Fox New's helping hand

Republican influence at Fox?!?
I'm shocked! shocked!

This news is making me real crabby this A.M.:nono1:

I guess, following this logic, we should assume that ABC and CNN are really branches of the Democratic Party.

After all, Disney,ABC's parent company, gave significantly more money to the Democrats in 08 and 09 than it did to Republicans.

Likewise, Time Warner, CNN's Parent gave most of their money to Democrats as well. In TW's case we are talking millions more to Democrats than Republicans. With a parent like this, how can we assume that CNN isn't strongly biased to the Democratic Party?

Wow...

Pot...meet Kettle. Nothing like having a left leaning news agency call out a right leaning one...

Let's boil this down. Fox News' parent company made a political donation...:scratch:

Let's look at NBC and MSNBC just as an example. They are owned by General Electric. Since 1999, they have made $1,642,364 in contributions to Republicans. Why isn't anybody screaming about that? Admittedly, they have made $1,443,422 in contributions to the Dems.

Lets look at News Corporation during the same time period.
They gave $301,930 to Republicans and $382,451 to Dems.

While we're at it let's look at CNN seeing how they were the ones who stirred the pot.
They gave $9550 to Republicans and $46,361 to Dems.

Let's break this down into percentages...
GE: 53% to Republicans / 47% to Dems
News Corporation: 44% Republican / 56% to Dems
Both of those are fairly even. On the other hand...
CNN: 17% Republican / 83% Dem

Wow...who is fair and balanced? Certainly not CNN who reported this story!

It doesn't appear that any of the company's profile have been updated since May so go have a cup of java and chill rather than having a knee jerk full on body heave reaction to partial information. If you dig, it's amazing what you can find.

And since I'm a big believer in that a person learns more by doing it his or herself, I'll let all of you figure out where I got my data, but I will tell you that Campaign and Money have a lot to do with it...

you like the babes to parrot the party line, don't you?

Wow...

Pot...meet Kettle. Nothing like having a left leaning news agency call out a right leaning one...

Let's boil this down. Fox News' parent company made a political donation...:scratch:

Let's look at NBC and MSNBC just as an example. They are owned by General Electric. Since 1999, they have made $1,642,364 in contributions to Republicans. Why isn't anybody screaming about that? Admittedly, they have made $1,443,422 in contributions to the Dems.

Lets look at News Corporation during the same time period.
They gave $301,930 to Republicans and $382,451 to Dems.

While we're at it let's look at CNN seeing how they were the ones who stirred the pot.
They gave $9550 to Republicans and $46,361 to Dems.

Let's break this down into percentages...
GE: 53% to Republicans / 47% to Dems
News Corporation: 44% Republican / 56% to Dems
Both of those are fairly even. On the other hand...
CNN: 17% Republican / 83% Dem

Wow...who is fair and balanced? Certainly not CNN who reported this story!

It doesn't appear that any of the company's profile have been updated since May so go have a cup of java and chill rather than having a knee jerk full on body heave reaction to partial information. If you dig, it's amazing what you can find.

And since I'm a big believer in that a person learns more by doing it his or herself, I'll let all of you figure out where I got my data, but I will tell you that Campaign and Money have a lot to do with it...

Let's see, CNN gives a lousy 10K and 50K to REP and DEMS. FOX gives $1,000,0000 to the REPS and zero to the DEMS. Fair and balanced alright!

Republican influence at Fox?!?
I'm shocked! shocked!

Balances out ABC, CBS, and NBC Right?

Let's see, CNN gives a lousy 10K and 50K to REP and DEMS. FOX gives $1,000,0000 to the REPS and zero to the DEMS. Fair and balanced alright!

No, that's wrong. Fox didn't give anyone $1m. Perhaps you should reread the thread.

Fox's parent (News Corp) gave $1m to the Republicans.

That makes them just like CNN, NBC, MSNBC, etc...

According to OpenSecrets, in the 2008 elections CNNs parent (Time Warner) gave $2.3m to Democratic candidates and $.55m to Republicans. Thats 81% to the Democrats. In 2009 it rose to 85% to Democrats.

Knowing that, what kind of fool would believe that we get fair and unbiased reporting from CNN?

The same is true for NBC and MSNBC. Their parent is GE and they support mainly Democratic candidates. Likewise ABC (parent Disney.)

The same is true for all aspects of the media now. There is not one that you can believe or depend on.

Money is one thing...abundant news coverage, ignoring certain news items, drooling over a candidate, getting a tickle run up one legs when talking about a candidate (Obama) bothered me a lot during the election process. I have lost faith in news reporters...there is no such thing as just reporting the news anymore...you have to listen-think for yourself - weed out the bias and do your own research and then make your own decision.

