Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on February 09, 2015, 09:28:13 AM
-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/)
PunditFact checks in on the cable news channels
MSNBC and CNN have improved ever so slightly on PunditFact's TV network scorecards, while Fox News has moved a touch in the opposite direction.
PunditFact, a sister site of PolitiFact dedicated to fact-checking pundits and talking heads, last looked at its network scorecards in September. The scorecards measure statements made by a pundit or a host or paid contributor on a particular network. They do not include statements made by elected leaders, declared candidates or party officials.
So what’s the latest tally?
At Fox and Fox News, 10 percent of the claims PunditFact has rated have been True, 11 percent Mostly True, 18 percent Half True, 21 percent Mostly False, 31 percent False and nine percent Pants on Fire.
That means about 60 percent of the claims checked have been rated Mostly False or worse. Here’s how it breaks down (as of Jan. 27, 2015):
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/yoQ1iMgJHZbrC_n8a2xTUhRZ9OWaiAEMPLewGATLhPUGbt1VY3-Y5vOjYS-69cfl_5YHg-EzgdWEEgLSQUMrZle1t4zH-7mV-r9a4M1lsGKJdejuGROYOP88HtXr9ksY4Q)
At MSNBC and NBC, 44 percent of claims have received a rating of Mostly False or worse. The full breakdown:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/aKreK0HrXVXgtTv9PDZAHefbIBaKqHkU-Sz9NiwbSgMjUQsXsccUj2l0xKfHSLdmJgObkzwpYsVo70LBsuEvm03iWFYPr-WNXXTPzGlMSLDelN4g9t0hNHvmMDsA7dNSzA)
And as for CNN? It has the best record among the cable networks, as 80 percent of of the claims rated are Half True or better.
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/jeXVGfUBTOtWGC0FmppOrkD8mqUNFk9QKF3lUjcBynnOGJOCZXQ7Gz0t2Qk866NwFNF-crrRlO8V0sAbyoSWwCYA475NQLW2VnJM1_1uQNkMDiR6_KQE1SjnyXF5_ekCoQ)
As we have said in the past, be cautious about using the scorecards to draw broad conclusions. We use our news judgment to pick the facts we’re going to check, so we certainly don’t fact-check everything. And we don’t fact-check the five network groups evenly. CBS, for instance, doesn’t have a cable network equivalent, so we haven’t fact-checked pundits and CBS personalities as much.
-
So basically the news is no longer reported, only agenda based propaganda.
-
So basically the news is no longer reported, only agenda based propaganda.
Sickening.
The news has become a corporate propaganda machine
-
wow fox did awful compared to cnn
-
Sickening.
The news has become a corporate propaganda machine
What better way to get your agenda moving than have it reported as news
-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-ca (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-ca)
PunditFact checks in on the cable news channels
MSNBC and CNN have improved ever so slightly on PunditFact's TV network scorecards, while Fox News has moved a touch in the opposite direction.
PunditFact, a sister site of PolitiFact dedicated to fact-checking pundits and talking heads, last looked at its network scorecards in September. The scorecards measure statements made by a pundit or a host or paid contributor on a particular network. They do not include statements made by elected leaders, declared candidates or party officials.
So what’s the latest tally?
At Fox and Fox News, 10 percent of the claims PunditFact has rated have been True, 11 percent Mostly True, 18 percent Half True, 21 percent Mostly False, 31 percent False and nine percent Pants on Fire.
That means about 60 percent of the claims checked have been rated Mostly False or worse. Here’s how it breaks down (as of Jan. 27, 2015):
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/yoQ1iMgJHZbrC_n8a2xTUhRZ9OWaiAEMPLewGATLhPUGbt1VY3-Y5vOjYS-69cfl_5YHg-EzgdWEEgLSQUMrZle1t4zH-7mV-r9a4M1lsGKJdejuGROYOP88HtXr9ksY4Q)
At MSNBC and NBC, 44 percent of claims have received a rating of Mostly False or worse. The full breakdown:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/aKreK0HrXVXgtTv9PDZAHefbIBaKqHkU-Sz9NiwbSgMjUQsXsccUj2l0xKfHSLdmJgObkzwpYsVo70LBsuEvm03iWFYPr-WNXXTPzGlMSLDelN4g9t0hNHvmMDsA7dNSzA)
And as for CNN? It has the best record among the cable networks, as 80 percent of of the claims rated are Half True or better.
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/jeXVGfUBTOtWGC0FmppOrkD8mqUNFk9QKF3lUjcBynnOGJOCZXQ7Gz0t2Qk866NwFNF-crrRlO8V0sAbyoSWwCYA475NQLW2VnJM1_1uQNkMDiR6_KQE1SjnyXF5_ekCoQ)
As we have said in the past, be cautious about using the scorecards to draw broad conclusions. We use our news judgment to pick the facts we’re going to check, so we certainly don’t fact-check everything. And we don’t fact-check the five network groups evenly. CBS, for instance, doesn’t have a cable network equivalent, so we haven’t fact-checked pundits and CBS personalities as much.
LOL @ the Fox hit piece. So I guess Bengazi was a blatant lie because they broke they story and it wasn't until months later (like 8months later) when the other networks finally woke up.
-
The people over a Faux News are probably laughing their asses off at Brian Williams.
If Faux News had the same standards they would literally needs to hire a new staff every day
-
just watch fox for a day and you know that article is true,well maybe not you coach ;D
-
fox news viewers don't really want to hear the truth they just want to hear what fits in their agenda
-
Brian Williams? :D
-
Hope this helps...
http://www.politifactbias.com/
-
I wonder what specific statements they rated? I have my doubts about this, especially because it comes from "politifact."
(http://flavorscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/32b0adb.jpg)
-
Hope this helps...
http://www.politifactbias.com/
please post the link refuting the subject matter of this thread
-
this is disturbing. basically it's a coin toss with ANY channel that what you're seeing is bullshit.
I guess we can all stop telling young people to "watch the news so you know what's going on in the world"
this is reason #654,765,986,654,543 why i'm never voting again.
-
please post the link refuting the subject matter of this thread
Brian Williams and Dan Rather :-* :-* :-*
-
Brian Williams and Dan Rather :-* :-* :-*
Go back to bed loser.
-
please post the link refuting the subject matter of this thread
I just did by debunking the original link with what I put up. Like Media Matters and "snopes" is left wing bias bullshit designed to slander Fox. You can't (well...you can) possibly believe that MSNBC is even remotely credible. For fucks sake Sharpton is an Obama lackey.
-
I just did by debunking the original link with what I put up. Like Media Matters and "snopes" is left wing bias bullshit designed to slander Fox. You can't (well...you can) possibly believe that MSNBC is even remotely credible. For fucks sake Sharpton is an Obama lackey.
I asked you to post the facts debunking the stats in the original post
If you just want to claim that Politifact is bias and makes errors and is therefore not credible in any context then let's apply that standard to Fox News, Hannity, Rush and every other source that provides fuel for your daily self humiliation
-
I asked you to post the facts debunking the stats in the original post
If you just want to claim that Politifact is bias and makes errors and is therefore not credible in any context then let's apply that standard to Fox News, Hannity, Rush and every other source that provides fuel for your daily self humiliation
As usual, you're a retard. If I can post links upon links showing that an entire web site is bias that automatically makes anything "poll' they do null and void.
