Fox news or CNN

AAAintheBeltway · Mar 27, 2003

Fox News Channel, which has pretty much destroyed CNN and MSNBC already, seems to me to be taking maximum advantage of this conflict. Their reports are bursting with pride and patriotism. CNN by contrast has devoted a lot of coverage to so-called peace demonstrators and maggots like Michael Moore. CNN's war coverage is skeptical at best and seems to dwell on possible US screw-ups.

Am I the only one who has noticed this? Or is anyone even bothering with CNN anymore? If you want the Iraqi side, just go to Al Jazeera.

alfonso · Mar 27, 2003

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Fox News Channel, which has pretty much destroyed CNN and MSNBC already, seems to me to be taking maximum advantage of this conflict.

Stands to reason. I saw a poll the other day saying that 51% of Americans believe Iraq was behind 9.11

skeptic123 · Mar 27, 2003

They all stink. The US channels are censored or self-censored and this is disgusting. Al-Jazeera is presumably not censored but is extremely biased.

nitro · Mar 27, 2003

I flip back and forth between the three (and then some more) like a madman...

nitro

aphexcoil · Mar 27, 2003

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Fox News Channel, which has pretty much destroyed CNN and MSNBC already, seems to me to be taking maximum advantage of this conflict. Their reports are bursting with pride and patriotism. CNN by contrast has devoted a lot of coverage to so-called peace demonstrators and maggots like Michael Moore. CNN's war coverage is skeptical at best and seems to dwell on possible US screw-ups.

Fox is way too conservative and MSNBC is a bit too liberal. Does anyone know of any channel that is basically moderate and touches a bit of everything?

I'd like to know who's rioting / protesting where, but I don't want them to devote an hour show to it.

Do most of you like Bill O'Reily?

Trajan · Mar 28, 2003

Quote from aphexcoil:

Fox is way too conservative and MSNBC is a bit too liberal. Does anyone know of any channel that is basically moderate and touches a bit of everything?

I'd like to know who's rioting / protesting where, but I don't want them to devote an hour show to it.

Do most of you like Bill O'Reily?

I would say that MSNBC is center/right at this point. Fox is definitely the patriotic channel, while they do present all the news, all viewpoints aren't there. I would say that anit-war protests have gotten immense coverage, on the other hand, patriotic rallies, pro-war, pro-troops, anti-Saddam, haven't at all by any network. One more thing about Fox, a lot of military families watch the channel.

I don't "like" Bill O'Reilly, but occassionally I enjoy his show. He puts dumbasses on T.V. and yells at them for a couple of minutes. He takes up causes nobody else does.

whocares · Mar 28, 2003

FOX news is THE WORST ! As you just said, they only give you one side of the story. So how are you supposed to find out about counter arguments ? Enough to mention that when Kofi Anan spoke for the first time since the war started, FOX was still discussing patriotism. What do you call this ? Stupidity or Unprofessionalism ?

Believe it or not, when I want to find out who's pro-war, who's against it, and why, I switch to Euronews. They're primitive, but honest.

msfe · Mar 28, 2003

Off to war with the armchair division

Someone once said that journalism is the rough first draft of history. The problem with rolling news is that it gives you the notebook and the crossings-out on the way to the first draft as well.

Congratulating themselves on not screening Arab television's footage of alleged American prisoners of war, some western networks might usefully have sat on some of their own cans of film. Last week, the dominant images of the war had been mysterious and green: most photo-ops happened in the viridescent wash of night-sight filming. Over the first weekend of conflict - perhaps because of a decision by some Pentagon movie director viewing the rushes - more events took place in daylight. But their meaning remained largely dark. The viewer frequently feels that you can't quite believe you're being allowed to see these things. Rather more problematic is you don't know what to believe about them either.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,920606,00.html

Trajan · Mar 28, 2003

Quote from whocares:

FOX news is THE WORST ! As you just said, they only give you one side of the story. So how are you supposed to find out about counter arguments ? Enough to mention that when Kofi Anan spoke for the first time since the war started, FOX was still discussing patriotism. What do you call this ? Stupidity or Unprofessionalism ?

Believe it or not, when I want to find out who's pro-war, who's against it, and why, I switch to Euronews. They're primitive, but honest.

How is Kofi Anan even important at this point, if he ever was? As far as one side of the story, which side do you mean? Who is winning? Is there another side to this question? They present all the news, period. In fact, I would say they are less biased than the BBC and Reuters. The allies are dominating and FOX reflects reality. As far as viewpoints about whether the war is justified or not, different viewpoints were on the network prewar. It was debated fairly on many of Fox's shows.

Trajan · Mar 28, 2003

Quote from msfe:

Off to war with the armchair division

Someone once said that journalism is the rough first draft of history. The problem with rolling news is that it gives you the notebook and the crossings-out on the way to the first draft as well.

Congratulating themselves on not screening Arab television's footage of alleged American prisoners of war, some western networks might usefully have sat on some of their own cans of film. Last week, the dominant images of the war had been mysterious and green: most photo-ops happened in the viridescent wash of night-sight filming. Over the first weekend of conflict - perhaps because of a decision by some Pentagon movie director viewing the rushes - more events took place in daylight. But their meaning remained largely dark. The viewer frequently feels that you can't quite believe you're being allowed to see these things. Rather more problematic is you don't know what to believe about them either.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,920606,00.html

I read the article three times and even though I've had a few beers this evening; I have no idea what it is saying. However, this is not uncommon from reading the Guardian.

Fox news or CNN

Guest