Nervous about Muslims? Shhh...Follow

It's in a discussion/debate format. Whether you think that actual discussion or debate is going on is a matter of opinion. The point being that MSNBC doesn't even try to present anything other than a rabidly partisan viewpoint.

Gee whilakers, garbaji! I didn't realize that "express(ing) such directly partisan (and intensely negative) views" only applied to "rattling off one liners after one liners".

I get that you are so deeply painted into your own partisan corner that you could never even entertain the notion that Fox News is nothing but a propoganda machine. Blinded by a belief system you follow without question, but somehow don't fully understand, all you have left is a reliance on mouthpieces telling you what to think.

If your bigoted, elitist and mysogynistic world-veiw did not elicit such revulsion, I'd almost feel sorry for you for being incapable of making your own decisions.



And on that note, I think I'll go ahead and find some FoxPron to post to make my point.

Well, Gbaji's really good at that. You know he can talk to professionals in a field he is only at best vaguely familiar with and point out all sorts of things they're just missing in their field. true story.

Not exactly that (/pedantic): http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/10/25/christian-whiton-wiki-leaks-ignore-threat-obama-democrats-congress-iraq-war/


He technically said we COULD: indict him as a spy, declare him an enemy combatant, freeze his assets, DDOS wikileaks, or hold hearings on how we can stop the flow of classified information in the future.

He never asked for it

It kinda does relate to *how* you present information though. And there's a huge difference between one person expressing an opinion about something followed by 2-4 other people all chiming in with their opinions and then having a discussion about it versus one person just going off on a long winded diatribe where he does nothing but say something negative about each person in a long long list of politicians of one party.

One is a discussion. The other is not. One has some value because the viewer actually gets exposed to explanations of *why* different people hold different opinions. The other has no value at all except in terms of repetitive propaganda.



This isn't about being partisan though. It's about observing different methods of expressing political opinion on different networks. And if you think that Fox news is guilty of just being a mouthpiece telling people what to think, then what the hell is Keith Olbermann? The guy didn't give a single explanation for anything. All he did was go from person to person and essentially say "This person == Bad" over and over and then tell his audience that they were evil if they didn't vote against them.

WTF is that? If someone's guilty of partisan cheer leading for "their side", it's you.



You must seriously have a hard on for Olbermann I guess. That's just... amazing. I dare to point out that the guy is a hard core partisan hack and you attack me for it? Was I wrong? Can anyone honestly compare that rant he did to anything any Fox News host has ever done?


I'll ask again: Show me the proof. If Fox News is so blatantly partisan and one sided and lacks discussion and debate, then show it to me. The clip of Olbermann was readily available. And at the risk of bursting your bubble, that's pretty normal for him. If you think that's what good political discussion should entail then maybe there's just no hope for you.

I can tell the difference in styles between the various networks. Why is that so difficult to understand? Here. I'll even explain it to you:

CNN and Fox news have nearly identical reporting styles. They both tend to have "news hours", where they just report on news pretty normally, and "news/commentary show", with a host who covers a variety of topics and then discusses them with 1-4 other people (either an interview or 2-4 person panel format).

The primary difference between the two in terms of content is that Fox does tend to focus more on politics while CNN will toss in sports on occasion. The primary difference between the two in terms of viewpoint is that with rare exceptions, the entire range of viewpoints on CNN are expressed by the liberals on Fox News, while the conservative viewpoints on Fox news nearly never appear or are expressed on CNN.

It's not that Fox News is all conservative, but that CNN has *no* conservatives at all. CNN is "all liberal". Fox news is "conservative and liberal". Of course, if you're used to commentary coming only from liberals, you're going to perceive Fox News as shocking because they "let those conservatives talk". I do find it funny that this results in people concluding that Fox News is more partisan than CNN. Very very funny!


MSNBC is the moonbat of cable news networks. Basically super ridiculously far left. They don't even try to be anything other than a collection of nutty liberals who couldn't hack it in even the already mostly liberal leaning media and so they end up at MSNBC. The opinions are typically just diatribes with little or no examination of explanation. The occasional interviews are almost exclusively with other very very liberal people. So it's the far left talking with the far left in a bizarre kind of rhetoric laden political circle jerk.