-
As usual, you're a retard. If I can post links upon links showing that an entire web site is bias that automatically makes anything "poll' they do null and void.
right
so the exact same thing applies to Fox New, Hannity, Rush etc..
All null and void
BTW - has politifact every criticized a Democrat?
-
coach - you know what's funny?
"Obama allowed benghazi attacks to happen" or "Obama didn't stop the attacks when he could have" -
I'm pretty sure you believe these things. Since both obama and the REPUBS in the house have declared this not to be true, it is now officially a CONSPIRACY THEORY.
you and i both know it's true... but it's a consparacy theory now.
-
GOP and most conservatives =
Patriots Parrots
Don't ever show them the shit they are fed. If you do they will line up like good little soldiers and parrot their beloved talking heads.
-
GOP and most conservatives = Patriots Parrots
Don't ever show them the shit they are fed. If you do they will line up like good little soldiers and parrot their beloved talking heads.
even if it is true.... it's still not as bad as (blah blah blah).
-
I love Obama and worship at the throne of Imam Ayatollah ObAMA eL bARAKI
tHAT SUCKS MAN
-
I want to hear from our resident conservatives.
Do you feel stupid now?
-
I admit I really am a self loathing closet case
Go back to bed loser.
-
this is disturbing. basically it's a coin toss with ANY channel that what you're seeing is bullshit.
I guess we can all stop telling young people to "watch the news so you know what's going on in the world"
this is reason #654,765,986,654,543 why i'm never voting again.
CNN did very well.
-
Go back to bed loser.
:'(
-
:'(
go back to bed loser
-
go back to bed loser
funny - im going to lift and be and stay in great shape. You =- fat liberal Michael mooreesqe retard pansie libfag.
-
funny - im going to lift and be and stay in great shape. You =- fat liberal Michael mooreesqe retard pansie libfag.
go back to bed loser
-
wen it comes to PUNDITS - yes, FOX's and MSBNC's are very animated, angry - they throw red meat to the bases.
Am I surprised that FOX is a little more 'over the top'? Nah. I mean, Meagyn isn't even a pundit... and she just "supposed" it was a terror fist-bump. They do that "some people say..." to introduce all sorts of hateful, animated theories into things. You can invent news with "some people say..." then make any accusation you want.
Not that I'm defending msnbc, they're dog shit stupid too. But from watching years of both, not much lately, I can tell you that MSNBC plays way more "gotcha" and over-reacts every little time they smell hypocrisy... While FOX plays way more "suppose..." and introduces scary, fake, hateful theories into the matter. They both suck, and it's touogh to say one sucks more or less, cause suckage is such a subjective thing, ya know?
-
I wonder how many FOX supporters or MSNBC supporters think their news network is 100% true? or 90%? Or 70%? etc.
-
I wonder how many FOX supporters or MSNBC supporters think their news network is 100% true? or 90%? Or 70%? etc.
I like to LOL at those who refuse to watch the other - but can say with certainty that the network does more of this or that.
For years, I watched each of the big 3, about 1/3 of the day. Lou Dobbs when he flirted with 911, Bill-O when he admitted FOX isn't balanced, but they provide the balance, olbermann when he totally nailed bush on the nexus of terror, announcing terror plots when politically convenient...
You have getbiggers that can't remember arguments from 2 weeks ago... lol... telling us why FOX doesn't do this, or MSN they don't watch always does that... lol.
-
I wonder how many FOX supporters or MSNBC supporters think their news network is 100% true? or 90%? Or 70%? etc.
I watch Fox and their hard news is "true," because they simply report the news. They don't get on the air every day and invent hard news stories. The opinion shows are just that, so I don't think you can reliably give their opinions some kind of arbitrary "truth" percentage.
Would be interested to see the breakdown of the hard news vs. opinion shows and the actual statements those folks rated.
-
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
In this case Fox reports hard news 40% of time, the rest of the time they feed the parrots.
-
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
In this case Fox reports hard news 40% of time, the rest of the time they feed the parrots.
Depends on the show. Megyn and Greta are excellent. O'Reilly is a blowhard, and I cannot really stomach him, but he has been leading his time slot for a very long time. Must be more than just "parrots" in his audience.
Also, all of their opinion shows have opposing viewpoints. Except for maybe Outnumbered, because the "one lucky guy" isn't always a liberal.
-
Depends on the show. Megyn and Greta are excellent. O'Reilly is a blowhard, and I cannot really stomach him, but he has been leading his time slot for a very long time. Must be more than just "parrots" in his audience.
Also, all of their opinion shows have opposing viewpoints. Except for maybe Outnumbered, because the "one lucky guy" isn't always a liberal.
why would you draw that conclusion
being a fundie, aren't you familiar with the term "preaching to the choir"
his viewers tune in because they already agree with him and they like getting angry with him about whatever he has decided to be pissed about that day
they also could (almost certainly are) just as stupid as he is which is another reason they probably like him.
-
Depends on the show. Megyn and Greta are excellent. O'Reilly is a blowhard, and I cannot really stomach him, but he has been leading his time slot for a very long time. Must be more than just "parrots" in his audience.
Also, all of their opinion shows have opposing viewpoints. Except for maybe Outnumbered, because the "one lucky guy" isn't always a liberal.
I doubt it. People watch FOX and other networks like that to reinforce their preexisting beliefs (preaching to the choir) . Parrots come in all shapes and IQs. Mix in a little hard news, opposing view points that don't participate equally during the entire broadcast and you have great propaganda that speaks to the heart of a particular political spectrum.
O'Reilly is a blow hard, but i have to give some props for not writing in an extreme right tone in "Killing Patton"
-
so i guess if you want the most factual news CNN it is ;D
-
I doubt it. People watch FOX and other networks like that to reinforce their preexisting beliefs (preaching to the choir) . Parrots come in all shapes and IQs. Mix in a little hard news, opposing view points that don't participate equally during the entire broadcast and you have great propaganda that speaks to the heart of a particular political spectrum.
O'Reilly is a blow hard, but i have to give some props for not writing in an extreme right tone in "Killing Patton"
That is part of it. People do tend to watch and read things that reinforce what they already believe.
But that's not the whole story with Fox. They're simply better at both their news and opinion shows than anyone else. The hard news is factual. The opinions shows overall are solid. They don't coddle liberals like the MSM. The hosts and guests are more entertaining and funnier.
Importantly, they always have opposing viewpoints, so their programming isn't just about parroting whatever the conservative line might be.
-
That is part of it. People do tend to watch and read things that reinforce what they already believe.
But that's not the whole story with Fox. They're simply better at both their news and opinion shows than anyone else. The hard news is factual. The opinions shows overall are solid. They don't coddle liberals like the MSM. The hosts and guests are more entertaining and funnier.
Importantly, they always have opposing viewpoints, so their programming isn't just about parroting whatever the conservative line might be.
LOL - the only claim you can objectively make is that they are better at drawing an audience.
period
-
fox 60% false lol. we report you comply
-
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/cable-news-coverage-climate-change-science.html#.VNlGRPnF_HU
To gauge how accurately these networks inform their audiences about climate change, UCS analyzed the networks' climate science coverage in 2013 and found that each network treated climate science very differently.
Fox News was the least accurate; 72 percent of its 2013 climate science-related segments contained misleading statements. CNN was in the middle, with about a third of segments featuring misleading statements. MSNBC was the most accurate, with only eight percent of segments containing misleading statements.
