|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| ...people who claim they wouldn't be caught dead watching Fox News, can possibly know what it is running 24/7? |
Who's said that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| I hardly agree with everything I hear on FoxNews but at least they're not disingenuous. |
What? Even you yourself admit:
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| ... it is true that most FoxNews commentators lean right ... |
Every time they claim to be "fair and balanced," they're committing an act of disingenousness; it's a statement so untrue that it's a joke nearly everyone in our society knows and understands. Mind you, that doesn't even begin to discuss the individual acts of disingenousness they partake in in their actual reporting (one example of which Rufus just gave, with Hannity's Obama quote).
If you want to say other news agencies are also disingenous, I won't disagree. But saying Fox isn't disingenous is an outright lie. Why do that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
NAVFC imagined:
| Quote: |
| do you really have to ask why Obama would have a problem with foxnews? Are you really that Naiave? Foxnews has become nothing but the 24/7 anti Obama channel. No matter what Obama does, they always find a way to report on it as if it were a bad thing, in a anti obama light, NO matter the circumstances. |
It's ridiculous to compare me with bacasper because he believes Obama is a sell-out. That's hardly my calling card. |
So each of you accuses me of agreeing with the other, while each claims to disagree with me.   It is good to know I have gotten everyone sufficiently confused.
It is not easy maintaining my reputation of being the one with whom everyone disagrees. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| It is not easy maintaining my reputation of being the one with whom everyone disagrees. |
I disagree with that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RufusW wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| It is not easy maintaining my reputation of being the one with whom everyone disagrees. |
I disagree with that. |
 See, everyone, I told you so  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BS Man in the middle. See the example I have regarding the foxnews story about Obama and 9-11 sympathizers. That is a BIG example of foxnews "reporting" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The attack on Obama that he harps on Fox news show the lack of ammunition that the Republicans have to use against the man. he also aparently doesnt like flies. So what. If the best attack the republicans can come up with is that he is disrespectful of that joke of a network than Obama must be doing a good job. Of course the media likes the guy. Young well spoken, educated with a beautiful wife two cute kids, well liked overseas and at home. It's natural that he gets favorable attention, and the media is aware he is liked, so they tread lightly but so what! Reagan got even better treatment from both sides, left and right. The honeymoon is ending. if Obama's worse offense is not liking Fox news he is doing a terrific job. I remember Van Sustern interviewing a lady who thought Donald Rumsfeld was a sex symbol!!! this is substantive journalism Fox style?? I do like Fox Business network though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RufusW replied:
| Quote: |
| O'Really? Fox news isn't anywhere near 'fair and balanced'. Have a look at 'Outfoxed' by Greenwald. Fox news took talking points directly from the Bush administration, it's viewpoint is decided by memos from 'head office'. Examples of Fox mis-editing material is abundent. |
Yes, I know, they're too numerous to mention. This is the typical response from those who can't be specific in their rebuttals. Clearly, FoxNews had a favorable relationship with the Bush Administration which isn't surprising since they were the only network to give the former President a fair hearing. Obama does the same for NBC and ABC. So while it doesn't make FoxNews objective, it is certainly no worse in its reporting than the others, which is my point.
| Quote: |
| Their biggest names intentionally distort actual news. NAVFC is entirely correct, Hannity played this quotre from Obama, "And, some people would justify the offense of 9-11" but he (intentionally) failed to show the next 30 seconds where Obama fully renounces the act. Remember when Fox photoshopped a couple of photos of commentators it didn't like to make them look ugly..... Obama doesn't give interviews because he thinks they're a joke and they need to clean up their act. |
Again, you're showing your ignorance. O'Reilly did a three-part interview with Senator Obama a month before the election. And citing Hannity as if he typifies all reporting is unfair. Hannity is a commentator; Brett Hume and Brett Baier and Chris Wallace among others on the network are not. But then you probably don't even know who they are. Hume used to be the point man on ABCNews and Wallace used to work at CBSNews.
