Don Henley of the Eagles has made a point for several years now of dedicating one of his songs to Murdock - Dirty Laundry. Murdock has always been scum. I now go to current or Jon Stewart for my news. Sad when a comedian brings us more honest news than our 'news' stations.
Good news should have no political slant. It's too bad that Murdoch's stations reach so much of the world - convincing people, in the way that they present current events on FOX, that Bill O'Reilley and all the other newscasters are interpreting news normally (without any side-taking).
It all comes down to a good BS meter. All news channels lean one way or the other. This is a fact. BUT Channels like PBS, MSNBC and even CNN try to hire both republicans and democrats. Political journalists and analysts will always have a political opion. Some can look past it or actually report the facts or have a civil and fair political discussion. Fox news chooses to hire republicans or conservatives to perform these tasks.
Look at the Alan Colmes. This guy is the liberal or democratic voice for Fox? No wonder a dedicated Fox viewer hates Liberals. In Foxes defense I will say that Msnbcs second biggest republican voice is the racist Pat Buchanan. Anyway, viewers Have a responsibility to understand who is reporting the news. Any jackass can put on a tie and run his mouth and call himself
bill o'reilly (FOX)
ok tell us something we don't already know......and again..nothing major will be done..these pple will continue to get away with this..fox will still be on the air....and to think many pple actually 100% whole-heartedly commit themselves to watch this station for their news and info.....excuse me while i turn the channel to Current for some real news....
Consider that Murdock realizes that Obama will be the next pres, so is preparing to change his tune in order not to disrupt his market share...which has, hitherto, been funded heavily by the right-wing hob-knobbers. Perhaps he foresees the tide is turning to reflect more the progressive point of view, along with the times...he doesn't want to be left out in the cold...this could be a good sign...or it could be just more of the usual fox news hyperbole...that wil be further twisted for the fox faithful...
I agree, there should be more accoutability in reporting. And whoever said that fox is middle of the road, is just another blind consummer...appealing to the base or vying for more narrow minded recruits...trying to make progressives look like left-wing fanatics...ain't gonna happen...
I know we can all respond to this by saying 'so we all knew Fox was pro-Bush?' but when you stop and consider it, this a pretty extraordinary and alarmingly cynical public admission by Murdoch. The taglines on the Fox network (repeated ad nauseum by his flock of appalling on-air commentators) are "Fair and Unbiased", "We report, you decide", and "The spin free zone". Murdoch is basically saying his journalists are puppets, he was the grand puppeteer and that his editorial policy has been misguided for the last eight years. Most CurrentTV viewers would appreciate Fox is a disgrace but we should be aware that a lot of people aren't particularly interested in sifting through their news for bias, don't realise the significance of Murdoch's admission and simply lap up whatever channel their remote lands on ... and they vote.
I really do not see why everyone is so mad at the guy. Mr. Murdoch has his own special interest, and as a businessman he will see to it that his interest are taken care of. I am NOT saying that he is right, in fact what he is doing is very wrong, but he owns what he does and has the power to manipulate people.
We must remember, evil people will do bad things. The problem is when people like us (who consider ourselves good) do not do anything about it. Stop complaining if you do not do any action to reverse the shady business people indulge in. If you do some action they by all means complain, you deserve to.
The funny thing about this is the belief that some have that O'Reilly believes anything he says. He might, but I think it more likely that he is a professional button-pusher, like all entertainers, politicians and marketing people. They wake each morning thinking about how to push the buttons of their target market.
Bill (and Fox) has chosen those who respond to their unique brand of political discussion as their target market. They want the far right to say, "Yeah! Got that right! Tell 'em Bill!" And the want the far left to say, "Idiot, moron, pugelist... he's no journalist." Both sides yearn to see more, to blog more. And the more that happens, the more money O'Reilly, Fox, and Murdoch makes. This has NOTHING to do with politics, and everything to do with Bill's prior entertainment gig ending, and him needing to find a way to make money off of button-pushing.
And before the liberal extremists jump in, the same can be said of plenty of liberals in the media too.
I assure you that once these guys have run their course on TV, there will be autobiographical books forthcoming from each of them with endless promotional talk-show interviews. This is all about money, plain and simple.
Anderson Cooper and Tim Russert will write books too, but their chosen target market includes both Dems and Reps!
Asking a billionaire if they use there money to make more money, is kind of absurd, they are definitely doing this. If you needed this video to prove that then you need to be a little less trusting of the media.
