What Should We Do About A Lying Billionaire Who Dominates the Free Press?

CASE DOUBLE CLOSED.

 

The case is closed only because you have a closed mind, devoid of the ability to see further than your own nose.

The tea parties are not a medium. I know because people like me ARE the tea parties. Fox is my preference, but, as I was mentioning to Deckard, it is merely part of my news channel rotation. Unlike you, I consider all opinions and assertions, and, unlike you, I consider all the facts. It is quite obvious that you pay attention only to information that kinda sorta supports your viewspoints and disregard the rest.

 

^ Hilarious.

 

Only because it is true. Your reply is nothing more than a nervous giggle like that of a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

 

So any study that goes against your opinion can't be accurate. You are demonstrating a mind set where you have your opinion, and anything that goes against your opinion must be biased.

Your opinion isn't based on any kind of scientific study, or even a flawed attempt at a scientific study, it is based solely on your personal viewing habits, and whatever biases that go along with those.

At least Major, and others can look at broad studies which should be more reliable than your solo observations. Major's even stated that the studies may be flawed, but you can't produce anything that shows that, or any valid studies to counter them.

But rather than look at and weigh evidence you stick with your opinion, and cast doubt without basis or evidence against anything that is contrary to what your opinion is. Furthermore if anyone who says differently, you chalk it up to it just being their opinion, even though they do have the studies with which to back their opinion and you have none. Yet you place more faith in your opinion than that of just about everyone else, and the studies done to gather evidence.

Just look at the thread, what you've posted, and the response to your posts, and your responses.

 

Fox is a political propaganda machine not a news organization and if you can't tell the difference you are destined to be a tool.

 

This is pretty much a textbook definition of the Tea Party "movement."

 

I swear you use ten times as many cliches in your posts as anyone else on this board. It's pretty incredible. And pretty sad too. Didn't you used to be a "journalist?"

 

You clearly have no idea how silly stuff like this makes you look.

 

No, I just want to know who made these "factual studies." I think that is fair before I give them validity. In my view bloggers, pollsters, studies and opinions should always be questioned.

 

And yet you "prefer Fox." It doesn't get any funnier than that.

 

I try to be simplistic so that you can understand. Where I disagreed with writing down to audiences, it was required for journalists so that news was more understandable. In your case, I see the logic.

 

Thank you.

 

You're welcome.

 

the thadeus gets the last word.

 

You're welcome .... to it. :grin: Oops.

 

Wow...you have become quite the drama queen.

Maybe you should move in with your new best buddy, Hugo Chavez.

 

His post was dramatic, sure, but it did have the advantage of being right.

 

I've been closely monitoring the the ensuing hilarity in this thread, first by glynch and then by batman jones. Both continue to shift the grounds of the argument.

Originally this was about one corporation (News Corp) owning too much of the media in this country. However, at some point when one of the posters mentioned the fact that Time Warner and NBC-GE are in the same media conglomerate category as the "menace" Murdoch, then somehow the argument shifted to the journalistic standards of Fox News.

Come on now, keep a coherent debate. Do you want to reduce the size of media conglomerates in general or want to silence Murdoch cause you think he is a liar?

Can't have both because the first is a real problem, the second one is just your opinion. Hey, I hate the NY Slimes for erroneous and plagiarized journalism but thats my opinion not a fact presentable to a Court as violation of "free" press.

I would support the idea of just breaking up the larger media corps including TW and GE, but to attack Murdoch as the only villain in the media is a plain silly.

BTW glynch, you still haven't responded to the numerous requests to crucify George Soros next to Murdoch, if you really aim to preserve a "free" press.

Or do believe Soros deserves a carte blanche for his great service to America?

 

If I was to think of the antonym for FoxNews, CNN, NBC, PBS do not come to mind. It's more of something like the Huffington Post.

CNN NBC, and PBS are not corporately biased but most journalists are actually Democrats and thus the news from these sources do tilt a bit liberal.


But where CNN is a bit liberal, FoxNews is extremely right-wing.

CNN will criticize OBama as will other mainstream media outlets. But you never hear a peep about conservatives on FoxNews.