It's amusing to watch, I suppose, but don't even remotely kid yourself that you're being "informed" as a result.


That is what I've observed watching those three networks. Does anyone refute that? What are you opinions if they differ? Cause I'm just telling you what I see.

He implicitly (to be generous) advocated any and all of them.

You can pretend he wasn't talking about Guantanamo if you really want to.

That's why I get all my news from Andrew Brietbart and Matt Drudge.

Lol. Predictable. Can't respond to what is posted, so ignore it and attack the person.

Have you *ever* sat down and just watched a Fox news discussion and a CNN discussion about the same subject back to back? Ever? Do it sometime and you might just maybe possibly learn that what I'm telling you is true.

Then give me an example. Show me where a Fox News host just goes on a diatribe in which he or she just spends 5 minutes spouting short little negative statements about a long list of liberal politicians. No attempt to present any sort of coherent case to support their statements. Just makes them one after another. I have *never* seen that sort of thing on Fox News. And neither have you. You're just unwilling to admit it.

And you really should watch CNN as well. As I stated earlier, they use similar formats in their political discussions, but there is a conspicuous lack of any conservative opinions on their panels. Assuming you are honest about watching Fox News a lot, you have to admit that they do have liberals on their panels, that the liberals are given time to speak, and that the views expressed by those liberals are "real" liberal positions and opinions (not strawmen).

While you won't see the same sort of "out there crazy" liberal opinions commonly seen on MSNBC on Fox, if you do bother to take the time to watch CNN, you'll find that the liberals on Fox are expressing the same positions and the same arguments as the panelists on CNN. They're not holding back because they're on Fox. But as I stated earlier, what you will notice if you pay attention is that there are almost *never* any people on the CNN panels who express the conservative positions on those topics.


How do you objectively measure if the political discussion on a network is presenting you with all sides? If you only watch one discussion on one network, you can't. You have nothing to compare it with. But if you watch one and you hear arguments A, B, and C, and then you watch the other and on the same subject you hear arguments A, B, C, and also D, E, and F, you can conclude that the second network is presenting you with a wider view of the issue. And when A, B, and C are consistently what we'd call "liberal" arguments, and D, E, and F are "conservative" ones, it's not a leap to say that one network is being "fair" to both sides while the other is not.


I have done this. Many times. And it's glaring how unbalanced the opinion's on CNN are compared to those on Fox. But hey! Don't take my word on it. Go ahead and do the same test I've done. DVR two news/opinion programs on the two networks on the same day. See if you can find a similarly formatted discussion on each of them on the same subject. And then objectively take note of each argument made and compare them. If you are willing to challenge your own convictions and do this, it might just open your eyes to how things really are out there. What you think is biased opinion really isn't. It's just opinion reporting that presents a viewpoint you almost never ever get to see or hear anywhere else.


That's not bias on Fox's part. It's bias on nearly every other networks part. It's just so ubiquitous that you only notice something is "different" when watching Fox. But without being objective about it, you wont realize that it's because everyone else is doing it wrong, not Fox.

Edited, Oct 29th 2010 7:25pm by gbaji

This, multiplied by 1000. I'm really honestly questioning whether or not you've ever seen a Fox program... and stop bringing up the "spitting insults for 5 minutes" crap. Olbermann was presenting quotes and ideas from the candidates, not sitting back and saying "they suck!" It wasn't a serious attempt at debunking their ideologies, it was an attempt to stir up voters, to get them excited. If it were Fox, they'd simply make something up about it... like saying the healthcare bill included mandatory government healthcare that, when refused, would result in jail time.

Who cares? Seriously, you're going to ignore every other thing on FOX so long as no one can provide a very speciifc example you've personally decided is the gold standard for proving partisanship? That's seriously pathetic.

I'm not defending MSNBC. I don't watch it and I don't give a fuck about Keith Olbermann. And given that MSNBC has changed their broadcast model to make themselves a liberal version of FOX, I wouldn't waste time trying to say MSNBC isn't crazy liberal in their punditry. But sitting there crowing about how "MSNBC must be worst because I saw one thing there and you can't show me the exact same thing so I win!" is just retarded.