Most people believe that there is ether a liberal bias or a conservative one, on the media as a whole. that generalization and objectifying of the media is untrue. both are there to site examples Michael Moor on the left. He once tried to get the green party to extort the democratic party for Nader’s withdrawal of the 2000 election (He admitted to it in his book _Stupid_White_Men_). Murdoch is on the right manipulating it for his own interests and for his company.
Between fox and walmart selling america out from underneath us they re also dumbing down the average person. Boycott and you will feel a little better. Here is on way of looking at the schmucks at walmart. How much money do you really save going to reichmart. Now think back to the last time you were in that unstaffed smelly hell hole. Remember standing in line forever. Dont even think about going to the pharmacy. Now think about that time and factor that by what you saved. Well my life and time is worth more than a couple of pennies so F douchemart i would rather spend my money locally and get better products besides everything from cockmart is made in china.
When NPR reports that medical bankruptices have increased every single year for a decade --- they scream, "That's bias! That's a left wing slant!"
Nope, sorry. It's a FACT!
When CBS reports that there is a corresponding rise in tainted beef every year that the Conservatives reduced funding for meat inspectors -- they scream, "That's bias! That's left wing!"
No, it's a FACT!
You reduce government inspection because you hate all forms of government oversight and as a result more tainted/diseased beef gets released into the public -- that's a fact!
The real problem is that conservatives are in denial that their policies don't work.
So when medical bankruptices go up or when there are more cases of infected beef making it into the public because of insufficent government oversight -- instead of realizing they made a mistake and went overboard with their "We Hate All Forms Of Government Oversight" philosophy, they instead get mad people are even reporting it!
"Don't point out our mistakes, man!" they say. "Pointing out our failures is biased!"
When your critical of a president with a 31 percent approval rating or a war in Iraq assembled by a bunch of oil men thats whats considered far left wing. If its not Fox news its just Liberal media. If your a republican of course your not going to be concerned that opinion is cumming across as news. As long as its your opinion.
Journalism - writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation
Nearly all media outlets have bias, although Fox is more heavy-handed than most, and Murdoch's statements reveal it is intentional.
When I first discovered media bias years ago, I was disappointed; until then, I had believed that news was 'objective'. Not so, not in the slightest. At best, we can watch them (even Fox), learn what's being said, and reach our own conclusions.
There are a few journalists who seem unbiased on TV... Meet the Press' Tim Russert, and CNN's Anderson Cooper seem to be equal-opportunity investigators and abusers.
But most of the rest seem to be more like game show hosts whose goal is to get you to watch through the next commercial; or automatons who simply download their instructions from the RNC or DNC. Those disgust me.
the tyrants are attacking from many fronts. we got the authoritarians in power and the propagandists spreading thier shit across the land. this is trully a fucked up time in america. i want bill clinton back.
The best way to understand Fox News is as a product, as opposed to a news service. It happens to be incredibly successful at catering to its niche, but besides that fact, its not so different than most of the other corporate 'news' networks.
Everytime a thought is communicated or interpreted, there is some kind of information "manipulation/distortion" - its unavoidable....unless reporters just plagiarize everything and read text from a newswire.
Its clear none of you actually watch Fox news - otherwise you'd understand that they're highly critical of Bush and conservative policies as well...and unlike mainstream liberal and social media outlets, Fox news gives in-depth, comprehensive coverage to all issues and perspectives without the sideshow / personal vindictiveness toward Bush&Co practiced by every other media institution.
Anyone in the news business who says they don't intend to influence perceptions/opinions is clearly lying.
Murdoch and his radical pundit bullies are the only people in the media who openly acknowledge and discuss their personal biases....and are consistently ridiculed for it.
PBS much better on the non bias. Calling Obama a terrorist with NO PROOF IS CRAP. You know it. It is conservatively biased and you can't see it. Bending with public opinion is not reporting it's being a political woos.
Since we have the First Amendment in this country, there is nothing wrong with a station like Fox News to blather on about anything they please -- where they become dishonest and hypocritical is when they try to pass it off as 'Fair And Balanced', which, of course, it isn't. And imo, most of CNN and MSNBC are also NOT 'news' as I imagine news to be.
That's one reason I enjoy PBS -- it covers points of view, just like other stations, but it doesn't try to pass off opinions as facts. Programs like the Lehrer News Hour present facts, then interview people from each side of the issue to get their opinions. That way we can make up our own minds. Stations should be able to program whatever they want, but there should be standards, perhaps governed by the FCC, about what IS and IS NOT 'news', and what is/is not 'opinion', or 'commentary'.
