posted June 12, 2007 05:40 PM            

quote:

---

Is it biased?

---

posted June 12, 2007 09:11 PM            

Now, as compared to CNN and MSNBC as well as 99% of the print newspapers- it seems very Right leaning.

Mostly that is due to the fact that the above mentioned media sources are dominated by left leaning editors and reporters (seriously, I can hunt down the results from the poll that asked journalists of print news and media sources if they were liberal or conservative- it is VERY left leaning).

posted June 12, 2007 11:34 PM            

IMO they all have a lean, in one direction or the other.

I think Pid's right in that Repubs think Fox is fair because it was the first cable news network to fairly represent the "right" side of things, in a sea of abject "leftness" in the news. IMO Fox used to be more in the center, but now it's pretty right leaning - which is ok to me because I see the rest as pretty left-leaning, so they balance each other out.

posted June 14, 2007 02:27 PM            

I don't have cable so I also have no idea about CNN etc. I do find everyone's information very interesting and of course, "informative" hehe (informative information, imagine that!) so if you have anything to add in the future or anything to add to my mention of Fox programming in general, I will check back. Thanks again!!

posted June 14, 2007 06:47 PM            

*******************************************
The information I read began with this introduction:

"As tallied up at JunkScience.com courtesy of the global warmers’ own
data, Kyoto is estimated to have cost about $150 billion so far, while
only hypothetically reducing the average global temperature by 0.0015
degrees Centigrade.

At that rate, it would take 667 years and cost $100 trillion to
hypothetically avert just 1 degree Centigrade of global warming.

But such infinitesimal estimates of averted global warming would only
apply, of course, if Kyoto’s signatories actually complied with its
provisions. They are finding it virtually impossible to even do that."

and went on to explain that Al Gore claimed to understand this
information and when asked if he thought Kyoto

****(The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change is an amendment to the international treaty on climate
change, assigning mandatory emission limitations for the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions to the signatory nations.

The objective is the "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system.")**** so sayeth Wikipedia

would actually make a difference and Al Gore replied, "Hell no!" The
article went on to explain that he supported spending the trillions of
dollars (or maybe it was just one trillion so far and the trillIONS
comes into effect over the 6 hundred and some years to reduce one
degree... "to demonstrate that international support could be mustered
for action on the environment" which the article scoffs at as "quite an
expensive political exercise."

This information has caused me to consider the hidden (most likely
political) agenda to both sides of the Global Warming issue. I haven't
seen the Gore movie yet but I am glad that this information will help me
to view it more objectively when I do see it. I mean initially
everyone's thoughts are, "What could be wrong with taking action to save
our world from global warming!? " But realistically, trillions of
dollars could be spent in other ways, teaching people to slow down and
consume less which is really the only thing that will have any real
effect on the pollution in our world. However, if Kyoto really cracked
down and imposed regulations that would change our way of life, and
actually made a difference, the people would rebel, especially in
America, home of the "greedy capitolistic pigs" as my high school
government teacher lovingly referred to us.
********************************************

That is what I posted to one of the message board assignments. The link to "Junk Science" was given to us by the professor and it seems to have a lot of links to Fox.News stories so I just wondered why he chose the link.
www.junkscience.com

We also got three other links and he just added 3 links on vaccines and the vaccine scare that I also looked at, along with 3 chapters from a college text and homework assignments for each chapter all due in one week of summer class (yay) so although I am interested and would love to have a great class discussion, the kiddos aren't reading the links. I figured a lot of people here in Global would have already educated themselves on these issues so I came for the real deal.

posted June 14, 2007 08:53 PM            

The truth is that they haven't coherently figured out the truth on Climate Change, what impact humans may have on it, and whether or not the Earth self-adjusts to correct it. I think it's very safe to say that the effects have already been felt in a wide variety of areas, and may continue to be felt as long as any warming trend continues.

posted June 15, 2007 12:07 PM            

Reason? The record cold weather in lots of places on earth last winter and extending into spring and early summer and as recently as a few weeks ago in Denver, CO.

posted June 15, 2007 11:59 PM            

I get such a balanced view from both sides, my favorite kind of education.