Let's see, CNN gives a lousy 10K and 50K to REP and DEMS. FOX gives $1,000,0000 to the REPS and zero to the DEMS. Fair and balanced alright!

Futurebeachbum hit the nail on the head, but I find it interesting that you paid absolutely no attention to the fact that I underlined "parent". Maybe I should say paid absolutely no attention to...

There are so many who can't get past the blinders that they have strapped to their heads.

For the record, I don't line up with either party so I can dance with whom I choose, but when the information needed to make an educated decision or judgement is there for anybody to find by searching on four words, I find it both humerous and sad that so many people are blinded with rage and hate for the party that they are not affiliated with.

Maybe everybody should go back and reread this article...
In Politics, Sometimes The Facts Don't Matter : NPR
posted in this thread...
http://www.sowal.com/bb/politics-current-events/49344-have-you-ever-changed-your-mind.html

Futurebeachbum hit the nail on the head, but I find it interesting that you paid absolutely no attention to the fact that I underlined "parent". Maybe I should say paid absolutely no attention to...

There are so many who can't get past the blinders that they have strapped to their heads.

For the record, I don't line up with either party so I can dance with whom I choose, but when the information needed to make an educated decision or judgement is there for anybody to find by searching on four words, I find it both humerous and sad that so many people are blinded with rage and hate for the party that they are not affiliated with.

Maybe everybody should go back and reread this article...
In Politics, Sometimes The Facts Don't Matter : NPR
posted in this thread...
http://www.sowal.com/bb/politics-current-events/49344-have-you-ever-changed-your-mind.html

A big "AMEN Brother", to that statement!

As long as groups call out other groups, they need to stand in the firing line. That glasshouses thingy again.

I have a problem with one man who controls a huge media conglomerate giving any single Party 1 Million dollars. It doesn't pass the smell test.

I have a problem with one man who controls a huge media conglomerate giving any single Party 1 Million dollars. It doesn't pass the smell test.

But somehow, it doesn't bother you when a large corporation like Time Warner gives multiple millions of dollars to one party? They seem kind of media conglomeratish to me.

Let's see, CNN gives a lousy 10K and 50K to REP and DEMS. FOX gives $1,000,0000 to the REPS and zero to the DEMS. Fair and balanced alright!

That kind of means that there is "no balance" whatsoever.

I mean a one $1 donation to the Dems might have even looked a bit more "fair."

I don't think any news organization or parent company should be donating money to any political candidates if they want to be considered real journalists.

I don't have a problem with individuals donating or donating equal amounts to every candidate in the race.

Does anyone notice that during the day, Fox News is less biased than during prime time. That is because during the day it is a news channel and at night it's a political advocacy group. The same could be said for MSNBC.

I think a distinction should be made between journalist and talk show host. I mean, Mike Huckabee has a show on Fox; Does anyone think he is objective in his reporting? He's a politician, not a journalist, for crying out loud.

Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and Sean Hannity are not journalist they are talk show hosts. It's like radio talk shows. Their job is not to report the news it is to try to convince you that what they say is the way to believe. And prime-time shows are for entertainment, not objective reporting.

...
Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and Sean Hannity are not journalist they are talk show hosts. It's like radio talk shows. Their job is not to report the news it is to try to convince you that what they say is the way to believe. And prime-time shows are for entertainment, not objective reporting.

I have said the same thing on here more than once. Thanks, though, for reminding everybody!

Does anyone notice that during the day, Fox News is less biased than during prime time. That is because during the day it is a news channel and at night it's a political advocacy group. The same could be said for MSNBC.

I think a distinction should be made between journalist and talk show host. I mean, Mike Huckabee has a show on Fox; Does anyone think he is objective in his reporting? He's a politician, not a journalist, for crying out loud.

Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and Sean Hannity are not journalist they are talk show hosts. It's like radio talk shows. Their job is not to report the news it is to try to convince you that what they say is the way to believe. And prime-time shows are for entertainment, not objective reporting.

Unfortunately, they succeed far too often.

Does anyone notice that during the day, Fox News is less biased than during prime time. That is because during the day it is a news channel and at night it's a political advocacy group. The same could be said for MSNBC.

I think a distinction should be made between journalist and talk show host. I mean, Mike Huckabee has a show on Fox; Does anyone think he is objective in his reporting? He's a politician, not a journalist, for crying out loud.

Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and Sean Hannity are not journalist they are talk show hosts. It's like radio talk shows. Their job is not to report the news it is to try to convince you that what they say is the way to believe. And prime-time shows are for entertainment, not objective reporting.

Yes, watching some of these is like reading the editorial pages. Nothing wrong with that. They may assist you in forming opinions and on top of that they are entertaining. Furthermore they refer to real news events, so they do provide news to a certain degree. It's up to the viewer to search out other sources, do his own research, and find pure objectivity, which of course is a nothing more than a concept.