Why is FOX news conservative?

[Wreckem]

Murdoch isnt a conservative nor does he have a conservative agenda.

He is an oppurtunist and has a business agenda.

Fox News has a conservative bias because there are big bucks there. Cable News is not news its infotainment. Murdoch is a shrewd businessman, more so than Bill Gates or anyone else except Buffett.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
Murdoch is a shrewd businessman, more so than Bill Gates or anyone else except Buffett.

Oh, so that's why he has so much more money that Gates or Buffett!

 

[ProfJohn]

David Brinkley on media bias

"Well, it's there and it doesn't show itself in everything that is printed or broadcast but it is there, and I think we're all used to it, we discount it. Some of the press also is more conservative and it's just the way the action is in this country and I don't know any way to change it. You just have to live with it."

How about this for media bias. Katie Couric the abortion rights marcher

Whoopi Goldberg: "Well because, you know, when you get out there and you march, because we've marched together."

Couric, feigning ignorance, retorted: "Nooo. I'm not allowed to do that." [She giggles]

Goldberg, playing along, with tongue firmly implanted in cheek as she stared upward: "Oh, no that's right. We have not marched together. It was somebody that looked like you."

Which leads to this:

On NBC's Today on Monday, Katie Couric posed at least seven abortion questions. To Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison:
"You know a lot has been made of the Republican Party being a very inclusive party, one that can embrace the views of various people. Given the way the platform has worked out vis a vis abortion, and the fact that some of these Republican governors are not speaking because they felt, as if they were being censored. Do you still believe you can call the Republican Party an inclusive party?"

During the 1992 convention, Couric only asked Clinton's mother Virginia Kelley puff questions:
"I also read in the many things that have been written about your son and his childhood that he used to walk to church alone with a Bible under his arm."
But Couric felt compelled yesterday to ask Dole s daughter Robin: "You all don t agree on all things political. I know you differ with him in terms of his views on abortion. Do you have discussions? Do you talk about it, talk it out, exchange views?"

hmmmmmm from Rather to Couric... not sure if that is a move to the center...

BTW: Rather was so biased he had his own web site "http://ratherbiased.com/"
Here are some great examples... and I'll leave out the fake memo story since we've talked that to death.

New president Bill Clinton congratulated Dan Rather on his on-air partnership with Connie Chung:
"Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. President. If we could be one-one-hundredth as great as you and Hillary Rodham Clinton have been together in the White House, we'd take it right now and walk away winners."
--Dan Rather at a meeting for CBS affiliates, May 27, 1993. Quoted in Columbia Journalism Review Sept./Oct. 1993.

and

On January 27, 1993, the Associated Press reported that nine of President Bill Clinton's cabinet appointees were millionaires. On January 23, 2001, the AP reported that President George W. Bush's nominees were "mostly millionaires." Dan Rather decided to follow the AP's lead in the Bush story, but not with the Clinton story. Rather never mentioned--throughout all eight years--that there were millionaires in Clinton's cabinets:
Dan Rather #1:
"Financial disclosure reports today show many in the Bush Cabinet and other top posts have two things in common: they're multimillionaires and many hold stock in companies affected by federal action. Some examples: Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, at least $ 5 million in stock options in the oil and gas industry company that he headed; Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, at least $5 million in stock options from his old company, Alcoa; and Secretary of State Colin Powell, at least $ 24 1/2 million in assets."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 23, 2001.
Dan Rather #2:
"The Clinton Cabinet is installed minus an attorney general."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
"The Clinton Cabinet is now complete."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, March 11, 1993

and last one... there are TONS more at the sight.

