Why does Fox News largely ignore Bernie Sanders in favor of discussing Hillary Clinton?
Simple!The best way to make to damage a candidate's campaign is to make him invisible by not talking about him at all.Media did this to Ron Paul. Fox news was at the forefront. They evaded talking about him despite a lot of once in a century events went around his campaign, ranging from fistfights among supporters in primaries to a campaign tactic which was tried only a century ago.So much that in CNN debate, Anderson Cooper did anything in his power to evade letting Ron Paul talk, even on the topic of abortion. Paul had to force his way in, taking the turn by saying "Im the only qualified medical doctor in this debate. If I am not going to respond on abortion, who will".The discomfort was tangible in Cooper's face at that point.Same is the way Fox approaches this. By evading.Moreover, more talk about Clinton gives more coverage to her. That Fox talks bad about her gives an impression that she is 'good' for Democrat voters as well.GOP knows Hillary is easily beatable - she has a center-right stance which belongs to mid 90s, a period long past. For that reason, they know she cant mobilize voters with bothering to show up on election day, which will give immense power to the gerrymandering GOP already did for last House elections. Also she has A LOT of stuff which they can attack and make her look incompetent or dangerous, so is an easy game.Sanders is dangerous for backers of Fox. He talks about making corporations pay the taxes they owe, even increasing their taxes. He talks about single payer healthcare, free education and whatnot. Stuff which most developed countries have, but US shouldn't. So Fox is using the 'make invisible' tactic. Despite most of the media has moved to other stages of 'establishment backlash' as explained in Glen Greenwald's fantastic article:The Seven Stages of Establishment Backlash: Corbyn/Sanders Edition
Why is the only major news agency coving this story is FOX?
I find it really sad that the first 12 people who answerd obviously didn't even look at the breaking story. Or if they did, accepted the fact that Obama was setting up the infastructure to turn news agencies from news agencies to propgonda fonts.
Do CNN, MSNBC and Fox News cause real harm to the United States?
Yes. These mainstream news outlets have brought our country to the edge of a civil war by sensationalizing & politicizing news stories to increase their ratings. Rather than delivering clear & accurate reporting, the news has become divisive force that promotes racial hatred, classism and political bigotry.As a former Fox News viewer, I blame that organization for starting the modern arms-race of mainstream news radicalization, which began when they replaced the traditional 5pm news hour with opinion shows (O’Reilly, Hannity & Colmes, etc).Before Fox, I watched CNN and Headline News every day, and often complained that they had a liberal/progressive agenda to their reporting. However, they did provide a regular, traditional newscast that attempted to cover all the mainstream topics of interest, such as weather, entertainment, politics, etc.Fox replaced this with O’Reilly, who tapped into Clinton-era conservative angst and spoke as a demagogue against liberal agendas in government and media. Sean Hannity reinforced it, paired with/against the likeable but relatively passive Alan Colmes who did little to restrain him. More like them came later.As Fox grew larger, it became more extreme, and competing news organizations began to push back with extremist hosts of their own, such as Glen Beck, Nancy Grace, Alex Jones, and many others. The shows, the guests, the message & social commentary became darker, more confrontational, and full of spite.Fast-forward to 2017, and our headlines are filled with “Black Lives Matter” riots, Native Americans facing off against tanks at the Dakota Access Pipeline, and a fever-pitch of anti-Russian propaganda. Don’t forget to throw in the obligatory anti-Middle Eastern stereotypes, lots of coverage of terrorist events, and TV show host rhetoric that barely stops short of inciting the very violence it’s supposed to be impartially covering.An industry that once considered itself the “5th estate” as a social watchdog has turned into at 24x7 live feed of constitutionally-protected, litigiously-defended hate speech with one purpose in mind: to make you angry, and to keep coming back to see what happens next…
NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX and the CW: Which one is the most liberal?
MSNBC which is owned by NBC is considered the most liberal. Fox News is by far the most conservative. CNN would probably be considered the most moderate in general. A lot of conservatives say it is also liberally biased but statistically their coverage pans out about 50/50. People on the far right tend to think a thing that is moderate is actually liberal since for their point of view it is
Are the Fox News viewing members of the 101st Chairborne Division "patriots"?
What about this guy? (an old favorite) A BUSH SUPPORTER'S WAR STORY My name is cumbologna. I am a soldier. Let me relate to you what happened to me one fateful day in June of '05. My unit is part of the the 101st Chairborne Division. We were patrolling the message boards on Iraq when the latest news broke. It was not good. A story from the AP reported that Bush's approval rating was at 42% and dropping. In a matter of minutes, the libbies came at us with their attacks on our leader George Bush. My Commanding Officer messaged me, "Libbies on thread 1270!" His name was libbiessuckcock -- he was with me on IM. I fired a shot off at the traitor on thread 1270. "You look French!" I wrote. BAM! That's one less libbie to ever threaten America again. "Cheese-eating surrender-monkey!" I told another. There's another notch for my keyboard!
So tired of President Trump being the main focus for news (reason why stopped watching news TV in general). When will this news stop?
