Does anyone actually watch FOX or MSNBC for NEWS?

[Tarquelne]

TV news is like human-source intelligence. Watching it tells you what people think, not necessarily what's true. And even as human intel. it's generally pretty crappy. Imagine, for example, running an (anti)organized crime wire unit where you're restricted to 10 second sound bites and, for the most part, only bug the most outspoken blowhards. Oh yeah: And the guys you bug know you're listening. So it's often not even "What they think." Instead it's a matter of "What they want you to believe they think."

My advice is: Beyond really basic events it's usually pretty shallow and generally a waste of time. "Waste of time." Not "completely uninformative." You can still be informed, but you'll learn things far more reliably and quickly reading online. Or a whole bunch of high-quality papers or magazines.

Plus it's nice having the 'net as a research tool to check your news sources. It doesn't take too long to learn who you can trust and who you can't.

Finally: If all you're looking for is confirming your own prejudices it's *even better* for that than TV, too.

 

[MobBoss]

You recently used a Fox News article that was largely quotes from an obscure Turkish tabloid, and which also apparently quote mined two Norwegian law professors, as the topic for a thread. When it was pointed out you claimed that it was such an article from a reputable French news source. The original Turkish article did quote that French source in its own article, but it then went on from there to promulgate highly biased opinions about those quotes, which was what Fox News based its article upon.

Many of the articles found on Fox News, and especially its subsidiaries, are fairly written with a reasonable amount of journalistic integrity. And I even quote them on occasion when they are. But many of them are not. They are really on a par with many of segments on their cable show. Perhaps I just missed all the cases where people in this forum incorrectly reacted as you claim.

Again, wasnt the source that Foxnews used on this from the AFP and not some turkish tabloid? Incredibly biased?

And I can understand why you would seem to miss how people react to Foxnews.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I suggest you go back and read the original thread where I made all this quite clear. Since it happened last week or so, it shouldn't be too difficult to find.

Perhaps you can provide an example or two where people in this forum unfairly reacted to actually "fair and balanced" Fox News articles, instead of deservedly criticizing them for disseminating propaganda. Or in this particular case for apparently quote mining two Norwegian law professors themselves, while citing an obscure Turkish tabloid as the basis for their article.

 

[civver_764]

You keep your riches
I'll sew my stitches
You can't make me think like you mundane
I've got a message for
All those who think that they can etch these words
inside my brain

TV what do I need?
Tell me who to believe
What's the use of autonomy
when a little button does it all?

 

[MobBoss]

I suggest you go back and read the original thread where I made all this quite clear. Since it happened last week or so, it shouldn't be too difficult to find.

Perhaps you can provide an example or two where people in this forum unfairly reacted to actually "fair and balanced" Fox News articles, instead of deservedly criticizing them for disseminating propaganda, or in this particular case apparently quote mining two Norwegian law professors while citing an obscure Turkish tabloid.

Ok, I did. Here was your post in regards to it:

The story is based to some extent on a number of quotes from this article that appeared in a Turkish English-speaking tabloid, which is the link in the Fox News article:

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n....y-as-killer-faces-21-years-at-most-2011-07-25

But the apparent quote mines of Norwegian law professors don't appear.

Right off the bat, at the top of the story is this: OSLO, Norway - Agence France-Presse

AFP was the original source of the story. It plainly says that. And in that same thread, Bamspeedy pointed out several other sources that did that as well.

Why does Fox News choose to quote him? Why does the NZherald choose to as well?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10740700

News agencies in other languages:

http://news.google.com/news/search?...&ned=us&hl=en&q="Daniel+de+Francisco"&tbm=nws

It seems AFP is the original news agency to interview him and quote him.

Many news agencies get the news from the same sources. So one reporter interviews people on the street and then those words are repeated through several news agencies all over the world.

And fwiw, I dont grasp your angst at the 'quotemine' reference since the Fox article actually mentions them as having the opposite viewpoint of others in the thread. Isnt giving both points of view the BALANCED thing to do?

What do you consider in that AFP story as 'incredibly biased' since it seems to actually offer two different points of view there?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Right off the bat, at the top of the story is this: OSLO, Norway - Agence France-Presse

They are apparently just using quotes from the AFP and drawing their own biased conclusions about them, much as Fox News does all the time.

And fwiw, I dont grasp your angst at the 'quotemine' reference since the Fox article actually mentions them as having the opposite viewpoint of others in the thread. Isnt giving both points of view the BALANCED thing to do?

As I made quite clear in the other thread, my "angst" is over the apparently quote mining Fox News did. They seemd to have taken those quotes completely out of context by insinuating that the Norwegian law professors were not discussing bringing back the death penalty as they apparently were. But they were reacting to the supposed negative reaction from a multitude of Norwegians, which is apparently quite imaginary and based on the biased opinions of a Turkish tabloid.

And since the quotes were not in the article from the Turkish tabloid, it was apparently Fox News who did so. This is further proof that it was not simply taking an existing article from a reputable source and reposting it.

What do you consider in that AFP story as 'incredibly biased' since it seems to actually offer two different points of view there?

Once again, only the quotes are apparently from the AFP source. Do you have any actual proof to the contrary? For instance, did the French article claim anything so obviously blased as this:

If found guilty, Behring Breivik's 21 years in prison would equal a penalty of 82 days per killing.

As has been pointed out repeatedly in the other thread, that statement is clearly a deliberate distortion. He is quite likely never getting out of prison. Even the Turkish tabloid admits the mechanisms are already there to keep him imprisoned indefinitely.