I read the beginning of the first thread and it is very helpful. I appreciate you digging those up AG and yes, it looks like a lot of reading. It was VERY cool of you to compile those threads. You rock!

posted June 16, 2007 12:19 AM            

quote:

---

Is Fox News biased....is the pope catholic?

---

posted June 16, 2007 02:10 AM              

funny... i saw this thread title and came here with the full intention of saying the same thing.

posted June 18, 2007 11:08 PM            

------------------
Waiting for my Soldier Bear to come home from the Sandbox.. I love you Bear...Forever and a Day....

www.IMWITHFRED.com

posted June 18, 2007 11:14 PM            

April 27, 2006
Not A Good Sign For Snow: WH Reporter Complains About Fox On TV
From a gaggle with Scott McClellan today:

We're fairly sure "Q" is : Jim VandeHei

Q It's come to my attention that there's been requests -- this is a serious question -- to turn these TVs onto a station other than Fox, and that those have been denied. My question would be, is there a White House policy that all government TVs have to be tuned to Fox?

MR. McCLELLAN: Never heard of any such thing. My TVs are on four different channels at all times.

Q Because you have four different TVs. But every time I've ever been --

MR. McCLELLAN: Every TV in the White House also has channels every -- has a split screen, where they can --

Q Well, they always seem to be tuned to Fox, and there's been requests, and these are paid for by taxpayer dollars. And my understanding is that you guys have to watch Fox on Air Force One. Is that true?

MR. McCLELLAN: First time I've ever heard of it. First time you've brought it to my attention, meaning the first time the press corps has brought it to my attention. In fact, I've watched other channels on here.

Q There's one --

MR. McCLELLAN: Hang on, Jim, come on. I've watched other channels on here, so I don't know where yuo're hearing that. But it's the first time anyone in the press has raised that question with me.

Q You've watched other channels other than Fox?

MR. McCLELLAN: On here, yes, sure.

Q I've never seen -- they're always turned to Fox, which a lot of people consider a Republican-leaning network.

Q Scott, is it one -- on the airplane, is it one for all? I mean, if it's tuned for Fox here, is it Fox everywhere?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think that certain areas may be interconnected, but I'll have to double-check which.

Q Is yours off, wherever you are?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the conference room, or the senior staff office, the staff office, they're different TVs, and you can switch to different channels. I'm not sure if some of these in the back are connected to some of the others that are watching right here, right now. It doesn't look like it to me. I've never known anyone that's raised a complaint about a request from back here to watch a different channel.

Q I'm officially raising it and officially complaining about it.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm going to go see if we can change the channel for you. Have you called up?

Q I was the Fox victim, and I was told -- the quote was, "No," when I asked for CNN.

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know who you talked to, so -- it didn't come to my attention. You don't know who you talked to either?

Q Well, the magic people at the other end off the phone.

MR. McCLELLAN: The magic people at the other end of the phone. Well, I'll see if this cabin is --

Q I was told, "We don't watch CNN here, you can only watch Fox."

MR. McCLELLAN: As I said, it's hard to respond to something when I don't know who it is you talked to.

Q I used the phone back here.

MR. McCLELLAN: I find this all quite amusing, to tell you the truth. I mean, there are a lot of people on this plane that do watch that channel.

Q I've never been told, no. They're such nice guys up there.

MR. McCLELLAN: First time you brought it to my attention. I'll go see what we can do on it

posted June 19, 2007 11:33 PM            

He also asks that the TV be tuned to Fox News, "The Smoking Gun" reported. And he likes the suite equipped with extra lamps, with all the lights turned on, as well as copies of the local newspaper, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/23/cheney.hotel/index.html

Almost all TV sets inside the White House are tuned in to Fox http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1896137&page=1&GMA=true
(It's just one line in an article, so who knows the validity of it.)

posted June 19, 2007 11:45 PM            

That is one hell of a stretch, even for someone like you.

------------------
Waiting for my Soldier Bear to come home from the Sandbox.. I love you Bear...Forever and a Day....

www.IMWITHFRED.com