People will always watch what they want to hear. The hilarious thing is that survey they gave to watchers of Faux News, where huge percentages of them thought that the 911 hijackers were from Iraq, and that there WERE weapons of mass desctruction, etc. -- wonder if they also think the Sun revolves around the Earth... lol
We can't prosecute him for treason - since he's not even an American. Since he owns TOO much of what is American interests as an alien to our country, he has no loyalty to you and I, our children, our grand parents, your dogs and cats. He don't give a hoot - but for what profits him.
Rupert Murdock is no better than a lame ass criminal who lies, steals and cheats to get what he wants from you and I.
Boycott everything Murduck!
He is another example of what is wrong with the United States. If he were a disease, he'd be Cancer. He's the old deadwood left over from another era LONG GONE. His brain is trapped in a world that no longer exists - and which he never truly understood. Those thick coke bottles he wears for glasses does him no good because the problem with his vision is his arrested development.
How about a geographic study of where FOX is most popular? As a travelling photographer it seams to me FOX is most popular in regions with the highest divorce rates, dropout rates and right wing religious strongholds. Once again I state the obvious of " EDUCATION CHANGES EVERYTHING" FOX NEWS fair and balanced for the fairly unbalanced. Viewership of the propoganda empire has dropped considerably over the last 6 years, yet still thrives in the most depressed and backwards areas of the country. Kind of like the Friends of coal telling people left wing environmentalists are taking coal mineing jobs. While in fact, this is never reported however, 10 years ago there were 132,000 coal miners in appalachia. Impliment mountaintop removal, and today there are 23,000. Now let's hear the no spin take on a legitimate conversation and debate. You will get no takers from corporate media. Just take a look at how many reporters and producers with a hint of ethics are now working in independent media.
I think this is where Fox and NPR (along with all the other "egghead" news networks) part ways.
The left will look for the Truth of a situation and report is even if it makes them look bad.
The right is utterly incapable of this. Whereas we can turn on our own people and our own ideas -- where is there even a single example of the Right doing this?
If there economic polices FAIL (as are doing now in a spectacular fashion) are the right wign shows really reporting that the mortgage crisis is really a result of their OWN conservative ideology of zero government oversight?
No. As always the right wing noise machine isn't interested in the truth of the situation so much as spinning it to support their political philosophy -- and you can't be a journalist and do that.
The left is more than willing to expose its own shortcomings. The right absolutely refuses.
So to say the bias is equal and the truth lies in the middle is giving the right waaaaay too much credit. They've clearly earned a F in journalism but we're trying to give them a C just because it seems unfair to fail them?
Yeah, it sucks that they have totally failed as journalists but they have earned that failure.
Valid point, but I'm not talking about simply things like your examples. Bias is not just the slant you take, but the stories which you elect to show, and the way you tell those stories. Take a look at the front page of current.You don't see a slant there?
And I'm not on the right by any means, I simply call it like I see it.
Well this just puts the truth out once and for all. To what many of us already knew and many others thought they knew. All though it isn't wrong for him to have his point of view, that is what makes him American, however i think that when you have a media base as large as he did, it is your responsibility to try and show both sides of a debate no matter which one you support.
Yeah, duh. The worst part is they publicly acknowledge they are manipulating us and TV is their tool, yet this is one of the only places I've seen where the people are trying to take back the airwaves. People are willing to sit and be told they're being lied to and just take it, like "ok as long as I have my American Idol..."
If you're not going to boycott it and do something about it, they're winning.
All the news networks are the same, CNN and MSNBC just express more closely to most of your views. This is a real liberal site. I say turn off the fucking TV all together, its destroying us as a nation.
Fox News has -- what? -- 4 hours of facts in a given day and 20 hours of "commentary shows" that discuss those facts.
Fact: The sun is a star that the earth revolves around. That fact gets 1min of air time in a 24hr "news" cycle.
The Commentary: "Well the liberals who hates Jesus are trying to push their extreme secular ideology on our children by insisting that their theory regarding the non-rotation of our sun be taught in high school science classes at the exclusion of traditional mainstream Christian belief that the sun revolves around the earth. Joining me to discuss this is Rev. Hagee. Now Rev. Hagee how many parents have been physically assualted and jailed by the extreme left-wing teachers? Have their been any deaths yet and what can ordinary people do against the all-powerful liberal machine that controls everyone's life and is responsible for all death and disease in America?"
Fox News is 99 percent commentary (propoganda) and 1 percent actual news/facts.
