Monday, June 6, 2011

Fox News is Part of The Problem

Fox News claims to be fair and balanced.  Right there I’ve got a problem with it.   If we’re talking about simple differences of opinion, then fine, but we are not. We are talking Capitalism vs. Socialism as the issue at hand in America on a serious level since LBJ was in office.  Pick a side and get on it – Passionately and let’s see who wins this thing because both concepts cannot coexist and Capitalism remain healthy. 

I maintain Capitalism at the Micro level is working but at the Macro level in the USA, it is not.  It has morphed into Crony Capitalism at the macro level.

As an example of crony capitalism, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, supporting Barack Obama, the most far left individual we’ve had in a position of power ever.  For monetary and power based personal and company gain.  Banks don’t need liberalism or socialism, so why the big support.  Ditto GE and many others.

It is my opinion that Fox News maintains high levels of political and issue Hyper-Speak to maintain its ratings, add to the divisiveness in the USA, using that emotion to sell itself, it’s commentators, books, and all the rest.  It is playing us the same way the Dems do, under the illusion of presenting the Conservative side.  If they really wanted to do that, they’d spend some time looking at issues and explaining why or how a conservative approach to an issue would be helpful or a better solution.  People get No exposure to capitalist concepts in school and haven’t for decades.  If Fox, like any other medium, wants to call itself a news channel,  its job is to inform the public.  Seems there is little of that going on.  It all seems to be some adolescent side show of “he said this, they said that”, the liberals are squawk squawk squawk.   That gets through to nobody.

News is 90% opinion these days, and maybe has been since the news channels went 24 hours a day.  There isn’t 24 hours worth of news in a day, so what else could they fill up the rest of the time with?  If Fox wants to display the other side, then it needs to have calm, unemotional presenters who lay out the case on the issues of the day.   It certainly doesn’t do that.  No one does.  Hannity – emotional – O’Riley – emotional, Sheppard Smith – circus act.  Liberals brought on to the show are easy unintellectual targets and do nothing to counter the liberal case with the conservative case.

We’re all being played.  The media, the politicians, the organizations, groups and others asking for our support or money. The Heritage foundation – someone convince me sending them $100 will have the slightest impact on anything.  All nonsense, all used to control and shear the sheep.  That would be us.  Especially those of us working and paying taxes.



  1. FDR was the most dangerous pusher of socialism/communism; with his right hand man Henry A. Wallace (a KGB Agent) making policies/laws-Social Security/Tax deductions, passed 1951 even 3yrs. after he was forced to resign.
    The difference is we today don't have a Jesse H. Jones up in the Admin. If not for Jones, we would have been Total Communist before FDR passed away.

  2. They Say, I most certainly agree. FDR sided with Stalin every chance he got.
    During WWII, Churchill wanted to go to Berlin through Europe's soft underbelly, which was from the East. But Stalin didn't want a bunch of American fighting man and machine in that area as he intended to take it all after the war, so FDR went against Churchill -and more importantly- our own soldiers and sent them to a blood bath on the Normandy beaches instead. We would win either way, but a hell of a lot of men were killed who wouldn't have been.

    FDR certainly got things rolling. After we kicked the world's ass though and came back here, these men sure weren't taking any commie BS from the Dems. We knocked them back more than a few notches, but they started up again big time with LBJ. Which to me puts a real focus on the JFK assassination again. I believe there were three gunmen. The one that did the most damage was standing in a storm sewer (the kind that are the slits facing the roadway) facing JFK's limo at precisely the time he was shot.

    So, what do you think about FOX news? Help or hinderance?

  3. I notice Fox News avoids stories about Israel and the middle east since the Saudis bought a portion of it.

    They have lost credibility.

  4. Another great point that should have been added. As you say, these are businesses with owners who pay the bills and have their Own agendas.

    Thanks Opus.

  5. Hey Kid, you got it right. Fox news panders to both sides and I fail to see a strong stand on the serious issues. It's just a different version of MSNBC or my opinion, with just a little icing on the cake to keep the conservative crowd.

  6. DeanO, I guess I could have just said That. :)

  7. Very well said, Kid.
    They need to pick the RIGHT side and stick with it.
    I don't like the way they do things.

    I think Breitbart's video and news channels are lots better.

