Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Fox News

3,543 bytes added, 19:43, 16 March 2007
I took out the sexual reference to Bush. This is a family site. If you are going to vandalize, at least restrain your language. --[[User:Octaviohpaz|Octaviohpaz]] 17:25, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
The discussion about Hannity and Colmes doesn't belong in this article. If you feel compelled to write about this, go to their article and write it in the discussion page.--[[User:Octaviohpaz|Octaviohpaz]] 17:28, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
I don't see how the attack on Israel contributes to this article. I erased it. --[[User:Octaviohpaz|Octaviohpaz]] 17:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
I modified the last sentence. Typical liberal bias.--[[User:Octaviohpaz|Octaviohpaz]] 17:44, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
Is a citation ''from'' Fox News saying that Fox News is fair and balanced really a good idea?
I would think that it would be more appropriately said as "Fox News claims to be fair and balanced," or something along those lines.
Anyone disagree?
Yes - Fox News is obviously sympathetic to conservative views, as is all of Rupert Murdoch's empire. To suggest otherwise is absurd and makes a mockery of this whole project. How can a news network be "unbiased" yet not attack Bush as a matter of policy? It doesn't make sense. Of course they have some "liberal" views expressed, but this is not the same as "fair and balanced reporting". It is what it is, and it is very successful, but let's be honest about what it is - isn't honesty supposed to be a virtue?
--[[User:Commodore Guff|Commodore Guff]] 15:23, 7 March 2007 (EST)
*I disagree. One of the ways Fox News attempts to be fair and balanced is by inviting guests from both sides of the issue. Personally I would prefer to only hear from conservatives, but Fox News has both sides. Hannity and Colmes is a great example of a Fair and Balanced show - Sean is the Conservative and Alan is the liberal (and proud of it). [[User:Crocoite|Dean]] 17:28, 7 March 2007 (EST)
I think the link for the first reference needs to be changed. It is used as a citation for Fox News saying it is Fair and Balanced, but the link only goes to a page with employment opportunities.
::Even as a pretty conservative person, I will admit Fox News has a definite conservative bias. I'm not faulting them for this, but the media inherently has a bias. That's why having so many different news sources is such a good thing. Nevertheless, it's not just "liberals" that think Fox News is biased. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 14:49, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
== Fair and Balanced? ==
I have been doing research on both Fox and CNN, and I have seen many occasions where both networks would be "reporting" the same event and yet both reports are completely different. After watching hours of both networks, and analyzing word usage, stories covered, and opinion pieces, I have come to the conclusion IMHO that both networks are hard at work spoon feeding America news that has been interpreted, digested, and analyzed for us. Both networks are telling us what to think about everything, the only difference is which way their messages lean. It would be nice for the news people to just give me the news without all the crap attached and let us make up our own minds. I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but I am still capable of making my own decisions about what I see.
== Another article protected to preserve its bias ==
Conservapedia continues to abdicate its goal of providing an unbiased encyclopedic source. See [[Theory of evolution]], [[Dinosaur]], and [[Young earth creationism]] for more fun.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 14:45, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
Wow. Well-cited information, called vandalism, was removed. Seriously, guys, come on.
"However, some liberals claim that Hannity and Colmes is still biased toward the right. Sean Hannity joined Fox News when the network started and personally nominated Alan Colmes as his debate opponent. Colmes, a liberal-moderate entirely off the screen of liberal politics, does not receive the same treatment that Hannity receives from the station (Hannity is often brought on during the daily news, while Colmes is not). In fact, the working title was "Hannity and Liberal to be Determined".<ref></ref> Liberals tend to cite Hannity's "superiority" over Colmes in the show as proof of bias."
Why was this removed? It was cited, clearly stated as a liberal belief, but considered vandalism and removed. Do you seriously think that information like this doesn't belong on a Conservative encyclopedia? Conservatives don't deserve to even hear the liberals' arguments? I strongly suggest an unblock, this is hardly vandalism, it's censorship. [[User:Splark|Splark]] 16:58, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
== Content and name change ==
Shouldn't the article be called Fox News Channel, shouldn't there be some reference to News Corp and to Roger Ailes? These are all things I'd be willing to do, would have no bias, and would add to the article. Is there no middle ground for protection? In wikipedia there is a semi-protected status which blocks IP users and new users that have been on the site for less than four days. Most vandals will forget about their plan in that time. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 17:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
== Outfoxed: Rupert Mudoch's War on Journalism ==
I watched the documentary in a politics course; it includes many liberal objections to Fox News...I think it deserves some mention. [[User:Reagan youth|Reagan youth]] 15:43, 16 March 2007 (EDT)