-
That is part of it. People do tend to watch and read things that reinforce what they already believe.
But that's not the whole story with Fox. They're simply better at both their news and opinion shows than anyone else. The hard news is factual. The opinions shows overall are solid. They don't coddle liberals like the MSM. The hosts and guests are more entertaining and funnier.
Importantly, they always have opposing viewpoints, so their programming isn't just about parroting whatever the conservative line might be.
They are better at spewing BS that their parrots want to hear that's all.
Having opposing views points only gives the illusion of fair and balanced news. When those opposing view points are over with, the rest of the new cast is influenced by false news, content and the opinion of the casters. Also there is the premise of the discussion that can influence the impact of the opposition combined with the debating skills, image and charisma of the opposing view.
-
They are better at spewing BS that their parrots want to hear that's all.
Having opposing views points only gives the illusion of fair and balanced news. When those opposing view points are over with, the rest of the new cast is influenced by false news, content and the opinion of the casters. Also there is the premise of the discussion that can influence the impact of the opposition combined with the debating skills, image and charisma of the opposing view.
Who specifically is spewing BS? The hard news anchors reporting the news? Opinion hosts like Megyn Kelly? Which shows do you watch?
Having opposing viewpoints helps make them fair and balanced.
-
Who specifically is spewing BS? The hard news anchors reporting the news? Opinion hosts like Megyn Kelly? Which shows do you watch?
Having opposing viewpoints helps make them fair and balanced.
lol telling lies makes them fair and balance, i've heard it all hahaha
-
lol telling lies makes them fair and balance, i've heard it all hahaha
Are you saying they invent hard news stories?
-
i'm saying they put their own spin on them
-
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
In this case Fox reports hard news 40% of time, the rest of the time they feed the parrots.
Really? Cause you sound like a parrot to me.
We have one news site accusing other news sites of lying and you have no fucking clue as to methodology, deviations, criteria, etc. You're just parroting a story.
Hmmm...gotta wonder.
-
i'm saying they put their own spin on them
They put their own spin on hard news stories? Are you confusing their hard news programming with the opinion shows?
-
Really? Cause you sound like a parrot to me.
We have one news site accusing other news sites of lying and you have no fucking clue as to methodology, deviations, criteria, etc. You're just parroting a story.
Hmmm...gotta wonder.
No.
There is a News Paper's website (Tampa Bay Times) who did a study on the accuracy of statements made by Pundits, hosts and or paid contributors on particular news TV networks. They found that 60% of Fox's are plain false, MSNBC's are 54% plain false and CNN's is 11%
While i am laughing at and responding to, the parroting "defense of Fox" by some here, i am not ignoring that both ends of the perceived political spectrum's news networks seem to be full of shit. Its just that no one on the left side has parroted much yet about MSNBC being fair and balanced with solid opinion shows, ...........factual hard news, .........non coddling of conservatives....funnier guests........, .............AHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH (sorry couldn't stop laughing as i typed this) and or what ever stupid thing our resident birther has said.
-
60% - really?
I expected it to be higher.
-
60% - really?
I expected it to be higher.
This doesn't surprise.
Did Al Sharpton and Brian Williams say that as well?
-
I was thinking Brian Williams could go to fox when NBC lets him go but now he's going to have to lie a hell of a lot more to fit in at fox :D :D
-
(http://src1.politicususa.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/fox-like-news-400x300-1.jpg)
-
I was thinking Brian Williams could go to fox when NBC lets him go but now he's going to have to lie a hell of a lot more to fit in at fox :D :D
no way.
He would have to step up his lying by another 30-40% to be able to hit Faux News standards
-
It's no wonder why liberals rank right up there as some of the dumbest mother f#%kers to exist on this planet. FACT!!
-
Should this thread not be stickie'd?
It is very relevant to this board.
-
Should this thread not be stickie'd?
It is very relevant to this board.
LMFAO -
DAN RATHER, BRIAN WILLIAMS, MSNBC, ETC RING A BELL ?
-
LMFAO -
DAN RATHER, BRIAN WILLIAMS, MSNBC, ETC RING A BELL ?
Yep. Plus the entire story sounds like BS anyway.
-
LMFAO -
DAN RATHER, BRIAN WILLIAMS, MSNBC, ETC RING A BELL ?
Yes they are all liars but FOX takes the cake obviously.
Now how about a sticky for this thread dear mods.
-
Yep. Plus the entire story sounds like BS anyway.
You mean it conflicts with the lies you tell yourself, dont worry we know that.
Now sticky this thread Mod and read it out loud every day before watching FOX.
Or even better dont watch FOX and wake up sheep.
-
You mean it conflicts with the lies you tell yourself, dont worry we know that.
Now sticky this thread Mod and read it out loud every day before watching FOX.
Or even better dont watch FOX and wake up sheep.
I mean it sounds like BS, because "politifact" is hardly unbiased, we have no idea what statements they evaluated, and we don't know whether they were evaluating hard news stories or statements made on opinion programming.
-
You mean it conflicts with the lies you tell yourself, dont worry we know that.
Now sticky this thread Mod and read it out loud every day before watching FOX.
Or even better dont watch FOX and wake up sheep.
dude. you can make the claim that Fox News is more "full of shit" than MSNBC. yay. but when the score is 60-44 you can't call them "sheep". If your wife lied to you about 44 guys she fucked while she was married to you would you make fun of the guy whose wife lied about 60 guys she fucked while she was married to him?
and the score may very well be the other way around the next time they poll. Did you read the Q and A?
-
I mean it sounds like BS, because "politifact" is hardly unbiased, we have no idea what statements they evaluated, and we don't know whether they were evaluating hard news stories or statements made on opinion programming.
and they state just that in the article. so what does everyone do?
-
dude. you can make the claim that Fox News is more "full of shit" than MSNBC. yay. but when the score is 60-44 you can't call them "sheep". If your wife lied to you about 44 guys she fucked while she was married to you would you make fun of the guy whose wife lied about 60 guys she fucked while she was married to him?
and the score may very well be the other way around the next time they poll. Did you read the Q and A?
I can and i will. FOX wievers is 60% sheep.
MNSBC wievers is 40% sheep.
Thats 20% more sheep.
-
and they state just that in the article. so what does everyone do?
?
-
I can and i will. FOX wievers is 60% sheep.
MNSBC wievers is 40% sheep.
Thats 20% more sheep.
You have already stated on the board that you don't watch these stations.
-
and they state just that in the article. so what does everyone do?
FOX is known worldwide for its lies and propaganda.
Its only because americans live day in and day out with "news" that is filled with BS they seem to think thats how its supposed to be.
If you watch the news from some other countries like europe or great britain its a diiferent story intirely.
When someone from abroad watches FOX they recognize inside 5 minutes what is cooking.
-
You have already stated on the board that you don't watch these stations.
Yup that is why i am so well informed.
-
?
i'm agreeing with you.
-
I can and i will. FOX wievers is 60% sheep.
MNSBC wievers is 40% sheep.
Thats 20% more sheep.
44 dude. and 16% more.
and this statistic only tells an intelligent observer that they're ALL sheep.
but I bet you believe that you only get your news from a perfect news station that doesn't care about ratings at all. only the truth. it's seriously fucking adorable.
