Why I Left Fox News

[curryjunkie]

Fox New is so awful it has failed pretty much everywhere it's been tried with the exception of the US.

the uk has sky news which is Murdoch owned, its shite, but nowhere near as shite as fox

 

[bobgeese]

Nowhere in this Wikileak is CNN demonstrated to be complicit in any fashion with the Clinton campaign.

Do you understand that, or do you actually need us to explain to you what the text in your quote box means?

Except that their employee leaked questions to the Clinton campaign.

 

[Throttlehead]

Except that their employee leaked questions to the Clinton campaign.

Shall we talk about Trump's employees, all the coffee boys?

 

[Madmick]

Except that their employee leaked questions to the Clinton campaign.

And was fired for it. At no point did corporate CNN play any role in that malfeasance apart from hiring a woman who was a former chairperson of the DNC (prior to her hiring).

 

[CauseImbetta]

No, I don't. Fox takes money from "pharma" (i.e. advertising dollars). I don't even know what your Clinton CT references, but I'm already suspicious of any actual substance, there.

CNN may have a clear agenda, but they aren't engaged in this suppression of its own dissenting voices. If they are, then at some point someone might provide some testimony or evidence towards that assumption. It's not like CNN even has a President to shill for. I've seen many positive Op-Eds among the more liberal press bodies praising Trump's willingness to finally, seriously confront China's rampant international IP abuses, for example.

Meanwhile, Fox won't even let their top expert explain why the Russian investigation is a valid and critical undertaking to guarantee national security. Trump's own NSA and top intelligence advisers, including the one he just hired to replace McMaster, John Botlon, have literally called this the #1 national security threat we face today. This might be the only foreign matter on which Bolton and McMaster agree (because they certainly don't agree about North Korea, Iran, or Iraq). Yet Fox is out there insisting to the American people that it's a witch hunt. They are in direct contradiction with our own government.

Ironically, the harder leftist new sources out there have already been out there trying to downplay the Russian threat by offering a platform for pro-Detente intellectual like my own former Russian studies professor (a staunch leftist):
Russia Is Not the ‘No. 1 Threat’—or Even Among the Top 5: By declaring Putin’s Russia to be the greatest danger to America, the political-media establishment itself is endangering US national security.
So where is that liberal echo chamber? Cohen himself complains this is a bipartisan viewpoint among policy makers. The only Republican in government who has resisted acknowledging the obvious is Trump himself:
Retired four-star Army general: Trump ‘serious threat to US national security’

China, Russia listed as top threats in Pentagon's new National Defense Strategy
He dragged his feet for what-- nearly a year?-- to sign into law the sanctions bill recommended by the Senate 98-2, twice repressing it, and only finally signing it during the Stormy Daniels interview week, so pardon me if I think he was attempting to run interference, and wasn't sincere.

Ok, so CNN is at the polar extreme of Fox. Check out the funds from the Clinton camp. CNN has an agenda. Fox has an agenda. It's best to be in the middle. CNN is constantly anti-trump to an extreme. Hand selected audiences for the gun control debates, use of minority voices only to sttack Trump is disingenuous. Stormy 24h a day. Sad.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Fox New is so awful it has failed pretty much everywhere it's been tried with the exception of the US.

That's a silly metric. FOX News has dominated US ratings for decades for good reason. If Peters is correct, that dominance may end soon, but its success in the huge and influential US market hardly shows that it is awful.

The main reasons people criticize FOX stem from ideological disagreement. I get that. I don't much care for MSNBC for the same reasons, although I think it is worthwhile for conservatives to watch to clearly understand viewpoints different than their own.

The problems with CNN are deeper. From long-standing deals with tyrannical regimes trading softball coverage for exclusive access to a strange and petty obsession with Trump's ice cream preferences, they are a poor source for information regardless of one's ideological stance.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That's a silly metric. FOX News has dominated US ratings for decades for good reason. If Peters is correct, that dominance may end soon, but its success in the huge and influential US market hardly shows that it is awful.

The main reasons people criticize FOX stem from ideological disagreement. I get that. I don't much care for MSNBC for the same reasons, although I think it is worthwhile for conservatives to watch to clearly understand viewpoints different than their own.

The problems with CNN are deeper. From long-standing deals with tyrannical regimes trading softball coverage for exclusive access to a strange and petty obsession with Trump's ice cream preferences, they are a poor source for information regardless of one's ideological stance.

