This guy's (the Congressman's) logic is funny.
Oh, and I wish FOX news would do less commentary and more straight reporting. I think they bring in a decent variety of opinion in their reporting, but I wish they wouldn't see the need to correct the people they are interviewing. Why can't they just get someone on the opposite side on too, and have the two sides fight it out to the death?
Why not more reporting? First: because good field reporting is expensive. Second: because reporters that can report in even a relatively unbiased way are nearly impossible to find these days, as a result of the corruption of the vast majority of universities by leftists. And third: because you can't get in trouble legally for someone giving his opinion on air, but very quickly will with reporting truthfully.
ReplyDelete"Second: because reporters that can report in even a relatively unbiased way are nearly impossible to find these days, as a result of the corruption of the vast majority of universities by leftists."
ReplyDeleteReally?
"And third: because you can't get in trouble legally for someone giving his opinion on air, but very quickly will with reporting truthfully."
Really??
The former is obviously false by virtue of the fact that so many FOX reporters/commentators (the vast majority) are obviously not leftists. That being the case, how is it possible to blame the supposedly leftist university education for their conservative bias?
The latter just doesn't make any sense whatsoever at all. If you can't get in legal trouble for reporting partisan falsehoods, there's no way you're going to get in trouble for being honest. That's just straight-up silliness.
"The former is obviously false by virtue of the fact that so many FOX reporters/commentators (the vast majority) are obviously not leftists. That being the case, how is it possible to blame the supposedly leftist university education for their conservative bias?"
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily. He didn't say, "The reporters of FOX news can't be found because unbiased, non-leftist reporters are so hard to find." You are going in circles here. The absence of unbiased reporters due to the majority being leftist does not contradict the existence of openly opinionated (seemingly biased) reporters on FOX news.
"The latter just doesn't make any sense whatsoever at all. If you can't get in legal trouble for reporting partisan falsehoods, there's no way you're going to get in trouble for being honest. That's just straight-up silliness."
One's answer to this question hinges greatly on one's view of who has control over the media and public policy disclosure, supposing one assumes the existence of such a controlling agency. Otherwise, I would agree with your point, except for the fact that, as a principle, honesty (truth/light) is hated in this world.
And, regarding the original question, I think FOX news does itself damage by doing what they do well. Asking questions that people are trying to bypass or cover up, exposing weak areas in the policies of liberal proponents. I just don't see them do it very much to conservative types. Maybe, there is a good reason for this. Or, maybe it simply demonstrates their bias (concluding that it exists). I just think they could do a better job of what they do if they were slightly more judicious in their criticism.
"Not necessarily. He didn't say, "The reporters of FOX news can't be found because unbiased, non-leftist reporters are so hard to find." You are going in circles here. The absence of unbiased reporters due to the majority being leftist does not contradict the existence of openly opinionated (seemingly biased) reporters on FOX news."
ReplyDeleteI'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. You seem (though I may be wrong) to have misinterpreted what I said in a way that, if I had meant that, would indeed not make much sense. Let me try again . . .
The original statement I was responding to was a basic cause/effect link. BECAUSE leftists have corrupted the universities, it is nearly impossible to find unbiased reporters (and, therefore, FOX News doesn't have much reporting). This is, at best, totally irrelevant to the present discussion due to the obvious fact that the bias at FOX is entirely in the other direction. How can a leftist university education be to blame for reporters with a conservative bias?
So, as you rightly point out, a large number of leftist reporters does not contradict the existence of biased FOX reporters . . . In fact, it has nothing to do with it at all, making that observation entirely superfluous.
"I think FOX news does itself damage by doing what they do well. Asking questions that people are trying to bypass or cover up, exposing weak areas in the policies of liberal proponents."
ReplyDeleteI would tend to agree with this, though I would phrase it a bit differently because I don't think FOX does this all that well. You're right that they undermine the questions they ask by only asking them of one side, but much of what they ask falls under a different category entirely. A lot of their questions are entirely rhetorical in nature, and are not meant to be answered, but to plant some silliness in the minds of the viewer. Neil Cavuto is particularly bad about this ("Is Obama a secret Muslim?"). Here's an amusing little clip from The Daily Show a few years ago that illustrates what I mean: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-13-2006/the-question-mark
I'm not one to just pick on FOX, though. I think the very idea of 24-hour news networks is in large part responsible for the problem. It's just too much time to fill with reporting (unbiased or otherwise) or information that is of any use to anyone. Eventually, everyone but the loud idiot with an axe to grind is going to run out of things to say. I cannot stress enough how destructive the always-on, up-to-the-minute, 24-hour news cycle is to everything that journalism ought to be.
And as long as I'm posting Daily Show clips, here's one of my favorite take-downs of the networks (in this case CNN). There is a bit directly relevant to the present discussion at around 8:45, but the whole thing is good (I used this in the class I taught on rhetoric and composition last year): http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-12-2009/cnn-leaves-it-there