Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
The problem is that they CLAIM to be, and people watch them as such. And Fox's straight up news reporting is hardly any better. "Fair and Balanced" is just offensive and the journalism community as a whole takes it too heart.
(I'm kipping off to work now, so don't expect a response for a while)
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
I don't recall Beck or O'Reilly ever claiming to be news reporters as opposed to just giving their opinions on the news. Then again I rarely see them so please feel free to prove me wrong. Their entire tone and presentation screams opinion not news reporting. Anyone who would confuse them for news reporters would have to be an idiot. They're entertainment not journalism.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/05 20:02:31
mattyrm wrote: I will bro fist a toilet cleaner.
I will chainfist a pretentious English literature student who wears a beret.
nintendoeats wrote:If only you were wearing a redshirt
...
(laugh, its funny)
A Frazzled imposter, wearing a lookalike shirt. Seize him for stealing my shirt!
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Meh. I haven't read this entire thread so forgive me if this has been said... but the days of reporters going out into the field and digging up "dirt" on important issues is all but forgotten. Reporters read what they're given and the few that go outside are usually doing 1 of 3 things: weather ("It's raining, see! I'm wet!"), puff piece ("Look at the cute kittens and forget about the real issues."), or interviewing some slack-jawed yokel that witnessed a violent crime of some kind ("Show us on the doll where he shot her.").
I'd yell out the window "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore." but, at best, no one would understand and, at worst, I might get shot.
That's my 2 bits. I'm probably wrong but you read it anyway.
dreadlord wrote:Meh. I haven't read this entire thread so forgive me if this has been said... but the days of reporters going out into the field and digging up "dirt" on important issues is all but forgotten. Reporters read what they're given and the few that go outside are usually doing 1 of 3 things: weather ("It's raining, see! I'm wet!"), puff piece ("Look at the cute kittens and forget about the real issues."), or interviewing some slack-jawed yokel that witnessed a violent crime of some kind ("Show us on the doll where he shot her.").
I'd yell out the window "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore." but, at best, no one would understand and, at worst, I might get shot.
That's my 2 bits. I'm probably wrong but you read it anyway.
b) I get it
a) yes there are people, I've met a few of them. But they are primarily old guard. There aren't nearly enough. Most news organisations are shutting down their
Oh, by the way, from The O'reilly Factor's "about us page."
Pushing beyond just the headlines, The O'Reilly Factor also features issues from local markets that do not find the national spotlight on other newscasts. According to O'Reilly, "Just because a story originates from somewhere the networks typically avoid, doesn't mean it contains less challenging issues or compelling ideas."
However that doesn't matter. the channel is called FOX News. If it was called FOX that would be fine,s icne it doesn't imply any specific programming, but so long as it claims to be news such absurdly opinionated shows have no place.
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
However that doesn't matter. the channel is called FOX News. If it was called FOX that would be fine,s icne it doesn't imply any specific programming, but so long as it claims to be news such absurdly opinionated shows have no place.
I am glad as a journalist student whatever you are keeping your objectivity. That doesn't reinforce any stereotypes, at all...
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Look Frazzled. I know quite alot about manipulation and fallacious arguments. Fox, and those two programs in praticular, contain copious amounts of both. I find things to agree with in both liberal and conservative camps, but Fox isjust indefensible. It is not their opinions that I have trouble with (usually). Rather the disingenuous way that they defend them.
Or as O'reilly would put it "Shut up!"
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
Oreilly is an opinion show. they say it like five times an episode.
No disdain for MSMBC, NPR, or NBC?
Enlightening.
EDIT: I should note for purposes of transparency, although OReilly is a bit soft hearted and needs to toughen up a little bit, I like his show. Glenn Beck and Hannity(sp?) make baby Jebus cry.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/08 18:50:11
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
However that doesn't matter. the channel is called FOX News. If it was called FOX that would be fine,s icne it doesn't imply any specific programming, but so long as it claims to be news such absurdly opinionated shows have no place.
So the purely opinion based shows on CNN or MSNBC get a free pass?
mattyrm wrote: I will bro fist a toilet cleaner.
I will chainfist a pretentious English literature student who wears a beret.
"For a while I forgot Obama was black."
