^^ maybe you'd like to enlighten us with some Lexis-Nexis searches on, say, mentions of Lehman Brothers in the media before and after the weekend they went bankrupt, and then decide which caused the other

4/29/2009 12:51:02 AM

Nobody remembers how the media kept repeating the fact that we were in a recession back between '04-'07? They were definitely saying it back in '06.

Selective memory, I guess.

4/29/2009 2:57:46 AM

i remember thinking in like the fall of 2007 how it felt like we were kinda in a recession

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 3:07 AM. Reason : when the subprime mortgage mess starting making news]

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 3:10 AM. Reason : and like it takes at least a full year's data to determine if we are in a recession]

4/29/2009 3:05:11 AM

i'm talking about way before the subprime stuff was even on anybody's radar

4/29/2009 3:10:37 AM

Quote :

"They induced the panic that caused the massive sell-offs of stock and such that truly brought these banks to their knees. yes, bad loan practices and risky investments are ultimately to blame, yet it just seems coincidental that as the news agencies started naming names, the named started to falter. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy."

You have your chicken and the egg all screwed up. The MSM is most definitely a lagging indicator when it comes to fast moving economic topics, this point simply isn't debatable. If they started talking about banks being insolvent, it was because word was starting to spread around Wall Street. As gimmicky as Rick Santelli is, you do realize he is right there on the floor of an exchange, right? He can't help but to report on what he is hearing, and if the rumor is starting to spread that Lehman was in trouble, then he did everyone that had a piece of them that was able to get out of it a huge service. It isn't like these news orgs were flashing in massive red letters GET YOUR MONEY OUT NOW. Hell, Cramer was telling people to buy all the way to zero for Bear Sterns.

You also conveniently ignored the point that BAC and C still are insolvent as of right now. Why hasn't there been a bank run on those guys?

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 7:10 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 7:09:43 AM

god i fucking despise sean hannity and karl rove

4/29/2009 10:05:19 PM

honestly, despise might not be a strong enough word

loathe?

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 10:07 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 10:07:14 PM

i made the mistake of tuning in to his america for the first five minutes a little bit ago

his america is frighting

[Edited on April 29, 2009 at 10:28 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2009 10:09:42 PM

it's so blatantly partisan

to the point that I feel retarded even "pointing it out"

it's disgusting

4/29/2009 10:13:16 PM

it would be something if one of the network/cable news channels got rid of the graphics and sound effects

4/29/2009 10:25:24 PM

^ that's why fox news is so popular...

it's like watching ESPN, but about something that could be important

4/30/2009 1:18:26 AM

i feel like i could tolerate fox news if they actually tried to be "fair and balanced"

hannity is a tame version of rush

rove was a failure in washington now pretends to be a genius.

seriously, i understand that cnn and msnbc lean to the left. but i dont see how anyone with an iq over 15 can't see that foxnews is a glorified propaganda machine for the republican party.

i dont know why i even tune in. hannity makes me blood boil and michael steele makes me ashamed to be a republican. i still say one of these days i am gonna pull a specter and switch parties

4/30/2009 3:07:53 AM

lol.. this isn't Fox News related but I couldn't sleep and decided to check out how Rush Limbaugh is feeling at the moment

Quote :

"According to Obama, our response, after being attacked on 9/11, was immoral. Of all the people, of all things, Barack Obama should be the last person to lecture anybody standing atop a rock of morality. His foundation is leftist. He identifies with anti-American politics. He laughs, he yucks it up with these people who hate our country. He's been masterful at deceiving a large number of Americans with the help of his friends in the Drive-By Media. Look at who Obama has accused of being morally deficient: Wall Street, all CEOs, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the CIA, and essentially America itself. He has declared those five things morally deficient. And only now will Wall Street and CEOs, Bush and Cheney, CIA, and even America be straightened out with a new moral rudder headed by himself, The One, The Messiah, Barack Obama, the Most Merciful. Yet he supports infanticide. He attended a racist, bigoted church for 20 years. He had active support of the criminal political bullying enterprise known as ACORN. He has dealings with Tony Rezko, his working relationship with Bill Ayers, embracing and smiling Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, and not defending his country after it was slandered, this guy tells us he's in charge of our new morality. Sorry, folks, it's just tough to stomach. Tough to deal with on a daily basis. "

while it makes me laugh, at the same time it's pretty scary that millions of people listen to shit like this daily

4/30/2009 6:06:32 AM

I got a chuckle from their banner headline from their website the other day. "Arlen Specter turns his back on GOP voters" and are now calling him "Benedict Arlen".

