groups

I give recent examples of Fox making up crap and even getting sued over it and what do NeoCons then post ... Liberals are making up that Fox makes up crap. I can only guess that either they can’t read or they can’t understand what they do read. My examples were very true, very clear, and well documented and linked.

If anyone has been fanned with a low outside slider, it is Dagon and Hubbell.

Thanks for the example Hubs lol ...

By the way, who are you root’n for; the Yanks or the Phillies?

I'm no fan of MSNBC or any other cable channel. I watch programming on whatever channel happens to carry programming I enjoy but I have no personal loyalty to any of them. I find Fox offensive in many cases, especially in their political commentary, but that doesn't stop me from watching their primetime programming which, thank the gods, is devoid of political content for the most part.

Like LLL, TwoSpirits and a goodly number of others, I liken Fox to The National Enquirer, The Star and any number of other rags that print whatever the consumer will 'buy' and don't much concern themselves with facts.

I found this article.

It's from 2007, so it's old, but it also predates president Obama and the most recent interest in Fox.

It is interesting in that it comes from MSNBC. Almost ironic in it's assertion of the overwhelming left leaning people in news sources in view of this discussion.

"An unusual source-MSNBC-has provided the latest documentation of the liberal bias in the mainstream media."

"The findings, based on an analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) records from 2004 through the first quarter of this year, were that 125 of those went to Democrats or liberal groups, 16 to Republicans or conservative groups, and two who gave to both."

view link

I agree that LLL's examples were actually excellent (much better than many I have heard before). I also really like Dagon's info and the personal experience is something that I appreciate. I usually use myself, because I can never know enough facts, and I can never be 100% sure of what I have gleaned from other sources that may be biased or just not as accurate as one would like.

Their is enough information here from links and that has been shared to be quite educational. I absolutely am biased and leaning more towards the conservative view because of past experience, years of driving with talk radio on, and simple logical conclusions that I believe to make sense to me. My bias does not negate my interest in getting more information to uncover the truth regardless of where it comes from.

LLL's sharing of the girl that was raped who worked for Halliburton was an excellent example to me because it seems unlikely that it would have been fabricated.
Of interest to me and that was telling was the fact that the elected official that originally helped the girl was a republican from Texas.

I noticed that his party was not mentioned in the Maddow piece (hmm?) that definitely was not trying to promote republican love.

On the other hand, his presence within the story adds to the legitimacy of it. It is not very likely to have been somehow created in order to defame Halliburton.

I have not gotten the specific info on the bill but my first impression is that it is very important to protect the rights of a woman in such a situation as that. I would have to see the that the down side of the bill was at least as important to show justification for voting against it. I have not heard that argument. The fact that none of those that voted against it were willing to clarify their reasons to the Maddow show raises Questions.

I told Merlinsflame the other day that I wished that I had LLL's head of knowledge and experience, and then I would like to see what I believed about everything then.

I realize that it is the norm that a person is either on one side of these issues or the other and kind of sold in that direction, so that we tend to defend these positions.

My logic tells me that it is not very likely that an irrefutable law of physics would make all reality divided into equal democrat or republican halves.

I mean, how convenient is that? I don't buy into this notion. I think that we all have a lot more in common then we may realize at times. I think that propaganda has us polarized more often than reality.

Just my opinion. Everyone can decide for themselves.

I don't have time to decide for myself...too much football goin on right now..

So, for today and tomorrow, someone can decide for me.

Thank you.

Let's make it real simple.

Fox News calls itself Fox News. It's not news, it's an opinion/propaganda channel and all of its shows follow suit.

MSNBC calls itself "the place for politics" ~ it has a centrist/progressive bias. It doesn't call itself a news channel with news programs.

Democracy Now! is really news, but doesn't call itself news.

Fox lies.

I think Greta is the best! The others do require some patience some times - they are so self-serving - but Greta is usually sensible -

I love it. Fox has stripped their "news" shows of journalism. Pretty much lays it out in thet video, LLL. Well done.

Hey, I could be a fox newscaster. I can say "shut up" with the best of them!!

You can tell who is suseptable to propaganda and sensationalism by their devotion to Faux Noise. These are the same folks you find at a lynching or cooking dinner while declaring that the smoke from Auschwitz makes nice sunsets.

I'm so disgusted by the MO of Fox, I won't watch anything, joy .... so I wouldn't know about Greta. Her affiliation with Fox is enough for me to dismiss her.