Chris Matthews, always nuetral commentor.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote:"For a while I forgot Obama was black."
Chris Matthews, always nuetral commentor.
Yeah, that was a dumb thing to say. But it wasn't intellectually dishonest, it was just stupid. And because it was intellectually honest, it was easy to see both what he was saying...and specificly why it was annoying.
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
@Nintendoeats: You are confusing actual news reporting with opinion shows. Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly are NOT news reporting shows, and therefore not subject to the same standards of journalistic integrity that all of us journalists should be. If you want to make such blanket statements about Fox you should take into consideration Larry King, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews etc. They are not journalists, they are pundits. Their job is to drive up interest in the channel itself, not to report the news.
DR:80+S(GT)G++M++B-I++Pwmhd05#+D+++A+++/sWD-R++T(Ot)DM+ How is it they live in such harmony - the billions of stars - when most men can barely go a minute without declaring war in their minds about someone they know.
- St. Thomas Aquinas
Warhammer 40K:
Alpha Legion - 15,000 pts For the Emperor!
WAAAGH! Skullhooka - 14,000 pts
Biel Tan Strikeforce - 11,000 pts
"The Eldar get no attention because the average male does not like confetti blasters, shimmer shields or sparkle lasers."
-Illeix
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
chaplaingrabthar wrote:Can we agree that opinion news shows (Beck, O'Reilly, Olbermann, Hannity, Maddow, Nancy Grace etc.) are a scourge on the face of humanity?
No. If you don't like the, don't watch them. I don't watch most of those guys.
Am I the only one having Jersey shore DTs?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
chaplaingrabthar wrote:Can we agree that opinion news shows (Beck, O'Reilly, Olbermann, Hannity, Maddow, Nancy Grace etc.) are a scourge on the face of humanity?
yes.
@Frazzled: Are you saying that you don't know what the term means, or that Fox news guys ARE intellectually honest?
I have an example FROM THEIR NEWS DEPARTMENT, from the first page of a straight up youtube search (I looked at one other video before seeing this one).
This is complete "Lets get people scared about terrorism" nonsense. Fox is meerly presenting their opinion that people are afraid of terrorism as fact, and have simply found another excuse to reinforce it. In the first 5 seconds he says "america lives with the threat of terrorism every day." That is straight up hyperboly: The odds of an american dying in a terrorist attack are absurdly low. Everybody knows that you are less likely to die in a terrorist attack than litteraly ANYTHING ELSE that could even be calculated. Fox knows this, but it conflicts with their agenda. Instead of heeding it, they built an entire 5 minute story out of their own bias.
Its pure fear-mongering, and is horribly irresponsible journalism. It is directly harmful to the public discussion. And keep in mind, that was the second video I looked at (The first was an interview with ron paul about economic stuff, much of which was simply outside of my range of knowledge. It could have been horrendous, but I couldn't say for sure so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt). There is tons of this stuff.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/08 20:55:18
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
I'm saying now you're putting yourself up as the arbiter of whats intellectually honest.
I'm saying you're full of it. Chris Matthews is no more intellectually honest than Beck or Hannity or Janine garafalalalafalo or any of them. If not, then he's a true believer, and to be feared.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote:I'm saying now you're putting yourself up as the arbiter of whats intellectually honest.
Intellectually honest has a very specific meaning, and I'm applying it. Essentially all you are doing is hearing me say "he shows an unnacceptable bias" and responding by saying "You have an unnacceptable bias." In essence, rather than attacking specific arguments, you are attacking the debate in itself. There are rare times when this is acceptable (For example, if we are both staring in at the sun and I say in all seriousness"The sun does not exist, there is darkness all around" you really can't have a debate) But more often it is a simple dodging mechanism. So lets keep the phenominological arguments off the thread and get back to the actual debate.
As for true believers, they have their defenite uses as long as they stay honest and are not in charge. there should be somebody holding every opinion for the purpouse of debating it. That way every viewpoint gets covered with a fine-tooth comb. Of course, generally you are going to wind up explaining why they are wrong, patting them on the head, and wishing them better luck next time, but occasionaly they turn up something good.
Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity won't because they are willing to make things up, ignore clear contradictions and silence valid arguments from their oponents rather than respond to them. that is not productive.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/08 21:08:16
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
You see, around the same time as this article, I got a call from my Dad whilst at work. He wanted to know about my upcoming court date. Something I had absolutely no knowledge about, and I told him as much. Happens my Uncle had a note popped through his Door, asking about how he felt about my upcoming trial, from a reporter working for the Daily Record, quite possibly the raggiest of rags in Scotland. After a little digging, and much reassuring my Parents I was not in fact in any trouble whatsoever, it turns out to be the case I linked to above. My name is a single letter away from being that of the murderer, and the victim's Christian name is the shortened form of my Dad's middle name (Alexander). So really rather pissed off at the stress caused, I get hold of the reporter resonsible (he was all too keen to speak to me when he heard my name, no doubt expecting a scoop interview with the Murderer) and demand to know exactly where he got my details from, and my Uncle's home address. Lots of flim flam, quoting the Data Protection act. Eventually he says he found me on the Electoral Role. Except, that is impossible, as not only am I not registered to vote, I have been living in South East England for nearly 20 years (18 years at the time) and had in fact never been registered to vote in Scotland, as I was 11 years old when we moved South.
Despite quoting the Data Protection act myself, I never did find out how and where my details were obtained.
Journo's are absolute scum in my eyes.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/08 21:09:42
DR:80+S(GT)G++M++B-I++Pwmhd05#+D+++A+++/sWD-R++T(Ot)DM+ How is it they live in such harmony - the billions of stars - when most men can barely go a minute without declaring war in their minds about someone they know.
- St. Thomas Aquinas
Warhammer 40K:
Alpha Legion - 15,000 pts For the Emperor!
WAAAGH! Skullhooka - 14,000 pts
Biel Tan Strikeforce - 11,000 pts
"The Eldar get no attention because the average male does not like confetti blasters, shimmer shields or sparkle lasers."
-Illeix
Frazzled wrote:I'm saying now you're putting yourself up as the arbiter of whats intellectually honest.
Intellectually honest has a very specific meaning, and I'm applying it. Essentially all you are doing is hearing me say "he shows an unnacceptable bias" and responding by saying "You have an unnacceptable bias." In essence, rather than attacking specific arguments, you are attacking the debate in itself. There are rare times when this is acceptable (For example, if we are both staring in at the sun and I say in all seriousness"The sun does not exist, there is darkness all around" you really can't have a debate) But more often it is a simple dodging mechanism. So lets keep the phenominological arguments off the thread and get back to the actual debate.
What was the debate again?
The problem is you're reinforcing my point with your statements. If you had said, "yes Matthews is as pathetic as the rest fo them, but I like him", THAT would be both honest and refreshing. You explained it away and immediately drop into the stereotype of the journalist (student) who can't see his own bias.
I'm a boor and a bore. I don't give a rat's about anyone or anything besides family. I don't have the time. I'm a Texan first and just want the whole world to leave me alone, but occasionally like to tell other people what to do or they are full of it. I'm a blowhard and think i know everything. But I freely admit that and freely admit my biases.
The concept that what passes as modern journalism is neutral, or doing anything but crusading for its own whims and profits is an absulute myth that conveniently forgets its own history.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Journo's are absolute scum in my eyes.
We really are better off with them than without. Like I said, there are just a great load of terrible ones. Its the same with every profession, but journalists are always in the public eye their failures are well publicised and heavily judged. It sounds like that guy was doing something unethical (unless he was woprking with valid off-the-record data he couldn't talk about for other ethical reasons), and I fully defend your rite to smack the crap out of him.
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
Yeh journalists are fairly cold people. I have a friend who went through uni to become a journalist, only to quit on the first day of her new job after she was asked to call a widow and barage her with questions over how she felt on the stabbing of her husband, a day after said event.
Frazzled wrote:I'm saying now you're putting yourself up as the arbiter of whats intellectually honest.
Intellectually honest has a very specific meaning, and I'm applying it. Essentially all you are doing is hearing me say "he shows an unnacceptable bias" and responding by saying "You have an unnacceptable bias." In essence, rather than attacking specific arguments, you are attacking the debate in itself. There are rare times when this is acceptable (For example, if we are both staring in at the sun and I say in all seriousness"The sun does not exist, there is darkness all around" you really can't have a debate) But more often it is a simple dodging mechanism. So lets keep the phenominological arguments off the thread and get back to the actual debate.
