Did someone say FOX News was biased?

[Bereta_Eder]

The Iraqi Information Minister is more credible and less patriotic than Fox. 'nuff said.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Boshko

What an idiot. He could have done five minutes of research and found out that Krugman is an Economist and not a journalist. Just the kind of blind disregard of fact that makes Fox so beloved

What an idiot. You could have done one minute of research and found out that Krugman is a professor of Economics and International Relations at Princeton and a journalist / columnist for the New York Times.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Sava
Boris... the continuing voice of intelligence and reason (and I'm not just trying to get you in the sack)

Kronkite (spelling) was the best news anchor because he reported the news and didn't insert his own opinions.

He had an opinion segment at the end of the newscast at least once a week, and more often after Erich Severeid retired.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Boshko

Yeah, CNN ****s up with the facts all the time. But nothing beats not even being able to tell the difference between an economist and a journalist while defending your journalistic integrity. This guy is almost as good as Geraldo Rivera

Which makes you..?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Imran is correct, they do often throw in editorial segments at the end of their news. NBC has fleecing of America, ABC has John Stossel, and CBS has Andy Rooney

There's a big difference between an opinion piece given by someone who is there for the express purpose of giving their opinion, like Stoessel and Roony, and a news anchor being given time to express an opinion. The latter stinks, because it blurs the lines between editorial and reporting, as viewers are relying on an anchor for factual reporting. I don't give a rat's ass what Jennings' opinion is, I just want the facts of the story.

Cavuto is getting his panties in a bunch over accusations of bias, but it's so obvious he is biased it's ridiculous for him to be so vitriolic about it. But his vitriol is just another stunt to get attention and please the lowest denominator of FOX viewers, so it's done its job.

[JohnT]

"Yes, CNN sucks. Many ways - like pandering to Bush, by eliminating critical passages from a Blix report on their website. Please."

I pretty much conclusively proved that these allegations were false, even to those on this board who brought it to our attention. Shiite, let me find the thread again... I'll be back.

[JohnT]

Didn't take long.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by JohnT
"Yes, CNN sucks. Many ways - like pandering to Bush, by eliminating critical passages from a Blix report on their website. Please."

I pretty much conclusively proved that these allegations were false, even to those on this board who brought it to our attention. Shiite, let me find the thread again... I'll be back.

They left it out, deliberate or not. You're forgetting that I was talking to GP, so the finer issues like motives are not relevant.

But if you disagree on the relevance, you could also explain to George that maybe CNN's omissions about Saddam did not exactly emenate from an ardent love for ridiculous black moustaches.

[GePap]

Krugman is not a journalist: he is paid to write an opinion piece. Cavuto acts as if he were an anchor, but the fact is that all news people on FOX give editorials all the time, and they are inherently conservative 100% of the time.

Oh, and I love it how the main part of Krugman's article, how this wonderfully, freedom loving newscorp panders and grovels at the feet of the chinese communist leadership (to the extent of dropping one of the most respected news outlets in the world becuase it actually reports on Chinese abuses) is utterly ignored. guess critizicing dems. and liberals in the west is OK, but not the Chinese goevrnment: I will wait for someone here to praise these actions from newscorp, since of course, Murdoch and his little news empire could do no wrong.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


There's a big difference between an opinion piece given by someone who is there for the express purpose of giving their opinion, like Stoessel and Roony, and a news anchor being given time to express an opinion. The latter stinks, because it blurs the lines between editorial and reporting, as viewers are relying on an anchor for factual reporting. I don't give a rat's ass what Jennings' opinion is, I just want the facts of the story.

Cavuto is getting his panties in a bunch over accusations of bias, but it's so obvious he is biased it's ridiculous for him to be so vitriolic about it. But his vitriol is just another stunt to get attention and please the lowest denominator of FOX viewers, so it's done its job.

Boris, I think Cavuto admits he has a bias and is even proud of it. Re-read his piece. That is not what is making him mad.

Now, as to anchor's giving opinions in special segments, you can see that this is as old as broadcast news. The complaint, of course, by both the left and the right, is that reporters and anchors are spinning the news itself. This is a justified complaint to the extent it is true.

What Krugman was saying was that the reason FOX was biased in favor of the war is because of government pressure. Now, to me, that is incredible. Why FOX and no other broadcast network?

[DaShi]

They should report on CBeasts!

[GePap]

What kurgman was saying is that no other network lets it anchors (as opposed to hosts and opinion people) give little editorials. Fox lets all its people give appropriately conservative ones.

Oh, and he needed to bring up fox, since it is the only news nework in the US owned by Chinese-communist buttkissing Murdoch.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
Oh, and I love it how the main part of Krugman's article, how this wonderfully, freedom loving newscorp panders and grovels at the feet of the chinese communist leadership (to the extent of dropping one of the most respected news outlets in the world becuase it actually reports on Chinese abuses) is utterly ignored. guess critizicing dems. and liberals in the west is OK, but not the Chinese goevrnment: I will wait for someone here to praise these actions from newscorp, since of course, Murdoch and his little news empire could do no wrong.

Of course pandering to dictators to get reporters into a country is wrong. We should always condemn it.

GePap, what was your position on CNN's pandering to Saddam?

[GePap]

CNN was wrong, but the issues are not the same, since in this case we are talking about providing news service within the repressive regime being spoken about, not providing news about it elsewhere, into markets with plenty of competition to make up for CNN's failures. CNN was self-serving, while Murdoch is self-serving and helping out the Chinese as well.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
What kurgman was saying is that no other network lets it anchors (as opposed to hosts and opinion people) give little editorials. Fox lets all its people give appropriately conservative ones.

Oh, and he needed to bring up fox, since it is the only news nework in the US owned by Chinese-communist buttkissing Murdoch.

I think he was bringing up FOX because FOX was pro-war. He was trying to explain why FOX, and perhaps other broadcast netwoks, were pro-government: the FCC. However, on its face, this is ludicrous given the anti-government stance of virtually everyother broadcast news outlet that is also regulated by the FCC.