quote:

Originally posted by The17sss The thread is actually about John Stewart... or at least, it was. When you can substantiate your claim with stats or actual comparitive data that Fox's bias outweighs MSNBC and CNN, I'll listen. Until then, we may as well stop discussing all this stuff because we'll just chase our tails forever.

But hang on, we're not debating MSNBC, you are. The thread is about Jon Stewart and by extension his comments about Faux news. Therefore, comments on the validity of Faux news is appropriate whilst the actions of another, unrelated news channel (MSNBC) is not.

It's not about comparison of Bias, just JS's comments regarding Fucks "news".

lol... Jesus Christ. Dude, I freely admit to Fox having a slant! Freely! I'm just railing on the fact that others are making claims that Fox is the worst of them all.... based on what, comparitively? Just because I haven't posted scores of articles and youtube clips of MSNBC distortions and fuck-ups doesn't mean they aren't available. And even if I did, you'd come up with more from Fox, and it would never end! Let's all just admit: all news organizations are slanted and biased, and it is our own personal political feelings that leads us to choose one over the other. It's just fucking gay to single out one and say "it's far worse than the rest!" Everyone saying that about Fox votes Democrat (or would if they lived here)... not a coincidence.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN But hang on, we're not debating MSNBC, you are. The thread is about Jon Stewart and by extension his comments about Faux news. Therefore, comments on the validity of Faux news is appropriate whilst the actions of another, unrelated news channel (MSNBC) is not.

No, the thread is about Stewart's interview on his own show with John Yoo. Other posters in here started bringing Fox News into the discussion, when they had nothing to with the original post. At some point, I interjected at the absurdity of Fox being singled out as the lone rogue among news organizations, as if the others were something great.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss They are indirectly defending MSNBC... because the whole argument keeps turning into, "Yeah well Fox does this! Fox did that!" Sounds a lot like justification to me.

Pot. Kettle. Bla-... ahh, fuck it. The last few pages of this thread have been one constant circle, and each side of the argument is defending their side with the exact same tactics as the other. Move along.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss I mean... I don't know dude. What's really worse: a guest on a show making a crack like that (which was fucked up and grounds for reprimand, but spontaneous nonetheless), or a news organization's producers intentionally editing to create a story out of nothing to be read on air by an anchor with the goal of igniting racial tensions?

Then what is worse...this one case of msnbc doing shady things or fox constantly:

- lying about fema camps to scare the people
- lying that the end of life conseling being socialist death panels though up by democrats...even if a majority of republicans alredy voted for it in 2003
- as a "news" organisation starting a political protest then grossly overestimate the attendance to gain more attention
- over incite the crowds at said rally so that they look angrier so that you can make a more sensational story aboutit
-allow pundits to call for any means necessary to stop somebody from performing abortions (O'Riley in the case of dr. Tiller who was shot dead)
- support a contributor who actively alls for taking kids out of school so that they cant be adressed by the president...even if basically every president before has at one time or another adressed the children
- support a contributer thats at least mildly racist and on hs best day clinically insane (beck)
- invite experts to talk about bad bad videogames with full on graphic hardore sex even if the "expert" hasnt actually play the title to know that pure bs is flying out of her
- make a big ruckus about obama waiting 3 days for commenting on the underware bomber plot and pretend that 3 days is more than 6 days which is how long it took bush to respond to the almost identical plot...no criticism for taht one though
- doing a complete 180 on policy regarding criticising a president during wartime...while everything bush did was considered great and any critique was unpatriotic, the current tune is that the president is doing it all wrong, and that his every move should e criticised until he is forced to step down or be forcefully removed


Theres more i could think of but seriously, ive been up for 46 hours i ned a rest.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit When beginning a sentence, it is customary in the English language to use a capital letter for the first word.

great.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

quote:

Originally posted by idoru Not to mention that it should've been "well-developed".

fair play.

quote:

Originally posted by idoru Before critiquing the comprehension of others, it's probably best to make sure that he's being as clear as possible in order to avoid confusion.

...and you were doing so well.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

A little late to the party, eh?

didn't know there was going to be one.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

why is this still being discussed?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by bas we're just rolling in that sweet sweet Beatport chedda SON. I PUT DIAMONDS IN MY SALT SHAKER SO I CAN HAVE CRUSHED DIAMONDS ON MY FOOD...it makes my dookie twinkle!!!

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Let's all just admit: all news organizations are slanted and biased, and it is our own personal political feelings that leads us to choose one over the other.

no. i choose my news programs by which ones provide REAL news, and analysis that makes me think. I couldn’t give a flying fuck which supposed “angle” the news is portraying. Does it present relevant information? Is the information analysed by relevant experts? Are the viewpoints presented credible and compelling?

Fox gets a resounding NO to all those questions, quite independently from my own ideological viewpoint(s).

Just look at the news hour with jim Lehrer. They manage to cover the salient points of most debates without resorting to lies and propaganda to get the news across.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss It's just fucking gay to single out one and say "it's far worse than the rest!" Everyone saying that about Fox votes Democrat (or would if they lived here)... not a coincidence.

The fact you see things in such black/white terms just highlights why you choose to defend fox news. We (and im speaking for the thread posters here) don’t care that fox presents stuff we disagree with, we object to the fact that they insult our intelligence in how they do it.

This isn’t a partisan issue. Its about standards of journalism and integrity.

Ok, before we get back to how Jon Stewart is the most rational mind on television (he is), let me get one more Fox slam in...

I was at the gym the day that flight in NYC went down and landed in the Hudson. CNN was on the TV in front of me & reported it first. Then, to the right MSNBC came on and covered it as well. Eventually all the TVs were covering it, and when they announced it was caused by geese flying into the engines, I looked all the way down to the left of the row of monitors to the one showing Fox, fully expecting the headline to read "Terrorist geese join jihad on American skies".