What was the debate again?
The problem is you're reinforcing my point with your statements. If you had said, "yes Matthews is as pathetic as the rest fo them, but I like him", THAT would be both honest and refreshing. You explained it away and immediately drop into the stereotype of the journalist (student) who can't see his own bias.
I'm a boor and a bore. I don't give a rat's about anyone or anything besides family. I don't have the time. I'm a Texan first and just want the whole world to leave me alone, but occasionally like to tell other people what to do or they are full of it. I'm a blowhard and think i know everything. But I freely admit that and freely admit my biases.
The concept that what passes as modern journalism is neutral, or doing anything but crusading for its own whims and profits is an absulute myth that conveniently forgets its own history.
Ok. So your are a self-righteous ass. You are honest about that. So then when I say "Your being a self-righteous ass" I have every rite to do so.
What passes for modern journalism is gak, as I pretty clearly stated at the begining of the thread. We have to fix it. Thats what I'm saying. Fox came up because they are incredibly popular and extra super-bad.
As for my own personal biases, my only identifiable bias is towards a serach for the truth (which is why I got into journalism in the first place). I am completely honest about that. I tell the truth when it works against me, I hate witholding any information. My one goal in life is to get as much real solid truth out there as possible. Sometimes I will be wrong, and I will gladly accept that (as I have done many times in the past) so long as I am confronted with reason and evidence. Because I am human I will sometimes debate past the point of reason, but sooner or later I will turn around and see it.
That is the DEFENITION of intellectual honesty. It is the one code by which I live my life (except for a hatred of suffering in all living things). It surpasses my family, my economic well-being and my friendships (all of these have been harmed somewhere along the line). My bias is a constant war against bias. So god damn you. god damn you immensly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whatwhat wrote:Yeh journalists are fairly cold people. I have a friend who went through uni to become a journalist, only to quit on the first day of her new job after she was asked to call a widow and barage her with questions over how she felt on the stabbing of her husband, a day after said event.
Oh tabloids. Half-way between the NYT and the national inquirer. They are almost real papers!
Primarily a British phenominon. Do you remember which paper it was?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2010/02/08 21:30:32
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
Oh get off your high horse. You got called on your BS so it's a little late to get self righteous. No one is arguing that any of the pundits are news reporters, that they don't have bias, or that they don't twist things. In fact everyone but you seems to be capable of realizing that and treating it as fact. Whether they are on FOX, CNN, MSNBC, or whatever they are biased and NOT news reporters. This is not new and interesting insight, this is just a fact. Pundits are not news reporters, they are hired to comment on the news with their own opinions. You're the only person here who seems to have mistaken Beck or O'Reilly for news anchors.
As far as FOX's bias, well guess what, duh. Yes, we all know FOX is biased and leans so far to the right that only O'Reilly's ego is strong enough to support it. However your incessant screeching about it, and the fact that you started your argument by basing it on pundits and to the total exclusion of any mention of the bias of any other network's pundits or their reporting's bias makes you look intellectually dishonest.
mattyrm wrote: I will bro fist a toilet cleaner.
I will chainfist a pretentious English literature student who wears a beret.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
I started this whole thing by saying that journalists tend to be crap, no matter where they come from. Fox is simply the worst offendor And if you ask any journalist they will tell you that, for reasons like the example posted above. I also laid out pretty clearly what we need to do about it. Bitching about journalism as a whole isn't going to help any.
In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by "thou shalt not", the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by "love" or "reason", he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.
George Orwell is my hero.
Social Experiment: if you're pissed like me, copy and paste this into your sig, and add a number after it.
PISSED 8374982374983749873948234
Check out my band Man In A Shed
Alpha Legion - 15,000 pts For the Emperor!
WAAAGH! Skullhooka - 14,000 pts
Biel Tan Strikeforce - 11,000 pts
...
about anyone or anything besides family. I don't have the time. I'm a Texan first and just want the whole world to leave me alone, but occasionally like to tell other people what to do or they are full of it. I'm a blowhard and think i know everything. But I freely admit that and freely admit my biases.