-
brahahaha the fox viewers are on here try to cover for their lying station
-
44 dude. and 16% more.
and this statistic only tells an intelligent observer that they're ALL sheep.
but I bet you believe that you only get your news from a perfect news station that doesn't care about ratings at all. only the truth. it's seriously fucking adorable.
What the hell are you rambling about? I never watch MSNBC or any of the other stations. The media in Denmark is FAR superior to the propaganda you watch.
And it doesnt tell the intelligent wiever that they are ALL sheep. It says FOX wievers is numero uno in being sheeps, MSNBC second and CNN is pretty good actually. That means you should STOP watching FOX instead of making stupid posts where you attribute some BS to other posters and then attack that very fallacy. But keep lying to yourself Bear you are quite the master at it.
-
brahahaha the fox viewers are on here try to cover for their lying station
The really sad part is how they lie to themselves.
SoulC, Beach Bum and Bear defending the people that lie to them. So sad.
-
What the hell are you rambling about? I never watch MSNBC or any of the other stations. The media in Denmark is FAR superior to the propaganda you watch.
And it doesnt tell the intelligent wiever that they are ALL sheep. It says FOX wievers is numero uno in being sheeps, MSNBC second and CNN is pretty good actually. That means you should STOP watching FOX instead of making stupid posts where you attribute some BS to other posters and then attack that very fallacy. But keep lying to yourself Bear you are quite the master at it.
I don't watch Fox News. And if they were such a joke you wouldn't be losing your shit about them on this board week in and week out. I judge politics based upon what I see happen in the real world. in real life. to real people. I stopped listening to pundits when I was about 21 because it all seemed ridiculous to me. your view on american politics is sad and hilarious all at the same time. I used to get angry at disillusioned people like yourself. now I just think its cute.
-
The really sad part is how they lie to themselves.
SoulC, Beach Bum and Bear defending the people that lie to them. So sad.
please quote where I defended FOX news. please.
-
I don't watch Fox News. And if they were such a joke you wouldn't be losing your shit about them on this board week in and week out. I judge politics based upon what I see happen in the real world. in real life. to real people. I stopped listening to pundits when I was about 21 because it all seemed ridiculous to me. your view on american politics is sad and hilarious all at the same time. I used to get angry at disillusioned people like yourself. now I just think its cute.
So you get info about the conflict in Ukraine for instance by talking to the guy who fill you gas tank?
Sounds great Bear no wonder your knowledge is so limited.
Oh yeah and keep defending FOX allthough you never watch it ::) You are a sad fool old man
-
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRr5wCWqd42OYZi7uEDudawOzIrt2Gwo0UzE7rrgF0XlXTGn0qS)
-
please quote where I defended FOX news. please.
"dude. you can make the claim that Fox News is more "full of shit" than MSNBC. yay. but when the score is 60-44 you can't call them "sheep". If your wife lied to you about 44 guys she fucked while she was married to you would you make fun of the guy whose wife lied about 60 guys she fucked while she was married to him?
and the score may very well be the other way around the next time they poll."
-
So you get info about the conflict in Ukraine for instance by talking to the guy who fill you gas tank?
Sounds great Bear no wonder your knowledge is so limited.
Oh yeah and keep defending FOX allthough you never watch it ::) You are a sad fool old man
Again........... ::)please quote where I defended FOX news. please.
i'm guessing it takes you a little longer to read then most people.
-
Getting your news from any of the news networks is like watching wrasling and believing it's real.
-
"dude. you can make the claim that Fox News is more "full of shit" than MSNBC. yay. but when the score is 60-44 you can't call them "sheep". If your wife lied to you about 44 guys she fucked while she was married to you would you make fun of the guy whose wife lied about 60 guys she fucked while she was married to him?
and the score may very well be the other way around the next time they poll."
I agreed that FOX News is "more full of shit then MSNBC". is that defending them? wait. do you know what the word "defending" means?
-
hey whork. you're more full of shit than anyone on this board. see how I defend you? which makes me wonder why you're such a little dick.
-
The really sad part is how they lie to themselves.
SoulC, Beach Bum and Bear defending the people that lie to them. So sad.
what's truly sad is the fact that small minds like you need everything dumbed down into good guy/bad guy. if it cannot be understood in terms of comic book characters you simply cannot comprehend it.
you honestly believe that Republicans are bad and Democrats are good. this is the sad part. not that Fox lies 60% of the time and MSNBC lies 44% of the time. poor guy. you need hugs. not politico
-
cnn is 21% false wow way better than fox ;D
-
cnn is 21% false wow way better than fox ;D
the sad part is that doesn't CNN have worse ratings than both FOX and MSNBC?
which tells us what? no one wants to hear truth. they want to hear what they want to hear.
-
CNN has better ratings than msnbc,fox has better than both,as Pat Buchanan said the dumbing down of the republican party
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/30/fox-news-cable-news-ratings_n_6398220.html
yup you're right. I guess its the first time in a long time that CNN surpassed MSNBC in ratings. guess there is hope for us.
-
what's truly sad is the fact that small minds like you need everything dumbed down into good guy/bad guy. if it cannot be understood in terms of comic book characters you simply cannot comprehend it.
you honestly believe that Republicans are bad and Democrats are good. this is the sad part. not that Fox lies 60% of the time and MSNBC lies 44% of the time. poor guy. you need hugs. not politico
Again you are making stuff up to hide the fact you are stupid. You are born with below average intelligence (not your faulth) and get your news from talking to people on the street WTF ???.
The "good and bad" talking points is all on you. You make this argument everytime you post. Its called projection. Look it up.
Thanks for the hugs.
-
Again you are making stuff up to hide the fact you are stupid. You are born with below average intelligence (not your faulth) and get your news from talking to people on the street WTF ???.
The "good and bad" talking points is all on you. You make this argument everytime you post. Its called projection. Look it up.
Thanks for the hugs.
are you still talking?
-
Again you are making stuff up to hide the fact you are stupid. You are born with below average intelligence (not your faulth) and get your news from talking to people on the street WTF ???.
The "good and bad" talking points is all on you. You make this argument everytime you post. Its called projection. Look it up.
Thanks for the hugs.
If you're going to call someone stupid with below average intelligence you should at least be able to write coherently and sound like someone with better than an elementary school education. I'm just sayin . . . .
-
If you're going to call someone stupid with below average intelligence you should at least be able to write coherently and sound like someone with better than an elementary school education. I'm just sayin . . . .
English is not my first language. What is your excuse?
-
are you still talking?
Yes.
-
English is not my first language. What is your excuse?
You don't write like someone with an accent. You write like someone who is barely literate. Both form and substance.
-
Again you are making stuff up to hide the fact you are stupid. You are born with below average intelligence (not your faulth) and get your news from talking to people on the street WTF ???.
The "good and bad" talking points is all on you. You make this argument everytime you post. Its called projection. Look it up.
Thanks for the hugs.
no. for instance, I get my information on US tax from the Internal Revenue Code and the 30-40 hours a year of CPE that I take to get information from actual tax professionals. not from articles on the internet like you.
-
the bad part about whork is when he says stupid shit indoctrinated into his brain by the far left pandering to their base through little internet articles and gets called out on it he accuses people of being far right republicans and only watching FOX. it's called projection. and it's obvious and played out and tired as hell.
-
The really sad part is how they lie to themselves.
SoulC, Beach Bum and Bear defending the people that lie to them. So sad.
