Posted on 03/22/2010 5:35:08 AM PDT by raptor22
The research and analysis done developed scoring parameters that established whether a news item was presented with or without bias, and, if there was bias, whether it was positive or negative bias.
Anyway, I have become convinced that many FReepers view anything neutral as negative when it pertains to someone they favor and positive when it pertains to someone they don’t favor. In other words, many, apparently including yourself, can’t differentiate between neutral and biased due to your own bias. That means that, unless something positive is said, it is automatically viewed as negative. There is no “neutral” in the world of such people.
I watched FNC during the election and I found them to be quite fair and balanced, just as the professional research supports. I didn’t view them as rooting for either side. It is their agenda to be fair and balanced that makes them the leading cable news channel and the second most watched news channel, including broadcast news, in the country, and the reason why it’s favored all around the globe. I’m grateful that they’re there. They report many things that the other news outlets ignore. But for Fox, we wouldn’t know about those things.
For once I can be proud of being in CA. My rep is Dan Lundgren, a republican who, of course, voted no. Unfortunately my senators are(wait for it)Boxer and Feinstein. May they both rot in hell.
Correction to post 82, my congress critter is named Lungren, not Lundgren.
Fox tries to present both points of view, so yes, they had some pundit cheerleaders for deathcare just as they had pundit detractors of deathcare. But overall, the news portion of Fox news, not the opinion part, presented all the financial facts (all of which are necessarily negative and downright frightening), details and realities of zero’s deathcare plan. Nowhere else was that presented. It simply is NOT true that FNC presented some rosy view of deathcare. Anything BUT.
I see a lot of people at FR looking to be offended or martyrs or put upon or victims or whatever. Surely a bigger media villain than Fox can be found somewhere if you really, really try.
I am from Virginia and check these votes out:
VIRGINIA
Democrats — Boucher, N; Connolly, Y; Moran, Y; Nye, N; Perriello, Y; Scott, Y.
Republicans — Cantor, N; Forbes, N; Goodlatte, N; Wittman, N; Wolf, N.
Virginians need to make sure they get Connolly and Scott out when they are up for elections. It will be hard to get Scott out because his district is purposefully almost all black and my people tend to keep voting for these dummies. Nye and Boucher did a good job standing up to the pressure. Nye in particular, was on the side of his constituents especially we military wives.
As a military wife, I was proud that he could withstand the pressure. We need to let him keep his seat when he is up for re-election. I’m not sure if we could ever scrape Bobby Scott out of his seat.
We have to pick one, and focus.
Which guy has the least time in office, and is from the most conservative district?
Focus all the effort on him. Winning 1 seat is the proper goal for Oregon.
I did not say that FNC presented a "rosy view of deathcare". I said they had their share of health control cheerleaders and then I named some of them. Anything you take from this statement beyond what I actually said is something that you conjured up between your own ears and I will thank you to not attribute your own commentary to me.
As for presentation presented by Fox News and cheerleading is concerned, I heard Martha McCallen, news babe, not a commentator, make the following statement this morning: "The real question is whether or not businesses will raise their prices to pay for the new taxes brought on by Obama's health care plan". This has to be one of, if not the most asinine questions ever asked by a media talking head. No, Martha, businesses have a magic unicorn that defecates money just for such occasions. That's where they'll get the extra funds to pay for Obamacare. Good grief!
This is what passes for journalism these days on Fox News and you are sitting there defending it...
If you look at the list of who voted you’ll notice ALL of the Republicans - no matter the state - voted NO! And, almost ALL of the Dems voted Yes. However, there were a few states where all Dems & Repubs voted NO.
For example:
ALABAMA — Democrats — Bright, N; Davis, N.
Republicans — Aderholt, N; Bachus, N; Bonner, N; Griffith, N; Rogers, N.
UTAH — Democrats — Matheson, N.
Republicans — Bishop, N; Chaffetz, N.
There was nothing wrong with McCallum bringing up the issue in the form of a question or speculation. Yes, it logically follows that businesses will raise prices to pay the tax, but since it hasn’t happened yet, putting the issue forward in the form of a question or speculation is certainly better than never raising it, which is the tack other media outlets and the zero administration will take - and we both know it. I think your complaint with respect to McCallum and what she said is total nit-picking and suggests a petty, trivial mind behind the complaint. There’s nothing wrong with using a rhetorical tool for raising an issue with an audience.
You stated you begged to differ with my opinion as to whether or not Fox News is cheerleading for deathcare. As evidence, you offered up the names of some rat pundits who support it. That IS what Fox does - they present both sides. That is what makes them unique in the industry. That doesn’t make them cheerleaders for deathcare. To the contrary, it’s clear that, on the whole, Fox does not support deathcare because, of the total regular pundits and guests, there are more detractors of deathcare than there are supporters and their various news people bring up questions about the bill that tend to point out its flaws (because the flaws so grossly outweigh any beneficial aspects). This is true about FNC and FBN both. I guess you don’t watch Special Report on FNC, which is a news show with a split panel for topic discussion the last 25 minutes, or much of anything on FBN.
I’ll reiterate what I said to you before which, in essence, is that you’re not cpapable of objective thinking. Your bias and lack of recognition of your bias prevents you from thinking objectively in terms of news consumption. Your observation about McCallum proves it and is nonsense. At best, your first post to me may have been a non sequitur because you just don’t understand the model FNC uses to present news vs. opinion.
Is DeLauro married to Greenburg? I didn’t know that!
BTW, I think DeLauro gets my vote for Ugliest Person in the House or, at the very least, the Person Who Most Closely Resembles a Crow.
Oh, okay. I understand now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.