Jump to content

Fox News Poll

suv_guy_19
 Share

Fox News  

48 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you find Fox News to be fair and balances?

    • Yes
      29
    • No
      19

  2. 2. Do you find Fox news to be more balanced than other media organizations (eg. CNN)?

    • Yes
      26
    • No
      22

  3. 3. Do you think that Fox News always reports facts in their true context?

    • Yes
      24
    • No
      24

  4. 4. Finally, do you beleive that Fox News has a good reporting style when it comes to journalism?

    • Yes
      30
    • No
      18

Recommended Posts

RangerM

RangerM

Posted
Posted
Just drop the "when it comes to journalism" reference when you're reading. Oh, and that first question should read balanced.

Why would you drop the "when it comes to journalism" reference?

 

Are you asking about the network in general, or just the part where they report the news of the day?

 

If you're referring to the portions at the top and bottom of the hour, and the part between 6:00 and 6:30 PM (ETD), that's the news part. Most of the rest is editorial and commentary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickF1011

NickF1011

Posted
Posted (edited)
Voted "no" across the board. Entertaining? You betcha. News? Hardly.

 

Just so long as you hold a similar view of what CNN and MSNBC are calling "news shows" these days, I'm fine with that opinion. After all, they are all just going after ratings.

Edited by NickF1011
Link to comment
Share on other sites
V8 Ford

V8 Ford

Posted
Posted
So this brings me to the question: What does news mean in the US?

For me, the headlines on my homepage and espn. Probably similar for most Americans.

 

Most of what news channels do isn't news, it's comentary and in that regard I don't this poll is fair because the quality varies greatly from show to show. Some commentators just put out their opinions as facts, other guys actually bring in other people with different viewpoints, even if all they do is argue with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
V8 Ford

V8 Ford

Posted
Posted

I don't know why you're picking on fox on that account. All three cable networks run the same format: news events in daytime, commentary at all other times. As I understand it, Fair and Balanced used to mean that they'd bring in guests from both sides in the commentary section. I don't watch that often so I can't testify to how well they live up to their motto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the_spaniard

the_spaniard

Posted
Posted
Just so long as you hold a similar view of what CNN and MSNBC are calling "news shows" these days, I'm fine with that opinion. After all, they are all just going after ratings.

 

I do agree, with CNN being the closest to news, but still mostly just entertainment. Sometimes I do watch news from other countries (when they cover US news). There is always slant to any news reported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
suv_guy_19

suv_guy_19

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't know why you're picking on fox on that account.

 

 

Mostly because they make the claim of being fair and balanced. MSNBC isn't fair and balanced either, and CNN is closer, but we can never completely weed out balance. I'm also picking on Fox because so many people watch, and I'm simply wondering how they feel about the channel and why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roadtrip

Roadtrip

Posted
Posted
For me, the headlines on my homepage and espn. Probably similar for most Americans.

 

Even ESPN is biased towards major media markets, especially those on the East Coast. I won't forget their lack of coverage (or outright dismissal) of the Colorado Rockies' history-making end-of-season run in 2007, when they won 21 out of their last 22 games, won a "play-in" game against the Padres in the 13th inning just to get into the playoffs, and then swept the Phillies and the D-Backs to get into the World Series. ESPN's coverage during the Rockies' run was always at the end of their telecasts, always in deference to what the Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, and Phillies were doing.

 

ESPN had pretty much crowned the 2008 New England Patriots as the "Greatest Team in the History of Football" after they had gone 16-0 in the regular season and 2-0 in the playoffs. Judging from watching ESPN that season, every other team was completely irrelevant. The New York Giants (14-6) shocked "ESPN Nation" by beating the Patriots with a touchdown pass with 35 seconds on the clock to win 17-14 in Super Bowl XLII.

 

I guess from ESPN's perspective, at least a large-market team won.

 

I'm sure ESPN was none too happy to have had to cover the most-recent Super Bowl matchup between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Arizona Cardinals -- which meant general apathy in large East-Coast markets and therefore general difficulty in creating ad revenue for coverage leading up to the big game. Oh, well. I'm sure they'll survive.

 

This is not to slam ESPN. I remember where they came from, when I was watching their coverage of "Australian Rules Football" back in the early 1980s (which was really cool!). ESPN has come a long way, and I admire their success. I only wish they would be more objective, but I also understand that objectivity is not what made ESPN so successful.

 

Same with Golf Channel and golf coverage by CBS, NBC, and ABC (when it covers PGA tournaments). It's all Tiger, all the time. I realize that Tiger Woods is the best golfer of his generation and has the potential to become the greatest of all time and the historical importance of what he is doing. But when someone else wins a major -- which is an incredible accomplishment for any golfer, especially in the Tiger Woods era -- it pretty much goes unnoticed in the golfing media (the amazing run by Tom Watson in this year's British Open being an exception).

