Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Were I a Fox viewer, I'd consider it a waste of time. Why jump into a Foxophobic echo chamber when everyone knows there's no common ground whatsoever? The same folk who call Fox liars will post lies from Alternet & other ilk, never questioning factoids favoring leftish ideas. Conservatives & lefties are such mirror images of each other regarding bias, integrity & policy. I should be b**** slapped just for sticking me toe in the water here.
That the majority of the American viewing public appear to be bone-stupid is not a statistic to be proud of.
Please don't take the Brothers' name in vain.
Because Fox is the only conservative game in town conservatives have no other place to go; therefore, the whole conservative demographic is drawn to it. Conservatives don't have another channel with which to split their viewership. The same would be true if there was only one liberal/neutral channel, but there isn't, there are many. So the liberal/neutral channels split the available viewership among themselves.
Just to explain:
Among the 8,090,000 viewers in the 18-49 age bracket in this sample, Fox had the most with 2.4 million; however, while each of the other networks had less than this, their combined total equaled 5.7 million. more than twice that of Fox. Fox garnered only 29% of all viewers. And, had there been another conservative channel around they would have drawn even less.
And . . . . . . I know for a fact that some of Fox's viewers are liberals like myself who watch Fox because of its silliness and groan appeal. It's a perverse form of entertainment to be sure, but what can I say, they're the only game like it in town.
Erm, you are posting to what? T'Interwebs dude, t'interwebs. From which you can pluck the Beeb or al Jazirah; British broadsheets, Der Spiegel and hundreds of others. If you want a good digest from across the spectrum try The Week. Left, middle, right, or loony; if you're getting your news from only one or two places you aren't informed let alone well informed.
The largest longditudinal study of second-hand smoking using doctors and done across decades concluded there was double-nought, blank, FA, correlation. When it became apparent that the study wouldn't support the narrative the UN pulled the funding.
And this doesn't apply to LW media???????
Oh, no.
Just so you know....neither of those pix I posted was of you.
As someone who has seen people get sick from being around second hand smoke, myself included, I fail to see how second hand smoke is supposed to be harmless like the overwhelmingly and mostly tobacco company funded studies claim (the same companies who use to fund studies that claimed cigarette use was harmless, even beneficial). You are still inhaling toxins, carcinogens, carbon monoxide, and many other things that are not good. And, quiet obviously, the body has no magic repelling features that filter out the harmful effects of rape sperm or second-hand smoke. It must be asked of these studies how does the body filter out all this bad, especially when a non-smoker who is exposed to second-hand can have irritated lungs, difficultly breathing, and cough up thick and darkened mucus just from an evening of being exposed to second-hand smoke?
I've no doubt that 2nd hand smoke is a harmful mix of chemicals. But if someone claims that Fox is lying because Stossel says there is no good data, then this is an entirely different issue. This specific claim about data is not the same as claiming it's harmless. But in a quick perusal of the internet, I find that the data are problematic:
I understand that RW media makes a lot of claims about 'lame stream media.' They usually just make it up. Rush refers to it as 'drive by media.' It's just not true. If something is in the news, media outlets will cover it whether it's bad or good. RW media like fox will intentionally leave information out. For instance, with the Benghazi committees, fox never mentioned the outcome. With the IRS, fox never mentioned that both sides were targeted. News is news. Only fox is the one who selects what they want their viewers to see/hear. Most fox viewers and RW media listeners think the democratic party is a nightmare and cannot name a single thing they've done as good. That's because RW media intentionally doesn't report good news. RW media is all about demonizing the democratic party. If someone is fearful and hates a party so much, there's no way in hell they'll vote for that party. Most republicans vote based on fear, RW media knows this and exploits it. Just look at what the RW media is doing with this "Obama ammo ban!" They're all propagandists
I oftentimes wonder if there is journalism anywhere.
There is....when it happens. Work ranging from less than great journalism to prejudiced screeds can occur pretty much anywhere. One should be skeptical at all times.