Discussion: FOX News

[Hobodeluxe]

The headlines are wrong...they didn't give the GOP any money. Now that is either the media being lazy or misleading. I think the latter.

they are giving them "in kind" contributions.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: FOX NEWS CRITICIZED FOR PARENT COMPANY'S DONATION
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...akes-heat-for-news-corporations-gop-donation/

 

[DACrowe]

The only question i have is who wags the tail between NewsCorp/Fox and the GOP. The GOP makes the talking points, but half their presidential candidates for 2012 work for Fox and NewsCorp just paid Republicans for its loyalty. It seems the learner is now the master in this relationship. The losers are the American people, however.

 

[chaseter]

they are giving them "in kind" contributions.

So GE doesn't give the DNC more money than the GOP???

 

[Marx]

Does GE have a 24 hour news network?

 

[chaseter]

Does GE have a 24 hour news network?

They own MSNBC If Fox's commentary shows are the arm of the GOP, then MSNBC's commentary shows are the arm of the DNC.

 

[Marx]

They own MSNBC If Fox's commentary shows are the arm of the GOP, then MSNBC's commentary shows are the arm of the DNC.

I honestly wasn't aware that GE owned MSNBC. As far as MSNBC goes, I have never said that there isn't a liberal bias to their network.

The issue is FOX News parading around under a banner of 'fair and balanced' when they are anything but.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Does GE have a 24 hour news network?

MSNBC is jointly owned by NBC Universal (82%) and Microsoft (18%). NBC Universal is currently jointly owned by General Electric (80%) and Vivendi (20%) following the merger between GE's NBC and Vivendi's Vivendi Universal.

However, disappointments in both NBC and Universal has resulted in GE selling NBC Universal to Comcast in a joint venture with Comcast set to take 51% ownership and GE with 49% with option for Comcast to buyout GE's stake or GE forcing Comcast to buy their stake. This merger is currently under regulatory approval.

 

[hippie_hunter]

So GE doesn't give the DNC more money than the GOP???

GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt sits on Obama's Economic Advisory Recovery Board and the two companies that work closest with Obama are GE and Google.

 

[chaseter]

I don't know the validity of this site but I do know that GE donates more to Democratic organizations than they do Republican organizations.
http://ethicsalarms.com/2010/08/18/...-to-democrats-like-objective-media-companies/

General Electric, which owns NBC and (the left-obsessed MSNBC), donated $688,900 to Democrats through its PAC this election cycle compared to $410,100 to Republicans.in the 2010 election cycle. G.E. has also donated $237,000 to the Democratic Governors Association and $205,000 to the Republican Governors Association.(But it wasn’t a million to the Democrats. Maybe there’s a secret rule that you don’t become an official mouthpiece for a party until you give it a million dollars. I’ll have to investigate. )

The political action committee for Viacom, the parent company of CBS, contributed $108,700 to Democratic candidates this election cycle and $64,000 to Republicans. The PAC has also contributed $22,000 to Democratic-affiliated leadership PACs and $21,500 Republican-affiliated leadership PACs, and donated $4,000 to the Pennsylvania Democratic Party last April.

The House of Mouse, Disney, which owns ABC, is the most balanced of all by this standard: the company has given $110,500 to Democratic candidates and $95,000 to Republicans through its PAC.

Meanwhile,the PAC of Time Warner, the parent company of CNN, gives pocket change: $70,500 to Democratic candidates in the 2010 election cycle compared with $41,500 to Republicans. Time Warner also donated $5,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Still, it gives more than 75% more to Democrats—not that there’s anything wrong with that, if giving anything at all is acceptable.

Fox may say that they are fair and balanced but everyone knows that they are right wing just like everyone knows that MSNBC is left wing. But for CNN, ABC, and CBS to favor the left instead of the middle...then do we really need to complain about Fox News?

 

[hippie_hunter]

I think the majority of that money goes to incumbents regardless of party. Most corporations want to back the winning pony so they back the incumbent who wins most of the time.

Most incumbents are Democrats so there you go.

