How fair and balanced is fox news' coverage of the craig story, or the alberto resignation?

Answer 1

Joe Bloe challenges liberals to give examples of FOX being dishonest. Joe, you're wasting your time. In all the months I've been participating in this forum I have yet to see a single instance of the left offering any details of "lies" being told by Limbaugh, O'Reilly, FOX, Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. They have a lot of bluster, but no facts. I've also noticed that when someone criticizes Hillary, Pelosi, Reid, etc., nobody ever asks them for specifics to back up their criticism. That's because they don't want to read the facts.

Answer 2

I think fox news is absolutely terrible. I do have to say this though - their actual NEWS (the cut-scenes between the pundits) is actually fairly neutral and somewhat even-handed, not much different form the other channels.

Its when they let their right wing looney tune pundits report and freely comment on and distort the news for their own agendas, that's when Fox News gets really biased and starts to suck. The only half decent reporters on that channel are the low-level reporters and anchors (who probably make significantly less than their right wing looney tune lying fact distorting pundits and partisans).

The channel's credibility is being devastated by maybe 4 or 5 people, fire those and the entire channel may gain some marginal credibility.

EXAMPLE OF FOX NEWS NOT BEING FACTUAL:

Sean Hannity said verbatim " Bill Clinton was impeached and removed from office "

We all know Bill Clinton was impeached but NOT convicted and removed from office. Or I should say most people know that. I laughed at first, thinking Hannity was just trying to needle liberals, but then again people from other countries or who had a life in 1997 may not know the details of what exactly happened. Anyway, no excuse for lying when you're a "reporter".

Answer 3

Haven't watched much Fox lately, to be honest. I've been more into Headline News - news for the ADD crowd.

But I can't believe all the whining about Fox. Are they really any worse than Dan Rather/CBS airing a story centered around a memo they were told was fake?

Or Reuters Photoshopping pictures to make Israel look bad?

Or the LA Times putting a Photoshopped picture on their front page, showing a soldier pointing a gun at an Iraqi child?

Or the NY Times airing a "story" about a woman in the armed services that they didn't bother to fact-check? (She lied - what a shocker.)

I guess it's perfectly acceptable to lie and twist the truth if you're pushing the liberal point of view....

Answer 4

I think they have played it quite acurately. In the case of the AG, the story is what it is. He left, and the Dems collect another scalp on there quest to get rid of Bush's friends. Ashcroft, Brown, Myers, Rumsfield, Rove,Scooter, Pace, ETC.
Craig? Story is still developing. His local paper has been on trash hunt for months on the guy. Frankly Jim Mc Greavey should have had as much spotlight, but as a Liberal Dem, Skated thru most media. So on most of the two stories, I say yes, they are fair & balanced in their coverage.

Answer 5

Covering up the 2 year anniversary of the Katrina disaster and the American people that are still suffering .

I guess relocation is just normal .

Up root people and spread them all over the place with no intention of returning them back home .

The city and community they felt comfortable in had a major catastrophe strike and this nation let its own people down to an extent I think is criminal .

If we can no longer count on support from our neighbors then I want out of the deal .

You know the one where we all pay taxes to defend america from foreign aggression not a military to control other regions .

I want that money back .
I have been lied to so often I need a kiss first .

Answer 6

Durring the AG's speech, CNN talked over him, FOX aired it. I haven't watched FOX on the Craig story.

Answer 7

I don't watch any of this stuff as it's all been witch hunts, now when the tide turns I will! Fox usually have guests with an opposite view on it so it has to be pretty fair.

Answer 8

The Right to Lie in the "News"

FOX SUED FOR THE RIGHT TO LIE !!!

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.


If ever we needed to know why the biggest media consumers in the world are so badly informed, this pretty well tells it all. The Media Can Legally Lie.
According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts.
Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.
Akre and Wilson sued the Fox station and on August 18, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” about the widespread use of BGH in dairy cows.
[...] FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation."
In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
OK, pick your jaw up off the floor. That some court thinks they CAN is bad enough, that these people assert their right to do so pretty well kicks it all down the hole. And these guys wonder why their credibility is in the toilet and the net is burning them left right and centre.
Oh, and February 2003, 30 days before Iraq.

Answer 9

The story was front page on the web site, Hannity called for his resignation, what else to you want, Fox to sell out to the George Soros anti-American hate machine and report what they want you to hear???

Answer 10

Remember the fox in the hen house?