FOX Strategy Really Paid Off...........Idiots by captaincdc

Quote:
Originally posted by HATEHATEHATEFOX:
You're absolutely right about that! FOX is the right-wing's propaganda machine and I couldn't be happier knowing that Americans are finally waking up to that fact and tuning out.

OTOH, I've heard that Wonderfalls is quite good and I REALLLLLLY want to watch it but I'm soooo afraid that I will like it and then it'll be cancelled. Why oh why couldn't they have taken their show elsewhere? Well, at least I'll feel less guilty about getting the eps from tvtorrents.com.

Oh yeah ... FOX
Hate 'em. Hate 'em. Hate 'em.

~~~~~~~~
Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

What would you rather have, a left wing propaganda machine?

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 9:50 AM

HATEHATEHATEFOX

Quote:
What would you rather have, a left wing propaganda machine?

[political debate]
My dear, you are sadly mistaken if you believe there is such thing as a "left-wing" propaganda machine. TV networks are owned by the rich are the rich are inherently conservative. You should read a book called: What Liberal Media?
[/political debate]

However, I regret my politicization of what should be a celebration of FOX getting its just deserts for cancelling every good show they've gotten their claws into.

~~~~~~~~
Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 10:02 AM

KINGOFKOINS

Quote:
What would you rather have, a left wing propaganda machine?

Personally, I'd prefer no gorramn propaganda in the first place.

--------------------------------
It's sickening how comforting the privacy of the mind can be.
"Bible's broken; contradictions, false logistics. Doesn't make sense." - River
http://stripe.filetap.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 10:16 AM

SAMURAIX47

My dear, you are sadly mistaken if you believe there is such thing as a "left-wing" propaganda machine. TV networks are owned by the rich are the rich are inherently conservative.

[rant]
Most democratic politicians that I know of are pretty well to do... the Kennedys, John Kerry, Al Gore... There are a lot of rich out there with nothing better to do than be politically left so that people don't see how really greedy and power hungry they are. The rich feel like they are doing such a good deed trying to help the down trodden and the lower and middle class, yet that have no concept of life other than where they are at.[/end rant]

Jaymes

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 10:57 AM

HJERMSTED

Quote:
Well the Right needs a propaganda machine when the Left has every other major network spewing their propaganda.

This is such a myth.

Still trying to figure out where all these "left wing" media outlets are. Been hearing about them for years but have yet to see them on TV.

All I see on American TV is corporate media. Even PBS is becoming corporatized. Corporate = conservative... because it's all about earning money and not offending your sponsors with "controversidal" content.

If the U.S. REALLY had a left wing media, Janet Jackson's breast would NOT have been an "issue" several weeks ago. Americans would have been accustomed to nudity on TV already (like the Europeans are).

I am an unapologetic left winger who would love to see his views expressed on American TV. I have to watch Canadian and British news to get any progressive news at all.

It's a big wide world out there and we Americans live in a corporate media bubble, y'all.

mattro

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:05 AM

DUCESTECUM

Dear Mr. Davies:

Could you please explain to me how to put those cute emoticons in my responses?

Thank you.

and oh yeah (flips bird at fox)

SHOULDA COULDA WOULDA

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HATEHATEHATEFOX:
Quote:
What would you rather have, a left wing propaganda machine?

[political debate]
My dear, you are sadly mistaken if you believe there is such thing as a "left-wing" propaganda machine. TV networks are owned by the rich are the rich are inherently conservative. You should read a book called: What Liberal Media?
[/political debate]

