Fox News should be banned!

[metis]

This. Fox News is repulsive for a lot of reasons, but censorship is far, far worse IMO.

Amen.

 

[Valjean]

It's interesting that so many lefties have such intolerance for free speech.
They nominally advocate most traditional civil liberties, but in this one area,
they want opposing views censored. And it's not just calls for banning Fox
News.....their SJWs on campuses around the country want all slights, no
matter how minor, severely punished..

We don't want Fox censored, we want it fact-checked -- and the facts freely published.

 

[Father Heathen]

This. Fox News is repulsive for a lot of reasons, but censorship is far, far worse IMO.

Exactly. Fox News may be trash but I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to decide who can speak and who can listen.

 

[jonathan180iq]

You do know you are listing comedians and comedy shows as your references, right? And if you think Fox caused the demise of MSNBC then it might be time to feed your unicorn.

Yes I do. Are highly successful comedic news programs no longer considered media outlets where you're from?

And is it really foolish of me to suggest that Fox's ratings rise played a huge part in the transformations of MSNBC?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Fox_News


I mean the timing works out just perfectly...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_1996–2007

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_2008–2015

 

[Revoltingest]

I tend to agree with this. Instead of voicing a desire to ban Fox News, we should simply have retorts prepared to show their zaniness. It only takes a little bit of logic to corner fabricated stories into a corner.
The more they are shown to be wrong, the less people will value their information. It's as simple as that.

We don't want Fox censored, we want it fact-checked -- and the facts freely published.

They should all check & debunk each other.
Mischief abounds all across the political spectrum.
I hear it on NPR because that's what I listen to.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not just a "lefties" issue as the likes of Bill Maher and Jerry Seinfeld have publicly stated that they will no longer do their routines on college campuses, and it ain't because of the "lefties".

It must be difficult indeed to be their apologist,
since the SJWs could hardly painted as conservative.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

There are worse things than stupidity.

 

[metis]

This all sorta reminds me of an evening over the summer whereas I watched either O'Reilly or Hannity, who was highly critical of the "hate-filled left", and they spent much of the hour ranting and raving against Obama, the Dems, the "lefties", etc. So, I guess "hate-filled" to them applies only those on the other side.

Let's take an informal poll here: Do you hear more hate-filled comments/speeches coming from the "lefties" or "righties"? I definitely vote the latter-- not even close, in my book, as Fox and right-wing radio especially probably wouldn't even have an audience of one if they spoke nicely.

 

[metis]

It must be difficult indeed to be their apologist,
since the SJWs could hardly painted as conservative.

Don't know what you're referring to, and what does "SJW" stand for?

If for one minute you actually think that I'm for suppression of free speech on campus, then I would suggest you actually go back to the first page on this thread and actually read what I wrote and which comment I attached "like" to.

 

[esmith]

Don't know what you're referring to, and what does "SJW" stand for?

If for one minute you actually think that I'm for suppression of free speech on campus, then I would suggest you actually go back to the first page on this thread and actually read what I wrote and which comment I attached "like" to.

From what I gather SJW is an acronym for Social Justice Warrior

 

[jonathan180iq]

Let's take an informal poll here: Do you hear more hate-filled comments/speeches coming from the "lefties" or "righties"? I definitely vote the latter-- not even close, in my book, as Fox and right-wing radio especially probably wouldn't even have an audience of one if they spoke nicely.

Depends on the sources that people watch most often.

There are things that I despise about politics in the South that can be blamed on Conservatism that I find just as obnoxious when it happens out West and is more aligned with Liberalism.
I watch Bill Maher quite a bit. And though I don't care much for his antics sometimes, I'll admit that he can occasionally be hilarious. But for all his faults, the one redeeming quality of his show is that he and his guests can dive into real conversations about dissenting opinions, the likes of which I rarely (if ever) see on Conservative media outlets. It's almost as if good points made by Liberals on conservative media are simply shouted over, or they retreat into this corner of "Liberal Media Bias" arguments, forgetting the fact that their Conservative media program is the most-watched news channel in the history of television. That in itself makes me laugh.

 

[metis]

From what I gather SJW is an acronym for Social Justice Warrior

Sounds like you might be right-- thanks.

