Fox News reporter gets disciplined

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by diamond geezer, Oct 4, 2004.

  1. diamond geezer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    #1
    "perceived bias"?? Try obvious! Just try clicking on the Links from Foxnews and see what sort of websites you end up at.

    Fair and Unbiased, my ass.
     
  2. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #2
    Just like NPR, fair and unbiased, right?
    I think that it is almost impossible to have an unbiased news organization. If there is one, I have yet to see it.
     
  3. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    please survey today's NPR offerings and point out instances where they show bias.

    i'm sick of these unsubstantiated "liberal NPR" claims. substantiate it.
     
  4. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    Precisely. Show me the bias at NPR. What are they covering that they should not cover? What aren't they covering that they ought to cover? What are they covering unfairly? Where is the NPR equivalent to Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity? Where is the NPR anchor who one minute is reading the news and the next minute feeding out party-line commentaries?

    I'll tell you one thing FOX has managed to do. They've managed to erase the distinctions in some people's minds between quality journalism and pure gutter tripe.
     
  5. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #5
    Well, there's Al Franken. But he's just an entertainer. Like Rush said he was after the whole "pill-popping" thing. People on the far right call anyone in the middle the far left. They aren't all Michael Moores, or even Dan Rathers. Criticize Clinton and you're a patriot because it's your right. Criticize Bush and you're a commie, pinko, liberal, hippy, tree-hugging, frenchy, blah, blah, blah.

    I shouldn't know what Hannity, Coulter, O'Reily, et al thinks or feels about the issues. They should learn to report more, and editorialize less. Otherwise, they should stop with the "Fair and Balanced/No Spin Zone" slogans. Or Robert Navak releasing the name of a federal agent because her husband spoke out against the Bush administration. At least the lefties can admit to being liberals.

    The only thing I feel like I can trust is the Daily Show. They make fun of everybody. And :eek: MSNBC. I hate M$... but you gotta admit, it has good news coverage.
     
  6. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #6
    I love the Daily Show. Have you seen their latest ad campaign: "The Most Trusted Name in Fake News"?

    They've got a billboard right across from the Fox News headquarters, and a full-page ad in this month's Atlantic.

    I love it!
     
  7. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #7
    Hear, hear!!

    NPR has to be the one source I've found that gives BOTH sides of the story no matter what topic they are covering. Their stories are more in-depth than anything on Fox News or any other news station I know of.

    I agree with Zim. Substantiate this baseless claim, please.

    Taft
     
  8. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #8
    I'm convinced that the reason NPR is viewed as being liberal is that they avoid soundbites. Soundbites are easy to classify as being conservative as they come only in black and white. When an issue is discussed in depth, it is impossible not to explore the nuances of it, in other words a multitude of shades of gray are exposed and there is no way at all that such discussion can be labeled left leaning. Why are so many on the right so willing to push ignorance as a basis for their actions?
     
  9. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #9
    Alright, before everyone gets their panties in a bunch...

    Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting first addressed these questions in a 1993 study, which concluded that NPR's news programs failed, "in reporting, analysis and commentary, to reflect the diversity of the public." And here is part of the conclusion of that study.
    "Like the network's core listeners, many congressional Democrats likely consider NPR to represent the most liberal perspectives within acceptable public policy debate. NPR's rare public stand on a national issue staked out "safe" ground for liberal-minded Democrats, and by extension, made taking a stand further to the left appear more radical and thus less politically attractive."
    Granted the study was done ten year ago.

    Here is an interesting article from a year ago.

    Here is another quote from Jeffrey A. Dvorkin the NPR Ombudsman about a recent study by the Pew Center for the Public and the Press looking at the state of journalism, journalists and journalistic attitudes.:
    "It found that a majority of American journalists say they are liberals. Not surprisingly this has been grist for conservatives because it confirms the impression that journalists are overwhelmingly liberal compared to the public in general." There you go.


    I think you get the picture...these are just broad generalizations. If you want me to quote specific instances, I will.

    I am sick of people thinking the media isn't biased.
     
  10. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #10
    a professional journalist is able to separate their own beliefs from what they report. heck, even crap journalists know to do that. not all NPR correspondants are left of center (though many are), but that doesn't automatically taint their journalistic standards.

    townhall.com? you'll have to do better than that.

    my original challenge remains. pick a day, listen to NPR programming, and point out the bias.

    otherwise, stop the BS that their reporting is liberal, and the inference that, because of that, their reporting is less valuable.

    or does "in depth" automatically equate to "liberal" these days?
     
  11. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #11
    Terry Gross and John Ridley
     
  12. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #12
    I beleive there is a significant difference between how NPR and FOX handle "news", even if you wish to paint them as both being "biased".

    So I have to ask, doe this automatically equate the two? Since media is obviously "biased", do we throw our hands up in the air and allow any crime against journalism to go unpunished in a race toward the lowest-common-denominator?

    What happened to judgements not based merely on comparison?
     
  13. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #13
    I didn't set out to raise your blood pressure. I feel like I am participating in the Spanish Inquisition. I apoligize.
    Look, I am not bashing NPR, I am just stating that ANY news program is bound to have bias. I listen to NPR everyday, I give money to them every year. I can listen to any news program or read any newspaper and pick out instances that show bias, liberal and conservative alike. I believe that most journalists do their best to report the facts, but I also believe that it is impossible to tell a story without some form of bias. Meaning, we are hearing and reading the journalists representation and summation of the news.
     