  8. Bunni, Thank you - and also online resources such as American Thinker and National Review. But certainly not things like Newsmax who are not even credible most of the time.

    As a little humor, (and I don't watch Beck) but I did see a short segment of Beck where he and his sidekick were talking about and imitating some lib media complaining about Brietbart and they were mocking by saying "BREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETTBart."

    Makes me chuckle.

  9. Beck does say things, like I did/you did. Hannity does a good job of pealing back issues.
    I don't have the luxury of seeing or hearing the Fox News time slot. I hear some cons about Sheppard Smith or who ever the News Person is. So, I can't equate Hannity or Beck to Fox News.
    O'Riley----NO COMMENT!
    Although they are Needed to offset CNN, and the other Alphabet MSN.
    Opus is right about we all not having a News Outlet with A Backbone.

  10. It's a lot of work, but we must seek out various news sources to get the "facts." A few commentators on Fox do a pretty good job, but Fox as a whole is so bent on the "Fair & Balanced" gig that too often they put on leftist pundits that do nothing but spout the party line and add nothing to the conversation. Bloggers have become a new source for news (case in point-Weinergate) but, there again, you must be deligent about digging through opinion to get to facts. My absolute favorite, who I believe rarely gets it wrong, is Judge Andrew Napolitano (Freedom Watch--Fox Business). I'm afraid if he ever gets a slot on Big Fox, his show will be neutered.

  11. It's no secret I despise mostly everything about Fox "News" (Shep Smith being one of the exceptions). The reason I feel the way I do about Fox is not because they lean to the right, but because of the underhanded tactics they often use. Claiming to be "fair and balanced" when they are not, distortions/lies, turning fake controversies into news stories, etc. To me and many others, they are nothing more than an arm to the GOP. It may be good business, but it's bad journalism.

    Although I'm a liberal, I'd have no problem if a news outlet presented the conservative point of view in a manner that's fact-based and rational. Unfortunately, I don't think that approach would be as successful as the "Fox" model. After all, it failed in the past. In 2009, the host of “The Young Turks” did an excellent breakdown on Roger Ailes and the Fox formula:

  12. They Say, Thanks. It sounds like we're all in agreement that there is no 'news' source out there doing their job. Not surprising. When your master is someone other than the public, you can't possibly do your job if you're a 'news' outlet.

  13. Freedom by the way. Great comment. I find information I value more on the net from bloggers than I do traditional outlets. The disadvantage bloggers have is that they are localized to their area, and do not have the capability to travel to where the news is at, or gain access where access is often needed to get the information.

    Tough situation when so many people regard the 'news' as a trusted information source.

  14. Malcolm, fact based and rational. The Hell you say ! :) Yea, wouldn't that be nice.

    Looking through the comments, I think you'd agree pretty much everyone can see the insurmountable problems with traditional profit based 'news outlets', and that there isn't a lot of love lost for Fox. And these folks are all conservative.

    I don't know when the majority of media went rogue Democrat but it surely has. It is a fact that media executives donations to politicians are 90+ to Dems. That reveals where their support is and it is reflected in what they talk about and print for public consumption. That's wrong.

    Though I don't have an answer for fixing it. I think we're headed for a meltdown before people realize that liberal concepts are dead ends.

    I still believe Fox is about useless and that it does neither side any good, and:
    Though I make the above comment about liberal concepts being dead ends, you shouldn't take it personally. I have no idea what your solution ideas are, let alone that 'Liberal' is a term that cuts such a wide swath, it is practically meaningless to use to describe people.

    I feel like I'm going to start talking the mechanics of what America needs to do to put the country back on the right path in future posts, so I hope you'll stop back and offer your ideas on specific points.

  15. "We’re all being played"..
    My take exactly K=
    my respect for FOX and et al has 'tanked' - that is why I spend so much tine on the 'blog-is-sphere'
    I trust no where else!!
    do you think I may have an addiction "-)

  16. Carol-CS, at least one addiction is a good thing. I suspect yours is an addiction for truth and justice. :)

  17. Fair and balanced is a buzz phrase. They are and I agree with you as being a part of the problem.

    They were bought out (as Opus#6 stated) by an islamic country and have lost 90% of their credibility as fair and balanced.

  18. Admiral, yep, constantly being played..