I wonder if Revoltingest is against "social justice"?

 

[BSM1]

Yes I do. Are highly successful comedic news programs no longer considered media outlets where you're from?

And is it really foolish of me to suggest that Fox's ratings rise played a huge part in the transformations of MSNBC?

Never were and were never meant to be credible validation of issues. They are COMEDIANS and COMEDY SHOWS. The make up jokes and skits to produce a laugh or a parody. I know I'm wasting my time but maybe a stroll through reality would change your perspective a might. And MSNBC would have shot themselves in the foot even if they were the only cable news program available. You don't get much partisan than Chris Matthews or George Stephanopoulis. BTW you never hear a conservative voice ranting about banning any free speech.

 

[esmith]

What I don't really understand, (well I do because it goes against what the FNC crtics believe) is why the O'Reilly and Hannity shows are the standard that FNC is judged. Fox NEWS along with local news and ABC are our main source of news. We do not watch Hannity As far as I am concerned the Hannity show is nothing more than an opinion show and O'Reilly is too self-centered to watch. I have asked many times on various rant threads on FNC is if any of those that complain about FNC if they have ever watched any of the following "NEWS" programs.
Note: times are MST
American News Room 7AM
Shepard Smith 1PM (note do not watch, chores time)
Special Report with Bret Bair 4PM
Greta Van Susteren 5PM (note do not watch due to local and ABC news)

Business News on Fox Business Channel
Cavuto 10AM
Lou Dobbs 6PM

Now I'm almost 95% positive that those that have hissy fits over FNC have never watched any of these programs more than once or even once.
Challenge laid down.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Never were and were never meant to be credible validation of issues. They are COMEDIANS and COMEDY SHOWS. The make up jokes and skits to produce a laugh or a parody. I know I'm wasting my time but maybe a stroll through reality would change your perspective a might. And MSNBC would have shot themselves in the foot even if they were the only cable news program available. You don't get much partisan than Chris Matthews or George Stephanopoulis. BTW you never hear a conservative voice ranting about banning any free speech.

First, are you directing that "banning free speech" comment towards me? I'm not sure why you would, seeing as how I've never advocated for anything like that.

Good point about COMEDIANS and COMEDY SHOWS... If they can rebut a Fox media narrative with just a handful of wisecracks, what does that ultimately say about the content of that narrative? If you recall the CNBC Republican debate narrative, both during and after the show, you'll cite the constant stream of criticisms about softball questions and questions about puppies during the Democratic debate. Which news organization was at the forefront of that narrative? Was it a Liberal-based outlet or a Conservative one?

Here's a 6 minute clip of Trevor Noah, of the Daily Show, showing video of similarly personal and difficult questions during the Democratic debate on CNN...

So what were all those hours of television programming about unfair debate protocols really for?

And aside from all of that, you're not even focusing on the main point that I've put up here. It's as if you think I've only referenced Comedians to support my case...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_1996–2007

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_2008–2015

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Fox_News

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo...s-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/
“Ideological media does a very poor job overall,” Cassino told Forbes. “They don’t challenge people’s assumptions. In traditional news, you will find that more often than not, there actually is a correct answer and there is no gray area. People who tune into ideological media are motivated to hear their side of the debate and so you can have someone who watches MSNBC be so used to hearing about protests coming from the right that they automatically believe that Occupy is mostly a Republican protest.”

And the entire reason we are talking about this at all is because you asked this question:

With all the hateful attention directed at Fox News don't you think if they can be shown wrong it would create an entire media outlet in itself?

The fact is, the popularity of these shows that you seem to completely disregard are entirely based on the ideologically driven missteps of the personalities on Fox News... I'd like to hear you explain how they are not, if you disagree.

And finally, a couple of liberal personalities on MSNBC are not the same thing as a planned shift towards liberally biased media, which the organization purposefully changed to in order to model itself after the success of Fox. It's openly admitted by MSNBC's runners. I don't see what the pushback is about when it's there plain as day.

 

[jonathan180iq]

What I don't really understand, (well I do because it goes against what the FNC crtics believe) is why the O'Reilly and Hannity shows are the standard that FNC is judged. Fox NEWS along with local news and ABC are our main source of news. We do not watch Hannity As far as I am concerned the Hannity show is nothing more than an opinion show and O'Reilly is too self-centered to watch. I have asked many times on various rant threads on FNC is if any of those that complain about FNC if they have ever watched any of the following "NEWS" programs.
Note: times are MST
American News Room 7AM
Shepard Smith 1PM (note do not watch, chores time)
Special Report with Bret Bair 4PM
Greta Van Susteren 5PM (note do not watch due to local and ABC news)

Business News on Fox Business Channel
Cavuto 10AM
Lou Dobbs 6PM

Now I'm almost 95% positive that those that have hissy fits over FNC have never watched any of these programs more than once or even once.
Challenge laid down.

People don't have to complain about the handful of programs that aren't terribly broken.

Counter point, though... What's the popularity of those shows versus the personality driven programs?
http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/scoreboard-thanksgiving/278563

 

[Akivah]

They are the propaganda arm of the Republican party. They were created and funded to be so. This has been well established.

All media is biased in some fashion. Almost all the major media in the US tilts to the left. Do you want to ban them as well?

A documented study by UCLA measured the bias in the media.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664

Past researchers have been able to say whether an outlet is conservative or liberal, but no one has ever compared media outlets to lawmakers," Groseclose said. "Our work gives a precise characterization of the bias and relates it to a known commodity — politicians."

Let's keep both sides in play without banning anyone.

 

[metis]

What I don't really understand, (well I do because it goes against what the FNC crtics believe) is why the O'Reilly and Hannity shows are the standard that FNC is judged. Fox NEWS along with local news and ABC are our main source of news...

I mentioned it before a while back, but let me mention it again here.

A good friend of mine did some volunteer work for Media Matters which, granted, is a left-leaning site, and he watched one hour per day in the morning slot (I don't recall which one), and when he heard something conjectural and/or controversial, he recorded the time and the general theme, and then he e-mailed that info to MM. What he said, and that which I have also seen for myself, is that Fox has these pretty much daily "talking points" that includes their slant (opinion) even in the morning.

After the 2012 re-election of Obama, I tuned to Fox the next morning for maybe about an hour or so (off & on), and the gloom and doom was so clearly obvious. A real news channel doesn't do that.

 

[BSM1]

First, are you directing that "banning free speech" comment towards me? I'm not sure why you would, seeing as how I've never advocated for anything like that.

Good point about COMEDIANS and COMEDY SHOWS... If they can rebut a Fox media narrative with just a handful of wisecracks, what does that ultimately say about the content of that narrative? If you recall the CNBC Republican debate narrative, both during and after the show, you'll cite the constant stream of criticisms about softball questions and questions about puppies during the Democratic debate. Which news organization was at the forefront of that narrative? Was it a Liberal-based outlet or a Conservative one?

Here's a 6 minute clip of Trevor Noah, of the Daily Show, showing video of similarly personal and difficult questions during the Democratic debate on CNN...

So what were all those hours of television programming about unfair debate protocols really for?

And aside from all of that, you're not even focusing on the main point that I've put up here. It's as if you think I've only referenced Comedians to support my case...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_1996–2007

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MSNBC:_2008–2015

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Fox_News

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo...s-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/
“Ideological media does a very poor job overall,” Cassino told Forbes. “They don’t challenge people’s assumptions. In traditional news, you will find that more often than not, there actually is a correct answer and there is no gray area. People who tune into ideological media are motivated to hear their side of the debate and so you can have someone who watches MSNBC be so used to hearing about protests coming from the right that they automatically believe that Occupy is mostly a Republican protest.”

And the entire reason we are talking about this at all is because you asked this question:


The fact is, the popularity of these shows that you seem to completely disregard are entirely based on the ideologically driven missteps of the personalities on Fox News... I'd like to hear you explain how they are not, if you disagree.

And finally, a couple of liberal personalities on MSNBC are not the same thing as a planned shift towards liberally biased media, which the organization purposefully changed to in order to model itself after the success of Fox. It's openly admitted by MSNBC's runners. I don't see what the pushback is about when it's there plain as day.

My bad. I was looking at the OP title.

 

[jonathan180iq]

My bad. I was looking at the OP title.

It's all good.