 

[Superman]

Amazing, The biggest story of the day is the fact that US combat troops are leaving Iraq so I turn it over to Fox to see how they are covering it and what do I see? BillO still bi**ing about the NY "mosque" that isn't really a mosque.

 

[chaseter]

I think the majority of that money goes to incumbents regardless of party. Most corporations want to back the winning pony so they back the incumbent who wins most of the time.

Most incumbents are Democrats so there you go.

But Repubs had more incumbents in 2008. What I posted was 2008 and 2010.

 

[chaseter]

Amazing, The biggest story of the day is the fact that US combat troops are leaving Iraq so I turn it over to Fox to see how they are covering it and what do I see? BillO still bi**ing about the NY "mosque" that isn't really a mosque.

Bill is a commentator, not a news anchor. He talks about what gets his show the most ratings. Same goes for the 'talking heads' over at MSNBC. They talk about the issues that their viewers are most interested in. Keith O would always talk about Bush's vacationing like that was a huge story just like all the commentators on Fox are doing now for Obama. Most of the left wing shows yesterday were talking about Fox's parent company donating $1 million to a right wing organization when there were 1000 times more important things going on, like the troops leaving Iraq.

 

[VampElvis]

Commentator vs news. That's what gets really muddied in this too tired argument.
Fox's commentator's are pretty far right.
MSNBCs commentators are pretty far left.
I think Fox really drops the ball with the ubiquitous slogan that doesn't delineate between the two. I recall (anecdotally - I don't have and haven't looked for links) numerous polls and surveys around the time of the presidential campaign of the actual news that put Fox right of but closer to center than MSNBC and even some of the big3 evening news. Of course this didn't apply to the blowhards from any network.

 

[Paradoxium]

I honestly wasn't aware that GE owned MSNBC. As far as MSNBC goes, I have never said that there isn't a liberal bias to their network.

The issue is FOX News parading around under a banner of 'fair and balanced' when they are anything but.

Aside from what is pointed out about by hippie_hunter. It is worth noting GE is a giant hedgefund that screws with their account sheets to trick many investors. They had a huge incentive to back the bailout and it shows with their fear mongering in 2008. Ratigan - Mr. Anti-Bailout Crusader was singing a different tune like Beck was singing a different tune.

Beyond that, they are ****ing tax evaders. Easy to back politicos who want various taxes (not as simple as income taxes obviously, unless you're a Ubermann fanboy) when you hardly put much into the system. Especially useful against your competition. While Comcast now owns a majority stake (51%), this was recent and GE is still a minority owner.

 

[Superman]

Bill is a commentator, not a news anchor. He talks about what gets his show the most ratings. Same goes for the 'talking heads' over at MSNBC. They talk about the issues that their viewers are most interested in. Keith O would always talk about Bush's vacationing like that was a huge story just like all the commentators on Fox are doing now for Obama. Most of the left wing shows yesterday were talking about Fox's parent company donating $1 million to a right wing organization when there were 1000 times more important things going on, like the troops leaving Iraq.

First, There is no law that says BillO can't talk about the biggest news story of the day. In fact I would think he would want to talk about something like this since he thought going to Iraq was so important. I guess this story wasn't scary enough for him like the big bad mosque in NY story was.

2nd, "Kieth O" along with the rest of MSNBC and CNN commentators was on this story. They preempted there shows to talk about the US leaving Iraq.

3rd, I was speaking of the fact that Fox ran their regular shows like nothing was going on instead of preempting their shows like every other real news network did lastnight. It wasn't that BillO wasn't talking about Iraq, It was the fact that Fox so called "News" network wasn't, That is what I couldn't understand.

 

[Paroxysm]

Fox's motto "Controversy = Coinage"

 

[chaseter]

First, There is no law that says BillO can't talk about the biggest news story of the day. In fact I would think he would want to talk about something like this since he thought going to Iraq was so important. I guess this story wasn't scary enough for him like the big bad mosque in NY story was.

2nd, "Kieth O" along with the rest of MSNBC and CNN commentators was on this story. They preempted there shows to talk about the US leaving Iraq.

