Wow, that was way out in left field...but I'm sure that it all makes perfect sense to you...if that's any consolation.
Wow, that was way out in left field...but I'm sure that it all makes perfect sense to you...if that's any consolation.You basically already have seen it, the Benghazi hearing?
reality is missing a touch from you.
The media is the media. Fox leans right, the rest lean left to varying degrees. To attempt to claim the rest aren't partisan or don't push an ideology is naive.
Yes...more Candy Crowley please.I'd be perfectly happy for the questions to be laser sharp issue oriented and fact checked in real time. That's what the RNC wants, right?
reality is missing a touch from you.
The media is the media. Fox leans right, the rest lean left to varying degrees. To attempt to claim the rest aren't partisan or don't push an ideology is naive.
No, it's just based on both common sense and actual empirical evidence. (You realize people research this stuff, right?)
As mentioned previously you apparently think that news organizations in publicly traded companies willfully skew their news in an ideological direction that America doesn't share and therefore forego shareholder value in order to promote an ideological agenda. Are you saying the free market doesn't work? Haha.
Not that I think you will, but go look at the body of research on media bias. In a perfect world you should be happy that a partisan bias doesn't exist, but I imagine you prefer a world that allows you to continue to feel persecuted
If a pH of 7 is neutral, lower is acidic, and higher is basic, Fox News is a 1.5 while the others are 8 or 9.
They don't "lean" right - to be as far right as they are by leaning, they'd fall over.
lol persecuted? nope. Just calling things as they are. There is a market for left leaning news, especially since the public has been conditioned to accept it. Along came FOX which served those who were fed up with the status quo. Again, just because it was all there was, doesn't mean it wasn't left or that ideological bias wasn't present.
Yes, it would be nice if the news was the news with no slant but that's not how humans work. Each views the world through their own lens based on their life and knowledge. So again, to think that FOX is somehow different than the others shows naivety and/or willful ignorance.
Nope, just an acceptance of empirical research on the topic.
I notice that you ignored that part and just proceeded to blindly repeat your point without evidence. Speaking of willful ignorance... Haha.
lol, hmmm... research... yeah, clearly there was no bias. Fox just happened to have better "news". FFS you people are hilarious.
Please link said research...I keep finding that bias swings both ways depending on audience.You realize how stupid you sound when people say "hey, you might want to check the research on this" and you respond by not checking the research and then calling other people willfully ignorant, right? I mean that's basically the dictionary definition of willful ignorance.
The sad part is that even if you did bother to check it I bet you would immediately go search for anything that confirmed your view instead of looking at the research as a whole. You're just not capable of anything more it seems.
Please link said research...I keep finding that bias swings both ways depending on audience.
And I've always maintained this is complete bullshit...there are numerous studies that analyze and confirm media bias.I've linked research on this I don't even know how many times, in conversations I'm pretty sure you participated in no less.
Meta-analysis of media bias shows functionally no statistically significant media bias.
lol persecuted? nope. Just calling things as they are. There is a market for left leaning news, especially since the public has been conditioned to accept it. Along came FOX which served those who were fed up with the status quo. Again, just because it was all there was, doesn't mean it wasn't left or that ideological bias wasn't present.
Yes, it would be nice if the news was the news with no slant but that's not how humans work. Each views the world through their own lens based on their life and knowledge. So again, to think that FOX is somehow different than the others shows naivety and/or willful ignorance.
And I've always maintained this is complete bullshit...there are numerous studies that analyze and confirm media bias.
You realize how stupid you sound when people say "hey, you might want to check the research on this" and you respond by not checking the research and then calling other people willfully ignorant, right? I mean that's basically the dictionary definition of willful ignorance.
The sad part is that even if you did bother to check it I bet you would immediately go search for anything that confirmed your view instead of looking at the research as a whole. You're just not capable of anything more it seems.
The reality of capitalism pretty much is the ultimate research, no? I mean if the market didn't see a problem/need for counter-balancing the MSM then Fox News would have been a instant loser - no? It's ok, just ignore reality.
Use your head. All it says is that there is a market segment for what Fox News provides, it says nothing about the bias or lack thereof of other news sources. If anything, it indicates idea that people like partisan news, because it tells them what they want to hear.
Interestingly enough though, if what you're saying is true that means that numerous publicly traded corporations were willfully foregoing revenues for decades in the name of disseminating their ideology. I guess that your faith in markets is profoundly misplaced then, which has a pretty radical impact on the rest of your ideology.
lol.
You're especially full of shit today...just saying.Yes, you've previously linked exactly one widely discredited study. I have trashed it both myself and with links to plenty of other authoritative sources that pointed out how it was just really bad social science that you accepted uncritically.
This is what I'm talking about when I say people just look for the things that tell them what they want to hear. Go look at the state of research as a whole and you'll see what I'm talking about.
I wouldn't mind that, but surely you realize that comparing an explicitly partisan source like Fox and CNBC (of all other news outlets!)
You're especially full of shit today...just saying.
Ok, but you claim Fox is ideologically biased. So how could a new player in the very old media market compete unless there was a problem/hole in the market? If the metric is "bias" and that is pretty much their only unique selling proposition, how can anyone rationally say that bias didn't already exist(thus creating the hole in the market)?
Ok, but you claim Fox is ideologically biased. So how could a new player in the very old media market compete unless there was a problem/hole in the market? If the metric is "bias" and that is pretty much their only unique selling proposition, how can anyone rationally say that bias didn't already exist(thus creating the hole in the market)?
I believe markets don't care about anything except balance. Supply/demand etc will balance unless acted upon by gov't forces. It's been true since the beginning of time and still holds true today.
If, after listening to people like Rush Limbaugh for years on end, conservatives are convinced that the media is against them, this presents a great economic opportunity for a company like Fox to create a conservative biased news outlet to capitalize on that perception. It doesn't, however, make that perception reality. It also doesn't mean that the market could support multiple versions of FoxNews, which is precisely why the rest of the media isn't what conservatives say it is.
So far as the rest of the media, it makes absolutely no sense for them to present news which appeals mainly to people at one end of the ideological spectrum. They would all be competing against each other for those readers and viewers. These are publicly traded corporations. They aren't going to present ideologically biased news unless it benefits their bottom line. If you look at news media carefully, it is plainly obvious that it is presented in a sensationalist manner, in order to attract the most possible attention from the most possible viewers and readers. This is the only economic model which makes sense.
Yet conservatives have this notion that the news media isn't really trying to attract the maximum number of readers and viewers but instead is trying to propagate an ideology. This in spite of the fact that they are accountable all the way up the corporate food chain solely based on their bottom line performance. Their job security and salaries entirely depend on it but conservatives are saying that this isn't their priority.
These are profit driven corporations with accountability to shareholders. If conservatives want to make a serious argument, they can start by explaining how operating with a left bias is what makes the most sense for the media from a financial standpoint.