bkellyusa wrote:
It's clear that you don't watch Fox News and don't rally know anything about it. It's not the most trusted and most popular news channel on television for no reason.
Wonder why in their investigation of truth in news, PunditFact, a division of Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact found that FOX earned 60% "Mostly False" ratings. To be fair, MSNBC did not fair so well either with 46% "Mostly False" but earned less than 1/2 as many "Pants on Fire" as FOX did. But, MSNBC makes no claim of being a news channel. FOX has "NEWS" emblazoned on every broadcast
CNN earned 18% "Mostly False" ratings.
Again, I ask- If a disgraced Democratic Administration planned a news channel to spread one side of every story when all stories have 2 sides and then the chief planner of that channel was part of the administration and became the founding president of that channel, could it be called "Fair and Balanced?"
bkellyusa wrote:
I know you think the way you added that up is clever but it is bullshit. These days everyone can see through this liberal mind warping jive you guys pull. You used the very last number you could come up with that was after the economic crash and tried to say it was in the dumps during his entire term.
See for yourself.
http://www.multpl.com/unemployment/table?f=mClinton: General downward trend the entire 8 years.
Bush: Up & down for the 8 years, but mostly up, and never again as low as the day he took office.
Obama: Rising for the first 8 months (legacy of Bush), and then straight declining since then.
But that alone doesn't show the real problems of Bush's term. When the economy is flagging, the Federal Reserve would temporarily boost it by cutting the reserve rate. The idea is that more permanent measures would be made at the same time, and the cut would keep the economy afloat until the other measures took effect. Except Bush wouldn't make the permanent change, so the Fed kept having to cut the rate --- until it reached zero, and they couldn't cut any more, at which time, the economy started to collapse. So, this "good period" during the Bush adm you talk of, is just the Fed covering up Bush's mismanagement.
wlgoode wrote:
Wonder why in their investigation of truth in news, PunditFact a division of Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact found that FOX earned 60% "Mostly False" ratings. To be fair, MSNBC did not fair so well either with 46% "Mostly False" but earned less than 1/2 as many "Pants on Fire" as FOX did. But, MSNBC makes no claim of being a news channel. FOX has "NEWS" emblazoned on every broadcast
To be fair, PunditFact didn't fact-check EVERY statement made, just the ones that seemed unlikely enough that someone wrote in and asked them to check.
JamesCurran wrote:
To be fair, PunditFact didn't fact-check EVERY statement made, just the ones that seemed unlikely enough that someone wrote in and asked them to check.
I will accept that as true, makes sense.
Nonetheless Fox is not honest and was created in the Nixon Administration and Roger Ailes was the planner and Nixon staffer. To trust Fox is fooling oneself.
FRENCHY wrote:
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Boehner: Jobs, Jobs Jobs but don't dare ask me to bring a jobs bill or an infrastructure bill up for a vote. Let Obama turn up the "Jobs" dial on his desk! Or maybe take out that magic wand from his desk drawer and say "Jobs" as he waves it. That's the solution!!!
wlgoode wrote:
Wonder why in their investigation of truth in news, PunditFact, a division of Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact found that FOX earned 60% "Mostly False" ratings. To be fair, MSNBC did not fair so well either with 46% "Mostly False" but earned less than 1/2 as many "Pants on Fire" as FOX did. But, MSNBC makes no claim of being a news channel. FOX has "NEWS" emblazoned on every broadcast
CNN earned 18% "Mostly False" ratings.
Again, I ask- If a disgraced Democratic Administration planned a news channel to spread one side of every story when all stories have 2 sides and then the chief planner of that channel was part of the administration and became the founding president of that channel, could it be called "Fair and Balanced?"
Wonder why in their investigation of truth in news... (
show quote)
Try this. It's partially sponsored by the Brookings Institution who Politifact (the same outfit you are praising so highly in your response here) describes as a "center-left" organization so there is no reason why they would favor FOX News I don't think. From their results you can see that FOX News is the runaway winner in the trusted department. In fact, if you look at it closely it is very detailed and clearly a very thorough survey.
http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-fox-is-the-most-trusted-tv-news-source-in-america-2014-6
wlgoode wrote:
I will accept that as true, makes sense.
Nonetheless Fox is not honest and was created in the Nixon Administration and Roger Ailes was the planner and Nixon staffer. To trust Fox is fooling oneself.
I thought you guys liked immigrants. Roger Ailes came to this country and made a success of himself. His businesses outside of FOX News are also very successful. You guys just don't like him because he's not dependent on you for handouts.
Once again, you are confusing opinions with facts.
The survey has nothing to do with who is the most accurate, just who they prefer watching.
A lot of people thing the moon is made of green cheese, but that doesn't make it so. People like having their biases confirmed. If your biases are right-wing, you've only got one place to go. Amongst those that prefer facts, their loyalities are split among many sources.
bkellyusa wrote:
I thought you guys liked immigrants. Roger Ailes came to this country and made a success of himself. His businesses outside of FOX News are also very successful. You guys just don't like him because he's not dependent on you for handouts.
Roger Ailes was born in Ohio. You're probably thinking of Rupert Murdoch.
And Liberals have nothing against rich and/or successful people. (Just Friday I was talking with Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry's). We object to rich people who use their wealth to game to system.
JamesCurran wrote:
To be fair, PunditFact didn't fact-check EVERY statement made, just the ones that seemed unlikely enough that someone wrote in and asked them to check.
I looked at that poll and while I generally like Politifact and check with them pretty often regarding the legitimacy of some of the political nonsense I hear this piece looks very strange. The things that are fact checked look hand-picked and even their conclusions in a few cases seem skewed.
Besides, even if someone says something that is questionable FOX News they've got lots of liberal commentators sitting right there to challenge the comment. You can't get anymore Fair & Balanced than that. I don't know why anyone would object to that other than they just only want to hear one side of he issue which of course is THEIR SIDE.
The other thing I like is that FOX News isn't afraid of anything. They will report on issues that the left wants to see buried. Fox was years ahead of the other channels on the UN scandals and corruption during the Bush administration. The other were a year and a half late.
JamesCurran wrote:
Once again, you are confusing opinions with facts.
The survey has nothing to do with who is the most accurate, just who they prefer watching.
A lot of people thing the moon is made of green cheese, but that doesn't make it so. People like having their biases confirmed. If your biases are right-wing, you've only got one place to go. Amongst those that prefer facts, their loyalities are split among many sources.
James, you are only kidding yourself. The question is not who you like to watch the most but who do you trust the most. This is what I hate about the current loony left's way of thinking. If they can find a way to sidestep the real issue with a bunch of double talk they think they've accomplished something. It's never about the realities of the subject but only winning the argument.
JamesCurran wrote:
Don't be a fool. The US is a laughing stock around the world because
a) we refuse to acknowledge climate change.
b) We have mass killing is schools and movie theater but refuse to do anything about them.
c) we want to teach creationalism instead of evolution in schools.
I am glad you hate America and Americans so much you would bother posting what the Europeans think of us. Guess what. I don't give a flip what they think. They like Obama and he is killing us. What's that tell you. I prefer to see Americans do the right things and I don't care who doesn't like it.
On the other hand you American Hater are just like Obama and seem to be thrilled that someone dislikes us.
bkellyusa wrote:
James, you are only kidding yourself. The question is not who you like to watch the most but who do you trust the most.
Obviously, you've a lot to learn about confirmation bias. If you think the world is flat, and only one station tells you that it is, of course you are going to trust them the most, regardless of how true it is.
If you ask people "Is the news source you watch the most trustworthy?" you will naturally get 100% of the people saying "Yes".
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.