3rd, I was speaking of the fact that Fox ran their regular shows like nothing was going on instead of preempting their shows like every other real news network did lastnight. It wasn't that BillO wasn't talking about Iraq, It was the fact that Fox so called "News" network wasn't, That is what I couldn't understand.

So why complain about what Bill O was talking about He talks about what his viewers want to hear. Why would he talk about the troops leaving when he was for the war That would be like Keith O talking about how the troop surge in Iraq when Bush was president was a rousing success...he didn't.

This happens all the time. The only thing that should be of concern is whether or not what they present as fact is really factual. MSNBC, CNN, John Stewart, etc saying how Fox's parent company donated $1 million to the GOP is not factual.

 

[Marx]

I don't know the validity of this site but I do know that GE donates more to Democratic organizations than they do Republican organizations.
http://ethicsalarms.com/2010/08/18/...-to-democrats-like-objective-media-companies/


Fox may say that they are fair and balanced but everyone knows that they are right wing just like everyone knows that MSNBC is left wing. But for CNN, ABC, and CBS to favor the left instead of the middle...then do we really need to complain about Fox News?

If they would drop the 'fair and balanced' crap, I wouldn't have an issue with their network.

Amazing, The biggest story of the day is the fact that US combat troops are leaving Iraq so I turn it over to Fox to see how they are covering it and what do I see? BillO still bi**ing about the NY "mosque" that isn't really a mosque.

And that surprised you because?

 

[chaseter]

I agree that 'Fair and Balanced' is misleading. But, then again so is MSNBC's slogan 'You're Source For News.' These networks are just trying to get viewership so they misrepresent and skew the truth to get more viewers. These stations are basically talk radio but on tv.

You aren't going to do so if Fox's slogan is 'Right Wing News' and MSNBC's is 'Left Wing News.'

 

[Marx]

I agree that 'Fair and Balanced' is misleading. But, then again so is MSNBC's slogan 'You're Source For News.' These networks are just trying to get viewership so they misrepresent and skew the truth to get more viewers. These stations are basically talk radio but on tv.

You aren't going to do so if Fox's slogan is 'Right Wing News' and MSNBC's is 'Left Wing News.'

MSNBC's 'You're Source for News' and CNN's 'The Place for Politics' is in no way comparable to FOX News' 'fair and balanced'.

It's like I said, I wouldn't have an issue with FOX News if they would just drop the 'fair and balanced' crap. Everyone knows they're a media arm of the GOP, so why not own up to it instead of hiding under a banner that couldn't be farther from the truth?

 

[Superman]

So why complain about what Bill O was talking about He talks about what his viewers want to hear. Why would he talk about the troops leaving when he was for the war That would be like Keith O talking about how the troop surge in Iraq when Bush was president was a rousing success...he didn't.

This happens all the time. The only thing that should be of concern is whether or not what they present as fact is really factual. MSNBC, CNN, John Stewart, etc saying how Fox's parent company donated $1 million to the GOP is not factual.

I wasn't complaining about BillO, Like I said before, I was commenting on the fact that FOX was ignoring the story and running their regular shows like nothing was going on instead of covering this story like the other news networks.

And why would Bill talk about us leaving Iraq? Oh I don't know, Maybe because he was a big supporter of the war in Iraq and he might want to give his opinion on us leaving while it was going on?

Why are you still harping on the donation? I didn't even say anything about that in that post.

Look, I know you want to try to change the subject to be about BillO and the donation and the evil MSNBC and anything else other than what I was talking about but it's not going to work. I was commenting on the fact that the Fox "News" network wasn't covering this story, Nothing else.

 

[chaseter]

Eh, I don't care enough about either to debate which one is more prestigious. It is like saying being a crack head is worse than being a meth head.

 

[Superman]

If they would drop the 'fair and balanced' crap, I wouldn't have an issue with their network.


And that surprised you because?

I was surprised that they wasn't covering the story because they was a big supporter of the war. I would have thought that us leaving Iraq would be something they would want to complain about.

Then again, It is Fox, If it ain't something that will scare people then they want nothing to do with it.