I train in my free time unlike 99% of you libfags. Don't have time for TV
-
Getting your news from any of the news networks is like watching wrasling and believing it's real.
so 100% of all network news is false
-
so 100% of all network news is false
STFU and go train for F's sake will you?
-
so 100% of all network news is false
after the statistics from the article in this thread, how could a rational person believe anything they see....on any of these news stations?
CNN is by far the most honest news station and 20% of everything you see on there is a lie.
I know the point of this thread was to discredit FOX but an intelligent person with no dog in the fight would see this for what it is....being that ALL of our news sources are lying at best 20% of the time, at worst 60%.
everyone have fun voting in the next election based on false information. i'll stay home and actually do something constructive.
-
STFU and go train for F's sake will you?
go back to bed loser
-
STFU and go train for F's sake will you?
yeah!
then you will get big and strong like SC and be able to open plastic bottle caps with one swift and successful motion.
-
after the statistics from the article in this thread, how could a rational person believe anything they see....on any of these news stations?
CNN is by far the most honest news station and 20% of everything you see on there is a lie.
I know the point of this thread was to discredit FOX but an intelligent person with no dog in the fight would see this for what it is....being that ALL of our news sources are lying at best 20% of the time, at worst 60%.
everyone have fun voting in the next election based on false information. i'll stay home and actually do something constructive.
I can't believe the weather man when he tells me it's raining and I can see the rain outside my window.
I can't believe them when they report on a fire or some other clearly objective event?
If 20% is false then isn't 80% accurate
Of course when you have Faux News reporting on climate change containing over 72 percent misleading statements then you're basically a propaganda organization
When you can't refute that or make an excuse for it the only thing left to do is try to pretend that "everyone" is just as bad and paint the entire net work news with that same brush
That's all the defenders have left that they can do
Of course, it's total bullshit but that's the only gambit left until one has to admit that yes Faux News is in a class by itself when it comes to lying
-
I can't believe the weather man when he tells me it's raining and I can see the rain outside my window.
I can't believe them when they report on a fire or some other clearly objective event?
If 20% is false then isn't 80% accurate
Of course when you have Faux News reporting on climate change containing over 72 percent misleading statements then you're basically a propaganda organization
When you can't refute that or make an excuse for it the only thing left to do is try to pretend that "everyone" is just as bad and paint the entire net work news with that same brush
That's all the defenders have left that they can do
Of course, it's total bullshit but that's the only gambit left until one has to admit that yes Faux News is in a class by itself when it comes to lying
agree on everything here. the only concern I have is that you don't seem to be demonizing MSNBC as much as FOX. I mean its 60-44. they both have horrible stats.
I agree that the 60% for FOX is ridiculous. I think that the 44% for MSNBC is ridiculous too. I think its safe to say that both networks should be watched with extreme skepticism, maybe even disregarded completely.
and who's to say that you couldn't run a similar test a year from now and FOX would be 44 and MSNBC would be 60? I'd like to see them run the data when a Republican is in office. I'm guessing you'd see different results. simply because FOX panders to Republicans, and tears apart Democratic presidents, spreading half truths and outright lies, they would most probably lie more when the incumbent is a Democrat. can you tell me honestly that you think MSNBC wouldn't do this too if a Republican is elected in 2016?
bottom line is journalism is dead. dogma is alive and well. have fun trying to be an informed voter nowadays. I honestly believe its impossible.
-
agree on everything here. the only concern I have is that you don't seem to be demonizing MSNBC as much as FOX. I mean its 60-44. they both have horrible stats.
I agree that the 60% for FOX is ridiculous. I think that the 44% for MSNBC is ridiculous too. I think its safe to say that both networks should be watched with extreme skepticism, maybe even disregarded completely.
and who's to say that you couldn't run a similar test a year from now and FOX would be 44 and MSNBC would be 60? I'd like to see them run the data when a Republican is in office. I'm guessing you'd see different results. simply because FOX panders to Republicans, and tears apart Democratic presidents, spreading half truths and outright lies, they would most probably lie more when the incumbent is a Democrat. can you tell me honestly that you think MSNBC wouldn't do this too if a Republican is elected in 2016?
bottom line is journalism is dead. dogma is alive and well. have fun trying to be an informed voter nowadays. I honestly believe its impossible.
then you completely missed the point of my post
the classic tactic when people on the left can't defend a position is to claim that everyone is just as bad
-
then you completely missed the point of my post
the classic tactic when people on the left can't defend a position is to claim that everyone is just as bad
true but the tactic on both sides is also ignoring the fact that both sides ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE OTHER. this is why im done voting.
-
LOL @ the Fox hit piece. So I guess Bengazi was a blatant lie because they broke they story and it wasn't until months later (like 8months later) when the other networks finally woke up.
they broke the story and tried their best to blame that obama was lying using questionable reporting and outright hit pieces.....
-
I watch Fox and their hard news is "true," because they simply report the news. They don't get on the air every day and invent hard news stories. The opinion shows are just that, so I don't think you can reliably give their opinions some kind of arbitrary "truth" percentage.
Would be interested to see the breakdown of the hard news vs. opinion shows and the actual statements those folks rated.
I disagree..they report the news which is then followed up with a hit piece which usually asks "is Obama to blame for ...."
-
I disagree..they report the news which is then followed up with a hit piece which usually asks "is Obama to blame for ...."
Yes - cause gaybama is to blame for everything. F him
-
That is part of it. People do tend to watch and read things that reinforce what they already believe.
But that's not the whole story with Fox. They're simply better at both their news and opinion shows than anyone else. The hard news is factual. The opinions shows overall are solid. They don't coddle liberals like the MSM. The hosts and guests are more entertaining and funnier.
Importantly, they always have opposing viewpoints, so their programming isn't just about parroting whatever the conservative line might be.
The hard news is fa ctual in that the event they are reporting on actually ocurred but is always slanted toward whether Obama handled it properly, and lo and behold, it is always agreed that he did not handle said issue properly
-
I disagree..they report the news which is then followed up with a hit piece which usually asks "is Obama to blame for ...."
You agree that they report actual news stories, but disagree with opinions they express. That doesn't make the news stories false. This whole subject is retarded.
-
The hard news is fa ctual in that the event they are reporting on actually ocurred but is always slanted toward whether Obama handled it properly, and lo and behold, it is always agreed that he did not handle said issue properly
Let's assume what you say is true. That doesn't make their news stories false, which was the whole point of the story that started this thread.
-
it's only retarded because he's a fox fan :D :D :D I can't imagine being lied to 60% of the time and still covering for them. can you say pathetic :D
-
true but the tactic on both sides is also ignoring the fact that both sides ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE OTHER. this is why im done voting.
this statement doesn't even make any sense and you've still apparently misunderstood or have chosen to ignore my statement
let me make it as clear as possible
Fox News is by far the worst
there is no comparison
the last gambit of the right when faced with the fact that Fox is by far the worst offender is to pretend that both side are equal offenders
-
it's only retarded because he's a fox fan :D :D :D I can't imagine being lied to 60% of the time and still covering for them. can you say pathetic :D
It's retarded because no reasonable person believes Fox News (or CNN, etc.) invents news stories. That's just dumb.
-
Let's assume what you say is true. That doesn't make their news stories false, which was the whole point of the story that started this thread.
but they take the news and then interpret it by spinning it for days and days ina a slanted direction which fits the opinions of their comentators and the people who watch.....and this then brainwashes their audience into thinking about issues a certain way............which is usually wrong...then months later they MIGHT issue and apology if someone calls them out on it
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama lying about Benghazi???.....turns out there was no lying and no cover up
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama siccing the IRS on right wing groups???...turns out no conspiracy there either...