One of President Bill Clinton's first acts in 1993 was to repeal the ban on federal funding for international groups that assist in abortions. One of President George W. Bush's first acts was to reinstate that ban. In so doing, Clinton kept a "promise" while Bush pleased "the right flank of his party":
Dan Rather #1:
"On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Clinton fulfills a promise--supporting abortion rights."
"It was 20 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark abortion rights ruling and the controversy hasn't stopped since. Today, with the stroke of a pen, President Clinton delivered on his campaign promise to cancel several anti-abortion regulations of the Reagan-Bush years. CBS News correspondent Rita Braver has our report."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
Dan Rather #2:
"Up next here on the CBS Evening News, President Bush's fast anti-abortion action."
"This was President Bush's first day at the office, and he did something to quickly please the right flank in his party. He re-instituted an anti-abortion policy that had been in place during his father's term and the Reagan presidency, but was lifted during the Clinton years. CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts has more about the new President Bush in the Oval Office."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 2001.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
David Brinkley on media bias

"Well, it's there and it doesn't show itself in everything that is printed or broadcast but it is there, and I think we're all used to it, we discount it. Some of the press also is more conservative and it's just the way the action is in this country and I don't know any way to change it. You just have to live with it."

How about this for media bias. Katie Couric the abortion rights marcher

Whoopi Goldberg: "Well because, you know, when you get out there and you march, because we've marched together."

Couric, feigning ignorance, retorted: "Nooo. I'm not allowed to do that." [She giggles]

Goldberg, playing along, with tongue firmly implanted in cheek as she stared upward: "Oh, no that's right. We have not marched together. It was somebody that looked like you."

Which leads to this:

On NBC's Today on Monday, Katie Couric posed at least seven abortion questions. To Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison:
"You know a lot has been made of the Republican Party being a very inclusive party, one that can embrace the views of various people. Given the way the platform has worked out vis a vis abortion, and the fact that some of these Republican governors are not speaking because they felt, as if they were being censored. Do you still believe you can call the Republican Party an inclusive party?"

During the 1992 convention, Couric only asked Clinton's mother Virginia Kelley puff questions:
"I also read in the many things that have been written about your son and his childhood that he used to walk to church alone with a Bible under his arm."
But Couric felt compelled yesterday to ask Dole s daughter Robin: "You all don t agree on all things political. I know you differ with him in terms of his views on abortion. Do you have discussions? Do you talk about it, talk it out, exchange views?"

hmmmmmm from Rather to Couric... not sure if that is a move to the center...

BTW: Rather was so biased he had his own web site "http://ratherbiased.com/"
Here are some great examples... and I'll leave out the fake memo story since we've talked that to death.

New president Bill Clinton congratulated Dan Rather on his on-air partnership with Connie Chung:
"Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. President. If we could be one-one-hundredth as great as you and Hillary Rodham Clinton have been together in the White House, we'd take it right now and walk away winners."
--Dan Rather at a meeting for CBS affiliates, May 27, 1993. Quoted in Columbia Journalism Review Sept./Oct. 1993.

and

On January 27, 1993, the Associated Press reported that nine of President Bill Clinton's cabinet appointees were millionaires. On January 23, 2001, the AP reported that President George W. Bush's nominees were "mostly millionaires." Dan Rather decided to follow the AP's lead in the Bush story, but not with the Clinton story. Rather never mentioned--throughout all eight years--that there were millionaires in Clinton's cabinets:
Dan Rather #1:
"Financial disclosure reports today show many in the Bush Cabinet and other top posts have two things in common: they're multimillionaires and many hold stock in companies affected by federal action. Some examples: Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, at least $ 5 million in stock options in the oil and gas industry company that he headed; Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, at least $5 million in stock options from his old company, Alcoa; and Secretary of State Colin Powell, at least $ 24 1/2 million in assets."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 23, 2001.
Dan Rather #2:
"The Clinton Cabinet is installed minus an attorney general."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
"The Clinton Cabinet is now complete."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, March 11, 1993

and last one... there are TONS more at the sight.

One of President Bill Clinton's first acts in 1993 was to repeal the ban on federal funding for international groups that assist in abortions. One of President George W. Bush's first acts was to reinstate that ban. In so doing, Clinton kept a "promise" while Bush pleased "the right flank of his party":
Dan Rather #1:
"On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Clinton fulfills a promise--supporting abortion rights."
"It was 20 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark abortion rights ruling and the controversy hasn't stopped since. Today, with the stroke of a pen, President Clinton delivered on his campaign promise to cancel several anti-abortion regulations of the Reagan-Bush years. CBS News correspondent Rita Braver has our report."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
Dan Rather #2:
"Up next here on the CBS Evening News, President Bush's fast anti-abortion action."
"This was President Bush's first day at the office, and he did something to quickly please the right flank in his party. He re-instituted an anti-abortion policy that had been in place during his father's term and the Reagan presidency, but was lifted during the Clinton years. CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts has more about the new President Bush in the Oval Office."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 2001.

reaching

 

[Craig234]

John, I notice you show no interest in reading the two books I mentioned - the examples you posted neither address the larger issue nor even show examples of 'media bias'.

