you don't think MSM, major news print and Hollywood isn't left wing, you really haven't been paying attention.

[Chachma v'Oz]

No conspiracy. Air America failed not because of conservatives, it failed because their message was so far left even the left didn't buy it. If you don't think MSM, major news print and Hollywood isn't left wing, you really haven't been paying attention.

And you know that by reading "Confessions of a Left-Wing Air America Fan", eh? Nonsense.

I pay attention to the news, from all sources, the world over. If it all looks left-wing to you, then you're standing way too far to the right. It isn't everyone else who's out of step...

[antiquity]

Already addressed this one, if you care to remember. There doesn't have to be a conspiracy when they all have the same world view, report the same stories in the same way, using the same words (remember gravitas?).

Or not report it at all when it is not in the best interest of the left.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Or not report it at all when it is not in the best interest of the left.

(..., he says with a straight face after denying belief in a conspiracy...)

[hadit]

Reporting means reporting, not paraphrasing and framing. If it all reads essentially the same it's because the same thing is being reported on.

If they were reporting independently, they wouldn't all use the same words, like "gravitas". If you are using words to describe something, you are framing it.

[Chachma v'Oz]

I expect professional journalists to use the best words to describe everything they're reporting on. Your litmus test, "gravitas", doesn't have a lot of synonyms that can be used interchangeably just to mix things up for the paranoid reader.

[hadit]

I expect professional journalists to use the best words to describe everything they're reporting on. Your litmus test, "gravitas", doesn't have a lot of synonyms that can be used interchangeably just to mix things up for the paranoid reader.

If you honestly think they ALL independently found the same word and used it on the same day to report the same story, I have a bridge I can sell you, cheap.

[Chachma v'Oz]

I think that a lot of news outlets get their stories from international newswires and probably don't take liberties with the copy.

[hadit]

I think that a lot of news outlets get their stories from international newswires and probably don't take liberties with the copy.

Now you're talking. They don't represent independent thought or reporting. They are all basically just new readers. Reuters and the AP set the tone for the entire field. So you see, there doesn't have to be a conspiracy for all of them to simply parrot what's on the teleprompter, and when there's only one source, there's only one perspective.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Once the report from "that one source" has been confirmed, why not propagate it? That's not perspective, that's not opinion, that's not viewpoint, it's news reporting.

Now if you take what's on the wire and truncate it, passing along only the bits and parts that present an altered view of what transpired, then you're not reporting the news, you're massaging half-truths for political purposes.

[antiquity]

I think Chacha just painted himself into a corner with that one.

[antiquity]

Once the report from "that one source" has been confirmed, why not propagate it? That's not perspective, that's not opinion, that's not viewpoint, it's news reporting.

Now if you take what's on the wire and truncate it, passing along only the bits and parts that present an altered view of what transpired, then you're not reporting the news, you're massaging half-truths for political purposes.

Yes and that is exactly what the MSM does. For instance the Zimmerman 911 transcript.

[Chachma v'Oz]

You probably also think Romney has a shot at the White House (without an electoral college anomaly) and that Fox is unbiased.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Yes and that is exactly what the MSM does. For instance the Zimmerman 911 transcript.

Remind me of that talking point. What part was left out?

[antiquity]

You probably also think Romney has a shot at the White House (without an electoral college anomaly) and that Fox is unbiased.

Actually I do think Romney has a decent shot at the White House and as far as Cable news stations FNC is less bias in their opinion shows than lets say MSNBC. Of course no one can see a bias if they agree with talking points whether it be FNC or MSM.

[antiquity]

Remind me of that talking point. What part was left out?

You actually need a reminder of this:

Who holds NBC accountable? This is a simple, clear and glaring example of a news organization fabricating the story.

In the NBC segment, Zimmerman says: This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black.

The full version, though, unfolds like this:

Zimmerman: 'This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

911 operator: Okay. And this guy, is he white black or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Why do you always mention MSNBC being biased, which it may be, and then condemn the mainstream media. Pick a target and stay on it.

I went back an looked up the editing of the Zimmerman call and am reminded that nothing Zimmerman said was cut, but only the questions he was asked by the dispatcher. The source of the report, NBC, reviewed it and concluded that it shouldn't have been edited in that fashion, retracted the report and publicly apologized. And for that one error by one news source, which they owned up to, you yet, again, condemn all of mainstream media for bias.

Isn't that overkill? Critics of Fox News complain about Fox News, not the National Review and every other right-wing mouthpiece.

[9ball8]

Would that the press have countless resources to independently verify important reports. It does not, so we depend on a few that can send someone around the world (or have reliable contacts that can be verified).
The argument comes down to this: identify those news outlets that purposefully ignore important subjects (say, the failure to prosecute anyone for violations during the housing bubble). Add in those news outlets that inject propaganda to minimize -or maximize- the consequence of a given subject. Posts by lefties freely admit this happens across the media board (and name examples). Any admission of this happening in right-biased news outlets are muted in comparison, by righties on this thread. Go back and scan the posts, provide quotes to prove me wrong. Good luck with that, BTW.

Don't give up being a righty if you are one, but do try to wake up and improve the quality of your news by going to multiple sources. And openly criticizing your favorite news sources when they screw up doesn't mean you're not a righty; it means you are properly observant.

[antiquity]

Why do you always mention MSNBC being biased, which it may be, and then condemn the mainstream media. Pick a target and stay on it.

MSNBC is owned and operated by NBC news. If NBC didn't agree with MSNBC format they would do something about it. However it wasn't MSNBC who first reported the altered and misleading 911 tape it was NBC nightly news.

I went back an looked up the editing of the Zimmerman call and am reminded that nothing Zimmerman said was cut, but only the questions he was asked by the dispatcher.

Spin

The source of the report, NBC, reviewed it and concluded that it shouldn't have been edited in that fashion, retracted the report and publicly apologized. And for that one error by one news source, which they owned up to, you yet, again, condemn all of mainstream media for bias.

Their apology was like putting it on page 33 of the classified section. But you forgot to mention that heads rolled over the altered and misleading tape transcript.

But if you want me to remind you of other misleading and out and out lies by the MSM I can as they are right there on the internet.

Isn't that overkill? Critics of Fox News complain about Fox News, not the National Review and every other right-wing mouthpiece.

Believe it or not but FNC like all news sources makes mistakes. But I hear a lot of how FNC alters news but have yet to see any wide spread evidence. Do you have some major incident you like to share? Something on the same level as when Dan Rather was fired or maybe CNN's 'Tailwind' or Steven Glass, Jason Blair....etc.

I don't read the National Review so I have no opinion on it one way or the other.

[Lulu]

In general, most of mainstream news is complete garbage. I found CNN to the most unbiased and BBC generally has a more worldly view and perception of events vs. the myopic US version. However, this thread is about Fox News, not MSNBC.