However, I regret my politicization of what should be a celebration of FOX getting its just deserts for cancelling every good show they've gotten their claws into.

~~~~~~~~
Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

There are left wing propaganda machines just as much as right wing.

And just because you are rich doesn't mean you are Conservative. Most of the left wing ideals came from well to do people and not some poor bastard on the street. And just because someone wrote in a book that there isn't any left wing propaganda machine doesn't make it true. Someone can write a book saying there is and come up with facts just as strong as those found in "What Liberal Media?" And wouldn't "What Liberal Media?" be considered left wing propaganda within itself?

I don't like FOX TV's decision to cancel Firefly but they did. But also must remember it was FOX TV that canceled Firefly not FOX News or any of the other organizations within 20th Century FOX.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:27 AM

BIGBALDHEAD

Quote:

Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

wow a firefly and RD fan!!! Very Nice to meet you!

bbh

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hjermsted:
Quote:
Well the Right needs a propaganda machine when the Left has every other major network spewing their propaganda.

This is such a myth.

Still trying to figure out where all these "left wing" media outlets are. Been hearing about them for years but have yet to see them on TV.

All I see on American TV is corporate media. Even PBS is becoming corporatized. Corporate = conservative... because it's all about earning money and not offending your sponsors with "controversidal" content.

If the U.S. REALLY had a left wing media, Janet Jackson's breast would NOT have been an "issue" several weeks ago. Americans would have been accustomed to nudity on TV already (like the Europeans are).

I am an unapologetic left winger who would love to see his views expressed on American TV. I have to watch Canadian and British news to get any progressive news at all.

It's a big wide world out there and we Americans live in a corporate media bubble, y'all.

mattro

First of all what Liberalism are you talking about? Socialistic Liberalism or Jeffersonian Liberalism?

How sure are you that you are really getting progressive news from British or Canadian news agency? The BBC is owned and run by the British government. That would make it sort of like a monopoly. At least in America the media oligopoly so you aren't getting the everything just from one entity. Not much better though.

Now you use an example of Janet Jackson's breast being seen at the Superbowl as some sort of right wing agenda. The facts are that the Superbowl is the most watched program on American TV and many, many people thought that what was done was in bad taste. That is their opinion and that opinion was expressed. I don't think this issue has anything to do with left wing or right wing philosophies. I'm sure there are just as many left wing type people who thought it was bad taste as well considering they are tuning in to watch a football game and not to see Janet Jackson's breast. In the end to me it wasn't a big deal and I personally think it was blown out of proportion but there were many people who thought it was a big deal and I reserved the right not to pay attention to the media coverage.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:35 AM

DORAN

Fox News has nothing to do with the other Fox networks. Fox News has its fans with both the poor and the rich.. as does Firefly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 11:36 AM

PHOENIXSHIP

Yeah, that's so gorram satisfying. I hope they are still conscious when the last drop of blood drains out of their bodies.

Ahem, sorry.

Just watch... Fox will respond to this by adding more crap. You expect rationality from these juvenile creeps? Might as well expect mercy from a Reaver. It just ain't in their nature.

Brace yourself for Forever Eden 4 (they're skipping 2 and 3 to save money), The Littlest Groom All Stars vs. Crazy Animal Races, and The Surreal Life with the maid from The Jeffersons, Girl in Crowd from Episode 26 of "Saved by the Bell", the kid from "Johnny Socko and His Flying Robot, and Two Girls Walking By The Studio That Day.

Yech. I feel dirty.

"Why're you arguin' what's already been decided?"
Mal to Jayne, "Jaynestown"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 12:17 PM

HATEHATEHATEFOX

Quote:
Originally posted by rklenseth:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hjermsted:
Quote:
Well the Right needs a propaganda machine when the Left has every other major network spewing their propaganda.

This is such a myth.

Still trying to figure out where all these "left wing" media outlets are. Been hearing about them for years but have yet to see them on TV.

All I see on American TV is corporate media. Even PBS is becoming corporatized. Corporate = conservative... because it's all about earning money and not offending your sponsors with "controversidal" content.

If the U.S. REALLY had a left wing media, Janet Jackson's breast would NOT have been an "issue" several weeks ago. Americans would have been accustomed to nudity on TV already (like the Europeans are).

I am an unapologetic left winger who would love to see his views expressed on American TV. I have to watch Canadian and British news to get any progressive news at all.

It's a big wide world out there and we Americans live in a corporate media bubble, y'all.

mattro

First of all what Liberalism are you talking about? Socialistic Liberalism or Jeffersonian Liberalism?

I'm sorry but how American! As if you "owned" the entire concept of liberality and are simply "loaning" it out to other countries.
Quote:

How sure are you that you are really getting progressive news from British or Canadian news agency? The BBC is owned and run by the British government. That would make it sort of like a monopoly. At least in America the media oligopoly so you aren't getting the everything just from one entity. Not much better though.

The concern is that you are NOT getting multiple points of view through your supposed oligopoly. Only a few ppl/corps own the majority of media outlets (papers,radio channels,tv stns) so where oh where is this multiplicity? The verticalization of information allows a very few to manage and manipulate the opinions of the many.

May I point out the nonsensical Monica Lewinski "scandal"? Non-news becomes news if repeated loudly and often enough eventually non-affiliated media outlets will pick it up.

Quote:

Now you use an example of Janet Jackson's breast being seen at the Superbowl as some sort of right wing agenda. The facts are that the Superbowl is the most watched program on American TV and many, many people thought that what was done was in bad taste. That is their opinion and that opinion was expressed. I don't think this issue has anything to do with left wing or right wing philosophies. I'm sure there are just as many left wing type people who thought it was bad taste as well considering they are tuning in to watch a football game and not to see Janet Jackson's breast. In the end to me it wasn't a big deal and I personally think it was blown out of proportion but there were many people who thought it was a big deal and I reserved the right not to pay attention to the media coverage.

I think the poster was trying to point out that NO ONE CARES anywhere but in the US. Also, it was a convenient bait and switch to allow your never-actually-elected president a moment's respite from the Democratic campaigning. Which, btw, is ACTUAL news.

In Al Franken's hilarious book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, he quotes an independent news analysis company (Pew Charitable Trust Project for Excellence in Journalism) that analyzed the tone of coverage during the 2000 Presidential Campaign between Gore and Bush.

The so-called liberal media was MUCH more positive towards Bush (rep) than Gore (dem).

Bush = 24% Positive, 27% Neutral, 49% Negative
Gore = 13% Positive, 31% Neutral, 56% Negative

So, I guess left wingers are pretty stupid to be publishing all those negative stories about Gore. Dammit, THEY cost him the election!

Whatever, I hope your all your sakes that Mr. Kerry will take over come November and you guys can get back to where you were 4 years ago. No deficit, not so many ppl hating you, more of your ppl working, fewer ppl dying violently, fewer ppl homeless and/or without medical aid. Well done, Shrub.

~~~~~~~~
Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 1:14 PM

FLAMETREE

I have seen fox network news here in Sydney. It is hi-larious for about 5 minutes and then you just have to flick. And no it is not just me I have yet to meet anyone who can actually watch it. If USA wants to improve its image they should stop broadcasting that rubbish.

When I first saw it I thought it was a comedy channel.

However the quality of the rest of the newsa avaliable is very poor as well, yes I do mean the ABC, BBC, CCN hardily left wing except when compared to fox new.

By the way forget comparing the alliance to the nazi's, here they are compared to the USA.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 1:31 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC

First off:
Yay.

Second:
I hope for the sake of the republican part that Bush isn’t reelected. If it isn’t his stupidity or lack of understanding of the American political system it’s the fact that Cheney is taking bribes and was financially helping Iraq back when it was supposed to be illegal.

The White House is in a thin bubble and if given time to pop it could devastate the Republican Party.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 2:00 PM

Quote:
I'm sorry but how American! As if you "owned" the entire concept of liberality and are simply "loaning" it out to other countries.

Where ever did I say anything for you to think that? There are different forms of Liberalism out there and I am wondering from what area you are coming from because there are obvious differences between them.

First of all, you can't own an idea and since you can't own an idea then you can't loan or sell it to someone else.

It seems now that you are judging my character by a few simple words that you took out of context. Just because someone has a different idea than you or doesn't agree with you then don't insult them as I think you were trying to do. And it seems you think you know so much about America and Americans to say such a comment. You have your right to your opinion and I have my right to mine. Don't squash my opinion by demonizing me.

Quote:
The concern is that you are NOT getting multiple points of view through your supposed oligopoly. Only a few ppl/corps own the majority of media outlets (papers,radio channels,tv stns) so where oh where is this multiplicity? The verticalization of information allows a very few to manage and manipulate the opinions of the many.

May I point out the nonsensical Monica Lewinski "scandal"? Non-news becomes news if repeated loudly and often enough eventually non-affiliated media outlets will pick it up.

Oh, and you are getting multiple viewpoints from monopolistic government media?

If you don't like what you are seeing, instead of bitching about it then go build a media corporation of your own that would compete with the others. There are ways to get your viewpoint out there. A great example is exactly what the both of us are doing now.

Quote:
I think the poster was trying to point out that NO ONE CARES anywhere but in the US. Also, it was a convenient bait and switch to allow your never-actually-elected president a moment's respite from the Democratic campaigning. Which, btw, is ACTUAL news.

Oh, I'm sure that if something similiar was to happen at an event of their own that they would care about it and that their media would make a big deal out of. Considering that the Superbowl is more of an American tradition, it isn't going to effect other people as to what happens.

Quote:
In Al Franken's hilarious book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, he quotes an independent news analysis company (Pew Charitable Trust Project for Excellence in Journalism) that analyzed the tone of coverage during the 2000 Presidential Campaign between Gore and Bush.

The so-called liberal media was MUCH more positive towards Bush (rep) than Gore (dem).

Bush = 24% Positive, 27% Neutral, 49% Negative
Gore = 13% Positive, 31% Neutral, 56% Negative

So, I guess left wingers are pretty stupid to be publishing all those negative stories about Gore. Dammit, THEY cost him the election!

It depends on what you are defining as Liberal Media or what they are defining it as. And once again, just because some organization puts out some statstics doesn't mean that they are true. Another organization could put out statstics of the same issue and have a completely different result.

Quote:
Whatever, I hope your all your sakes that Mr. Kerry will take over come November and you guys can get back to where you were 4 years ago. No deficit, not so many ppl hating you, more of your ppl working, fewer ppl dying violently, fewer ppl homeless and/or without medical aid. Well done, Shrub.

If Kerry is elected, he won't take over until January.

If people hate me because I am American well then that is too bad for them. Without debt then there is no value to things; the deficit might actually work but you can't get money unless you spend it and the government isn't a bank to accumulate money. Whatever money goes into the government should either be used or go back to the people. Oh and by nationalizing health care the government will only be putting out a whole lot of medical businesses out of business sending millions of people out of their jobs. That will really help the homeless. And the only way you are going to help the homeless is by creating programs that help them find jobs or get a career. The saying is if you give the man a fish to feed himself and his family then he will eat well for one night. Teach the man to fish and get fish himself then he will eat well forever.

And one dictator out power and hopefully more to come after Saddam whether or not by the US's hand.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 2:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
First off:
Yay.

Second:
I hope for the sake of the republican part that Bush isn’t reelected. If it isn’t his stupidity or lack of understanding of the American political system it’s the fact that Cheney is taking bribes and was financially helping Iraq back when it was supposed to be illegal.

The White House is in a thin bubble and if given time to pop it could devastate the Republican Party.

Not a Republican so I frankly don't care. If the Republican Party falls then hopefully that will be a sign that the two party system will end.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 2:24 PM

CALHOUN

Fox Sucks!

Though it saddens me to think that they are prolly making a pretty penny off DVD sales....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 3:12 PM

GHOLA

Okay can someone please show me examples of Fox's so called right wing propaganda as that was apparently how this whole tangent got started

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 5, 2004 3:19 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I'd suggest you would take some time to realize that Fox News ( Fair and Balanced ) is a seperate critter from Fox T.V.

The folk at the news channel are doing a kick tushy job, out drawing cable news viewers and leaving CNN, MSNBC in the dust. I have no probs w/ how FOX NEWS is run.

To the pin heads at Fox T.V. programming...... Here's wishing you run into some damn hungry Reavers. Haa haa haa!

Holy flirking schnitt!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 3:51 AM

First off, Fox News, and Fox Entertainment are two different divisions. While I think it is arguable that Fox News is conservative, I think it is only in comparison to say, CNN, MSNBC, and the network news division.

But the news division really doesn't have anything to do with the entertainment network. If the entertainment side goes down, I don't think that will affect the news division much at all.

I note that those who are saying that the other networks are left wing, only make the statement, and dismiss the charge. Usually in a very insulting manner. It is not an effective argument technique. It just comes across as infantile, and convinces the audience that the speaker is, well, protesting too much.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 4:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HATEHATEHATEFOX:
Quote:
What would you rather have, a left wing propaganda machine?

[political debate]
My dear, you are sadly mistaken if you believe there is such thing as a "left-wing" propaganda machine. TV networks are owned by the rich are the rich are inherently conservative. You should read a book called: What Liberal Media?
[/political debate]

Ummm... There are plenty of rich liberals, and there is a thought that some rich folks become liberal out of guilt for simply being rich. You have heard the term "limosine liberal" after all.

Besides which, lets face it, the political left is essentially the same old feudal structure of peasants and aristocrats with a different line of BS to sell to the masses. Anytime you try to organize a bunch of folks to do a particular thing, someone has to take the job of co-ordinator, leader, captain, spokesman or commisar. Its the same game, just in a different language.

So who is best "suited" to be the new leftist leaders? The celebrities, the folks you (think you) know. Usually wealth comes from that, or is a derivative of the fact you are wealthy. Having folks complain constantly that you should feel guilt because you are rich, just aids the limosine liberal kind of mindset.

So, while they may be capitalists on their claw to the top, there is no reason to expect them to stay loyal to that system. In fact, once they have made it, it is all the more reason to destroy that system to avoid competitors. Which means working for different, even if unworkable, models of economics.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 4:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rklenseth:

Not a Republican so I frankly don't care. If the Republican Party falls then hopefully that will be a sign that the two party system will end.

This is the scariest, most illiberal thing I have read to date on this thread. I suppose all those who disagree with you will just have to shut up and take it then, huh?

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 4:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghola:
Okay can someone please show me examples of Fox's so called right wing propaganda as that was apparently how this whole tangent got started

Fox is "right wing" only in comparison to most (all?) of the other news networks. I have seen from time to time Fox putting liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans in side by side debates. What has usually happened is the Democrat has, well, argued in an ineffective, even counterproductive manner. Started name calling, bulldozing the other speaker (talking over them at a loud volume so as to drown them out,) etc. They make themselves look bad in a side by side comparison.

The Republican usually comes across as polite, and logical. And that in comparison to the debating tactics ultilized by the Democrats, is highly effective. And if the Republican looks good, you MUST be their shill. Even if it means better ratings than CNN, Fox News is still wrong somehow for allowing both sides to argue an issue side by side.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 6:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
Quote:
Originally posted by rklenseth:

Not a Republican so I frankly don't care. If the Republican Party falls then hopefully that will be a sign that the two party system will end.

This is the scariest, most illiberal thing I have read to date on this thread. I suppose all those who disagree with you will just have to shut up and take it then, huh?

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

No they don't have to shut up but I believe in the pholisophy of George Washington.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 6:45 AM

SEVENPERCENT

What a nice political thread we have going here- And here all I wanted to do was get on and do a little Fox bashing- Nice numbers that you posted, it's no surprise that Fox is going downhill, eventually people get tired of that mindless drivel-
One day, after the reality boom dries up, the network execs are going to take a look around and say, "you mean we need other programs now?" and be Shit Outta Luck- I think it's already starting to happen, and those numbers are the first step-

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 7:24 AM

GHOLA

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghola:
Okay can someone please show me examples of Fox's so called right wing propaganda as that was apparently how this whole tangent got started

Fox is "right wing" only in comparison to most (all?) of the other news networks. I have seen from time to time Fox putting liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans in side by side debates. What has usually happened is the Democrat has, well, argued in an ineffective, even counterproductive manner. Started name calling, bulldozing the other speaker (talking over them at a loud volume so as to drown them out,) etc. They make themselves look bad in a side by side comparison.

The Republican usually comes across as polite, and logical. And that in comparison to the debating tactics ultilized by the Democrats, is highly effective. And if the Republican looks good, you MUST be their shill. Even if it means better ratings than CNN, Fox News is still wrong somehow for allowing both sides to argue an issue side by side.

Um okay so what you're saying is that Fox News is wrong for having both arguments being put side by side. Can you please tell me what's so bad about them showing both sides. Wouldn't it be the responsibility of the person in the debate to present their argument in a calm and polite manner?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 7:53 AM

FAHQ

Even the beer chugging, knuckle dragging, belching, farting masses are tuning Fox out?

Imagine that......

Nothing that requires any form of intelligence to understand survives being aired on Fox. Including the broken wind.

"My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 9:10 AM

SOUTHERNMERC

Quote:
Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Drakon:

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ghola:
Okay can someone please show me examples of Fox's so called right wing propaganda as that was apparently how this whole tangent got started
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fox is "right wing" only in comparison to most (all?) of the other news networks. I have seen from time to time Fox putting liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans in side by side debates. What has usually happened is the Democrat has, well, argued in an ineffective, even counterproductive manner. Started name calling, bulldozing the other speaker (talking over them at a loud volume so as to drown them out,) etc. They make themselves look bad in a side by side comparison.

The Republican usually comes across as polite, and logical. And that in comparison to the debating tactics ultilized by the Democrats, is highly effective. And if the Republican looks good, you MUST be their shill. Even if it means better ratings than CNN, Fox News is still wrong somehow for allowing both sides to argue an issue side by side.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Um okay so what you're saying is that Fox News is wrong for having both arguments being put side by side. Can you please tell me what's so bad about them showing both sides. Wouldn't it be the responsibility of the person in the debate to present their argument in a calm and polite manner?

He wasn't saying FoxNews was wrong, just that the debates tend to be slanted towards the Right based on the actions of the participants. Actually, he was saying that ppl consider FoxNews "right" because they show both sides, and the Democrats chosen for debate are prone to histrionics while the Republicans remain calm and polite. This leads to a reduction in credibility of the Democrat while depicting the Republican as more intelligent and reasoned.

Not that this is TRUE, necessarily, just that it paints that picture for viewers. Haven't watched any debates on that channel, so can't really comment. But the impression I have from others who have watched them is that FoxNews is on the "Right" side of politics. Personally, I try to get information from a variety of sources before deciding, but that can be difficult, at times. Best bet is to use your head and think for yourself (which is antithetical to how many politicans want you to think, ie. "their way").

Submitted for your perusal. Edited for spelling (cause I'm nitpicky).

Jayne: "How big a room?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 10:07 AM

Fox News Channel or as I call it the scandal channel because it only covers Laci Peterson and Mr. Jackson and never anything close to real news unlike other real news channels, oh wait thats all "news channels" never mind.

Fox network the one that had Firely has nothing to do with that. What I think is going on with Fox network is this. You see at one time Fox was where original and unique shows were put on this is what made the network special. But over time they got more and more into trash T.V. Now the people that really have the power think folk will only like trash. But the new controlers of Fox have yet to get rid of the old programers of Fox. In other words this is why to this day programs of quality still get signed.

So I believe there is a civil war at Fox the new rulers believe in trash,yet the old school still signes shows of quality. In the madness that is your average corperation. The new school tries to sabotage the quality shows as fast as they can lack of advertising moving them around so they can't get ratings they have more control then the old school Fox executives. And just as fast as the new school Fox scum destroy the good shows and get them off the air. The old school Fox folks sign more.

Just a theory but it would explain why Fox keeps on to this day signing new shows of quality only to later sabotage them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 11:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincdc:
FOX is set to close the key ratings period with major declines in all the major categories: down 21% in households, down 23% in total viewers, down 26% in adults 25-54 and down 29% in adults 18-49. Those dips also mark the largest by any network in each respective category.
That was from www.thefutoncritic.com

Their strategy of getting rid of almost every quality show that actually required the use of a writer really seems to be paying off. They lost a quarter of their viewers in every category during Feb. sweeps. Could not happen to nicer folks I guess. I do hope Wonderfalls is a big hit for them, but I'm afraid they will wind up cancelling it for The Littlest Groom 2.

So, what, is The Littlest Groom 2 not going to be on now?

It definitely couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of ignorant, moronic clowns

They can have my "Firefly" DVDs when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers....

Oh yeah,

you, FOX TV!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 11:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:
Been listening to Pill-Popper Rush and his cronies, have ya?
Obviously you know absolutely nothing about the media in this country if you think the networks are "spewing" Left propaganda. And the way you spelled politics, with an "o", prooves my point...
Fox has been shilling for the current administration and it's now starting to bite them in the ass. To which I say Yipppeeee!!!!

To all of you who are throwing the political angle into the argument, let's try to keep our eyes on the shiny ball here. The real point of hating Fox is their low-brow programming aimed at the lowest-common-denominator of viewers, their utter hatred of any quality programming, and the willful stupidity they continue to show at every turn. Whether or not they espouse a certain political philosophy or other is completely beside the point. A good friend of mine, and recent Browncoat convert, is the most liberal of bleeding-heart, dyed-in-the-wool, Clintonite-apologist Democrats out there. He makes the damned Socialists running things over on the other side of the pond seem like Pat Buchanan. Obviously, based on my previous statements, which contain more than a slightly Conservative bias, you might conclude that myself and my friend from work agree on absolutely nothing. As a matter of fact we agree on quite a few things. We both agree that "Firely" totally kicks ass. We both agree that Fox is run by ignorant dung-flinging monkeys. We also both agree that we will never see eye-to-eye on politics, but that's ok, and it's utterly irrelevant.

I could go on even more, but I think I made my point. Let's leave the political blustering and posturing for a different board. We need all the fellow Browncoats we can get...

They can have my "Firefly" DVDs when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers....

Oh yeah,

you, FOX TV!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:00 PM

SOUTHERNMERC

Oop sorry. Let's get this hate back where it belongs.

FOX!!

Jayne: "How big a room?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HATEHATEHATEFOX:
...Whatever, I hope your all your sakes that Mr. Kerry will take over come November and you guys can get back to where you were 4 years ago. No deficit, not so many ppl hating you, more of your ppl working, fewer ppl dying violently, fewer ppl homeless and/or without medical aid. Well done, Shrub.

~~~~~~~~
Nothing is ever so profoundly regretted as a kind act.
Robertson Davies

Ok, now I have one political thing I have to say. You sir, based on your statements in your previous posts, must be from outside the USA. People from other countries, and liberals from the USA, seem to be under the misguided notion that we have to go along with the "recommendations" and "suggestions" of other countries. I, sir, think not. I admit I voted for Bush in 2000, and I also admit I will most likely vote for him again this year. One of the biggest reasons for me voting for him over some Liberal Democrat is he, largely, doesn't feel the need to get a "by-your-leave" from the UN, EU, NATO, or any other organization. IMHO, we in the USA have the right to go with our national interests over the wishes and desires of other nations. What that means, in essence, is that nobody gives a good gorram what some hoodlum warrior chief in Africa who happens to be on the UN Human Rights Commission thinks about how the USA conducts her affairs.

IMHO, I think we in the USA should become totally isolationist, since all we do is piss off every other country every time we do anything overseas. Of course, that would also involve eliminating foreign aid, pulling the thousands of troops we have stationed overseas back to our own borders, and telling the rest of the world to gen hou zi bi diu shi

From now on, we could use all the money we save from not sending it out to ungrateful, corrupt international organizations and collapsing military juntas to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless right here in the USA. That would make foreigners and liberals happy. We wouldn't be "interfering" in the affairs of other nations, and we would be fulfilling that do-gooder wish list that all Liberals have handy in their PDAs, in case anyone asks.

Ok, that's enough of my speechifying for now. Oh, and

off Fox TV.

They can have my "Firefly" DVDs when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers....

Oh yeah,

you, FOX TV!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:20 PM

Yes I agree only by working together can we create the kind of hate that is so, so very needed. You see I sometimes wonder if evil will ever be punished,yes I know it's wrong to doubt.But now Fox is being punished for it's crimes against viewers and all I can say is F

ck Fox!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:42 PM

LODRIL

Quote:
Originally posted by HATEHATEHATEFOX:

You should recheck the figures. The rich are not inherently conservative. If you look to campaign contributions from the last election, you will note that it was Gore and the Democratic party who received the most from individuals in the top tax brackets. Not just a little more, but far and above what Bush received. The facts are pretty clear... the rich, these days at least, are mostly Democrats.

As to Fox news; it's definitely a conservative spin. I actually prefer CNN, because they have a liberal spin and its easier for me to fish the truth out of something I disagree with than it is with a more appetizing story. I could cite numerous examples of blatant slant, but I won't.

It's not really germane anyway, so I should just let it lie. I get frustrated when people spew the 'conservatives are rich' propaganda without looking at the real numbers, and apologize to everyone for the aside. This is all pretty irrelevant since Fox network and Fox's cable news network aren't anymore associated than Fox and the media establishment of Australia and Europe that is mostly run by NewsCorp too.

All of which is to say, YAY! Dropping ratings means a strategy switch. Fox has always been the master of the overly-hasty programmnig strategy switch, so we should see fewer reality shows soon. The bad news, of course, is that even if they stumble onto something good, chances are it won't last long either.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:47 PM

If only our nation stopped funding other nations be they Israel or South Korea what a wonderfull world we could live in. No one would be mad at us for messing with others affairs. Just send all our troops home to defend our own borders sounds good to me. Not likely with the bonesmen vs. bonesmen election though. Either way expect more war.

For those not in the know both Kerry and Bush are both members of skull and bones a secret society based out of Yale. They meet in a tomb on Yale campus and graduate 15 members a year and slightly over 300 are still alive. And two are running against each other for President. Can you get any more anti-democratic?

The mainstream media the "newz" channels would tell everyone but there is to much important Laci Peterson news oh well.

Oh yeah,as I was saying F

ck Fox!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 12:54 PM

I like your tagline. "Transformers - The Movie" was totally underrated

They can have my "Firefly" DVDs when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers....

Oh yeah,

you, FOX TV!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 1:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dyairvatree:
If only our nation stopped funding other nations be they Israel or South Korea what a wonderfull world we could live in. No one would be mad at us for messing with others affairs. Just send all our troops home to defend our own borders sounds good to me. Not likely with the bonesmen vs. bonesmen election though. Either way expect more war.

For those not in the know both Kerry and Bush are both members of skull and bones a secret society based out of Yale. They meet in a tomb on Yale campus and graduate 15 members a year and slightly over 300 are still alive. And two are running against each other for President. Can you get any more anti-democratic?

The mainstream media the "newz" channels would tell everyone but there is to much important Laci Peterson news oh well.

Oh yeah,as I was saying Fck Fox!

Right on. Let's leave all the ungrateful foreigners to their own devices, and they can stop bothering us with their holier-than-thou, we-know-better-than-you-foolish-Americans nonsense.

While I'm talking about the gibbering fools overseas, I wouldn't want to exclude our own electorate. The whole notion of "Democrats" versus "Republicans", or "Liberals" versus "Conservatives" is meaningless. It only matters to those of us in the trenches, not to the the clowns in power. It's all smoke and mirrors, and it keeps the foolish sheep down here on the ground from focusing their beer-and-reality-TV-soaked eyes on the important issues in play.

So, in conclusion, let's just worry about pushing "Firefly" to the ignorant among us

They can have my "Firefly" DVDs when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers....

Oh yeah,

you, FOX TV!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 1:16 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by dyairvatree:
For those not in the know both Kerry and Bush are both members of skull and bones a secret society based out of Yale. They meet in a tomb on Yale campus and graduate 15 members a year and slightly over 300 are still alive. And two are running against each other for President. Can you get any more anti-democratic?

Sorry but what is secret about it? It had to let women in because of public equal rights lawsuits and it's fairly prestigious. You can find out about it on the Discovery Channel and there have been far too many movies based on it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 6, 2004 1:40 PM