Fox News bought?

[Tonington]

So Jack, what is the purpose of posting articles speaking to Fox and their "middle road" approach, in a thread that isn't directed at the political spectrum where Fox News resides, but the journalistic integrity of their management?

What is interesting here is that Fox News had some great journalists, who compiled a lot of research, and then Fox threw them under the bus. Can you link to Fox competitors firing their journalists because their news story would cause lost advertising revenue?

The story isn't notable because it's Fox, it's notable because of what they did.

 

[YukonJack]

Looks like our good friend Avro must built his sel-confidence by repeating himself:

"But, but...I thought they were fair and balanced.:lol:"

"No one else is using "fair and balanced" as a catch phrase."

Meanwhile forgetting the totally false claim by CNN: "The most trusted name in news".

If that is so, how come CNN viewership is trusted by less than half of those who watch FOX?a

Tonington, if I spent enough time googleing, I am sure I could come up with stuff that would prove that FOX is not the only news source that presents news that reflect their editorial stance and punish those anchors/personnel who disagree with it.

Sometimes it is not so much what a news source report, rather what it does NOT report. None, but FOX reported the voter intimidation by the Black Panthers in Philadephia during the Presidential election in 2008, until FOX shamed them into it.

NONE of them, except FOX reported the "I hate white crackers, every last iota of them.... kill them ... kill their babies" rant by a raging Black Panther.

I am not going to bother to link you to the video. You and others here would only say that it was staged by FOX, or if real the Panhter was misquoted.

 

[Avro]

Looks like our good friend Avro must built his sel-confidence by repeating himself:

"But, but...I thought they were fair and balanced.:lol:"

"No one else is using "fair and balanced" as a catch phrase."

Meanwhile forgetting the totally false claim by CNN: "The most trusted name in news".

If that is so, how come CNN viewership is trusted by less than half of those who watch FOX?a

This isn't about CNN, but since you brought it up YJ.

"The most trusted name in news" is as big of a joke as Fox saying they are "fair and balanced" especially when it is CNN themselves who are saying it.

Now, can you address the actual point without defecting it in different directions?

Do you think Fox is "Fair and Balanced"?

 

[Tonington]

Tonington, if I spent enough time googleing, I am sure I could come up with stuff that would prove that FOX is not the only news source that presents news that reflect their editorial stance and punish those anchors/personnel who disagree with it.

I guess we'll never know. Here we have actual evidence of Fox dumping stories they had intended to run because of pressure from advertisers, not because of their editorial stance. Did you watch the video? The editorial stance was, ask tough questions. When that impacted the operating budget, the editorial stance became, you will report what we tell you to report.

I don't really care if others do it as well. But that's me, I'm a principled fella. I don't lie and cheat. Others do, but that's not a compelling reason for me to give up my principles.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So Jack, what is the purpose of posting articles speaking to Fox and their "middle road" approach, in a thread that isn't directed at the political spectrum where Fox News resides, but the journalistic integrity of their management?

What is interesting here is that Fox News had some great journalists, who compiled a lot of research, and then Fox threw them under the bus. Can you link to Fox competitors firing their journalists because their news story would cause lost advertising revenue?

The story isn't notable because it's Fox, it's notable because of what they did.

If a journalist deviates even slightly form the official conservative, pro-Repulbican line, then that journalist is out, no matter how good he is, or how good a story he has reported.

Meanwhile forgetting the totally false claim by CNN: "The most trusted name in news".

That claim is well deserved and true enough. CNN has a reputation as a respectable, reliable news outlet.

If that is so, how come CNN viewership is trusted by less than half of those who watch FOX?a

So are you saying that if a news outlet has a bigger viewership, that outlet is more reliable? Then by your definition, Enquirer is more reliable than FOX news, since Enquirer readership is much greater than FOX viewership.


If FOX has bigger viewership than CNN, it simply means that right wing extremists faithfully watch FOX and take everything they see on FOX as gospel truth. It says nothing abut the reputation or reliability of FOX or of CNN.