It was much better in the old days when it was mostly newspaper and a single daily news HOUR wherein you didn't have time to pontificate and make commentary, you just had to essentially report the facts.
If you're going to be 99 percent commentary then by law you shouldn't be allowed to call yourself a NEWS organization.
If that's the case then what your really are is a talk show network and Fox News should rightly be called "Fox Conservative Commentary."
You can pay off students more so. Those student loans are looming over their heads, they do almost anything to get money. Some even sell their bodies on the Internet. I don't know if I'd fully trust such people with doing a well enough job on getting the 'right' news.
This is why I am a big supporter for universities being in charge of the news media. If we have graduate students doing research, etc... we can find ourselves in a better place where we are better informed than through these rich bastards. What we need is "real" people with "real" experiences informing the public on our current events.
But yes, this does not surprise me at all. Murdoch and his peers should be found guilty along with the Bush administration... but then again... aren't all corporate junkies like this? =P
Everyonbe has an agenda, it's naive to think that any news organization does not support one view or another. It is up to us to decipher what to believe and what not to believe. Remember that media is not some entitiy unto itself, it is made up of people just like you and me who are not neutral.
I actually respect Rupert's honesty, how many other media owners would admit to attempting to shape opinion with their reporting.
I never really liked Fox News and it had nothing to do with information as much as it had to do with their look. Red and blue worked for Superman as a peaceful look, but for a news media it just looked icky and I couldn't take them seriously because of that; besides their choice in graphics have always been horrible. Red is far too violent a color to have all over the place like they have it.
As far as them being "wrong" I don't know why people are under the assumption that they know what is and isn't right. All they have is their own opinions on what is right. Perception, people, not right in totality is what is going on here. Far be it for people to actually admit that they are going off of their opinion and not fact. People what to believe they know what is right but no one has ever given evidence of being right enough about what is a good source of news without being bias themselves.
And if Historians can infiltrate their depiction of events with their own bias then News wouldn't be safe no matter who it came from.
Fox news isn't the only (biased) media outlet owned by Murdoch.
From Wikipedia: "An article by Professor Roy Greenslade in Guardian Unlimited pointed out that elsewhere in Murdoch's media empire all 175 newspapers owned by him editorialized in favour of the Iraq war"
Click above to see the list of companies owned by him.
I am sad to say that PBS has even shown signs of wavering on their integrity. I hope that stricter rules for sponsorship might help them in the coming years of ...sanity(?) ...just had a flash of an idea.. How about voluntary payment for services such as PBS nonsponsored news and programming with integrity like Keith Olbermann? This could be paid for through our service provider bill and include a check mark for helping out these resources..so they can remain free in spirit and not infringe on poor viewers unable to pay. I know I would pay a nominal fee to watch Keith Olbermann without being nauseated by drug ads. What do you think?
I've found C-SPAN to be pretty impartial. When not covering congressional proceedings, they have other shows with live guests who are, in my opinion, interviewed fairly, and they open up the lines to callers who must identify themselves as Rep, Dem, or Ind so that they can be balanced.
i love keith olbermann. he's the only one on mainstream television actually holding this criminal administration accountable for their heinous actions.
however i would disagree about PBS. i think they have upheld their journalistic integrity very well and still are the standard bearers for journalism with shows like Bill Moyers Journal, Charlie Rose, and Frontline.
BBC America is Shite compared to the many BBC channels in Britian. I grab the BBC from the internet newsgroups and it's far far better than any US TV channel. Even PBS.
If you want some decent news coverage, slightly right of center, watch Canadian Broadcasting (CBC). they are very critical of the republicans in the US yet they are like the republicans of 50 years ago.
That's why we have plunged from 17th to 53rd in Free Press ranking. Thanks, Mr. Murdoch, for the total destruction of everything wholesome in the world. For your greedy world view you have perhaps fatally imposed on the rest of people, animals and the environment. Your garbage "News" format is now going obsolete. Thank goodness for Al Gore's Current format. We People again have the Voice to overthrow your Fox News memes brainwashing scheme before the damage is any worse. I hope some day soon my friends who follow your line of filth will understand that it is illogical including the drugging of our society with direct to consumer drug advertising and advocating killing of illegal aliens.
This is where freedom of speech becomes a tricky thing. Do news agencies fall under the freedom of speech, or are they limited despite it because of their responsibility to deliver the news in a neutral light?
Yes. And one could say well it wasn't very well "hidden" because we can see through it. But it WAS indeed hidden behind these words: "FAIR and BALANCED" Those words in their lingo should be forbidden, subject to arrest.