A few comments that are courteous outside the news don't prove news bias; one that was a news story doens't look biased to me:

One of President Bill Clinton's first acts in 1993 was to repeal the ban on federal funding for international groups that assist in abortions. One of President George W. Bush's first acts was to reinstate that ban. In so doing, Clinton kept a "promise" while Bush pleased "the right flank of his party":
Dan Rather #1:
"On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Clinton fulfills a promise--supporting abortion rights."
"It was 20 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark abortion rights ruling and the controversy hasn't stopped since. Today, with the stroke of a pen, President Clinton delivered on his campaign promise to cancel several anti-abortion regulations of the Reagan-Bush years. CBS News correspondent Rita Braver has our report."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
Dan Rather #2:
"Up next here on the CBS Evening News, President Bush's fast anti-abortion action."
"This was President Bush's first day at the office, and he did something to quickly please the right flank in his party. He re-instituted an anti-abortion policy that had been in place during his father's term and the Reagan presidency, but was lifted during the Clinton years. CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts has more about the new President Bush in the Oval Office."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 2001.

What is biased there? Because he referred to Clinton fulfilling a campaign promise and to Bush pleasing the right flank in his party?

 

[fire400]

you know what I think?

they are quite liberal, they take the free air and try to compress it to make it look like there is more head room for even conservatives to actually listen... which I think is very effective for getting viewers and listeners alike to want to tune in.

I'm trying to think here. since when do you see broadcasting stations trying to contend with "popular politics?" -what people want to hear, regardless of it being the truth or not.

-the U.S. was able to conquer the Nazi's. absorbed the way they ran their society and implimented it, convincing the world it was not the right way of living - a nightmare come true for leaders who face power struggle with competition in the United States... fight or become beaten with your people, regardless of morals.

fox news? I'd rather read newspaper from the metro.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Heifetz
Why is FOX news conservative?

Two words -- Rupert Murdoch.

"Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know.

The film explores Murdoch's burgeoning kingdom and the impact on society when a broad swath of media is controlled by one person.

Anotyher name, Roger Ailes.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Healey

Originally posted by: Rainsford

What does "being liberal" as an individual have to do with being liberally biased in your job?

If you're reporting on sports, not much. If you're reporting on politics and social issues, plenty.


This is almost 100% subjective, we can argue forever and never agree. I just view things a bit differently because I've had the opportunity to be in the trenches where we'd churn out the stuff day after day. Most of my time was in production as opposed to editorial which gave me the privilege of sitting back and taking the wide view.

But then again it was only my view filtered through my life experiences and personal biases. And of course how I relate those experiences here reflect my biases. Just as a right leaning journalist will present facts as he sees then, and a left leaning journalist will present the same facts from a differing viewpoint.

The entire "neutral journalist" model is pretty much an oxymoron anyway. Everyone paints the scene the way they see it, or want to see it.

given what you know, and your experience, in the news reporting field, I am curious about your perspective. It seems to me, and this goes for all cable news companies, that the idea of "journalistic integrity" is secondary to sensationalism. Left or right wing biases aside, should there be so much sensationalism in news reporting?

If you spend 10 minutes watching and hearing what these reporters say and do, the statements made are riddled with falacious arguments (appeal to emotion anyone?) and news reports are heavily edited, like news reporting on steroids.

I often compare cables news shows with Jim Leahers show on PBS...so drastically different yet the same information is reported.

What is your definition of journalism and do you consider your definition of journalism to be accurately portrayed and presented by todays news anchors, reporters, and journalists? When I think of journalism the first word that comes to mind is impartiality.

