You guys could read AP, where the news gets its news. Or BBC News, that have no particular stake in any particular bias with regard to American issues. The problem with Fox is not even its particular bias, it's just its quality of journalism. Hello and OK! magazines have about the same journalistic integrity as Fox.

Pretty much all of their reports are severely biased, half made up and very laughable. I'm not talking about the talk show hosts.
If you want real news you should really start looking elsewhere

I get it all from Fark and other browsing, I know it's not a credible source, but it serves as a gateway. If I find a story interesting I go digging. (Not the website...)
Also its great for wasting time in class. That and TV Tropes.

Honestly I get most of my news from Massassi and IRC. So I tend to get only the outrageous or the really cool stories. Sometimes I accidentally watch the evening news, but every time I do I learn something infuriating or depressing. It's really not worth it. Like the other night I learned that a man had been arrested for being naked in his own house (Infuriating) and that that girl missing from Florida had been found dead ( ) Why would I want to go through all that, when I can just be blissfully ignorant?

Don't worry, I think that's the same sort of mentality that most Fox viewers have. And I think Fox News has the highest viewing figures of all news organisations?

I go to BBC for my news. I never feel rage at any of the journalists, so that's good enough for me.

• Ars Technica
• BBC News
• Digg
• Lifehacker
• NPR
• Wired News
• TF1 (French)

I check most of these sites on a daily basis. I don't really have time for anything else. I'll actually watch Glenn Beck while eating dinner or Bill O'Reilly before work in the morning just for ****s & giggles (mostly because my father is an evangelical right-winger, he watches Fox "News" all day & we tend to debate a lot).

But fox news reports the sort of things I just said I don't want to hear about...

Do you read posts, or just pick out key words and jump to conclusions?

Funny, Fox News refutes the allegations and is reporting that an apology has been made by the White House.

Personally, I've never met a "normal" person that doesn't like Fox News or, at least, that shares the same type of anti-Fox News views that left wing loons, like many at this site and the Obama administration, have.

I used to love Fox News...and then one day they just stopped making sense. :/

I'm normal, And I deslike the entirety of American media, it's just gossip. But fox news is hate filled idiocy.

Good. Stick with your Canadian media, to whatever extent teenyboppers like you actually pay attention to it, anyway. No normal American could watch Fox News and come to the conclusion you have. It would be perfectly normal to simply prefer another network.

It has NOTHING to do with being left or right wing: Fox is just BAD journalism, regardless of any spin they may have.

I mean, you like Ann Coulter for ****'s sake. She's a racist, bigoted, disgusting human being. I don't understand how anyone could not see that.

Seriously, us left wing loons dislike bull****, not right wing slanted news. You can read The Telegraph in England which is incredibly right wing and GET THE NEWS FROM IT. The same isn't true of FN.

Exactly. Fox News publishes outright lies and misinformation on a regular basis. They make **** up just to get views, it's disgusting.

Nobody likes you or wants to hear what you have to say, either.

If you don't know anyone that doesn't take fox news seriously, then I'd love to know what planet you live on, and what the hell is wrong with everyone on that planet.

Pretty much.

Like I said, Rupert Murdoch has been pretty public about being inspired by British tabloids. He's actually proud of the questionable reporting and misinformation that built his media empire.

I think it's disingenuous to claim that Fox News is a conservative mouthpiece, though: I see no traditional values (only appeals to them) and absolutely no economic sense on that network. Fox News just exists so 'new money' rich people can convince the poor and ignorant that they're better off staying that way.

A corollary to my previous post. There are only two kinds of people who 'like' Fox News:

- The aforementioned 'poor and ignorant' who aren't able to recognize bad journalism and will, in fact, believe anything they hear as long as the person saying it is making a strawman of the social sciences.

- Rich, intelligent people who claim to like Fox News but really just read The Economist.

Rupert Murdoch also owns some of our highest circulation papers (one of which was the free daily London Paper, but Murdoch hates free so they closed down), I don't know of anyone who regards The Sun or any other tabloid as reputable.

I don't really read any papers, but I pretty much dismiss any news that doesn't come from one of: The BBC, Channel 4, The Guardian, The Independent, The Times (unfortunately this is also owned by Murdoch, but they tend to be more informed than his other tripe), The Telegraph or the Financial Times.

I think we can all agree that Fox news sucks to one degree or another. I think we're kind of missing the point, though, that all the other news organizations suck to one degree or another in the other direction (as was pointed out earlier about MSNBC).

So, it's lose-lose.

Fox news is the very definition of suck though.
Other news shows suckiness ratings are done on a scale of 1 to Fox.

....Yes...

What's wrong with MSNBC? I'm highly dubious of American media outlets being accused of "left-wing bias", as on an international scale all American media is decidedly right of centre (or maybe just reality has a left-wing bias), but I may well be overlooking something and I'd be happy to be corrected.

I think a tendency to an unrealistic black/white mentality is very common in poor journalism, and while prevalent is certainly not exclusive to American media - British tabloids and the Daily Mail are famous for this, as is Sky News, and certain British tabloids actively take pride in their bias toward a particular political party (ie, whichever one with most public support at the time).

Media in Norway is interesting in that political bias is less prevalent (possibly due to the system of proportional representation, so political issues often have more than 2 sides to them) but newspapers like Dagbladet are just as sensationalist as British tabloids. Though this was, of course, very different during the Nazi occupation of Norway when Aftenposten were forced to support the Nazis and papers like VG were created by members of the resistance movement (though both owned by the same company now).

What about pseudo-intellectual neocons who watch Fox news so they have something to reaffirm their beliefs and not have to worry that their heads are actually up their asses?

it really depends what you are using as a basis for "center" if you are going based on the U.S. only then yeah, most major media outlets do tend to have a slight left wing tilt. however if you are using the entire world to determine what "center" should be then the entire U.S. is slightly right of center, so of course media is going to appear right of center as well.

Also, despite the BBC's impartiality requirements it still leans slightly to the left for the simple reason it is predominantly staffed by young people who have been to university and as such are more likely to be liberal in their social outlook.

Funny you should mention it...

The Daily Mail was owned by Alfred Harmsworth, the man who is the main inspiration for Rupert Murdoch and News Corp.

Sky is 30% owned by News Corp and is run by Rupert Murdoch's son.

I'm not sure. Either they're smart, but they can't afford an economics book newer than Wealth of Nations or they're dumb and won't read it.

It was also owned by Harold Harmsworth, a champion of the British Union of Fascists, who personally wrote to Hitler describing his work as "great and superhuman" and congratulated him on the annexation of Czechoslovakia in 1938, and encouraged him to march into Romania.



Beautiful picture of Harold Harmsworth and friends

We need to bring back the chaplin.

That word isn't pronounced how you think it is.

psh, its a clever orthographic pun even if it doesn't work phonetically.

Shush. If you correct them we won't be able to snicker at them anymore.

Boco you're such a dumbass.

It's doubly hilarious as it's French and Fox hates the French! LOL! or rather 'LÓL' as they say in France.

Freedom OL.

It was that or my usual rant about the Daily Mail!

I think I already dropped a Godwin on the place.

No kidding

Now that we have established the motives of your actions, I would like to see the evidence of your accusations. I won't to see where the BIAS is, where the poor journalism is, and where the lies are.

Go ahead and show away.