not considered a news organization. i know oreilly and hannity are not but they are commentary people not news casters. but glenn beck and lou dobbs are also. when you get to the actual news reports like shepard smith and such, why are they not legitimate. cnn could be described as the same, could the not? just curious because i do not consider headline news and oreilly the same type of program. one commentates and one reports.
2007-09-17 05:45:31 · 13 answers · asked by BRYAN H 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's funny how when 9/11 happened, no one complained about baised reporting, because everyone was reporting the same thing.
But, when opinions start to differ, Americans claim bias in the press.
I think it's all hogwash. NO media source is truly unbiased. If you want a balanced view of the world, you have to pull infromation from several sources, and then make your own conclusions.
People are so willing to let the media dictate thier thoughts and views. It's really quite disgusting.
2007-09-17 05:56:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think the fox news, like other major news organizations largely utilizes news as a "show" and "entertainment." They deliver the Republican right-wing agenda well. I think their broadcasting-corporate should reside next to the Republican-led white house and be their spoke agent.
Commentary people like O'Really?(read: O'Reilly) and "Shown Integrity" (read: Sean Hannity) opinionize their viewers to the level where so many people are so opinionated. News hardly news anymore, it becomes more like a commodity.
The content doesn't not necessarily have to reflect the real news, the real issue. What matters more is how they can make it more exciting, and hot, whatever that could get your attention, as many of you as possible thus higher their rating.
It takes some efforts to figure out what the real news is really is.
2007-09-17 13:15:44 · answer #2 · answered by ASKER 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they are both slightly different versions of the same commentary. Oreily, hannity, Rush - those guys are obvious commentators who give their opinions and their entire shows are based on giving their opinion.
I also believe that any "news cast" is still subtly a giving of opinion - the news reports are giving in way that is biased toward the slant of network. I don't have a problem with this - the important thing is that you understand it and go out there and look for more information on your own. Don't just sit there and suck it all up thinking it's all true because it's on TV
2007-09-17 12:53:32 · answer #3 · answered by wh_johnny_05 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's all in the name!~!
2007-09-17 12:52:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I find Fox News to report on things sooner then many other networks, and stick with stories longer. I do consider it an actual News channel with commentary shows. But some people will call you an idiot or what not just for watching it. It tends to grind my nerves a bit.
2007-09-17 12:52:42 · answer #5 · answered by Chase 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It tells the news. Like anything else in life one should always get a second opinion. Good luck most' news outlets do not tell all of the news. Peace
2007-09-17 13:05:47 · answer #6 · answered by PARVFAN 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is not one media outlet that does not use some sort of self prescribed license to editorialize.
The news media is the only industry where good customer service is a bad idea.
2007-09-17 12:53:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't have a problem with Fox's news. However, if you ever watch Fox, the actual news is only about 10-20% of what is aired on that network.
2007-09-17 12:51:46 · answer #8 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Fox still has a right wing slant during their news broadcasts. I don't trust Fox news because of the BGH news scandal.
2007-09-17 12:55:55 · answer #9 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
When I first saw Fox News I thought it was a satire.
I'm still not entirely convinced it's not.
2007-09-17 12:55:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