As for the UCLA study, I got through the first paragraph up until it states that Drudge has a "right wing reputation but leans left."

that makes ZERO logical sense. That is like saying the sky has a reputation for being blue but is really red.
??? If something is object A how can it have a REPUTATION of object B?

anyways it is super late (or early) and I might wake up later in the morning and not understand any of what im saying right now so..

cheers!! :beer:

 

[Red Dawn]

Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

You guys are so cute with your "faux" news and "repukes", it makes you look very immature.

You will find many conservatives that will admit that Fox (notice I spelled it correctly) News tilts to the right, but you will have a hard time finding a liberal on this board that admits that anyone in the MSM tilts to the left. According to them, everyone but Fox News its absolutely in the center, no bias at all.

You can see how childish they become with the constant "Faux News" and "Repugnicans". They think that it helps them get their point across when they constantly insult the other side.

Obviously both liberals and conservatives have their good points and their bad points, the liberals refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing on their part and will always point to the conservatives (kinda like the whole "faux news" thing). I think that Palehorse has taken the right attitude in using this board as entertainment only. You won't find very many meaningful debates here, just the left trying to shout down the right.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

You guys are so cute with your "faux" news and "repukes", it makes you look very immature.

You will find many conservatives that will admit that Fox (notice I spelled it correctly) News tilts to the right, but you will have a hard time finding a liberal on this board that admits that anyone in the MSM tilts to the left. According to them, everyone but Fox News its absolutely in the center, no bias at all.

You can see how childish they become with the constant "Faux News" and "Repugnicans". They think that it helps them get their point across when they constantly insult the other side.

Obviously both liberals and conservatives have their good points and their bad points, the liberals refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing on their part and will always point to the conservatives (kinda like the whole "faux news" thing). I think that Palehorse has taken the right attitude in using this board as entertainment only. You won't find very many meaningful debates here, just the left trying to shout down the right.

Well at least according to you:roll:

 

[judasmachine]

RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS [stop me if you see a pattern] RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Craig234
John, I notice you show no interest in reading the two books I mentioned - the examples you posted neither address the larger issue nor even show examples of 'media bias'.

A few comments that are courteous outside the news don't prove news bias; one that was a news story doens't look biased to me:

One of President Bill Clinton's first acts in 1993 was to repeal the ban on federal funding for international groups that assist in abortions. One of President George W. Bush's first acts was to reinstate that ban. In so doing, Clinton kept a "promise" while Bush pleased "the right flank of his party":
Dan Rather #1:
"On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Clinton fulfills a promise--supporting abortion rights."
"It was 20 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark abortion rights ruling and the controversy hasn't stopped since. Today, with the stroke of a pen, President Clinton delivered on his campaign promise to cancel several anti-abortion regulations of the Reagan-Bush years. CBS News correspondent Rita Braver has our report."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 1993.
Dan Rather #2:
"Up next here on the CBS Evening News, President Bush's fast anti-abortion action."
"This was President Bush's first day at the office, and he did something to quickly please the right flank in his party. He re-instituted an anti-abortion policy that had been in place during his father's term and the Reagan presidency, but was lifted during the Clinton years. CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts has more about the new President Bush in the Oval Office."
--Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, January 22, 2001.

What is biased there? Because he referred to Clinton fulfilling a campaign promise and to Bush pleasing the right flank in his party?

Craig... you kill me....
How come Clinton was not pleasing the left flank of the party and Bush was not fulfilling a campaign promise?

In ever one of those Rather example he could have said the same thing about each side, but he made the Republicans look like they were taking the extreme view, while the Democrats were just following up on promises.

 

[dmcowen674]

America is now split into two splinter groups....Americans and Un-Americans.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

Chris Mathews- former Carter speech writer
George Stephanopoulos- Clinton chief of staff
James Carville- Clinton campaign manager

I guess by your view that makes CNN, MSNBC and ABC unbiased?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

Chris Mathews- former Carter speech writer
George Stephanopoulos- Clinton chief of staff
James Carville- Clinton campaign manager

I guess by your view that makes CNN, MSNBC and ABC unbiased?

