Fox News Tries to Bash Atheist and Agnostics

[Alitheia Aylso]

Check out this most recent strain of Fox News madness.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

why not / it is the sort of story that would appeal to the religious/political right, and most of their readership.

The Tories are aiming to hand over BBC News to the likes of Fox in the new charter, with political regulatory powers over it.
I can's see that Fox would not be bidding for the contract.

 

[Alitheia Aylso]

why not / it is the sort of story that would appeal to the religious/political right, and most of their readership.

The Tories are aiming to hand over BBC News to the likes of Fox in the new charter, with political regulatory powers over it.
I can's see that Fox would not be bidding for the contract.

Yes, it is a catering for the middle to far right. However they should not call themselves news and continue to do so.

 

[Laika]

“Can you point to one person who committed mass murder recently that had a religious background? You cannot.”

oh. wait. hang on. there's a name.... this thinking is so hard....

 

[Revoltingest]

Bill has conveniently forgotten about.......

Timothy McVeigh.....

Vester Lee Flannagan

These are just a couple believers who were keen on mass murder.

 

[Quintessence]

"I want you to stop talking when I try to get in..." the male on the left says, after he rudely attempts to interrupt the psychologist (who actually knows what she's talking about) several times. Someone's parents forgot to teach someone some basic manners. I don't know how people can even stand watching such trash television.

 

[Revoltingest]

"I want you to stop talking when I try to get in..." the male on the left says, after he rudely attempts to interrupt the psychologist (who actually knows what she's talking about) several times. Someone's parents forgot to teach someone some basic manners. I don't know how people can even stand watching such trash television.

I could only take a few seconds of it.

 

[Quintessence]

I could only take a few seconds of it.

I didn't watch the whole thing either. Gods... the argumentative style. Do they do that on purpose? It's moronic.

 

[Revoltingest]

I didn't watch the whole thing either. Gods... the argumentative style. Do they do that on purpose? It's moronic.

I expect that it's designed to appeal to people who agree with Bill, & love to see him browbeat those who disagree.

 

[philbo]

Fox "News" is an intentionally deceptive organization: less than half their news-formatted output is actual news, the rest is "opinion" and they have said on multiple occasions that opinion pieces don't need to have any relation to truth or accuracy. This lets them get away with truly surreal levels of misinformation and outright lying, while still having the brass neck to defend their news output as accurate.

And so many people believe the lies, it's truly scary.

 

[Revoltingest]

Although I think fox news is distasteful and I disagree with most of their opinions, the same can be said for almost every news organization. Very few try to present news as it is and are always trying to twist things around to pander to their audience or change public opinion. The media industry is just like that, mostly opinion, less news.

Aye, most of it is opinion.
I listen to NPR (government created & largely funded), which presents the left leaning opinions & spin.
Perhaps we notice opining most when we disagree with it.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Although I think fox news is distasteful and I disagree with most of their opinions, the same can be said for almost every news organization. Very few try to present news as it is and are always trying to twist things around to pander to their audience or change public opinion. The media industry is just like that, mostly opinion, less news.

The BBC is not commercial it is funded from a licence fee set by the government but paid buy all Tv owners.
it is a criminal not civil offence not to have a licence.

It is reqired by law to be impartial and give both sides of an arguement. No opinion is permitted in the News programs from the employees. If there is an interview both sides in a discussion get equal time.
If a correspondent is questiond he always makes it clear that the answer is his personal opinion.

Politically they get the balance right as all parties think that they are hard done by.

Brand identification is also banned unless it is the subject of the news.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Aye, most of it is opinion.
I listen to NPR (government created & largely funded), which presents the left leaning opinions & spin.
Perhaps we notice opining most when we disagree with it.

The wise person listens to the views of those who hold different views than themselves.
Out of professional interest, I used to watch and listen and read all different views; I now avoid them except to keep myself informed enough to use in my classes.
Clearly, I am no longer wise...

