No chip on my shoulder at all. Just a statement of fact. The fact that Fox does so well in ratings is that the other outlets are too far to the left for most of America. If it were not so, then they would not be dominating in the ratings.
The Cheif Operating Officer (normally the number 2 person in a corporation) of News Corp endorsing Kerry at a news conference. For those of you who just crawled out of your Year2000 bunker (the fabled turn of the century thing) this morning, News Corp owns Fox News. Fox news is not known for taking up causes for democratic candidates, last I knew. What a strange world we live in.
well said- this was possibly an assignment. So all bets are covered. I think they send a provider to Nader..... or was that Benarik(whats his face Libertarian)
I think most of Ralph's problems these days can probably be traced to never having had a good fuck...so maybe a provider is exactly what he needs. Either that, or he's suffering from plain vanilla dementia.
As is evident in "Outfoxed", the documentary which is very critical of the Fox News Channel, there is incredible top-down management of everything that reaches the air. Starting with their daily "briefing" memos in the morning, the on-air commentators are simply parroting management's story-line for that day. Maybe the "I, Robot" tagline is more appropriate for them.
In this context, hard to see how a top level Fox/News Corp. executive would be supporting Kerry/Edwards, without Murdoch's approval. Probably just being foresighted. Difficult to imagine Murdoch's News Corp. further expanding its tentacles with a completely hostile Kerry Presidency.
And this is in sharp contrast to the non-biased reporting of the AP (American Pravda), NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN. The reality is that Fox News success lies in the fact that the other outlets are SO liberal that most of America is tired of hearing them.
It is a lot more efficient and certainly a lot less dangerous. I once witnessed a very (no extremely!!) conservative friend call CNN a middle of the road network, so your claim about that network surprises me. It also goes against what I myself have witnessed. I sometimes post AP articles, I find them unbiased, and to be honest, pretty dull. I don't know much about the rest since I do not watch traditional network television.
No chip on my shoulder at all. Just a statement of fact. The fact that Fox does so well in ratings is that the other outlets are too far to the left for most of America. If it were not so, then they would not be dominating in the ratings.
No its based largely on the American Right having no idea of the true spectrum of political thought and THINKING there is a liberal bias. The press is in fact very centrist, even a little bit enmired with the right wing of progressive thought. Thast they are not totally reactionary can usually be laid at the foot of the fact that they are INFORMED. Seeing a vision closer to reality, they try to do their job and get the facts out only to be told that the facts do not fit the GOP version of the world. Out of this was born Fox News . Much closer to party organ a la Tass /Pravda/New China News Agency than journalistic enterprise.
But I welcome it. Any outlet is good- keeps the debate going. Plus its always good for a laugh.
That is a good view from the left. If that is the case, perhaps you would like to comment on why there was so LITTLE coverage of Libya giving up its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs after the determination and success in Iraq. If that is true, why has the Senate voting record of John Kerry not become an issue in the mainstream press. The reality is that Fox is getting trashed because most of the American people are voting with their clickers on whom to listen to. Also, the middle of the road democrats like John Conyers are complaining about the "bias" of Fox. That means that it is having a good effect and having the socialists squirm.
"overseas", have been doing it for decades and will do it for decades more. Your post has an underlying ignorance of how US business works. Is it any worse to "outsource" jobs to Germany thanit is to "outsource" them to Chile? What is your point? Is it that the campaign of Senator Kerry has 30 companies as supporters that you view as jobs "outsourcers". How many companies that support President Bush "outsource" jobs? In either case, the companies are doing what companies have always done. So again, what is your point?
You have explained nothing new to me about business("Your post has an underlying ignorance of how US business works"), but the Point is: "Kerry" is complaining about American companies sending American jobs overseas, but here is accepting thier support--("So again, what is your point?"). Your comment, "that you view as jobs "outsourcers", it is a fact, not fiction. I'm a VC and I support out scourcing. Any company with out a plan to out source(at least some of thier operation) will not get Funding,Period! I have always made money, no matter if it is a Republican or Democrat. Congress makes the rules of the game and as in any game, thier are winners and losers.
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
