The teabaggers party and their mouthpiece Fakes News are still desperately trying to run with their 15 minutes Libya story
I guess I shouldn't be surprised...they are the same jackasses who spent nearly four years and probably billions investigating a blowjob
Their irresponsibility can never be overstated
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
What's your definition of "substance "? Threads on "FoxNews is biased"? LOL.
Seriously, the only thing funnier in the world of politics than FoxNewd is the people that can't shut up about it. And miss the irony of their own clear bias on the matter.
These shows are successful from a business point of view and its a free market economy. There is demand for their product and as long as they do not trample on the rights of others they have the right to continue to produce and be successful.
But any product that is produced for consumption by the public must be held accountable for its content. Is it fair to the public if a company advertises a product that offers a benefit(s) but willfully understands that it is deceiving the public? The entities that are producing the product should be held accountable for what they produce; think about the reprecussions if this is not so.
As it relates to the corporations in the business of producing news content the standards that should be adheared to are as simple as what is learned in Journalism 101 classes. If they want to argue that adhearing to these simple standards compromises the entertainment value of their shows (which Limbaugh argues) and want to keep the content as is, then that is their right. Just don't attempt to deceive the public about your product.
News Entertainment instead of News.
I doubt very seriously that the lemmings from either idealogy will stop watching and in fact, it may even free the producers to produce content that is even more appealing to their loyal viewers.
Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 11-29-2012 at 09:28 AM.
If you find the content of this thread uninteresting and without substance, then you can ignore it. But I assure you that a lot of people found the topic news worthy. How can I be so sure? It was the number one trending story for most of yesterday on Yahoo.
Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 11-29-2012 at 09:40 AM.
What you want (as I interprit it), and what I tried to make clear, is a State-Based or Industry-based "Board of News" that would (per your description) de-legitimize right-leaning news sources and opinion. That would label them (against their will) as "entertainment only", while supporting left-leaning news as State or Industry supported "legitimate news".
You're not in fact against dishonesty or media manipulation, because if you were, ALL of our mass media would be labeled "entertainment" as such, as they all lie, misrepresent, willfully omit and selectively cover the news of the day.
I choose to allow the consumer, the individual, to decide what content to partake of, and how to feel about that content. Unless something criminal has occured, I see no role for the State, and less for a left-leaning industry board, to have the power of legitimizing or delegitimizing forms of media.
Well, lets get right to it.Just don't attempt to deceive the public about your product.
News Entertainment instead of News.
Would you label ABC, CBS and NBC News as "News Entertainment"?
Would you label the Washington Post and New York Times as "News Entertainment"?
If yes, at least you're consistent in your (IMO) incorrect view.
If not, you are doing exactly what I said above, simply working to delegitimize right-wing news (which the left consistently calls lies even when they're not), and implement a formal legitimacy to your own sides biased news agents.
You know when I'll be REALLY impressed......when you support holding POLITICIANS IN ELECTED OFFICE to this kind of scrutiny. Lie while in office, and you are immediately kicked out, and a new election held. How about that? THAT I could support, given how deeply ingrained lieing is in our politicians, left and right.
Not exactly criminal like Nixon but not exactly no blood on his hands either. The blaming of this on a film was at best a lame attempt to deflect the basic policy or if you will a lame attempt to cover up his policy which has been successful because the opposition party supports his policy.
Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 11-29-2012 at 10:23 AM.
meh - its not like this would have affected the election - most people just don't give a **** about what happened in Libya. If they did, Romney would be Pres-elect.
And to answer your question; all of the main stream media is culpable to one degree or another so yes, they all would fall into the category of 'News Entertainment'. Give them a probationary period to raise their standards so they can stop letting down the citizens or continue to offer their product in the manner that they have been. Those that want to adhere to those simple journalistic standards learned in basic college classes can keep their status as 'news', the others will be categorized as 'news entertainment' and can continue producing what has been successful. And do you really think that they loyal followers who faithfully tune into Hannity or Maddow every evening will stop because it has a "news entertainment' logo on the bottom?
Its the job of the media to hold the politicians to scrutiny. The public only knows what it is given as information, for the most part. It is a partnership between the media and the public that allows us to have a free democracy or not. If our supposed free media is not working, neither will the democracy.
I find it entertaining. That was what I posted. I find lack of self awareness extremely amusing, so I've enjoyed much of this thread. The fact that it "trends on Yahoo" means about as much as the fact that Honey Boo Boo gets enormous cable TV ratings, and only expands the scope of that comedy.
I particularly enjoy your lecture on me avoiding this form of media if I don't like it, as you continue to tell us how Fox News should be reformed.
Feel free to keep it coming. You know, all this "substance", Mr. Intelligent.
Last edited by JetPotato; 11-29-2012 at 11:42 AM.
Everyone is biased.
Thus every journalist is biased.
Thus all news is biased.
Thus labeling biased news coverage as "news entertainment" is useless.
This doesn't mean news outlets shouldn't be held accountable for outright false information. When something is objectively provably false, news media will issue a retraction. However bias, spin and the all the other forms of obscurement used by every news station in existence cannot be improved by regulation. As Warfish pointed out, any such regulatory body, be it government run, or private will be susceptible to exactly the same bias your trying to prevent in the media.
So what's the solution?
Understand that everyone has an agenda, and check facts for yourself.