Fox News - the lying liars unmasked.

[Guest Elrond]

Hi All,I ran across a more than bewildering/anger inducing article at the Washingtonpost.com site today concerning the widespread false beliefs Americans have concerning the politics and realities of the day - and how Americans are lead to those widely held false beliefs. The article highlights a just finished study conducted by the non-partisan Program on International Policy Attitudes: PIPA for short.In a nutshell: Fox "News", and to an extent, CBS "News" is anything but... Avoid them like the plague for actual news, because they don't provide it. Fox News in particular is a marketing machine and nothing more, dressed up as a legitimate news organization. Get your news from PBS instead: they are the most accurate news source in the United States.Stuff like this makes me literally sick to my stomach - from any side of the isle. We need a law for prominent warning labels on some news organizations just like we have for food that advertises what its not! Instead of the useless semi-transparent "News" advertising graphic always visible in the bottom right of the screen, we should demand organizations like this post a prominent warning label to their duped viewers stating exactly what they lie about!This must be the most anti-American thing I've come across in years.The Article: Fact-Free Newshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Oct14.htmlAnd the study results:Report of Findingshttp://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Med...2_03_Report.pdfPress Releasehttp://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Med...02_03_Press.pdfQuestionnairehttp://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Med...estionnaire.pdfThe organizationhttp://www.pipa.orgYours in frustrated anger,Elrond

[Sonar5 3]

This study is nothing but bunk, through and through....There questions are nothing but hypothetical garbage designed to thrwo the subject off and not really understand what they ar asking. One Look at their website as well as their board and supporters labels this study as nothing but a partison study designed to do nothing but evoke false IMPRESSIONS of what really happened.Look at this question as an example.*****************Q13. Imagine that after the initial UN inspections in Iraq, the US and other countries inthe UN Security Council disagree about whether Iraq is adequately cooperating with theUN inspectors. President Bush moves that the UN approve an invasion of Iraq tooverthrow Saddam Hussein, but most of the other members of the UN Security Councilwant to continue to use threats and diplomatic pressure to get Iraq to comply, and themotion does not pass. President Bush then decides that the US will undertake an invasionof Iraq, even if the US has to do so on its own.Just based on this information, what do you think your attitude would be about thisdecision?2/03 1/03I would agree with this decision..........37% 33I would not agree with this decision.... 36 36I would not agree, but I wouldstill support the President .................... 25 27(No answer) ........................................... 2 5******************************Now, first off using the word IMAGINE as the start of the question is pretty biased, as well as the statement "motion does not pass" There was never a motion legally introduced, nor put to a vote. but based on this question, IMHO, it is designed to elicit a false assumption on the subject thinking that the motion was ontroduced.*******************Example #2Q15. As you may know, the Bush administration has said that Iraq played an importantrole in the September 11th attacks. Would you say that you:1/03Have seen conclusive evidence ....13%Haven

[Guest Elrond]

Hi Joe,Oh good heavens. I can't even respond to that as its clear you're ignoring what the focus of the study was and its methodology. I don't know why, but you've made that clear.As for PIPA being partisan, thats simply ridiculous. PIPA is one of the most trusted organizations for non partisan research on American and Governmental attitudes in the world. Saying different doesn't make it different. Good heavens, prominent members of the US Naval War College and the Brookings Institute are on its board!Stick to Fox instead of an unbiased National Public Radio or the Public Broadcasting System as you wish Joe. I can only conclude you enjoy being mislead, as crazy as that sounds.Take care,Elrond

[Sonar5 3]

Sorry, but anything connected to Ben & Jerry is suspect.Also in the Findings link, they state Fox news as Mostly RepublicanPBS as Less republican and more eductaedCBS as more democraticI ask This:WHy would they not state that PBS is also More Democratic instead of deminishing that fact by stating PBS is less republican...If that doesn't make you wonder, the rest won't make you wonder either.I got the jist and their feeble attempt, when analized simply does not stand up to logical conclusions based upon their MISPERCEPTIONS in the data.And the more they keep trying to push FOX down, the stronger Fox Gets. Works for me. :-) Regards,Joe

[Guest Elrond]