NAVFC:
| Quote: |
| BS Man in the middle. See the example I have regarding the foxnews story about Obama and 9-11 sympathizers. That is a BIG example of foxnews "reporting" |
Somebody must have earned their forensic skills from a correspondence course through the local Bx.
You mention one story to be representative of all the reporting done at FoxNews. And you have nothing to say in response to my other specific comments.
rollo pouted:
| Quote: |
| The attack on Obama that he harps on Fox news show the lack of ammunition that the Republicans have to use against the man. |
First, let me applaud you on your mastery of English syntax. Your students are in good hands. 
| Quote: |
| he also aparently doesnt like flies. So what. |
Yes, this aside is really germane to the discussion and moves it forward.
| Quote: |
| If the best attack the republicans can come up with is that he is disrespectful of that joke of a network than Obama must be doing a good job. Of course the media likes the guy. Young well spoken, educated with a beautiful wife two cute kids, well liked overseas and at home. |
Laura was older but well spoken and educated and her caboose is smaller than Michelle's. And unlike her successor, Laura never had to retract or redefine her public statements. The Bush daughters, who were educated in public high schools in Austin unlike Obama's, weren't cute as they were older. So let's not go there.
Well liked by whom? The French and Germans ignored his requests for more troops in Afghanistan, he's being criticized as we speak by the Ayatollah in Iran. The Israeli leaders don't take a shine to him believing he's pro-Arab and the Afghan President criticized a recent drone missile attack on his watch that killed dozens of civilians. But he does have the Kenyan vote wrapped up--I'll give you that.
As I said, if you bothered to do more than skim, there's nothing wrong with the media liking Obama but they are falling over themselves trying to do his bidding and that is almost unprecedented.
| Quote: |
| Reagan got even better treatment from both sides, left and right. |
You're kidding, aren't you? The liberal press skewered him (calling him the "Fascist Gun in the West" among other epithets) but the Democratic leaders in Congress, notably Tip O'Neill, loved him on a personal level at least. Yet millions of Democrats voted for him not only because of his charisma but his policies and principles. Already there is a growing schism between Obama the man and Obama the leader among the electorate, which recent Rasmussen polls have detected.
| Quote: |
| I remember Van Sustern interviewing a lady who thought Donald Rumsfeld was a sex symbol!!! this is substantive journalism Fox style?? |
Susteren is a commentator and includes light-hearted fare in her daily program which you'd know if you'd bother to watch since Rumsfeld left office. And fluff stories often end the nightly alphabet soup news programs, in case you hadn't noticed.
Fox accused:
| Quote: |
| they're committing an act of disingenousness; it's a statement so untrue that it's a joke nearly everyone in our society knows and understands. |
That's a slogan and like all slogan it's three parts advertising and two parts truth. Speaking of which, what about CNN's "the most trusted news network" slogan? Go back and review some of the slogans other networks have used, too.
There is no thing as entirely objective news reporting because by virtue of what they choose to cover all the networks are being subjective. Further, I never claimed FoxNews is always in the right.
Next in line, please... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| That's a slogan and like all slogan it's three parts advertising and two parts truth. |
Except in this case it's zero parts truth, which is why it's disingenous. As you yourself say, it's a right leaning network. They are neither fair nor balanced in their coverage; they have an agenda.
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| Speaking of which, what about CNN's "the most trusted news network" slogan? Go back and review some of the slogans other networks have used, too. |
I'm not saying those networks aren't disingenous, am I?
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| There is no thing as entirely objective news reporting because by virtue of what they choose to cover all the networks are being subjective. Further, I never claimed FoxNews is always in the right. |
You did however claim Fox News is not disingenous, and that's a lie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't really want to bring the hammer down yet, this looks like it'll be a fun thread, but here's a few examples of Fox mis-editing material.
http://mediamatters.org/reports/200905050003
The incident NAVFC brought up:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200906040053
O'Really misrepresenting a past interview and claiming Dr. Tiller killed 60,000 fetuses.