4/30/2009 7:00:42 AM

Its always appropriate to attack the journalistic quality of a news organization because you disagree with their editorialists.

[Edited on April 30, 2009 at 7:48 AM. Reason : s]

4/30/2009 7:48:20 AM

their entire program is "editorializing"

all of it

I wouldn't be surprised if they took potshots at the democrats during the fucking weather

4/30/2009 10:00:16 AM

Quote :

"hannity is a tame version of rush .... seriously, i understand that cnn and msnbc lean to the left. but i dont see how anyone with an iq over 15 can't see that foxnews is a glorified propaganda machine for the republican party."

having watched Fox News throughout the day for the past 2 weeks while visiting my grandma (the first time I've actually watched multiple programs daily), I've realized that Hannity, Beck, and O'Reilly are not the problem with the channel. Those shows are commentary, and anyone watching them should be aware they are commentary. O'Reilly pretends to be fair, but in the end, he's still commentary. As far as I can tell, Beck and Hannity don't even pretend like they're trying to be fair.

What I realized, though, is that it's all the supposed news programs that are the main problems. The morning show, the mid-morning show with Megan Kelly, Special Report, etc are all supposed to be news shows, but they are anything but. The Megan Kelly show is the worst - she is nothing but a female, blond Hannity masquerading as a news anchor. Her interviews and banter with the guests she has on is incredibly credulous. She brings on wing-nut right wingers, like the lunatic fringe conservatives (often equally hot women), then does nothing but give them leading questions and flame bait, and more often than not just jumps in directly with the guests opinion and inserts her own opinions left and right.

The Special Report show in the afternoon is better than the one with Megan Kelly, but mostly because Bret Baier hides his biases a little better, and doesn't actively comment on the stories. Instead, he leaves that up to Brit Hume, who is at least labeled as Commentary, but still engages with Brit in whatever he is commenting on. And the field reporters are pretty bad too - they regularly add commentary and sarcasm in their field reports.

My biggest surprise after 2 weeks was that I O'Reilly actually gets a raw deal from the left (unlike Hannity and Beck - they deserve all the derision they get). I discovered a couple things - 1) O'Reilly certain can be and often is a total dickhead. When he is passionate about a particular topic and is certain on his position, he is unrelenting and totally bullish. This is where all the clips come from to discredit him or make him seem unhinged. However, 2) on a surprising number of topics, he is actually quite moderate, or even if he is not moderate on the topic, he gives a fair chance to his guests and is, yes, "fair and balanced". He regularly has guests on his show who are much further to the Right than himself, and when talking to them, he often stops them and backs them up, and interjects "no, that's not fair", "ok, enough with the hyperbole", "if you listen to what Obama actually says", etc.


Overall, though, if you watch Fox News all day or if it is your only or main source of news and commentary, then you will end up with a very skewed version of the news and current events. To Fox News' credit, it is a completely consistent view of the world - they have managed, through all their shows, to create an entirely different version of the world that people can easily buy into if that's all they watch.

4/30/2009 11:52:02 AM

100 Days of Fair and Balanced:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35eRxxZ-Ar0

plz to embed

it's worth the watch

4/30/2009 12:27:44 PM

dont know if anyone posted it yet, but fox news was left out of his news conference last night lol

4/30/2009 1:47:01 PM

I know they weren't gonna air it on Fox proper, only on some of their other channels.

4/30/2009 2:05:31 PM

Fox is the only 24 news station I get on basic cable, so it is the one I watch the most. I'll be honest, I wasn't a fan before, and they're not my favorite news source by a long shot, but watching their guests, they are the only network I've seen which actually invites guests from both the left and the right on a regular basis. MSNBC? Please. CNN? Occasionally. I think the utterly dismissive and unprofessional coverage of the Tea Parties (whatever your personal opinion of them might be) shot through any pretense of balance. The real story behind them was CNN and MSNBC's bitterness at the rise (right or wrong) of Fox.

