Fox News should be banned!

[dawny0826]

They promote violence, bigotry, and greed! I think they should be banned for humanity's good.

Treat them like Islamic extremists and extremists of all kinds.

An enemy of nice polite tolerant society!

I keep up with both Fox News & CNN and compare stories. The truth is usually found somewhere in the middle.

I do tend to agree with Megyn Kelly often.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I do tend to agree with Megyn Kelly often.

I have to admit, I've enjoyed some of the videos I've seen her tear into someone, or some of the glares she gives to some people, typically when someone says something stupid in regards to women's rights, or the competency and abilities of women in general.

 

[Revoltingest]

Washington Post is a conservative source. NYT is actually a fairly decent source, and while they are more cosmopolitan (something they have readily admitted), they don't have the perceived liberal bias that many believe they have. NPR, they swing abit to the left, but they also feature a variety of points of views and subjects.
What I am referring to is when you can look at news sources and claims, and being able to find many falsehoods. With the numbers, Fox, CNN, and NBC just are not honest enough to be considered worthy of being called "news." Sure, mistakes happen but we shouldn't be able to create lists and databases of lies told by a news source while calling that source news.

Where you don't find falsehoods, others do.
Fundamentally, to want to censor Fox News is to be pro-censorship.
If it becomes institutionalized, then it won't just be Fox under government's heel.
And what is 'true', will shift with each administration.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Where you don't find falsehoods, others do.

If something is true, it is true. If it is false, then it is false. Half-truths or partial-truths are still not the full truth, and are thus still inaccurate and contain falsehoods.

Fundamentally, to want to censor Fox News is to be pro-censorship.

I'm not saying we should censor them, but rather because it can be objectively proven they often distort the truth and report falsehoods as fact they should not be able to call themselves news, because, objectively speaking, they are not.

 

[Revoltingest]

If something is true, it is true. If it is false, then it is false. Half-truths or partial-truths are still not the full truth, and are thus still inaccurate and contain falsehoods.

Things are seldom so simple.
Example:
Is redefining "assault rifle" to mean "non-assault rifles which look like assault rifles" a lie?
Some say no, attributing it to evolving language.
Some say yes, spotting mischievous spin.
Example:
When NPR claims anti-gay marriage types want homosexuals to burn in Hell, this is an utter fabrication designed to whip up their audience into a frenzy. (And this is with funding from the very same government which is supposed to determine what's true.) It's no doubt true for some, but is it honest to generalize so?

 

[BSM1]

Fox and Friends are still representative of Fox, and they do discuss news events. And the statistics are very meaningful because they confirm that Fox, CNN, and MSNBC are all a bunch of lying pretenders with Fox being the most dishonest. I also gave you several examples where they presented false information. And so what if Fox disavowed the birther crap? None of the other networks had people who believed it.

Washington Post is a conservative source. NYT is actually a fairly decent source, and while they are more cosmopolitan (something they have readily admitted), they don't have the perceived liberal bias that many believe they have. NPR, they swing abit to the left, but they also feature a variety of points of views and subjects.
What I am referring to is when you can look at news sources and claims, and being able to find many falsehoods. With the numbers, Fox, CNN, and NBC just are not honest enough to be considered worthy of being called "news." Sure, mistakes happen but we shouldn't be able to create lists and databases of lies told by a news source while calling that source news.

Actually you simply given a lot of lip service to your bias. You still haven't cited one story to back up your claim. Peace out.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You still haven't cited one story to back up your claim.

Seriously?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Is redefining "assault rifle" to mean "non-assault rifles which look like assault rifles" a lie?

If it's not an assault rifle then it isn't an assault rifle. Just because something may look like one doesn't make it one.

(And this is with funding from the very same government which is supposed to determine what's true.)

It's not the government deciding but objective facts.

When NPR claims anti-gay marriage types want homosexuals to burn in Hell, this is an utter fabrication designed to whip up their audience into a frenzy.

Clearly many of them do. It should be more clear and concise, but at least can objectively prove, with evidence, that many anti-gay marriage types do want homosexuals to burn in Hell.

 

[Revoltingest]

If it's not an assault rifle then it isn't an assault rifle. Just because something may look like one doesn't make it one.

And yet, they continue the ruse.

 

[Revoltingest]

Clearly many of them do. It should be more clear and concise, but at least can objectively prove, with evidence, that many anti-gay marriage types do want homosexuals to burn in Hell.

