Is Fox News bad for you?

[ehcks]

Well, yes. Because that's the way things work: the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim.

I suppose I could click the button in the quotes that takes you to the original post, leading all the way back to the first in this chain, where a GWCarver makes the claim that Fox News shows liberal viewpoints in a serious manner. That the negative claim you want to be proven is the null hypothesis to this original claim.

Or I could not do your work for you. That sounds easier.

 

[Ziggurat]

I suppose I could click the button in the quotes that takes you to the original post, leading all the way back to the first in this chain, where a GWCarver makes the claim that Fox News shows liberal viewpoints in a serious manner. That the negative claim you want to be proven is the null hypothesis to this original claim.

Or I could not do your work for you. That sounds easier.

Wrong. SG's claim was not simply the null hypothesis. She put forward a specific hypothesis of her own, one which was NOT the only alternative to GWCarver's hypothesis, one which she claimed to prove but did not. It has never been my responsibility to prove GWCarver was correct, because I have never made that claim.

At this point, I can only conclude that you have become confused as to the issues at hand, because this post of yours is wildly inaccurate in its basic assumptions. Perhaps you need to go back through the quote links to find out.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The default position is Fox News presents a biased right wing POV of liberal and Progressive POVs, and that includes straw men.

I posted examples of liberal straw men Fox has put on air and argued against.

Feel free, Zig, to support your position that Fox presents a balanced view of liberal and conservative POVs.

About the best I've seen is Megan What'shername challenging Dick Cheney's warped view of the Iraq war.

That Fox is a right wing mouth piece is well documented. (See Media Matters and the video, "OutFoxed".)

If you are seriously asking me to prove Fox is biased, it's laughable.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Are you trying to imply that NPR and FOX are at opposite ends of some political spectrum?

I'm implying nothing. I'm saying flat out that if one only listens to one source for information that the odds are overwhelming that they are not getting the whole story.

I grew up in a home that got two newspapers (one on Sunday because they merged for that one day). One was very much to the left and the other one was not as far as editorial pages went. I saw how what happened below the fold was dictated by their editorial styles. They printed what fitted into their own views and ignored that which didn't. Neither one was perfect but if you read both you got a pretty good idea of what was going on.

NPR was just an example that came to mind at the moment. I could have used CNN or MSNBC.

 

[Ziggurat]

The default position is Fox News presents a biased right wing POV of liberal and Progressive POVs, and that includes straw men.

That is YOUR default position, and it's a result of your personal biases.

I posted examples of liberal straw men Fox has put on air and argued against.

And logically, this does nothing to demonstrate that they do not also present accurate liberal positions. But that was your claim. Your claim remains unsupported.

Feel free, Zig, to support your position that Fox presents a balanced view of liberal and conservative POVs.

But this was not my position. This wasn't anyone's position. GWCarver's position was that Fox does present accurate liberal viewpoints (whether or not it also presents inaccurate ones is a different claim). My position was simply that you had failed to prove him wrong. I have already pointed out the difference, your failure to grasp that difference even after being told demonstrates either dishonesty or reading comprehension failure.

If you are seriously asking me to prove Fox is biased, it's laughable.

I'm asking for nothing of the sort, because that was not the claim of yours that I challenged. You are simply piling failure on top of failure at this point. You seem to have nothing left now but straw men and moved goalposts.

 

[Minoosh]

I've gotten a real kick out of Megyn Kelly at times. She had some wonderful exchanges with Karl Rove and with Erik Erickson.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Ziggurat. Don't bother. S.G. is insanely to the left. She takes issue with minor language inflections (Republics? Really?). That is someone who will never listen to anyone not in lockstep with how they see the world. Reason is not in their book of tactics and never will be.

 

[Minoosh]

About the best I've seen is Megan What'shername challenging Dick Cheney's warped view of the Iraq war.

Yeah, her!

I'd like to see the Cheney clip - did she do this on-air? I find Fox unwatchable, not because it's biased but because it's so obviously biased. That sounds weird, I know. I end up angry, not at Fox, but at people who want their information masticated to such a degree.

ETA: Like mom.

 

[Trakar]

Yeah, her!

I'd like to see the Cheney clip - did she do this on-air? I find Fox unwatchable, not because it's biased but because it's so obviously biased. That sounds weird, I know. I end up angry, not at Fox, but at people who want their information masticated to such a degree.

ETA: Like mom.

