Fox News is NOT a Republican news channel, ok?

[Bill3000]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Fox ever pretended they're not pro-Republican?

"Fair and Balanced" unfortuanatly is not meant to be sarcasm. Mind you, part of the reason why conservatives consider it unbiased is because it fits more within their political ideals.

Probably the same as the opposite, really, with some people considering BBC or CNN unbiased... although Fox is by far the most blunt.

Either way, it's all sensationalism. Noncentrist opinions in news sell nowadays.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Bill3000


"Fair and Balanced" unfortuanatly is not meant to be sarcasm.

I thought their idea was than repugnazism was objectively superior.

[Ming]

Hmmmm.... instead of starting a new thread...

From the Washington Post:

The Fox News Effect

By Richard Morin
Thursday, May 4, 2006; Page A02

We report. You decide. Does President Bush owe his controversial win in 2000 to Fox cable television news?

Yes, suggest data collected by two economists who found that the growth of the Fox cable news network in the late 1990s may have significantly boosted the Republican Party's share of the vote in the 2000 election and delivered Florida to Bush.

"Our estimates imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 8 percent of its audience to shift its voting behavior towards the Republican Party, a sizable media persuasion effect," said Stefano DellaVigna of the University of California at Berkely and Ethan Kaplan of Stockholm University.

In Florida alone, they estimate, the Fox effect may have produced more than 10,000 additional votes for Bush -- clearly a decisive factor in a state he carried by fewer than 600 votes.

Fox cable news debuted in 1996 as a competitor to CNN and four years later was available to about one in five Americans. That allowed DellaVigna and Kaplan to compare changes in the Republican vote shar efrom 1996 to 2000 in 9,256 cities and towns where Fox News was introduced. They also examined election data from 2004.

They found clear evidence of a Fox effect among non-Republicans in the presidential and senate races, even after controlling for other factors including vote trends in similar nearby towns without access to Fox. "While this vote shift is small... it is still likely to have been decisive in the close presidential 2000 elections," they concluded.

Della Vigna and Kaplan say the Fox effect seems to permanent and may be increasing. But they caution that their study does not prove that Fox is shading the news to favor Republicans. Their findings would also be explained if Fox is offering balanced coverage that counteracts lefty bias in the competing media.

-----------------------------------------------------------
The Experiment: The Fox Effect II

We experiment. You decide: Do people apply a political litmus test to the news?

Yes, suggest the results of the latest online experiment by The Washington Post, washingtonpost.com and Stanford University's political communication lab.

The test found Republicans preferred to get their news from Fox -- even when the news stories were about subjects far removed from politics, such as sports or travel.

On the other hand, Democrats avoided Fox when it came to political news and preferred National Public Radio and CNN. And when the news focused on controversial issues such as the Iraq war and politics, "partisans are especially likely to screen out sources they consider opposed to their political views," said Stanford professor Shanto Iyengar, director of the communication lab.

More than 2,000 people participated in the test of whether attention to the identical news story was increased or decreased when the story was attributed to Fox News, NPR, CNN or the BBC. Participants saw a brief headline accompanied by the logo of the news organization. They were asked to choose which story they wanted to see, then repeated the task across six news categories -- American politics, the war in Iraq, race in America, crime, travel and sports.

There was one twist: Some participants saw a story attributed to Fox, whereas others saw the same story attributed to CNN, NPR or the BBC. Comparing the percentage of Democrats who chose to see a story about race if it was on Fox vs. CNN offered clues about whether partisanship mattered.

The results found strong evidence that people apply a political litmus test to the news, avoiding sources they view as unfriendly while seeking out compatible sources, a finding confirmed by researchers at Polimetrix in a national study with a representative sample of adults done in cooperation with the Stanford lab.

The Republicans even preferred to get news about sports and travel from Fox while Democrats didn't have as strong a preference on non-political stories, Iyengar found.

[Ecthy]

Only spammers revive old threads.

[Ninot]

Old Threads for the win!

CNN is loaded with old Clinton advisors, but they don't pretend them to be unbiased.

[MrFun]

(reads Ming's post)



I hate the Fox effect.

[Ming]

Originally posted by MrFun
(reads Ming's post)

I hate the Fox effect.

I lean more to the right than most here, and I hate the Fox effect as well.

[Jon Miller]

see, CNN is biased right also

JM

[Bill3000]

Originally posted by Ming


I lean more to the right than most here, and I hate the Fox effect as well.

Considering the skewness to the left this forum has (Even comparing to CivFanatics), that's not saying much. I mean, we have like what, two real bone fide Republicans or whatnot in this forum?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Reality has a liberal bias

[Arrian]

The results found strong evidence that people apply a political litmus test to the news, avoiding sources they view as unfriendly...

And/or untrustworthy. In other words, I'm anti-republican right now (didn't used to be, may not be in the future), but that doesn't mean I trust all "liberal" sources and shun all "conservative" sources. If I read something that comes across as shoddily-researched and/or looney, I don't really care if their conclusions match my viewpoint - I'm probably going to avoid getting my news/opinion from there in the future.

-Arrian

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Reality has a liberal bias

Who ever claimed Apolyton ever represented anything close to reality?

[Sava]

Nobody, I don't think. Apolyton doesn't represent the real world. And that is a good thing, IMO, because reality is full of a significantly larger amount of people with lower IQ's.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ming


I lean more to the right than most here, and I hate the Fox effect as well.

ok

[Berzerker]

The results found strong evidence that people apply a political litmus test to the news, avoiding sources they view as unfriendly while seeking out compatible sources

I get to whine about whatever news is supporting the current Prez