The word "many" was not in the claim.
If Fox pulled a stunt like this, there'd be wailing & wringing of hands accompanying the calls for censorship.

 

[esmith]

Are you finished rambling yet?

Nope, too damn cold outside so I have to do something to agitate the unknowing who are attempting to lead the willing who are attempting to muck up those that are grateful that the Democrats are not always in power.

 

[ShivaFan]

FOX is an outstanding cable news channel, certainly the most popular source of cable news in America. It stands up to racists such as Black Lies Matter and the Nation of Islam, it is fair and balanced, it reports on the greed of the government class and their power hungry abuse and taxations on freedoms, on and on which explains why their timely news is so welcomed and in demand.

But of course, they do have their faults as with all things human, for example there is a definite, not all but very obvious, bias against the Trump campaign and his supporters which are the majority of the Republican base... some are obvious Establishment-Bush types.

But overall, they filled a demand of the majority who had enough of the old dinosaur legacy ABC, CBS, NBC phony "liberal" (government class) news. And they are not alone, even more majors are on the rise, soon there will be a full blown News Max TV (cable) channel and news site, and of course the internet has many news sites similar to FOX with dominance in readership.

Ban? What cowardly attitude from those who think no one gives them an ear who absurdly call for a ban and demand attention - which is true: no one cares about their silly howls at the moon, and demands for a "ban", it is like saying "ban puppies". Beyond reality check, why waste time with even making such a statement? It is beyond sophomoric.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's interesting that so many lefties have such intolerance for free speech.
They nominally advocate most traditional civil liberties, but in this one area,
they want opposing views censored. And it's not just calls for banning Fox
News.....their SJWs on campuses around the country want all slights, no
matter how minor, severely punished.

The excuse this special pleading by crying, "Fox lies!" & "Fox is propaganda!".
But this is based upon a narrow & illusory partisan perspective. Leftish sources
do the same, but favoring Dems instead of Pubs. But that goes unnoticed.
Freedom of speech is messy & vexing, but it beats having some government
aparatchik decide what is 'true', & then imposing that upon us all without dissent.

This is Americastan, goll darn it! If'n you can't take the heat without trigger
warnings.....er, content advisories.....then ya'll can move to North Korea.
Political discourse is nice & orderly there.

Note: This is the most appropriate point for someone to invoke the
false false equivalence fallacy, & link a supporting screed from Alternet.

Well you know.

The double standard is the American way.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And yet, they continue the ruse.

They can, but a milk snake and a coral snake also look alike, with the difference being one is harmless and the other is deadly.

The word "many" was not in the claim.

It should have been, or, better yet, the actual number according to whatever poll.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well you know.
The double standard is the American way.

I suspect it's everyone's way.....except for Revoltistanians.

 

[Revoltingest]

They can, but a milk snake and a coral snake also look alike, with the difference being one is harmless and the other is deadly.
It should have been, or, better yet, the actual number according to whatever poll.

Is Fox the milk snake, with NPR being the coral snake?
To advocate for one party & be funded by a government headed by a prez of that party is indeed the most dangerous.

 

[Iti oj]

Freedom of the press.

they should not meet those standards considering all the lies and lack of facts and mostly sharing opinions and misinformation.

 

[Revoltingest]

they should not meet those standards considering all the lies and lack of facts and mostly sharing opinions and misinformation.

Who decides which sources are honest / dishonest?
Do you trust government to vet & control our sources?
Would you have given this power to Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, & GW Bush?
Would you like to see Donald Trump or Hillary wield it?

 

[Underhill]

Yes.
Do you?

I didn't say you favored such censorship.
In fact, I believe you'd oppose it.....even for Fox.
So you wouldn't be included in the group, "so many lefties", I referred to in post #12.
See how highly I think of you?
(Does it creep you out that you live in my thoughts?)

I don't know any lefties who would be in favor of censorship. There may be some, but then there are some on both sides of the aisle that believe aliens come down at night and anally probe them. I don't give much credence to the "some" at the fringes.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I honestly don't think there's anything inherently wrong with personality-based news outlets on their own. The problem arises when the public at large decides to get their understanding of public events from these harshly biased sources. Entertainment news is not bad until it becomes the only news source that people rely on. Aside from causing more divisiveness between everyday people, it also has the nasty side effect of dumbing down the population by raising a generation of adults who don't know how to critically think. The problem ultimately isn't Fox News (or MSNBC for the other side). The problem is that people seem to be losing the ability to discern the difference between quality or non-quality sources of information.