As for O'Reilly, yes he has an opinion, but I haven't seen a single show on a single other network which actively seeks out people who disagree with them, treats them with general respect, and gives them the last word.

It is about time we embraced the fact that none of our news sources are balanced. The last great TV reporter died with Russert's untimely heart attack.

4/30/2009 7:24:59 PM

^ times 2

4/30/2009 7:35:07 PM

^^ this probably doesn't count, but both TDS and the Colbert Report routinely have guests with opposing views on. And the times when Bill Maher has guests with opposing views, he's MUCH more respectful and polite than O'Reilly or Hannity generally are.

But, I don't actually watch TV news, so I can see how Fox's alleged horrible-ness could be par for the course.

4/30/2009 7:52:31 PM

it is par for the course. the difference is that their editorials are skewed to the right, while everyone else's skews to the left.

so naturally, the liberals shat a brack over it, because they can't abide it when someone disagrees with their worldview.

4/30/2009 8:03:28 PM

^^ It counts for TDS, Colbert, and Maher but I was sticking to major networks.


In addition, no-one would argue that Maher, TDS, and Colbert are neutral reporters. Their bias is quite well known, which is to their credit; as is their seeking out guests who differ from them.


One of the things that makes me despise Rush is his pompous advocacy of the "Arena of Ideas" which he refuses to enter himself. Don't pontificate about how great your ideas are when you won't personally put them to the test.

4/30/2009 8:39:05 PM

i wish i could find my post about fox news not respecting people from the other side. The bottom line is they don't. And really I try to omit the guys with the one hour shows on all networks because yes all of them are dbags that will say their opinion and show the world how they want to see it.

I am talking about the regular news stories that Fox covers with insinuations out the ass, snide comments by the anchors and interviews where the anchor basically attacks the person from the left they are interviewing trying to make them look like a wacko and prove how they are wrong. That is my main reason I hate FoxNews.

4/30/2009 8:40:36 PM

Quote :

" In addition, no-one would argue that Maher, TDS, and Colbert are neutral reporters"

i think that's what's so thorny about Fox News though. They still assert they have no bias and they are "fair and balanced."

5/1/2009 1:42:00 AM

and they are the only news station guilty of this



come on, it happens just as frequently on the rest of the cable news networks

fox news is the first major television news source to be outspokenly conservative, in a environment that has been monopolized by left wing journalism for the better part of the last century

and the fact that they are consistently dominating the ratings across the board is even more reason to be sour about their seemingly 'uncouth' manner of reporting

5/1/2009 2:00:51 AM

^
being on top should only increase their burden to be better, not create a race to the extremes


And i maintain that Fox doesn't get more views because of their bias, they just have better marketing and more appealing production than anyone else.

5/1/2009 2:11:12 AM

Image hosted by Angelfire

5/1/2009 10:05:37 AM

5/1/2009 10:38:27 AM

^^^I'd wager their bias has a lot to do with it. I'd guess that more conservatives get their news from TV than liberals. I think liberals are more inclined to get news from internet and radio than conservatives.

Not to mention Fox news has the right-wing bias market covered, while CNN, MSN, ABC etc have to compete for the left-wing market.

[Edited on May 1, 2009 at 10:44 AM. Reason : ^^^]

5/1/2009 10:44:08 AM

^^ the funniest thing about that graphic is that the first question starts with "Since the war ended"....
looks like the survey was performed in summer '03

5/1/2009 10:54:25 AM

^yeah, there's lots of funny things about it, but it encapsulates the gist of what i'm trying to say...

5/1/2009 10:55:25 AM

Quote :

"I am talking about the regular news stories that Fox covers with insinuations out the ass, snide comments by the anchors and interviews where the anchor basically attacks the person from the left they are interviewing trying to make them look like a wacko and prove how they are wrong. That is my main reason I hate FoxNews. "

Eh... the same thing happens on CNN/MSNBC on their non-editorial "reporting" but its not noticed as much because it is 1) par for the course and 2) you share their bias more than you share Fox News, so it seems less biased to you.

5/1/2009 10:55:55 AM

ok then find examples. because that seems to be you generic answer for anything in this thread.