Why did Fox News quote this obscure Turkish tabloid in its article instead of the original AFP article?

 

[madviking]

BBC for Europeany things.
AJ for Middle Easty things.
OT for Americany things.

 

[bombshoo]

I watch MSNBC for the humor factor (Chris Matthews says some funny things trying to be serious) but get most of my real news online. Fox is just frustrating, except for Fox and Friends which sinks to such levels of stupidity it is funny sometimes.

 

[MobBoss]

Form...again....the story includes opposing lines of commentary....both sides of the issue are represented....the AFP story was referenced in media outlets all over the world like that.

You talk about the original story from the AFP itself........can you provide a link to it yourself? For comparative purposes?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Form...again....the story includes opposing lines of commentary....both sides of the issue are represented....the AFP story was referenced in media outlets all over the world like that.

Then I'm sure you will have no difficulty finding and posting the original AFP article, instead of more cases where they are referring to the Turkish tabloid or the Fox News article instead.

 

[classical_hero]

Since you claimed it was quote mined, you need to show that is was.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I stated it was apparently quote mined by Fox News, since those quotes are clearly not in the Turkish tabloid article. The only reason I say "apparently" here is due to the quotes not having citations which can exactly determine the context which they were made. But they certainly appear to be arguing against reviving the death penalty instead of supposedly going against the will of of the majority of Norwegians to have stricter laws, as the article insinuates.

But if the Turkish tabloid article is a reprint of an AFP article, instead of merely quotes from that article as they appear to be, the original article obviously did not include them.

It is quite common for various news agencies to take base articles and embellish them in such a manner. What they typically do not do though is quote mine like this, but that is commonly done by Fox News. I think this is yet another example of their lack of journalistic integrity which they are so infamous.

 

[sophie]

I don't really watch news (or much tv, for that matter) anymore. What current events I do know of come entirely from cfc.

 

[MobBoss]

Then I'm sure you will have no difficulty finding and posting the original AFP article, instead of more cases where they are referring to the Turkish tabloid or the Fox News article instead.

Actually, Form, you were the one that brought up the 'original' AFP article and alleged that Foxnews (or rather the 'Turkish Tabloid' ) significantly deviated from it....so you provide it and prove it.

If you cant, then you cant.

And I remind you yet again, Foxnews was the source that included comments defending Norways legal system. Again, if a source actually provides both sides of an issue how is it 'incredibly biased'?

You've made a lot of claims here without a lot of actual fact to back it up. I've been the one to go back, and offer up links and proof to back up my claim. You? Not so much.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Actually, Form, you were the one that brought up the 'original' AFP article and alleged that Foxnews (or rather the 'Turkish Tabloid' ) significantly deviated from it....so you provide it and prove it.

The Fox News article obviously does because it contains large sections which deviate from the Turkish tabloid. It is nowhere close.

 

[MobBoss]

The Fox News article obviously does because it is not an exact copy.

Still haven't found an example of someone negatively reacting in this forum to a Fox News article that is a carbon copy of an AP article?

I think I've got a pretty good example right here in this thread.

I have you allegeding extreme bias, propaganda and all that rot, despite the inclusion of both sides of the issue fairly equally.

And its happened before, and we all know it because of the way the knee jerks around here to the Foxnews links. And I would go find some examples for you, but trying to search for a two letter word (i.e. AP) doesnt work, and doing Foxnews in general gives so many examples as to be silly.

But i'm hardly the only one thats commented about the knee jerk even though its an AP article thing. A couple even mention it in the thread you are referencing. So, even though I dont provide proof to please you, I think its still a given it occurs in this venue.

So, how's the search for that AFP article going?

 

[SuperJay]

Neither. I don't think I've ever watched Fox News. I have watched Rachel Maddow on MSNBC but I don't watch their news coverage, just saw her show a few times. It was good. She's a rare one, that Rachel.

I get most of my news from NPR and the BBC. Robert Siegal, Michele Norris, Mellissa Block, Steve Inskeep, Renee Montagne and their colleagues at the Beeb - Clair Bolderson, Julian Marshall, Robin Lustig, and Owen Bennet-Jones among others - all do great work keeping me up to date on the happenings.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I have you allegeding extreme bias, propaganda and all that rot, despite the inclusion of both sides of the issue fairly equally.

That may be your opinion. But it certainly isn't mine. I think it is quite clear that this is yet another example of how Fox News deliberately injects bias and even propaganda into its supposed "news" articles, as they have so frequently done in the past. They don't have this extreme negative reaction from the vast majority of people in the world today because they are actually "fair and balanced", instead of just the opposite.

 

[MobBoss]

That may be your opinion. But it certainly isn't mine. I think it is quite clear that this is yet another example of how Fox News deliberately injects bias and even propaganda into its supposed "news" articles, as they have so frequently in the past. They don't have this negative reaction from the vast majority of people in the world today because they are actually "fair and balanced".

I just want to point out that you have yet to offer a single link or proof to back up your claims in this thread. What parts of that story are 'deliberate bias' or even qualify as 'propaganda' in it? I point out again that the story actually provides commentay for both sides of the issue....so whats your beef with it? Aside that its just Foxnews of course.

And fwiw, I think they have such a negative viewpoint in this particular venue because so many here are of the opposite opinion of conservatism, and Foxnews does indeed give a conservative slant to the news just as other major media sources go the other direction.

Foxnews is successful because until their arrival on scene major media played to one venue. Foxnews saw a demograph opportunity, and turned their format into the number one news format today. Good for them, but it does tend to piss off the more fringy and intolerant quite a bit.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Would you two like to be alone for a while?