First, you mentioned the phrase “News TV.” If you are talking about the nightly news broadcasts of NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS. then, great. Because those are all legitimate news, and they are on TV. If you meant the Cable Networks such as “Fox News” or “CNN” or MSNBC,” then I suggest you refer to them as “Cable TV Networks,” because they all offer more editorials, opinion, and commentary, and do not actually consist of much “news” at all. In fact, one of them (“Fox News”) offers almost no news. It is just propaganda, it is opinion, which is designed to manipulate.When will this stop? If you are referring to legitimate journalism (NBC CBS, ABC, or PBS), then, not until Trump is out of office. His daily statements and actions which are violations of the US Constitution, and violations of human rights must be reported to the public. It would be irresponsible not to alert a nation’s citizens when a leader begins separating children from parents, or publicly suggests we should ignore due process, or begins tariff and trade wars, or agrees to meet with with a cruel, autocratic leader and shake hands, or publicly proclaims himself above the law. It would be irresponsible for legitimate journalists to ignore an assault on the nation’s democracy. It would be irresponsible to ignore his disturbing behavior, since he is running one third of the federal government.I remember in the early 1970s, when new outrages occurred every single day, as the final 24 months ticked down to Nixon’s resignation. That was the last time in our American history when I recall a new outrage every single day, on the front pages of every newspaper, and as the lead story every night on all legitimate news broadcastsIs this “different” from when Obama was in office, or when Bush was in office, or when Clinton was in office, or GHW Bush was in office, or when Reagan was in office, or when Carter was in office, or when Ford was in office? Yes. In all of those cases, we might undergo an entire news broadcast without hearing the latest “scandal of the day” or the latest “outrage of the day.” We might have seen a front page of an entire newspaper that did not mention the current occupant in the White House.This is different.So, it will continue, as long as the current person inhabits the Oval Office, I am afraid.In the US, real journalists have a responsibility. And, they take that responsibility very seriously.
If you are a liberal, do you watch Fox News? And why?
To be Liberal in a way says that you examine all sides of an issue. For me, my liberalism drives me to seek facts first and foremost so that I can foment my opinions. It’s my opinion that too many Americans are turning on the tv to hear “Opinions” of others, rather than searching for facts.Over the years since Fox came to be, I would turn to it periodically just to check up on them. Bear in mind that Fox first of all is big. They have many channels on cable, but let’s just stick to the FNC (Fox News Channel) on cable.On FNC (NOT your local FOX) they’re on 24/7/365. Most people assume from their name that they’re “all news”. After all they’re called Fox News Channel right? All news, the way that CNN was for decades, all news?Nope. At FNC they have news only 1/3 rd of the time. The remaining 2/3 rd is Opinion talk show format! They have 2 hours of news in the AM, 2 hours at noon, 2 hours in the early evening and again at midnight. In between its Hannity, O’Reilly, Fox & Friends or Judge Jeanie and others of a particular political sway.Now the News portion is what I’d monitor. I already know where the Opinion Guys are going to come down, and all in all the News portion is fairly accurate, but the Talking Heads can go off with their personal takes at any time, much like CNN has been doing lately. Mostly I see the difference in that they’re covering, and thus reporting on.I’ll see CNN covering Trump’s outrageous Tweet of the day, while Fox chose to ignore the Tweet and be covering an aspect where Trump is misunderstood or being ignored unfairly. There is a distinct bias, and both channels hav gone further away from center since Trump came along. Is Trump polarizing? You betchya!As a result, I try to get my news off the Internet from very sage and professional sources that have a long record of gathering and disseminating News, like Associated Press. Or well established newspapers and magazines. It’s not hard to do. What’s hard is sifting through all of the wannabe sites and faux news sites to get to the good stuff.
How come Fox News is never held accountable for their lies?
Yup, mix bee, the enquirer is why John Edwards is now totally exposed. 1. Glen Beck's show is an opinion show. You could write "the sky is purple" and it is nothing for which an accounting is required. 2. Birther issues? How about transparency with the remainder of his documentation? 3. Racism? I cannot claim 24/7/365 recall of fox, but I don't think he has been called racist. Proof required. 4. Indoctrination of children? No, no need for Obama to do that, he has teachers for that. 5. Prolonging the recession? Yup, that is a legitimite claim. If you cannot understand a failed stimulus bill (designed not to work) and a two year muddle over tax rates preventing investment, you cannot comprehend the truth behind that one. 6. Intentionally raising gas prices? Of course not. Doing nothing to lower them? You can answer that one however you like. 7. Quadrupled the debt? No. Simple math. He has merely nearly doubled the overall debt. He may have quadrupled the annual deficit. Clarify. 8. Monspotgribblefritz. Just checking if you are reading. 9. Obama clearly continued the misguided Bush policies regarding TARP and bailouts. Sad. He could have done far better. 10. Rigging elections in WI? No knowledge on that one, but a pretty serious accusation. ANY NETWORK (or BLOG) or (YA-hoo) can say whatever they want (until the first amendment is repealed), and it may or may not be wrong or incorrect. The MSM (mainstream media) has very rarely felt the need to correct their incorrect biased reporting or their errors or their biased reporting of portions of events / reports / facts. Life -- get one.