What is enlightening is to see you call this research partisan when its facts lead one to stay away from Fox AND CBS for news - both the worst examples of news organizations that misinform. As you point out, both have mainly Republican and Democratic viewships, respectively. Thats about as un-partisan as it comes. Whats more, the facts in the study point out that the other network television news organizations such as NBC, ABC and CNN fare hardly better. Only some print news sources and PBS/NPR provide non-partisan news and don't mislead the American people (ie: they tell the truth without skewing information one way or another - something I hope one would value as top priority in a news source!).But wow... I just visited your own custom politics site you have created as linked to in your banner. Now I understand where you are coming from and what your politics are. I also understand now why you have the views you do of this non-partisan research.Now that I know your "angle", I won't debate this report with you: it'd be a fruitless exercise. For those others concerned about the accuracy of the news they seek and are reading this, however, here's a link to PBS viewer demographics:http://www.pbcionline.org/charts.htmThose are profiles of the majority of the educated Republican AND Democratic middle class that make up the PBS/NPR public. Exactly why, I'm sure, the research clearly shows PBS and NPR don't mislead their viewers/listeners.Take care,Elrond

[Guest Paul_W]

Elrond, perhaps you should stick to hardware.No, you're right, I suppose you have every right to bring up a political issue here, but I'm here to say that I disagree with you, and that the title of your thread is strikingly similar to that recently published book by that sarcastic, name-calling, way-left "comedian" that uses the Fox News slogan in its title. And so you agree with that gentleman do you? Up to this point I'd taken you to be a serious voice of reason in the forums.Yes, I'm also very tired of hearing criticism of Fox News from "establishment news types"--the sort of people who regularly bring us interesting interviews with and reports about the likes of Ms. Spears and various other cardboard-cutout "celebrities."And I'm tired of news organizations that take the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson seriously, and regularly give them air time, with interview segments, quotes, reports on their latest demonstrations, etc.No, I don't have the time to post umpteen threads and enter into endless discussions in an effort to refute what you've posted above. And it would be pointless anyway. Then again, I don't need to watch graphic films about car crashes and visit the morgue in person to believe that driving dangerously is a really bad idea.Fox News, based on recent numbers that I saw, but that I cannot specifically quote, has a far higher audience than MSNBC, and I believe is significantly higher (around double if I recall) the average CNN audience. And they've been growing. Apparently there are lots of folks simply fed-up with the lock-step, unvaried, "here's-how-you-should-look-at-society" approach of the other news organizations.But there are those now intent on attacking, demeaning and undermining--sometimes with a transparent book, sometimes with a study. And this attack stuff can even show up while on a quick visit to the general forum of a flight sim Web site....

[Sonar5 3]

Where I am coming from should not matter when discussing this biased ALLEGED study.I didn't personalize this, but you feel the need to do so. That is quite sad, that you can't defend the study on its merits without retorting to my site, my angles, and where I am coming from.Come on over to my Political Forums and I will debate you there. I have read up quite a bit on thie ALLEGED STUDY, and have some pretty good ammo.But to Respect Avsim's policies, I won't bring any of it up here, as they don't really want political posts on this forum, and clearly those studies are political in nature.BTW - As a United States Citizen, I could care less what the rest of the world thinks about my countries policies. You know why, because it's our country and not theirs. And they better well get used to that, because we will not fall into theri alleged version of a world order. That is why our country was formed in the first place. To get ridof, and away from the European viewpoint. Some poeple just don't simply understand that FACT.********************Apologies to the mods. I'm done, and I will only respond to this further in my own forums as this is not the place. Just remember, I did not start this thread, Elrond did.Regards,Joe

[Guest Elrond]

Hi Paul,Well, since you're calling my post potentially biased, I'll lay out where I personally stand politically for you (even though this really has nothing to do with a research study that isn't mine):I don't know if I'd agree with whomever wrote that book as I haven't read it. What I have read were media reports quoting the title which I thought was ironic no matter what it was aimed at - exactly why I used it here (I'll grant that it sounds like a mistake to have done so - *if* you're right about the contents of the book). I read that the book alluded to or had Fox News on the cover, or it was somehow related to the title. If the book is indeed critical of Fox News, then I'd have to say I'd probably agree with it because I've seen the "reporting" on Fox News and its absolutely terrible (its on Sunday mornings just before Fox NFL Sunday, which I love).I have also seen the "reporting" on CNN and MSNBC, both of which are terrible as well - if not as blatantly slanted as Fox News is. If the book I borrowed the title of this thread from is *too* partisan in the other direction (such as CBS News evidently is - I've never seen it), I'd probably *disagree* with it. I don't like my news (or reading) skewed too far one way *or* the other.I believe in limited gun rights, or put it in the other direction, I believe in gun control on weapons that realistically have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in a womans right to choose in some circumstances, or put in the other direction, I believe a woman shouldn't have the right to abort if it would be a healthy baby born in a healthy environment. I believe in the right to stem cell research, or put in the other direction, I want limits on stem cell research to only come from actual medical miscarriages and the like. etc, etc, etc. I vote both republican and democrat, not on party lines. I vote for the most sane individual with the most sane politics running on a ticket, regardless of political party. If I absolutely *had* to name my political affiliation, I'd probably call myself a conservative democrat - or, a centrist republican. They both fit my personal ideals.In short: I demand an unbiased truth from my news sources, regardless of my personal politics (or, as much as I am aware of and can find).I most certainly agree with you about the general TV news these days: it seem to be mostly sensational numbers grabbing hog wash. I do, however, watch the news hour with Jim Lehre (or however thats spelled) on PBS, as well as read a lot of online general news from www.nytimes.com and www.washingtonpost.com as my schedule permits. I subscribe to Time magazine and get a lot of my financial news from The Wall Street Journal as well.If you are right and Fox news has a bigger audience than MSNBC and CNN, that just proves that the research above was dead on: Fox News is the source of much of the misinformation that the American people hold about recent events (believing in things and events that don't exist and didn't take place!).That the American people are largely deluded is not in question, its fact: how that came about now seems to be answered with this important research. Its surprising that you didn't address that in your reply: the fact that the majority of American citizens *are* deluded when it comes to some of the most important facts concerning one of the most important events of our history - and how they got that way.Take care,Elrond