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama not handling the Ebola scare properly and stating repeatedly he was threatening the lives and well-being of Americans???...turns out only ONE person died and that person was sick before he even made it to a U.S. hospital
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
ANYBODY WHO DEFENDS FOX IS OUT OF THEIR GODDAMN MINDS
-
but they take the news and then interpret it by spinning it for days and days ina a slanted direction which fits the opinions of their comentators and the people who watch.....and this then brainwashes their audience into thinking about issues a certain way............which is usually wrong...then months later they MIGHT issue and apology if someone calls them out on it
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama lying about Benghazi???.....turns out there was no lying and no cover up
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama siccing the IRS on right wing groups???...turns out no conspiracy there either...
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama not handling the Ebola scare properly and stating repeatedly he was threatening the lives and well-being of Americans???...turns out only ONE person died and that person was sick before he even made it to a U.S. hospital
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
don't bother he's in denial,typ fox viewer,that's why their the lease informed
-
but they take the news and then interpret it by spinning it for days and days ina a slanted direction which fits the opinions of their comentators and the people who watch.....and this then brainwashes their audience into thinking about issues a certain way............which is usually wrong...then months later they MIGHT issue and apology if someone calls them out on it
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama lying about Benghazi???.....turns out there was no lying and no cover up
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama siccing the IRS on right wing groups???...turns out no conspiracy there either...
How many hours of coverage did they devote to Obama not handling the Ebola scare properly and stating repeatedly he was threatening the lives and well-being of Americans???...turns out only ONE person died and that person was sick before he even made it to a U.S. hospital
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
The news shows report the news. So how many times did they invent hard news? I don't recall any. Spending a lot of time covering certain news stories isn't inventing stories. A large of that is covering what the MSM fails to cover.
The opinion shows spend a lot of time bashing the president, but he earns most of it. At least on the shows I watch. And think about it: if Fox wasn't around, which other part of the MSM would attempt to hold the president and his people accountable?
Here is an example of how the MSM treats the president and his people. Embarrassing.
-
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/cable-news-coverage-climate-change-science.html#.VNlGRPnF_HU
To gauge how accurately these networks inform their audiences about climate change, UCS analyzed the networks' climate science coverage in 2013 and found that each network treated climate science very differently.
Fox News was the least accurate; 72 percent of its 2013 climate science-related segments contained misleading statements. CNN was in the middle, with about a third of segments featuring misleading statements. MSNBC was the most accurate, with only eight percent of segments containing misleading statements.
-
The news shows report the news. So how many times did they invent hard news? I don't recall any. Spending a lot of time covering certain news stories isn't inventing stories. A large of that is covering what the MSM fails to cover.
The opinion shows spend a lot of time bashing the president, but he earns most of it. At least on the shows I watch. And think about it: if Fox wasn't around, which other part of the MSM would attempt to hold the president and his people accountable?
Here is an example of how the MSM treats the president and his people. Embarrassing.
I do recall FOX reporting false facts when certain Tea Party groups would get together...FOX would often inflate the actual number of people there to try to make tea party support seem bigger than it actually is...I think they got caught twice doing this
-
Fox News has the hottest babes - ;)
MSNBC has libfag dykes and trannies
-
no. for instance, I get my information on US tax from the Internal Revenue Code and the 30-40 hours a year of CPE that I take to get information from actual tax professionals. not from articles on the internet like you.
Projecting again are we? We have a free press in Europe very informative and reasonably unbiased.
What is wrong with articles on the internet?
-
I train in my free time unlike 99% of you libfags. Don't have time for TV
You have time to post here..a lot.
I train as well maybe im the 1%.
-
I do recall FOX reporting false facts when certain Tea Party groups would get together...FOX would often inflate the actual number of people there to try to make tea party support seem bigger than it actually is...I think they got caught twice doing this
So they just invented a number? Sounds awfully weak.
-
true but the tactic on both sides is also ignoring the fact that both sides ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE OTHER. this is why im done voting.
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
-
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
sure but let's just pretend they are all equally as bad
-
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
yes it is. I wonder what MSNBC was. I'm sure they were close to CNN. Liberal news stations don't lie nearly as much as FOX.
-
i'm also assuming that when other people cite CNN as a source that you guys will defer to them as a good source of info. right? I do now.
-
When Mark Foley, a Republican, of Florida was linked to suggestive emails, Fox originally tagged him as a Democrat, rather than fix the mistake entirely, when the same graphic was used latter on O'Reilly's show, the party tag was missing entirely
-
yes it is. I wonder what MSNBC was. I'm sure they were close to CNN. Liberal news stations don't lie nearly as much as FOX.
MSNBC 54% false.
-
yes it is. I wonder what MSNBC was. I'm sure they were close to CNN. Liberal news stations don't lie nearly as much as FOX.
take the example of stories about climate change in 2013
Fox coverage was 72% misleading and MSNBC was 8% misleading
let's go around and round up 8% to 72% and just say they are both equally bad
-
When Mark Foley, a Republican, of Florida was linked to suggestive emails, Fox originally tagged him as a Democrat, rather than fix the mistake entirely, when the same graphic was used latter on O'Reilly's show, the party tag was missing entirely
Blacken is still a proud graduate of the Joe Biden School of Plagiarism. lol
Bodhisattva answered 5 years ago
When Mark Foley, a Republican, of Florida was linked to suggestive emails, Fox originally tagged him as a Democrat, rather than fix the mistake entirely, when the same graphic was used latter on O'Reilly's show, the party tag was missing entirely.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100517185209AAkPwfb
-
take the example of stories about climate change in 2013
Fox coverage was 72% misleading and MSNBC was 8% misleading
let's go around and round up 8% to 72% and just say they are both equally bad
now you're cherry picking stats and ignoring that MSNBC is still lying about 50% of the time. my question is why? they're not a serious news station. either is FOX. why are you defending a station that's right up there with FOX with lying?
-
just more honest mistakes by the 60% lying fox news
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/oreilly-foley-d-3.jpg)
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/2001551296293851628_rs.jpg)
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/Sanford.jpg)
-
just more honest mistakes by the 60% lying fox news
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/oreilly-foley-d-3.jpg)
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/2001551296293851628_rs.jpg)
(http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj38/blackkos/Sanford.jpg)
awesome. now post some of the lies from MSNBC. seeing as you're so fair and balanced.
-
Blacken is still a proud graduate of the Joe Biden School of Plagiarism. lol
Bodhisattva answered 5 years ago
When Mark Foley, a Republican, of Florida was linked to suggestive emails, Fox originally tagged him as a Democrat, rather than fix the mistake entirely, when the same graphic was used latter on O'Reilly's show, the party tag was missing entirely.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100517185209AAkPwfb
just keep covering for your lying news source,it's no wonder your so fucking dumb :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
-
Here is an example of an invented news story.
NBC News Admits 'Error' In Editing Of George Zimmerman 911 Call
Posted: 04/03/2012 5:54 pm EDT Updated: 06/03/2012 5:12 am EDT
NBC News is admitting that it made an "error" editing a recording of George Zimmerman's 911 call moments before he shot Trayvon Martin.
