Log in

View Full Version : FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”



Silcc69
05-12-2011, 05:52 PM
Well I can figure out how this argument will be like but I can say without a shadow of a doubt Fox News does a better job than any other news station at getting there point across

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102100007

February 10, 2011 7:20 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: “I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”
Indeed, a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Matters confirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation (http://www.hungangels.com/columns/200910130008), virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate (http://www.hungangels.com/research/201012210005)without the slightest regard (http://www.hungangels.com/research/200910190025) for fairness (http://www.hungangels.com/mmtv/201012230002)or fact checking (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201012230007).
“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”
And that’s the word from insideFox News.
Note the story here isn’t that Fox News leans right. Everyone knows the channel pushes a conservative-friendly version of the news. Everyone who’s been paying attention has known that since the channel’s inception more than a decade ago. The real story, and the real danger posed by the cable outlet, is that over time Fox News stopped simply leaning to the right and instead became an open (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201009160022) and active political player (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/200908170001), sort of one-part character assassin and one-part propagandist (http://www.hungangels.com/research/201011020054), depending on which party was in power. And that the operation thrives on fabrications and falsehoods.
“They say one thing and do another. They insist on maintaining this charade, this façade, that they’re balanced or that they’re not right-wing extreme propagandist,”says the source. But it’s all a well-orchestrated lie, according this former insider. It’s a lie that permeates the entire Fox News culture and one that staffers and producers have to learn quickly in order to survive professionally.
“You have to work there for a while to understand the nods and the winks,” says the source. “And God help you if you don’t because sooner or later you’re going to get burned.”
The source explains:
“Like any news channel there’s lot of room for non-news content. The content that wasn’t ‘news,’ they didn’t care what we did with as long as it was amusing or quirky or entertaining; as along as it brought in eyeballs. But anything—anything--that was a news story you had to understand what the spin should be on it. If it was a big enough story it was explained to you in the morning [editorial] meeting. If it wasn’t explained, it was up to you to know the conservative take on it. There’s a conservative take on every story no matter what it is. So you either get told what it is or you better intuitively know what it is.”
What if Fox News staffers aren’t instinctively conservative or don’t have an intuitive feeling for what the spin on a story should be? “My internal compass was to think like an intolerant meathead,” the source explains.“You could never error on the side of not being intolerant enough.”
The source recalls how Fox News changed over time:
“When I first got there back in the day, and I don’t know how they indoctrinate people now, but back in the day when they were “training” you, as it were, they would say, ‘Here’s how we’re different.’ They’d say if there is an execution of a condemned man at midnight and there are all the live truck outside the prison and all the lives shots. CNN would go, ‘Yes, tonight John Jackson, 25 of Mississippi, is going to die by lethal injection for the murder of two girls.’ MSNBC would say the same thing.
“We would come out and say, ‘Tonight, John Jackson who kidnapped an innocent two year old, raped her, sawed her head off and threw it in the school yard, is going to get the punishment that a jury of his peers thought he should get.’ And they say that’s the way we do it here. And you’re going , alright, it’s a bit of an extreme example but it’s something to think about. It’s not unreasonable.
"When you first get in they tell you we’re a bit of a counterpart to the screaming left wing lib media. So automatically you have to buy into the idea that the other media is howling left-wing. Don’t even start arguing that or you won’t even last your first day.
“For the first few years it was let’s take the conservative take on things. And then after a few years it evolved into, well it’s not just the conservative take on things, we’re going to take the Republican take on things which is not necessarily in lock step with the conservative point of view.
“And then two, three, five years into that it was, we’re taking the Bush line on things, which was different than the GOP. We were a Stalin-esque mouthpiece. It was just what Bush says goes on our channel. And by that point it was just totally dangerous. Hopefully most people understand how dangerous it is for a media outfit to be a straight, unfiltered mouthpiece for an unchecked president.”
