Is there an "independant" News Channel in America?

[JohnRM]

Nightly talk shows are the devil, that's for sure.

Well, that is exactly what they are - talk. It is not news. Now, I happen to have a lot of respect for Bill O'Reilly, although he does annoy me sometimes, but what he does is NOT news. If I recall, Bill has even said as much on several occasions, calling it "News Commentary."

 

[Bill3000]

There is no such thing as an unbiased news channel, but that's not important. The fact of the matter is that the news should report news, not interpret it - this is something that no one does, and is practically impossible anyway.

Most news nowadays is more akin to entertainment than news - the quintessential example being Fox, of course, but other channels are becoming like this (with regards to sensensionalism, not bias.)

 

[nivi]

The BBC sees itself as biased.

 

[skadistic]

WTOP on the radio.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Most news nowadays is more akin to entertainment than news - the quintessential example being Fox, of course, but other channels are becoming like this (with regards to sensensionalism, not bias.)

With its overuse of graphics and movie style soundtracks the British ITN is very much going down the route of "Entertainment News".

Frankly I think it's bloody awful and I hope the BBC holds out against going down the same path for as long as possible.

 

[.Shane.]

I agree w/ Whomp NPR/PBS are excellent sources of news.

Fox is a joke. CNN is fine, but they're pretty weak in terms of hard news.

 

[Katheryn]

You forgot talk radio.

Talk radio is where it is at.

 

[Zamecnik]

Our media in America is in bad shape. The closest thing we have to "independent" news channels are PBS and NPR, which do feature some excellent and in-depth reporting. Some of their specials are very good as well. Fox (far-right) and CNN (center-right) are corporate machines, appealing to the lowest common denominator. CNN used to have some decent reporting, but as some commentator remarked, they're going the fox route and trying to grab a piece of that "white-trash pie."

 

[ComradeDavo]

The thing about the BBC is that it is neutral, which to the right-wing means it's left/liberal biased

 

[woody60707]

So whos the guy that said "being center means being right"? The center is a bais all it's own, being that it is always shifting to fit in it's place beteewn the left and righty's

 

[Elrohir]

Now some will scoff, but i see the BBC as pretty much fair as regards viewing the two main political parties, and general world events.

Meanwhile Fox bashing almost seems like an American pastime.

I there anything to watch that is independant to either sides viewpoint?

Everything here is biased. But most of it is better than the BBC.

 

[Katheryn]

The thing about the BBC is that it is neutral, which to the right-wing means it's left/liberal biased

There is a big scandal going on right now about the BBC:


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...iased,+admit+the+stars+of+BBC+News/article.do

We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News
21.10.06
Add your view


Sue Lawley led the discussions during the summit.
It was the day that a host of BBC executives and star presenters admitted what critics have been telling them for years: the BBC is dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism.

A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues, especially concerning Muslims and the war on terror.

It reveals that executives would let the Bible be thrown into a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran, and that they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden if given the opportunity. Further, it discloses that the BBC's 'diversity tsar', wants Muslim women newsreaders to be allowed to wear veils when on air.

At the secret meeting in London last month, which was hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians.

 

[Katheryn]

Fox has changed dramatically since the purchase of a large amount of stock by a Saudi prince:

Saudi Prince Calls Murdoch And Changes Fox News
During last month’s street riots in France, Fox News ran a banner during a news segment, reading: “Muslim riots.” Billionaire Saudi Prince al-Walid bin Talal, who owns 5.5% of Fox News, was unhappy with the tagline:

I picked up the phone and called Murdoch… (and told him) these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty. Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots.

Talal gained notoriety after 9/11 when he blamed U.S. policies for the terrorist attacks.

Fox News spokeswoman Irena Briganti refused to confirm or deny that the call took place but “acknowledged the network changed the banner after receiving complaints.”

He evidently has the power to change the view on Fox news.

The day Murdoch was painted as a red by the right

Joanna Walters in New York
Sunday October 22, 2006
The Observer


For the watching analysts, the main news at Rupert Murdoch's News Corp AGM on Friday was that he managed to extend his 'poison pill' defence against John Malone's Liberty Media for a further year, but with a reduced margin of only 57 to 43 per cent.
Everyone else was absorbed by the spectacle of irate small investors giving him a taste of his own tabloid medicine and accusing him of being a red under the bed.

Murdoch may have a Chinese wife, but what on earth, conservative shareholder Cliff Kincaid wanted to know, was he doing having so many dealings with Communist China?

The obvious answer - making money - was clearly not acceptable to the moral majority.

And why, perhaps even worse in their eyes, was he breakfasting with Hillary Clinton, having held a fundraiser for the Democratic senator?

'She is a very intelligent, smart and charming politician,' Murdoch purred. He ignored the Communist China reference while emphatically answering 'No' to questions about whether he was currently doing business with North Korea.

Meanwhile, Leon Weil wanted to know why Murdoch's channels broadcast programmes such as Nip/Tuck which, he spluttered, featured misogyny, bestiality, necrophilia and was going to screen a 'rear entry' sex scene in the next three months? They are all on after kids' bedtime, Murdoch assured.He tried to distract them with news of the company's fast-growing internet division, which has recently bought MySpace. 'To some in the traditional media business, these are the most stressful of times. For us it's a great time,' he said.

But the little people would have none of it. It was the contamination of traditional media by politically hostile elements that bothered them. Why was Al Jazeera shown on BSkyB? And why did BSkyB broadcast Channel 4's Death of a President, which mocks-up the assassination of George W Bush?

Of course, broadcasting rules dictate that Murdoch operate 'open platforms', allowing everything from Al Jazeera to Antiques Roadshow down his tubes.

But finally he could sympathise with his critics. 'Unfortunately I cannot censor the BBC or Channel 4,' he grumbled.And that's not a poison pill, just a bitter one.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,1928146,00.html

 

[Tycoon101]

The thing about the BBC is that it is neutral, which to the right-wing means it's left/liberal biased

The thing is, you tend to believe that 'If it doesn't agree with me, it's biased'.

I only use this site, despite it's liberal orientation, for my news, because American news stations are a joke. There are no truly centrist stations. Why would someone, who is centrist, want a TV station? Biased people want one, so they can say that America believes their crap.

 

[Perfection]

News is inherantly biased, you're trying to turn all the going ons in the world into a something you can paruse in 20 minutes while having coffee, facts are gonna be left out, pictures will be incomplete, people will be shortchanged and end up getting annoyed by it.

That's just the way things are.

 

[Taliesin]

At the secret meeting in London last month, which was hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians.

I bet it's full of Jews, too.

Anyone who isn't automatically inclined to laugh at the quoted section should read the rest of the linked article and note how sensationalist the above claims are when compared to the measly quotations (mostly not actually from BBC executives) proffered by way of support.