"Today" aired an edited version of Zimmerman's call to the police in a segment about Martin. The show's audio made it sound as though Zimmerman had volunteered that Martin was "black." In actuality, the 911 officer asked if the "suspicious person" he was calling about was "black, white or Hispanic."
NBC News launched an internal investigation into the story. On Tuesday, the network expressed "regret" for the omission, and apologized to its viewers.
"During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret," NBC News said in a statement to the Hollywood Reporter. "We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/nbc-news-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-911-call_n_1401167.html
-
your so fucking dumb
Bwahaha ;D
So why did you plagiarize again?
-
awesome. now post some of the lies from MSNBC. seeing as you're so fair and balanced.
I must have missed it is anyone covering for MSNBC like beachbum is ball lapping for fox ;D
-
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
also 80% is HALF TRUE OR BETTER for CNN. so it's not 80% true. yay news stations!
I just find it funny how you're all being lied to and you sit around bragging about who's lying to you the least and touting them as "good sources of news". it's adorable how you all believe in this shit. i'm sure you're one of those people who cry at presidential inaugurations.
-
I must have missed it is anyone covering for MSNBC like beachbum is ball lapping for fox ;D
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
whork is, considering this is what he took from the original article. why did he ignore the stat on MSNBC?
-
I really do love my wife. in fact 80% of what she tells me is half true or better. it's awesome having a person in your life who you can trust.........80% of the time.....to tell you a half truth.........um....wait .
-
now you're cherry picking stats and ignoring that MSNBC is still lying about 50% of the time. my question is why? they're not a serious news station. either is FOX. why are you defending a station that's right up there with FOX with lying?
I'm not ignoring it.
the claim but "punditfact" ( http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/) claims "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests"
Go to this link and take a look at their examples: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Many of these "NBC" lies are right wing republicans lying on their network.
My link was about a specific topic over a specific period of time showing a blatant (72% misleading) intent to mislead on a specific subject
-
and one more that wouldn't fit in the last post
-
politifact? ::)
-
I'm not ignoring it.
the claim but "punditfact" ( http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/) claims "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests"
Go to this link and take a look at their examples: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Many of these "NBC" lies are right wing republicans lying on their network.
My link was about a specific topic over a specific period of time showing a blatant (72% misleading) intent to mislead on a specific subject
not sure if you understand what I mean by "cherry picking" facts. you refuted my accusation of cherry picking facts by cherry picking more facts. all I see here are libs and conservatives telling lies and half truths. you should reread your post.
-
I'm not ignoring it.
the claim but "punditfact" ( http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/) claims "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests"
Go to this link and take a look at their examples: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Many of these "NBC" lies are right wing republicans lying on their network.
My link was about a specific topic over a specific period of time showing a blatant (72% misleading) intent to mislead on a specific subject
so are you saying that FOX doesn't have left wing pundits lying on their news station? they do. that's why the FOX pundits get to yell at people to get ratings. and I read the original article, it explicitly says that it is by station, not by who says it. so FOX would have the same problem as MSNBC in that respect, but you simply chose to ignore that FACT. come on man. this is getting silly
-
well let's agree both fox and msnbc are garbage,i can buy that
-
well let's agree both fox and msnbc are garbage,i can buy that
thank you. yes.
-
not sure if you understand what I mean by "cherry picking" facts. you refuted my accusation of cherry picking facts by cherry picking more facts. all I see here are libs and conservatives telling lies and half truths. you should reread your post.
I thought I was referencing your source for your claim about MSNBC lying 50% of the time
If that is not your source for that claim that then please post it or bump it because I must have missed it
now you're cherry picking stats and ignoring that MSNBC is still lying about 50% of the time. my question is why? they're not a serious news station. either is FOX. why are you defending a station that's right up there with FOX with lying?
-
I thought I was referencing your source for your claim about MSNBC lying 50% of the time
If that is not your source for that claim that then please post it or bump it because I must have missed it
At MSNBC and NBC, 44 percent of claims have received a rating of Mostly False or worse. The full breakdown:
-
At MSNBC and NBC, 44 percent of claims have received a rating of Mostly False or worse. The full breakdown:
where
you're not referring to the source that I used are you?
-
where
you're not referring to the source that I used are you?
no. I don't even know what you're talking about anymore.
-
no. I don't even know what you're talking about anymore.
where is this from
At MSNBC and NBC, 44 percent of claims have received a rating of Mostly False or worse. The full breakdown:
-
where is this from
wait huh?
it's from the original post that started the whole damn thread. the same article that said that FOX is 60% fake also says that MSNBC is 44% fake.
i'm confused. did you seriously completely ignore the part of the article about MSNBC? come on man.
-
wait huh?
it's from the original post that started the whole damn thread. the same article that said that FOX is 60% fake also says that MSNBC is 44% fake.
i'm confused. did you seriously completely ignore the part of the article about MSNBC? come on man.
yes, did you bother to click the link in the first post
here it is: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/
then when you get there you will see a link which will take you here:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/sep/16/fact-checking-fox-msnbc-and-cnn-punditfacts-networ/
Then you will have a link to "MSNBC" which will take you here: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Actually you will see a link to "MSNBC file" and another to "NBC and MSNBC" but they both go to the same page
There you will see all the examples which included in the prior post.
You will see them explain that "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests."
They mix NBC and MSNBC together and part of their "misleading" statements include things like statements from pundits and guests such as Dick Cheney, Carly Fiorina
That is why I'm not putting much stock in your (their claim) of 44% mostly false
On the other hand, my example was scientists looking at news stories on a specific topic for a specific period of time and didn't mix NBC and MSNBC together
The result?
Faux News misleading 72% of the time vs. MSNBC only 8%
-
yes, did you bother to click the link in the first post
here it is: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/
then when you get there you will see a link which will take you here:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/sep/16/fact-checking-fox-msnbc-and-cnn-punditfacts-networ/
Then you will have a link to "MSNBC" which will take you here: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Actually you will see a link to "MSNBC file" and another to "NBC and MSNBC" but they both go to the same page
There you will see all the examples which included in the prior post.
You will see them explain that "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests."
They mix NBC and MSNBC together and part of their "misleading" statements include things like statements from pundits and guests such as Dick Cheney, Carly Fiorina
That is why I'm not putting much stock in your (their claim) of 44% mostly false
On the other hand, my example was scientists looking at news stories on a specific topic for a specific period of time and didn't mix NBC and MSNBC together
The result?
Faux News misleading 72% of the time vs. MSNBC only 8%
ok now you're being stupid. yes and the same goes for Fox and Fox News. The liberal pundits that say false things also add to the total for Fox. You're blatantly cherry picking facts to suit your argument. you're being silly.
-
yes, did you bother to click the link in the first post
here it is: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/
then when you get there you will see a link which will take you here:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/sep/16/fact-checking-fox-msnbc-and-cnn-punditfacts-networ/
Then you will have a link to "MSNBC" which will take you here: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
Actually you will see a link to "MSNBC file" and another to "NBC and MSNBC" but they both go to the same page
There you will see all the examples which included in the prior post.
You will see them explain that "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by MSNBC and NBC personalities and their pundit guests."
They mix NBC and MSNBC together and part of their "misleading" statements include things like statements from pundits and guests such as Dick Cheney, Carly Fiorina
That is why I'm not putting much stock in your (their claim) of 44% mostly false
On the other hand, my example was scientists looking at news stories on a specific topic for a specific period of time and didn't mix NBC and MSNBC together
The result?