[Guest Ken_Salter]

Hey Elrond, you aren't the only one...;-)http://saltydogfly2.avsim.net/images/avsim_sig.jpg"Ah, the Luftwaffe - the Washington Generals of the History Channel." - Homer Simpson

[Guest Elrond]

As I stated above, I'll politely decline debating you - here or at your own forum - now that I know where you're coming from.The best to you (and I mean that),Elrond

[Sonar5 3]

And as always,The best to you as well.Take Care,Joe

[michal 44]

People prefer different news organizations for variety of reasons. So what's new ?In fact I am yet to find any news organization that I am completely satisfied with. This has to do with the basic premise that the news as a product is inherently *boring* to people unless some spin is put on top of it. Therefore everyone puts their own spin to spice things up. PBS does it and Fox does it. I actually like to watch all of them (time permitting) and after that I have a pretty good idea what's really going on. But I do have personal dislike for Dan Rather - he bends news to fit his commentary and not vice versa.Honestly, I reserve my frustration or anger for some real stuff.Michael J.

[michal 44]

>>BTW - As a United States Citizen, I could care less what the>rest of the world thinks about my countries policies. I admit I agree with this. It is just about as important to me what an average Frenchman thinks of the USA as what my neighbor thinks of my recent car purchase.And those poor Frenchmen can't even fly VFR at night .. I have pity on them *:-*Michael J.

[Sonar5 3]

Hi Michael,I watch Fox, because I like th entertainment value I get compared toothers. But I also flip as well.I also get news from numerous sources before forming my own opinion.I like the wires the best, though. It is usually put out before the majors spin it. And all th emajors, including Fox spin. I just prefer their spin over the others most of the time. Not all the time, but most.Regards,Joe

[Guest Elrond]

Hi Michael,I understand where you're coming from. Indeed, even at the news sites I mention above, I too detect *some* biased reporting (in both directions of the isle, depending upon the presenter/writer). But in all cases, I feel as if I'm getting as close to the truth as its possible to get in a medium that is *selling* me the news. That includes PBS to some extent (I don't listen to NPR much so couldn't say).As for anger and frustration: this, by far, tops the bill for me. Its American public support for or against a set of topics that allows or prompts those in power to execute action on those topics. War, by far, the most important of those actions. Regardless of political affiliation or belief in said topics, it absolutely *astounds* me that 60% of the public are so mislead by a variety of news sources that they believe in events that haven't happened and don't exist in reality! Events that *could* largly determine how much money is coming out of their pockets and how many sons they'll continue to put in bullets way. Whats more important than either of those? How can one make honest decisions with dishonest information in any aspect of ones life?Much worse, these beliefs allow a government they elect to form policy based on a bedrock of misbelief! And it doesn't matter *what* those policies are: conservative or liberal (or insane).That isn't Democracy: thats brainwashing.The above is the exact definition of Propaganda with a capitol "P". Thats the U.S.S.R. at its pinnacle, and ###### Germany in its prime. All in the name of "Entertainment" with your news source (with, one knows, political agenda at its core). If one wants entertainment, watch a sitcom or movie. Why in the world mix it with world news that deludes, misinforms and lies to the watching public?It frustrates and angers me to no end. It directs the future of my country.Take care,Elrond