FOX NEWS - Is that what they call journalism nowadays?

[Brazil4Worldcup2002]

I recently got FOX 'NEWS' at my place in London and I have to admit, its the most biased, unprofessional, innacurate news channel I have ever seen.
From what I have seen thus far they spend about half of the time talking about the "war on terrorism" (of course including Iraq as part of this war even though there is no actual proof that the regime was 'terrorist' but anyways...) 1/4 of the time talking about the Michael Jackson case and the rest on really 'low-class' talk shows like the O'Reilly factor that is as intellectually stimulating as the Queen's Christmas speech (recently saw them arguing whether the NFL should have more black coaches).

I may be wrong but there is more happening in the world than the above things mentioned...a lot more or is American news really supposed to be dumbed down entertainment?

Anybody agree with me?

 

[EverFresh]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>is American news really supposed to be dumbed down entertainment? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well duh!

 

[lander]

Axxx,
I fully concur. I was consulting on the west coast with a few Brits, so being the only American I was outvoted on which news channel we'd watch. I couldn't believe hon increbily dull BBC was compared to our news, but on the same hand the fairness and relevance of reporting was remarkable. There was actually a bit called "World News" that included more than the US and Canada

It's very easy to understand why so many Americans feel the way they do - the news here is terribly biased and I assume it's intentionally done so in return for federal favors. Sad, really.

 

[PatPatriot]

A2...I challenge you to list what is factually false in what FOX puts out in its newstation.
By the way most journalist are on holiday this time of year that is why you are getting a re-mix of Jackson type shit...By the way the NY Times and CBS have been the 2 media outlets most charged (and proven) with prostitution of the truth and plagerism...and also are considererd far and away the most liberal biased.

 

[Brazil4Worldcup2002]

One thing I noticed that is biased and even false is:
They happen to refer some of the Palestinians as terrorists instead of militants (unlike all other networks i have seen).

Calling them terrorists immediately makes them biased, in the same way calling them freedom fighters would be biased. Terrorists have a very different stigma to militants or insurgents.

Furthermore, if they are factually correct in the information they present but carry out an ommission of other important facts, whatever they may be, it may still be considered factually false because it does not show a whole picture.

Regarding what you said about Times and CBS being biased - fair enough if it is true what you said (there is the question of who came up with this finding), its of no real concern whether its 'right' or 'left' wing biased as both sides (considering they both still exist as they did during the cold war) still are capable of 'brainwashing' the public.

 

[Oceans11]

Theres a lot of subtle word play used by the media agencies to influence the public without being too obvious about it.

'Terrorists' and 'militants' is one example.

Sometimes 'killed' and 'murdered' are used in verbal reports, one side kills, the other side murders.

One side has 'strikes' and 'operations', whereas the other side 'attacks'.

and so on.

 

[Oceans11]

If you watch the big American newschannels after other places like the BBC, you realise that they talk a lot, and yet they manage to tell you diddly about wtf is really going on.

Lots of fancy content, but theres not much meat on those bones. You're almost as clueless as you were before you started watching.

I do find them good for TV pictures during a sudden live event.
The speed that live pictures get put up onto TV during an unforseen event is impressive.