  14. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #14
    Terry Gross is the antithesis of Bill O'Reilly. Bill O'Reilly CONSTANTLY injects opinions into his interviews because he is constantly running commentary. If a guest says something Bill O'Reilly doesn't like, he responds with, "Oh, COME ON! You really believe THAT!?!?" An interviewer with a shred of objectivity would not inject his opinion into an interview like that.

    Further, their styles are COMPLETELY different. Bill O'Reilly strives for conflict, most of which he himself produces. He is not objective and doesn't claim to be. This allows him to literally attack his guests and cause confrontation. If you go on his show with an opinion which runs contrary to O'Reilly's, you can be assured you WILL be attacked. Gross, on the other hand, and in the traditional style of journalists, asks questions without injecting her reactions into the conversation. She doesn't attack based on her own beliefs. She tries to extract information.

    I'm not saying Bill O'Reilly is the devil. But he is NOT a journalist in the traditional sense. His show is one of constant commentary. Gross' show is one of news and journalism.

    Are the questions Gross picks sometimes indicative of her own bias? Probably. But that is true of ANY journalist or person out there. What seperates the good journalists from the bad is that the good one's try to limit the amount their own bias affects their work. O'Reilly doesn't even attempt to and THAT is what make him and Gross different.

    Taft
     
  15. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Funny, but I listen to NPR news every day and I have never heard Terry Gross appear on a news program. And Ridley? Never heard of him. And in any event, you haven't demonstrated in any way shape or form any how either one of them is the equivalent to O'Reilly or Hannity in their naked political partisanship.
     
  16. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #16
    Ok, I will agree with you about Bill O'Reilly.

    And thank you for re-stating my point, above.
     
  17. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #17
    I am not sure anyone is disputing the inherent bias in using actual humans for use in delivering News. This tendency is recognized and actively mitigated by competent journalism.

    Fox is not so abhorrent because of it's bias, but because of it's appalling lack of journalistic standards both as a result and in pursuit of that bias.

    To equate NPR is an insult.

    Perhaps we are talking past each other here....
     
  18. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #18
    Terry Gross-Fresh Air
    John Ridley-commentator for Morning Edition (he is not on everyday)

    Terry Gross is not as blunt as Bill O'Rielly, but has on many occasions used Bill O'Reilly type tactics when asking questions. I apologize if I can't remember any off the top of my head.

    I will admit that Terry Gross and John Ridley are not nearly as brash as Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity, but neither of those guys claim to not have an opinion on what they are reporting on.

    I will assume that NPR will never have the equivelant of Bill or Sean, simply because it is Public Radio.

    The spanish inquisition continues... :D
     
  19. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #19
    Thank you. I too think we are talking past each other.
    I never meant to EQUATE NPR to FOX News. I was only trying to point out that bias exists in all reporting.
     
  20. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #20
    Sorry, but I have to point out that this argument is based on pure deconstruction, of the "everybody is biased therefore nobody should be trusted" variety. Where this leads in journalism is to the conclusion that since FOX and NPR are both "biased" that they're "about the same," even though NPR strives to provide information and FOX has no greater mission than trumpeting the Republican Party line. The differences in approach to reporting could hardly be more apparent. I think we owe it to ourselves to be able to make these none-too-subtle distinctions so that we do not fall into the trap carefully created by the right wing, which is to destroy the credibility of all sources of information that don't promote their agenda. After that, it's all bread and circuses.
     
  21. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #21
    Time for a suliloquey on subjective reality!

    So the arguement here is over perceptioons right?

    I'll just be brief.

    With no other source of input than our imperfect senses and no mode of reasoning than our imperfect and highly individual neural pathways we have no proof that anything exists, let alone has truth, meaning or relevance. For all we know Terry Gross and Bill Oreilly are simply a neurological twitch, a mental compensation for a lack of adequate data... a hollucination if you will. In fact I may as well stop pretending I'm typing this because nobody really exists except me anyway because it's all in my head after all and reality is simply a complex series of small personal nerological disfunctions. Can someone pull the plug? I don't like this coma anymore.
     
  22. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #22
    I am going to open my big mouth again. Are you saying that there are no traps set by the left wing? and that the left wing doesn't try and destory the credibility of all the sources of information that don't promote their agenda?
    I think that it is a naive thing to say. But at least we know where you stand.
     
  23. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
    Apparently you don't have any idea where I stand, because I haven't said any of those things. If you'd like to try again to respond to my last post, then by all means, feel free, but if you think I can be bated into changing the subject, then you're wasting your time.
     
  24. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #24
    Ah poop....foiled again. lol
    Don't flatter yourself. :D
     
  25. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #25
    I believe the meaning of the above snippet is easy enough to discern when taken in context of the whole paragraph.

    I think it is too early to piss IJ off, and that is surely what you are going to do with comments like these, which obviously ignore the fact that IJ, myself and others have gone to various pains to explain that one must judge each source by it's own merits regarding the standards of journalism and not get mired in comparisons or relativism.
     

Share This Page