VinTek wrote:I'll chime in, even though the question is addressed to DH. As mentioned, FoxNews is clearly biased toward the right. From what I've seen on CNBC, they're pretty much left-leaning. CNN pretty much seems to air all views and folks on both sides of the aisle agree to come on their shows, which would indicate that they don't think they'll be ambushed.
Anyway, bias isn't really the issue. What's at issue is whether or not that bias creates FUD based on inaccuracies, half-truths or outright lies. We've proven time and time again that this happens at Fox. We haven't seem anywhere near the same number of incidents with the other sources. CNBC may be biased, but they generally get the facts right and usually present them in context. Every media source makes errors but at Fox, they seem to have thrown out their fact-checking department in order to make their points.
Personally, I don't bash Fox because it's biased; they have a right to have an editorial point of view. I don't like Fox because they distort the truth.
Edit: Okay Eagle, I've got a questions for you. Given how much has been disproven about what they air, why do you keep watching these jokers? Do you believe them? If you want the input of others, you need of offer some of your own. Fair enough?
I generally agree with what Vintek is saying here. CNN famously has roots under a left-leaning guy but they seem to make an effort to report the facts without a consistent agenda. In fairness, I basically think the Huffington Post and MSNBC suffer the same credibility problem as FN though I don't think they are as flagrant about it.
And I object somewhat to the characterization of my comments as "bashing." I have said nothing about FN except that they are biased. They make a point of representing the views of the right wing and I am only pointing that out. If I want to know what the right wing stance on an issue is then FN is a decent source for hearing that point of view. I do watch it occasionally, more than I watch MSNBC. Personally I try to get my news from at least a couple of sources. I read the NYT until they put up the paywall. I like the Financial Times and the WSJ. I sometimes read the Washington Post. But then I think for myself and form my own opinions. Oh, and I do sometimes read HuffPo but mostly for fluff.
Vintek says they "have a right to be biased." That might be and it might not be. I would have to research it. In spite of the widespread, knee-jerk belief that companies are free to do whatever they want, this is actually not true. Broadcaster use the public airwaves and operate under licenses that they can only maintain if they serve a public need. For most broadcasters there used to be a requirement that they provide a public service of reporting news professionally. I do not know if this is still true. And FN is primarily cable so they don't use the airwaves. But they are syndicated on radio at times so perhaps they do NOT have the legal right to be biased in their news reporting. But of course I'm not naive enough to think that anything would ever be done about it.
My best suggestion to you Eagle, if you are seriously interested in learning about issues, forming knowledgeable opinions, and having a degree of credibility when arguing your opinions, would be to read at least 4 different sources. FN presents the views of the right wing, CNN seems to try to drive up the middle, MSNBC or HuffPo might be good for you to get some balance, and finally, a well-respected international paper like the Financial Times might also give you perspective on how the rest of the international community addresses problems. And when you read those opposing views, you've got to THINK and keep an open mind. Most sources will report the same facts. If you compare a FN and an MSNBC story for example, any difference in the stories will usually be pure opinion. They will each present the same facts then twist them to support their specific view. If you want to be an intelligent consumer of information and a good citizen in a democracy then you need to ignore the differences between the stories (opinions), extract the common information (facts), and think about to form your own viewpoint. If you find that your own viewpoint always agrees with any particular source then you're doing not thinking for yourself.