Megan Kelly - http://news.yahoo.com/megyn-kelly-dick-cheney-iraq-interview-135553569.html

 

[Frozenwolf150]

No, it wasn't. He was mocking the idea that too many people have health insurance (and dishonestly implying that's what Siegel was saying). One of Stewart's following quips was "too many people have health insurance, ... and food, and shelter." Siegel's idea (which I share) is that health insurance is too comprehensive. The essence of insurance is (or should be) financial. It is a financial contract which transfers risk from one party to another for a cost. Health insurance today has morphed into a government-subsidized, prepaid health plan.

And what kind of message do you think that sends to people who have insufficient health coverage, or zero health coverage? Insurance often covers only part of a procedure, not all of it, even though the treatment itself is approved. This forces the patient to foot the rest of the bill out of pocket.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yeah, her!

I'd like to see the Cheney clip - did she do this on-air? I find Fox unwatchable, not because it's biased but because it's so obviously biased. That sounds weird, I know. I end up angry, not at Fox, but at people who want their information masticated to such a degree.

ETA: Like mom.

She did do it on air. Apparently even Fox is ready to admit the Iraq war was a mistake.

The whole interview

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ziggurat. Don't bother. S.G. is insanely to the left. She takes issue with minor language inflections (Republics? Really?). That is someone who will never listen to anyone not in lockstep with how they see the world. Reason is not in their book of tactics and never will be.

That is YOUR default position, and it's a result of your personal biases.

And logically, this does nothing to demonstrate that they do not also present accurate liberal positions. But that was your claim. Your claim remains unsupported.

But this was not my position. This wasn't anyone's position. GWCarver's position was that Fox does present accurate liberal viewpoints (whether or not it also presents inaccurate ones is a different claim). My position was simply that you had failed to prove him wrong. I have already pointed out the difference, your failure to grasp that difference even after being told demonstrates either dishonesty or reading comprehension failure.

I'm asking for nothing of the sort, because that was not the claim of yours that I challenged. You are simply piling failure on top of failure at this point. You seem to have nothing left now but straw men and moved goalposts.

You guys can't be serious.

 

[ehcks]

Ziggurat. Don't bother. S.G. is insanely to the left. She takes issue with minor language inflections (Republics? Really?). That is someone who will never listen to anyone not in lockstep with how they see the world. Reason is not in their book of tactics and never will be.

No, I am insanely to the left, not SG. Hi, I'm a Marxist. I believe the people can break free of their classes and government and be equals. SG? Does not.

Can you stop lying about where people lie on your screwed up political line and deal with actual issues for five minutes?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, I am insanely to the left, not SG. Hi, I'm a Marxist. I believe the people can break free of their classes and government and be equals. SG? Does not.

Can you stop lying about where people lie on your screwed up political line and deal with actual issues for five minutes?

Thanks, I appreciate that. I am very much a capitalist, I even own my own business. I do believe in most of the Progressive agenda, and they are not Marxists or even socialists either.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

You guys can't be serious.

Ginger, I actually like you. All of your faults included. I wouldn't have it any other way. You are one of my best friends on this planet. I'll high five you from now to eternity and back. That doesn't make you right.

 

[fishbob]

Freedom of speech means that not all speech will be something that you agree with. I'd rather have access to the opposing point of view and let it speak for itself than block it out. I watch and listen to NPR and Fox for just that reason. I can't form a valid opinion if I only hear one side of the argument.

You have two sources - one is relatively reliable and attempts to report accurately and the other is a den of lying weasels. And you attempt to develop your opinions on some kind of balance between the two?

 

[DavidJames]

You have two sources - one is relatively reliable and attempts to report accurately and the other is a den of lying weasels. And you attempt to develop your opinions on some kind of balance between the two?

Gee NPR didn't use to be that bad.

 

[DDWW]

Thanks, I appreciate that. I am very much a capitalist, I even own my own business. I do believe in most of the Progressive agenda, and they are not Marxists or even socialists either.

But you didn't build your business, the Govmint did!

 

[DavidJames]

But you didn't build your business, the Govmint did!

Do you honestly not understand the context of that or are you just trolling?

 

[CORed]

The first amendment allows news media to generally say whatever they want. Is the first amendment harmful?
Many years ago, I had the experience of observing an event first hand and then later reading about it in the newspaper. After that I regarded all news media as suspect with the potential of causing harm.

Seeing news reports on events of which I had personal knowledge was certainly an eye opener for me. To be fair, some of them got it mostly right, but many were so far off it was ridiculous.