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/bill-oreilly-edits-joan-walsh-intervi
'Commentators' are allowed to be biased, but they're not allowed to change/misrepresent facts.
There's two possibilities; either they're so stupid they can't process information correctly and unintentionally take incorrect messages from what people say; or, they do it intentionally to promote a specific viewpoint. Either way, they shouldn't be trusted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sketcha
Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:02 am Post subject: :p |
|
|
hahahahahahaha ...
this is a joke right??
well, if not ...
true, Obama should stop harping or mentioning Fox News for one reason: it's not worth it
fox news is not worth his (or anyone's) time or energy to even spew the name out
I'm really amazed they can call it news and I wonder how those people at fox news could sleep at night, or are they just clueless ... no, I don't wonder, they're not worth thinking about
way I like to treat fox news is like a piece of dog turd on the sidewalk, you just side step it and go about your day
it may offer a bit of amusement now and then, but it's basically turd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Middleman uttered:
| Quote: |
As I said, if you bothered to do more than skim, there's nothing wrong with the media liking Obama but they are falling over themselves trying to do his bidding and that is almost unprecedented.
|
In what is practically another first, I agree that it is unprecedented, but it is only in degree and not kind.
Ironically however, you are giving me a run for my money for the poster with whom everyone wants to disagree. Good show |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:01 am Post subject: Re: WHY IS BARACK OBAMA ALWAYS HARPING ON FOXNEWS? |
|
|
Middleman pondered:
| Quote: |
| Why is this President allowing himself to be so pestered by a single news network? |
and then remarked:
| Quote: |
| Both NBC and MSNBC are in the tank for Obama big time. It's hardly limited to a few shows as you imagine. |
Absolutely.
| Joshua Frank wrote: |
| If not now, when exactly will Obama�s policies be scrutinized with the same veracity that Bush�s were? When will the media end its love affair with Obama and hold his feet to the fire like they did Bush once the wheels fell off the war in Iraq? When will progressives see their issues as paramount and oppose Obama and the Democratic Party until they embrace their concerns? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't come across this news that Obama is constantly harping on Fox News...was this a Fox News story?
If Obama has been, I personally imagine it would be reference more to the joke they are, rather than him actually 'harping' on them - which implies heavy moaning, complaining, lecturing, and heavy reference of warnings type of behaviors.
Anyways, IF this is a story, sounds like a Fox News story to boost rating and stroke it's self-ego. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:32 am Post subject: Re: WHY IS BARACK OBAMA ALWAYS HARPING ON FOXNEWS? |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
| The "slobbering love affair," as award-winning former CBS senior reporter Bernard Goldberg has coined it, shows no signs of abating despite the last flicker of post-election afterglow. Obama is getting favorable press on a scale that hasn't been seen since JFK, who was the master at chumming it up with the Fourth Estate. |
I WISH this were true, but it isn't. I recall President Bush was given almost two or three years of complete flattery and loveliness from pretty much all media sources and even the Democratic Party themselves.
It was basically when Saddam Hussein was captured, and no WMD were found, that everything went off course for Bush, among an esclating amount of other factors after that. Prior to that time, there was certainly a 'love America, love Bush' era that lasted way longer than it should have with the Media.
---
Obama's adminstration, I see A LOT more 'what does McCain think?' and 'What does the GOP think?' news stories constantly challenging Obama and he JUST got into office. I don't recall in 2001 any 'what does Gore think?' or 'what do Dems think?'.
I've also been witnessing intensive anti-Obama stuff right from Day 1. With Bush, and even with all the 9-11 poor leadership of Bush, you had everyone supporting Bush with all things well after he failed. It took a few years for people to actually acknowledge what a failure he was. (Hence why we see diehard Republicans embracing Palin, O'Reilly, and everyone who comes down the waterpipe except for Bush).
PERSONALLY, I would much prefer more of THAT American spirit - supporting our President until he actually does poorly fail, rather than this constant tea parties, threats to leave the Union, and all the other anti-American garbage that I keep viewing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