Faux News misleading 72% of the time vs. MSNBC only 8%
from YOUR link.
Some of you also have asked why we include statements of conservative pundits on MSNBC in MSNBC’s rankings and liberal pundits speaking on Fox News in Fox’s rankings. The thought we hear is that doing so doesn’t present a true measure of the network.
We, however, believe in measuring the overall veracity of a network -- and think MSNBC and Fox News should be held accountable for what pundits they put on air.
also from YOUR link, the author agrees with me. they're both jokes. not JUST fox. not JUST msnbc.
-
ok now you're being stupid. yes and the same goes for Fox and Fox News. The liberal pundits that say false things also add to the total for Fox. You're blatantly cherry picking facts to suit your argument. you're being silly.
I'm looking at the source data for the claim
do you not get that
I'm didn't "cherry pick" anything
I copied exactly what they provided as examples
I didn't "pick" any of them
Do you dispute the fact that they combined both MSNBC and NBC ?
Here is the source: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
-
The comparisons are interesting, but be cautious about using them to draw broad conclusions. We use our news judgment to pick the facts we’re going to check, so we certainly don’t fact-check everything.
do me a favor. don't post a link to argue your side, and then disagree with the same link in the same fucking post.
-
from YOUR link.
Some of you also have asked why we include statements of conservative pundits on MSNBC in MSNBC’s rankings and liberal pundits speaking on Fox News in Fox’s rankings. The thought we hear is that doing so doesn’t present a true measure of the network.
We, however, believe in measuring the overall veracity of a network -- and think MSNBC and Fox News should be held accountable for what pundits they put on air.
also from YOUR link, the author agrees with me. they're both jokes. not JUST fox. not JUST msnbc.
by my link you mean the source data for the thing you claim shows 44% misleading ?
an example of a misleading statement on MSNBC is a statement by Cheney
Are you aware of Cheny EVER being on MSNBC?
So when Cheny goes on NBC and lies that is one of the examples of misleading statement by pundits/guests on MSNBC
That's what you were thinking....right?
-
by my link you mean the source data for the thing you claim shows 44% misleading ?
an example of a misleading statement on MSNBC is a statement by Cheney
Are you aware of Cheny EVER being on MSNBC?
So when Cheny goes on NBC and lies that is one of the examples of misleading statement by pundits/guests on MSNBC
That's what you were thinking....right?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/
this is what I know. read it.
-
by my link you mean the source data for the thing you claim shows 44% misleading ?
an example of a misleading statement on MSNBC is a statement by Cheney
Are you aware of Cheny EVER being on MSNBC?
So when Cheny goes on NBC and lies that is one of the examples of misleading statement by pundits/guests on MSNBC
That's what you were thinking....right?
what I think you're saying is that this study is bullshit and misleading.............b ut only for the bad stuff they say about MSNBC. LOL!!!!!!
-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/29/punditfact-checks-cable-news-channels/
this is what I know. read it.
so instead of drilling down to the source data you'd just prefer to ignore it
-
what I think you're saying is that this study is bullshit and misleading.............b ut only for the bad stuff they say about MSNBC. LOL!!!!!!
I don't seem them combining Faux News with another channell
When they combine NBC and MSNBC and refer to is as NBC and then give example of misleading statements such as one made by Cheney on NBC don't you see that that's bullshit and misleading?
When you think of misleading statements by MSNBC pundits are you thinking of Cheney?
-
I don't seem them combining Faux News with another channell
When they combine NBC and MSNBC and refer to is as NBC and then give example of misleading statements such as one made by Cheney on NBC don't you see that that's bullshit and misleading?
When you think of misleading statements by MSNBC pundits are you thinking of Cheney?
you've been going at this too long. you're outthinking yourself and making errors. I do it too sometimes.
Q: Why do you group NBC and MSNBC together?
A: At this point, we group both NBC and MSNBC together, as we group together Fox and Fox News Channel.
-
you've been going at this too long. you're outthinking yourself and making errors. I do it too sometimes.
Q: Why do you group NBC and MSNBC together?
A: At this point, we group both NBC and MSNBC together, as we group together Fox and Fox News Channel.
I don't group them together - politifact/pundit fact does that (seriously have you not understood that all this time)
All you have to do is follow the links back to the source data
why do you choose to refuse to look a that
Answer this simple question as honestly as you can
When you think of MSNBC being misleading are you thinking of statement made by Dick Cheney on NBC ?
Is that the picture you get in your mind?
again, I didn't "cherry pick" that. It's right from the source of the article you referred to.
-
I don't group them together - politifact/pundit fact does that (seriously have you not understood that all this time)
All you have to do is follow the links back to the source data
why do you choose to refuse to look a that
Answer this simple question as honestly as you can
When you think of MSNBC being misleading are you thinking of statement made by Dick Cheney on NBC ?
Is that the picture you get in your mind?
again, I didn't "cherry pick" that. It's right from the source of the article you referred to.
all I see is that the study is treating each station the same. you can't accept that. because you can't accept that MSNBC is ridiculous as FOX. I can't help you anymore.
-
if ANYONE agrees with Straw's assessment please let me know. until then I am done. you've thoroughly confused me with your convenient logic.
-
if ANYONE agrees with Straw's assessment please let me know. until then I am done. you've thoroughly confused me with your convenient logic.
you're telling me you were literally unable or unwilling to follow the links back to the source data ?
I've spelled it out for you 3 times now
-
first image of from the initial article/link
second image is from the source data
Notice they are identical but the 2nd one show that they are mixing NBC and MSNBC together (in fact they don't even mention MNSBC)
They then go on to list a bunch of example which you claimed that I "cherry-picked"
Are you really saying you didn't understand this before?
-
and here are examples from the source data of statements made on NBC (or is it MSNBC - the page with the quotes ONLY states NBC and I doubt Cheney ever went on MSNBC but maybe he did)
-
yes it is. I wonder what MSNBC was. I'm sure they were close to CNN. Liberal news stations don't lie nearly as much as FOX.
Not nearly but close.
CNN was the clear "winner".
-
i'm also assuming that when other people cite CNN as a source that you guys will defer to them as a good source of info. right? I do now.
They beat the pants of FOX and MSNBC for sure.
-
CNN is 80% true.
FOX is 60% false.
Thats a huge difference.
whork is, considering this is what he took from the original article. why did he ignore the stat on MSNBC?
I didnt i took the lowest and the highest score to show the huge difference. It wouldnt make sense otherwise.
-
also 80% is HALF TRUE OR BETTER for CNN. so it's not 80% true. yay news stations!
I just find it funny how you're all being lied to and you sit around bragging about who's lying to you the least and touting them as "good sources of news". it's adorable how you all believe in this shit. i'm sure you're one of those people who cry at presidential inaugurations.
Yes yes yes you have seen the light Bear and the rest of us are just braindead::)
-
well let's agree both fox and msnbc are garbage,i can buy that
+1
-
300000000 people. 2000000 watch Fox News and this is an issue ?
-
They beat the pants of FOX and MSNBC for sure.
except for reporting accurately on climate change and then MSNBC is by far the most accurate and FAUX is basically a propaganda/disinformation source.
-
300000000 people. 2000000 watch Fox News and this is an issue ?
fewer people watch msnbc, but they're continually credited for giving the presidency to the libs.