5/1/2009 10:58:10 AM

its not worth the effort. it wouldn't do any good because it would just be labeled anecdotal, which it would truly be.


suffice it to say that i spoke the truth and you wouldn't believe me no matter what I said to back it up.

5/1/2009 11:00:30 AM

most annoying topic in TSB

Because fans of either side won't 100% admit their channel or preferred news source is biased.. why does anybody give a shit? Are you really THAT put off that they said "fair and balanced"? Do you feel cheated as a viewer that they're lying to you or something? Get over it, its marketing

What are they supposed to say? "Fuck you Liberals, this is a CONSERVATIVE BIAS ONLY NETWORK"

oh man look how many times they said socialist!!!!

[Edited on May 1, 2009 at 11:38 AM. Reason : .]

5/1/2009 11:37:31 AM

in that case [/thread]

5/1/2009 11:40:45 AM

^^

wrong

i'm fairly liberal and I'll say that the media has a liberal bias

this is fairly obvious and comes not from manipulation by individual sources but stems from the nature of journalists and journalism as a whole

the bias from fox comes purposefully and from direct manipulation

they force their conservative bias and it's wrong

5/1/2009 11:46:39 AM

Reality does have a liberal bias...

[Edited on May 1, 2009 at 11:51 AM. Reason : ]

5/1/2009 11:51:21 AM

My response is always that it's not necessarily the media but the reporters themselves who are more typically liberal. Every large news company is owned by a very conservative corporation that allows, but absolutely does not push, a bit of liberal bias.

Obviously these reporters are allowing their own biases in, but with Fox, those biases are not only inherent in the reporters but handed down talking points and edicts from on high. Well, not so on high now that the republicans aren't in control anymore ;0

5/1/2009 12:13:16 PM

so is the liberal response now that it doesn't really matter whether or not the reporting is biased, but what matters most is WHY it is biased?

ugh...


"My biased tv is better than your biased tv because mine is biased for ALL THE RIGHT REASONS!!!"

5/1/2009 1:47:16 PM

Quote :

"I think the utterly dismissive and unprofessional coverage of the Tea Parties (whatever your personal opinion of them might be) shot through any pretense of balance."

the Tea Parties were so stupid and unfocused that they really didn't deserve ANY media attention

5/1/2009 2:02:27 PM

I did find one clip of CNN reporters going too far/being an asshole.

Compared to the tons of clips from FoxNews being insulting and an asshole I think CNN does pretty well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wWQmFf-k7o&feature=related

NOTE: I AM NOT USING THE WORD BIAS IN THIS POST.

[Edited on May 1, 2009 at 2:13 PM. Reason : Bias is like a mouth, everyone has one.]

5/1/2009 2:11:48 PM

Quote :

"so is the liberal response now that it doesn't really matter whether or not the reporting is biased, but what matters most is WHY it is biased?"

No, that isn't the liberal response.

5/1/2009 2:23:34 PM

Quote :

"the Tea Parties were so stupid and unfocused that they really didn't deserve ANY media attention"

Well, that's exactly my point. You think they don't deserve coverage so when CNN covers them dismissively you think, "hmm... good reporting"

On the other hand, if Fox News were to have covered all those stupid and unfocused "Save the Earth" concerts a couple years ago in a dismissive manner, you would have been all like, "OMG BIAS!!!"

5/1/2009 2:59:53 PM

i really don't see how anyone with a brain thought the Tea Parties deserved coverage. My dad is a big Republican and he even thought it was pretty stupid

and that "100 days of fair and balanced video" is

5/2/2009 7:06:27 PM

tea parties would be awesome if they were started during bush's years

5/2/2009 7:15:42 PM

i thought the tea parties were pretty fuckin ridiculous, but their message was valid.

however, how can you ignore it when hundreds of thousands of americans gathered all over the country to rally over something they believe in. whether you like it or not, its news. however, when 100 liberals gather for some bleeding heart issue, its breaking news on msnbc. fox news covered it so extensively probably because they knew all the other news sources would turn a could shoulder. their high ratings during the rallies shows that their coverage wasnt a futile effort, despite what other networks would have you believe

5/3/2009 11:40:59 AM