The Fox News bashing

[Aunt Sponge]

Everyone's issues with Fox and it's related reporters exposes people's narrow-mindedness and inability to think outside a box other than one that, for example, is stringently liberal.

Taking the time to laugh, mock and demean the ONE news-station based purely on it's choice-phrases and other such trivial things often comes across to people who are NOT continuously tuning in to see what's going on as petty and childish.

Instead of instantly tossing out the usual, worn out and non-comedic jokes and comments why not actually put forth why the strong anti-fox sentiment.

I'll fill in one blank - They're conservative.
Based on this one fact I draw the conclusion that, ot some people, nothing is acceptable if it's conservative - it MUST be liberal to be "balanced" in any way.
So how does that make sense?

Explain

"Faux News" implies "fake"
Any reports or stories that have been proven to be completely or partially fabricated - and what is that percentage in comparison to the number of fabricated sources from the "others"?

Explain.

Mocking the "Fair and Balanced" phrase they've been using for years to summarize their efforts to involve Democrat, 3rd party and Republican sources in all their reportings and guest appearances.

Having disagreement with "fair and balanced" implies that Fox News is not fair and balanced and someone else is.
So, who is that someone else? And what have they reported on recently that deems them so much more "balanced" than Fox?

Explain.


I will, likewise, explain through an extensive comparison I'll conduct over the next three months (between now and early December). I will research and compare articles written by CNN and ABC - both are standard news sources with a general consensus of NOT being "sided" - as well as MSNBC, FOX NEWS and REUTERS

I will select 5 different topics recently reported on in the last year and read and compare articles as such: A minimum of 5 different topics = 2 articles from each source on each topic, netting a total of 10 articles from each news-source.

Topic 1: Tarp (dating back to last year - post election)
Topic 2: The closing of Guantanamo (Reports from within 1 month after the decision was passed and reports from current-observations unless all sources have not addressed it recently, as well.
Topic 3: The Acorn Incidents that recently unfolded
Topic 4: As a caliper - I will attempt to dig up old articles on the same topic that date back more than 2 years.
Topic 5: the Healthcare Bill currently being debated.

Now, the part that I haven't quite nailed down, yet, are the points of assesment.

I have, so far, things to measure such as "sarcasm and slight" "lact of factual-fortitude" (aka - fakery or fluffing of details) and the overall tone when writing on these varied subject (with certain words and phrases the overall article will be pro/neutral/against)

I have some prediction about what my research and comparisons will net but I'll keep that to myself.

And, in fairness, I will also lightly evaluate the creditials of the article-author ... some people with questionable views and backgrounds do get their articles published by certain sources and, if they're extremely biased in a senseless manner I'll void their articles.

[Roboto]

You're really doing this? It will definitely be interesting!

[JLTsChief]

I am really interested in your findings. I hate when people assume that just because I watch FOX News that I am biased and stupid. I guess one can't watch CNN and FOX News to help get a viewpoint on an issue. All news stations are biased in one way or another. Some way worse than others. I think it will be really awesome to see what you come up with!

[Am]

I've missed having you around.

[icarryyourheart]

You may be my new favorite person ever.
I'm just sayin'.

[Bama*Mama]

I'm really looking forward to seeing the results of your research!

[jasonsangel]

I'm really looking forward to your results!

[Aunt Sponge]

Thank you!

I'm thinking, though, that perhaps i need to rope a 3rd party equal who's not biased or just recently drifted from another party (like I did) to gather the articles I'll reference.

I'll figure that out.

I considered doing this with televised reports - but those always contain excessive humor, jokes and sarcasm that isn't really present in the articles from all news sources and those types of things are harder to collect, anyway.

[CocoaGoddess]

I'm not even going to pretend that I was able to fully grasp your OP, or your intent. Seriously, I don't know what you're trying to do here.

I don't need an unofficial "study" to tell me that Fox is the Home of ****head Birthers. There's practically an entire channel on YOUTUBE to validate it.

[jennypage]

I don't understand your point either. How can one person alone make an unbiased study? Isn't that impossible?