 

[Revoltingest]

The wise person listens to the views of those who hold different views than themselves.
Out of professional interest, I used to watch and listen and read all different views; I now avoid them except to keep myself informed enough to use in my classes.
Clearly, I am no longer wise...

I listen to NPR for 3 reasons......
- As a highly educated elite pseudo-intellectual living in a very left leaning locale, I feel comfortable with most of the people on it.
- I rail & fulminate at those ****** ****** & their ******* ******* effete liberal snobbish agenda.
- Their stations come in clearly here.

It keeps me balanced to get news from diverse sources.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Many would argue that since it is government funded it could be significantly more biased than a commercial one. Just because both sides of an argument are given doesn't mean it isn't biased. Personal opinions can also bias viewers, even if it is clear it is personal opinion.

people interviewed must be biased. the BBC has no opinions, nor can express any.
It is not funded out of taxes or by the government. It only gets the licence fee that it charges to all those with tv. Those with only radio pay nothing.
Government is at arms length
The government can ony make laws and decisons that effect all news media not just the BBC
the license fee that can be charged is set by parliament at the end of each charter period, not at the whim of the government of the day.

The parliamentary comittees made up of all Mp's can question any one and any agency or business or government minister. The government can not interfere, cabinet ministers are subject to the same process of regular questionig.
refusal or giving false evidence will inevitable result in loss of office or worse, for contempt of parliament.
Parliament is soverign even over the Government.
Even Murdock was humbled buy the process.

The present Governmet wishes parliament to change the next charter to give it direct control, and sell off the entire news service to a contractor.

 

[Deathbydefault]

Cool, another identified bigot.
Add his *** to the giant list in the back then ignore him for the rest of his life.

Can't fix stupid.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

It is not funded out of taxes or by the government. It only gets the licence fee that it charges to all those with tv. Those with only radio pay nothing.

The licence fee is a tax in all but name. You have to pay it if you have a TV - whether you watch BBC channels or not; even if you receive any channels at all or not. It even applies to devices that can stream programmes as if they're being broadcast live so computers, tablets etc are included. The BBC hires private collectors who go around homes tricking you into signing away your legal protections so they can collect undeserved payments on the BBC's behalf.

I think the licence fee should be scrapped and replaced with a subscription service. The BBC is no longer the sole TV provider in the UK and they don't deserve the money they get.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The licence fee is a tax in all but name. You have to pay it if you have a TV - whether you watch BBC channels or not; even if you receive any channels at all or not. It even applies to devices that can stream programmes as if they're being broadcast live so computers, tablets etc are included. The BBC hires private collectors who go around homes tricking you into signing away your legal protections so they can collect undeserved payments on the BBC's behalf.

I think the licence fee should be scrapped and replaced with a subscription service. The BBC is no longer the sole TV provider in the UK and they don't deserve the money they get.

And how would you stop people taking a free ride.
we are not all agrieved freeloaders
They use official court agents to collect money owed, like any other supplier.
It is a Law they are breaking not a civil debt.
the fee is also covering the entire uk broadcasting infrastructure.
That would still have to paid for with no BBC.

 

[averageJOE]

“Can you point to one person who committed mass murder recently that had a religious background? You cannot.”

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

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

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

why not / it is the sort of story that would appeal to the religious/political right, and most of their readership.

The Tories are aiming to hand over BBC News to the likes of Fox in the new charter, with political regulatory powers over it.
I can's see that Fox would not be bidding for the contract.

Whilst I would not like the BBC to be biased in any form, it must be said that now it has a solid, if sometimes soft and implicit, left-liberal bias, so I don't see that the left have the right to complain that much. The Tories really should reign in the BBC if they get the chance and try and transform it so it actually is a largely impartial and neutral broadcaster, in its entertainment shows as well as its news and current affairs.

Anyway, the debate in the video is silly in the setting, but Gnus and the like are always bashing religion in this way. I don't see how what these people are saying is any different to what the likes Dickie Dawkins and other Gnus often spout off.