Good point, but I doubt they will even listen.

I'll reply for him so he doesn't have to copy and paste his reply....


"Well at least according to youroll:"

 

[JD50]

double post

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Faux News is so unbiased that the Dub cherry picked his spokesman from it's ranks:laugh:

Chris Mathews- former Carter speech writer
George Stephanopoulos- Clinton chief of staff
James Carville- Clinton campaign manager

I guess by your view that makes CNN, MSNBC and ABC unbiased?

Chris Matthews is basically on the republicans' side. Most of his 'biased' comments are in republicans' favor or against democrats.

Stephanopolous is mostly on neither side. He seems to take shots at both.

James Carville is definitely a liberal; does he have his own show now? Usually the media only puts liberals on with right-wingers opposing them.

As for your logic - I know you were just responding to the point that Fox hires republicans, but they hire James Carville types, not Chris Matthews types - can I count David Brock as a right-winger since he's a former right-wing writer, if you count Chris Matthews as a liberal because he wrote for Jimmy Carter?

You have to look at their actual views, too.

Look, one of the leading right-wingers has *admitted* the situation:

Grover Norquist, the right's brilliant political organizer, explains his team's advantage by virtue of the mindset of modern conservatism. "The conservative press is self-consciously conservative and self-consciously part of the team," he notes. "The liberal press is much larger, but at the same time it sees itself as the establishment press. So it's conflicted. Sometimes it thinks it needs to be critical of both sides."

That's it; when Fox hires a republican from the Bush team, he continues to wear the 'team jersey'; when ABC hires Stephonopolous, he has to be 'neutral'.

 

[piasabird]

If you are use to listening to the Liberal Bias of NBC and CBS, then maybe you might think Fox News is a little on the conervative side. You have been brainwashed by the liberal network news for so long that you have become a zombie incapable of intelligent independent thought.

 

[marincounty]

Fox news in not conservative- Fox news is fascist.Notice the movement of Tony Snow to the whitehouse, govt control of the news.
Can you imagine the uproar if Dan Rather became the spokesman during Bill Clinton's term? I haven't heard any complaints about this from right wingers.
How about Talon news?
Anyone seen a fake reporter at the white house press briefings lately?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: marincounty
Fox news in not conservative- Fox news is fascist.Notice the movement of Tony Snow to the whitehouse, govt control of the news.
Can you imagine the uproar if Dan Rather became the spokesman during Bill Clinton's term? I haven't heard any complaints about this from right wingers.
How about Talon news?
Anyone seen a fake reporter at the white house press briefings lately?

Ya and for some reason he was behind the podium! :confuzzled;

 

[astrosfan90]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Usually the media only puts liberals on with right-wingers opposing them.

You trying to tell me that Keith Olbermann isn't liberal?

By the way, maybe it was mentioned in the thread already, but it bears repeating. The talk shows are the op-ed columns of a news network. The actual news content on Fox is not biased unless showing real news instead of celebrity gossip counts as bias.

 

[Ferocious]

Think WWF versus real high school wrestling.

Exciting vs. boring.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: astrosfan90

Originally posted by: Craig234

Usually the media only puts liberals on with right-wingers opposing them.

You trying to tell me that Keith Olbermann isn't liberal?

By the way, maybe it was mentioned in the thread already, but it bears repeating. The talk shows are the op-ed columns of a news network. The actual news content on Fox is not biased unless showing real news instead of celebrity gossip counts as bias.

Keith Olbermann is the one, unique, rare, recent exception.

Of course, the same network hosts 'Tucker'. The numbers are far, far, in favor of the right.

Fox News' 'news' has a strong right-wing bias that the right-wingers seem unable to see because it's just too close to them.

There are all kinds of ways to do bias - some of the largest are simple what you cover versus what you leave out, others include time for which side, phony definitions of the two sides (having a 'moderate' and a 'right-winger' be the two sides), the tone with which the different sides are treated, whose 'allegations' get more coverage, etc.

Read Alterman's book for info to get informed on bias.

 

[Vich]

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

:thumbsup: