December 19, 2005

FOX

I think most people on the left think that we right-wingers love Fox News. Fox is always trotted out as the one example of ultra-conservative views, and several times when I have repeated something I read online, people have said, "What, did you hear that on Fox?" when they don't believe me. For the record, I know many right-wingers who don't like Fox. My husband and I enjoy watching Forbes on Fox and Cavuto on Business, but that's about it.

I personally see very little difference in the way Fox reports the news. For example, on Iraqi election day last week, the Fox reporter said, "This is the day Bush has been waiting for...", which really burned me up. Why not the day the Iraqi people have been waiting for, or the day the world has been waiting to see, or the day the American public, or anything but always placing the emphasis on Bush? Fox is just as crappy, and it drives me nuts. In fact, the day after Iraqi election day, my husband sat down and checked all websites of the major networks. MSNBC, ABC, CNN, they all had that stupid freezing rain as their top story. My husband said, "I bet Fox got it right," as he typed in the URL. Nope, they also went with freezing rain, though at least the Iraqi election was the second story; the other news sources didn't even have it on their main pages.

Therefore, I wasn't that surprised to find that Brit Hume on Fox only ranks as slightly right of center on that new media study from UCLA. Fox isn't nearly as far right as people like to pretend.

Take a few minutes to read the results of that study. They seem to have done a good job trying to filter out bias in their study. Interesting stuff.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:17 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 311 words, total size 2 kb.

1 As you might have guessed, invoking Fox News is simply a way some people handwave away views they don't agree with. I hardly watch network or cable news and I keep getting told that all I watch is Fox News, or if they're really trying to get cute: "Faux" News. Ooo... isn't that so clever to spell it that way?

Posted by: Patrick Chester at December 19, 2005 09:35 AM (MKaa5)

2 Sarah, Agree with you wholeheartedly. Although Fox tries harder to be fair and balanced, they frequently allow total idiots to put out what any engineer, philosopher. or military historian could debunk as untruths of the Left and touchy feely liberals. For instance, how many times can a Dhimmicrat claim there is no plan, when there obviously is one. Maybe it isn't going perfectly, but what war ever has? Or how about the discussion about how oil companies are gouging folks deliberately. I lived in Texas during the oil bust of the 80s. My high school friends' fathers were losing their businesses, homes, jobs, and the shirts off their backs because they couldn't make enough drilling because the oil was too cheap. My old girlfriend's new husband was in the oil business, and got laid off with 2 kids to feed. He had to take a loan officer job at the bank -- foreclosing on the rigs and equipment of the folks he used to work with. He hated what he had to do so much he spent all his spare time training to be a sheriff and eventually join the FBI. He never wanted to go back to hurting his friends again. The oil companies laid off thousands of folks in Houston just because oil was so cheap they couldn't afford to pay their employees and still keep from bankruptcy. So because oil is now a commodity, we pay whatever Hugo Chavez wants to charge us, and that is somehow Exxon's fault when he jacks up the price to cheat his own people out of their revenue and line his cronies' pockets? Fox isn't perfect. It is still too far left for most common sense military folks who know what war is about and how to fight one. They try to distill an entire epic down to a 10 second sound bite. But they're better than most, so we watch them instead of SeeBS. Keep on keepin' on, gal. You are doin' fine. Subsunk

Posted by: Subsunk at December 19, 2005 11:30 PM (6RsXX)

3 We also lived in Houston during the 80's. It was a horrible time. People would pack up and leave their homes in the middle of the night. We went from a very comfortable way of life to barely making ends meet. We left in 1990, and I still miss the good people of Texas. Sarah's Mama

Posted by: Nancy at December 20, 2005 02:04 PM (Z+RCN)

4 Yeah, they're not right-wing, they're simply not virulently left wing. Then again, for many leftists that's the same thing as being a right-wing extremist. Probably the same for right-wing extremists, but they're marginalized, whereas the other side is aggrandized. Kalroy

Posted by: Kalroy at December 20, 2005 08:25 PM (AwOS7)

5 Kalroy stole what I was planning to say. Because FOX is not in total lockstep with the main alphabet soup folks, they get branded as ultra-conservative. Also because Brit dares to have people like Fred Barnes or Bill Kristol on panels (balanced by Mara Liasson and Juan Williams) - surely they must be neocons, right?

Posted by: Barb at December 21, 2005 01:55 AM (g9qHI)

6 To say Fox "is still far too left" of anything shows how far the scale has moved in this country. The people you decry as "far left fringe" are actually moderates in any other democracy. Some people need to pick up a book or two and realize that buzzwords and propaganda don't change the actual definition of political positions. They can be fluid but weren't meant to be splashed onto the wall and called whatever your talking points says they should be called.

Posted by: mmm...lemonheads at December 21, 2005 03:55 PM (uZuRD)

7 mmm...huh?

Posted by: Sarah at December 21, 2005 04:26 PM (EhEOa)

8 lemmonhead, Gee, I guess the GOP email address book forgot me. I haven't had my talking points today. Can't survive without them. Of course, I survived without them for 47 yrs, so maybe I can struggle on through without them. "The people you decry as "far left fringe" are actually moderates in any other democracy. Some people need to pick up a book or two and realize that buzzwords and propaganda don't change the actual definition of political positions. They can be fluid but weren't meant to be splashed onto the wall and called whatever your talking points says they should be called." A "moderate" in any other democracy would not insist on impeachment without crime, defeat without honor, retreat without failure, and whining and crying about their own defense by better people than said "moderates". Military folks don't get to pick and choose who in the country they will defend. If they did, you can bet there would not be much effort expended to save folks who think the country can't win wars, shouldn't protect its citizens because it violates the terrorists' civil rights, and who insists other Men and Women sacrifice their lives and efforts for the "moderates" safety and well being while denigrating their work. If other democracies believe Howard the Coward, Nancy the Nut Case, and John I'll Retreat Before Battle Is Joined because we just can't win anything, then I guess I don't think they are truly serious moderate democracies who will stand up against tyranny. Can't wait to see how they handle the coming Islamic Caliphate, when the Real "Moderate Islamists" begin stabbing them, beheading them, and beating the women who don't wear hijab. I won't be counting on their support to defend my family from harm. They've never come through before. You are free to hold to your opinion. It merely shows how uneducated and blissfully ignorant of true sacrifice and honor you are. Walk on, bud. Right off the cliff your heading for. Subsunk

Posted by: Subsunk at December 24, 2005 09:53 AM (6RsXX)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
49kb generated in CPU 0.0116, elapsed 0.1061 seconds.
49 queries taking 0.0971 seconds, 205 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.