 

Tiger Woods is a churlish superstar, whose behavior on the golf course is a poor example for young people learning the game. When he hits a shot that is not exactly as he expects, he curses (when he knows he is being covered by network cameras), and throws his clubs or slams them to the ground in disgust. In addition, he is an incredibly slow player -- which is a bad example for all golfers. (If Tiger wasn't Tiger, he would be penalized for slow play.)

 

But the networks continue to focus on Tiger. Tiger, Tiger, Tiger -- it's as if the rest of the field didn't exist. The media who cover Tiger understand who drives their market -- whether we like it or not.

 

Media is all about marketing. As consumers of media, it is up to us to filter what the media offers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RangerM

RangerM

Posted
Posted (edited)
So why is it called Fox News then? There is barely any fact based news going on. That would be fine if a ) it wasn't called Fox News, and b ) the channel did't have the slogan that it does.

Given the fact that it isn't operated by the Government, and you are free to choose CNN or MSNBC, what difference does it make to you?

You don't like it, therefore you don't want others watching it either?

 

MSNBC declares itself to be "A Fuller Spectrum of News". Lame though it is, do I care? No.

CNN stands for "Cable News Network". I could care less, even though Roland Martin has more in common with Oprah than the news.

 

Mostly because they make the claim of being fair and balanced. MSNBC isn't fair and balanced either, and CNN is closer, but we can never completely weed out balance. I'm also picking on Fox because so many people watch, and I'm simply wondering how they feel about the channel and why.

Be honest, do you dislike Fox because so many people watch, or is it that so many are (or could be) influenced by some of the opinions (O'Reilly, Hannity, etc)?

 

Why not let people make their own decision, and leave it alone? Do those who watch Fox News lack a certain ability to discern the truth that requires you to teach them?

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ralph Greene

Ralph Greene

Posted
Posted (edited)

To me....Fox news is always very "slanted" in their coverage of the news, all right wing BS, kinda like MSNBC is on some of their shows (Oberman) to the left.

 

Mostly I think Fox News is Rupert Murdock's propaganda outlet.

 

CNN is best balanced IMHO. And in the financial area....Blumburg mostly just reports the facts, CNBC tries to ham it up too much to suit me, but does report factual info. I have 7 TV's on cable, and keep one on financial stuff all day long somewhere in house or garage. I need facts and info all day long, not banter and the news from a political or philosophical slant.

Edited by Ralph Greene
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickF1011

NickF1011

Posted
Posted
To me....Fox news is always very "slanted" in their coverage of the news, all right wing BS, kinda like MSNBC is on some of their shows (Oberman) to the left.

 

Mostly I think Fox News is Rupert Murdock's propaganda outlet.

 

CNN is best balanced IMHO. And in the financial area....Blumburg mostly just reports the facts, CNBC tries to ham it up too much to suit me, but does report factual info. I have 7 TV's on cable, and keep one on financial stuff all day long somewhere in house or garage.

 

As someone who leans toward the right, I see CNN as being very left-slanted. It's all perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ralph Greene

Ralph Greene

Posted
Posted (edited)
As someone who leans toward the right, I see CNN as being very left-slanted. It's all perspective.

 

I don't really have a major problem with any jouranalist who leans left or right in their opinions. My problem is usually with their beginning premises. It's usually the premise I question, not so much the discussion. Being conservative or liberal is a legitimate philosophical position for any American, and their position doesn't make them a good or bad American.

 

Example: If I said on a TV news show....As a host to a panel....."Today we are going to discuss if Nick should continue beating his dog". They do that so cleverely that it usually ignores the fact you don't beat your dog. Both sides guilty of this, and that's what i don't like. On news show....just report the news. But most folks seem to want a variety show with personality, not straight facts.

Edited by Ralph Greene
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickF1011

NickF1011

Posted
Posted
I don't really have a major problem with any jouranalist who leans left or right in their opinions. My problem is usually with their beginning premises. It's usually the premise I question, not so much the discussion. Being conservative or liberal is a legitimate philosophical position for any American, and their position doesn't make them a good or bad American.

 

Example: If I said on a TV news show....As a host to a panel....."Today we are going to discuss if Nick should continue beating his dog". They do that so cleverely that it usually ignores the fact you don't beat your dog. Both sides guilty of this, and that's what i don't like. On news show....just report the news. But most folks seem to want a variety show with personality, not straight facts.

 

I really have no problems from any of the networks regarding their actual news segments. I visit all of their websites regularly and read actual news articles. I can't really stand any of the cable networks though, as they stuff far too much opinion in between all the facts. I don't really see much of your example during their actual news segments, just during the hours of primetime opinion shows, which I really can't stomach anymore on any of the networks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...