So much silliness in this post, but the weirdest bit is the ice cream preferences. CNN as an institution is obsessed with Trump's ice cream preferences? WTF? What would indicate that?

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

So much silliness in this post, but the weirdest bit is the ice cream preferences. CNN as an institution is obsessed with Trump's ice cream preferences? WTF? What would indicate that?

I'm not being weird. CNN is.

 

[Jack V Savage]

So two people (from how long ago?) joking about his ice cream thing indicate a lasting "obsession"?

I think the issue here is that if you have an ocean of data and a lot of confirmation bias, you can prove anything to yourself.

Ed: I just randomly picked out "crickets" to demonstrate a point. I can say that CNN is obsessed with crickets. You don't believe me? Here:

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/09/us/crickets-american-story/

https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/06/us/oklahoma-cricket-swarms/index.html

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

So two people (from how long ago?) joking about his ice cream thing indicate a lasting "obsession"?

I think the issue here is that if you have an ocean of data and a lot of confirmation bias, you can prove anything to yourself.

I didn't call it a lasting obsession. I called it a strange and petty obsession, and yes, two separate stories about Trump's ice cream preferences is strange while the subject itself is inherently petty. How many scoops did Bush get? How about Obama?

I think the issue here is that you asked for something to back up my claim and I gave you two pieces of evidence. Now you should say, "at least this once, Inga was right".

 

[splendica]

CNN is the bottom of the barrel. CNN is a dumpster fire. I'd watch MSNBC or FOX over CNN any day.

Yes indeed. It's not even close.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Why is CNN obsessed with whales?:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/europe/killer-whale-mimics-human-voice-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/23/asia/australia-beached-whales-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/17/health/humpback-whale-super-groups-trnd/index.html

We know they're cool, but chill out guys.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I didn't call it a lasting obsession. I called it a strange and petty obsession, and yes, two separate stories about Trump's ice cream preferences is strange while the subject itself is inherently petty. How many scoops did Bush get? How about Obama?

I think the issue here is that you asked for something to back up my claim and I gave you two pieces of evidence. Now you should say, "at least this once, Inga was right".

You didn't provide any evidence at all of an obsession. You provided evidence that it was mentioned (probably everywhere, really, as that was a weird story and most news sources spent a small portion of a day discussing it).

 

[Greoric]

Why is CNN obsessed with whales?:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/europe/killer-whale-mimics-human-voice-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/23/asia/australia-beached-whales-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/17/health/humpback-whale-super-groups-trnd/index.html

We know they're cool, but chill out guys.

There is something wrong with your brain.

 

[HomerThompson]

Why is CNN obsessed with whales?:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/europe/killer-whale-mimics-human-voice-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/23/asia/australia-beached-whales-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/17/health/humpback-whale-super-groups-trnd/index.html

We know they're cool, but chill out guys.

 

[Jack V Savage]

There is something wrong with your brain.

Too logical, for some, I guess.

A 24-hour news station will have stories on everything. It's not evidence of obsession. You know what they were really obsessed with? Clinton's State Department IT security protocol violation. That was by far the most covered "issue" in the 2016 election (covered more than all policy issues combined).

 

[Greoric]

Too logical, for some, I guess.

A 24-hour news station will have stories on everything. It's not evidence of obsession. You know what they were really obsessed with? Clinton's State Department IT security violation. That was by far the most covered "issue" in the 2016 election.

It's just odd how you jump in to defend a political hack org, and its as cringeworthy and weird when* someone dashes in to defend Fox.

 

[HomerThompson]

It's just odd how you jump in to defend a political hack org. and its as cringeworthy and weird if someone dashed in to defend Fox.

This thread is about Fox News, though.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It's just odd how you jump in to defend a political hack org. and its as cringeworthy and weird if someone dashed in to defend Fox.

Is it honest to describe what I've said ITT about CNN (or more generally) as a "defense" in your mind? I guess it doesn't matter to you. But to clarify, it's only your own extreme hackishness that would lead to you to call them a "political hack org." They've become a ratings-seeking news-ish tabloid channel.

This thread is about Fox News, though.

And people have rushed into to defend it by ridiculously trying to compare it to CNN.

 

[Greoric]

This thread is about Fox News, though.

Excuse me, "when*"