It’s worth noting that Fox News employees, either current or former, rarely speak to the press, even anonymously. And it’s even rarer for Fox News sources to bad mouth Murdoch’s channel. That’s partly because of strict non-disclosure agreements that most exiting employees sign and which forbid them from discussing their former employer. But it also stems from a pervasive us-vs.-them attitude that permeates Fox News. It’s a siege mentality that network boss Roger Ailes encourages, and one that colors the coverage his team produces.
“It was a kick ass mentality too,” says the former Fox News insider. “It was relentless and it never went away. If one controversy faded, goddamn it they would find another one. They were in search of these points of friction real or imagined. And most of them were imagined or fabricated. You always have to seem to be under siege. You always have to seem like your values are under attack. The brain trust just knew instinctively which stories to do, like the War on Christmas.”
According to the insider, Ailes is obsessed with presenting a unified Fox News front to the outside world; an obsession that may explain Ailes’ refusal to publically criticize or even critique his own team regardless of how outlandish their on-air behavior. “There may be internal squabbles. But what [Ailes] continually preaches is never piss outside the tent,” says the source. “When he gets really crazy is when stuff leaks out the door. He goes mental on that. He can’t stand that. He says in a dynamic enterprise like a network newsroom there’s going to be in fighting and ego, but he says keep it in the house.”
It’s clear that Fox News has become a misleading, partisan outlet. But here’s what the source stresses: Fox News is designed to mislead its viewers and designed to engage in a purely political enterprise.
In 2010, all sorts of evidence tumbled out to confirm that fact, like the recently leaked (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201012090003) emails from inside Fox News, in which a top editor instructed his newsroom staffers (not just the opinion show hosts) to slant the news when reporting on key stories such as climate change (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201012150004) and health care reform.
Meanwhile, Media Matters revealed that during the 2009-2010 election cycle, dozens of Fox News personalities endorsed, raised money, or campaigned for Republican candidates or organizations in more than 600 instances. And in terms of free TV airtime that Fox News handed over to GOP hopefuls, Media Matters calculated the channel essentially donated $55 million worth of airtime to Republican presidential hopefuls last year who also collect Fox News paychecks.
And of course, that’s when Murdoch wasn’t writing (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201009300050) $1 million checks (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201008160046) in the hopes of electing more Republican politicians.
So, Fox News as a legitimate news outlet? The source laughs at the suggestion, and thinks much of the public, along with the Beltway press corps, has been duped by Murdoch’s marketing campaign over the years. “People assume you need a license to call yourself a news channel. You don’t. So because they call themselves Fox News, people probably give them a pass on a lot of things,” says the source.
The source continues: “I don’t think people understand that it’s an organization that’s built and functions by intimidation and bullying, and its goal is to prop up and support Republicans and the GOP and to knock down Democrats. People tend think that stuff that’s on TV is real, especially under the guise of news. You’d think that people would wise up, but they don’t.”
As for the press, the former Fox News employee gives reporters and pundits low grades for refusing, over the years, to call out Fox News for being the propaganda outlet that it so clearly is. The source suggests there are a variety of reasons for the newsroom timidity.
“They don’t have enough staff or enough balls or don’t have enough money or don’t have enough interest to spend the time it takes to expose Fox News. Or it’s not worth the trouble. If you take on Fox, they’ll kick you in the ass,” says the source. “I’m sure most [journalists] know that. It’s not worth being Swift Boated for your effort,” a reference to how Fox News traditionally attacks journalists (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/201004060042) who write, or are perceived to have written, anything negative (http://www.hungangels.com/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2008%2F07%2F0 7%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2F07carr.html) things about the channel.
The former insider admits to being perplexed in late 2009 when the Obama White House called out Murdoch’s operation as not being a legitimate new source (http://www.hungangels.com/columns/200910270002), only to have major Beltway media players (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/200910290007) rush to the aid (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/200910180006) of Fox News and admonish (http://www.hungangels.com/blog/200910200008) the White House for daring to criticize (http://www.hungangels.com/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fusatoday.printthis.clickability .com%2Fpt%2Fcpt%3Faction%3Dcpt%26title%3DKeeping%2 Bthe%2BFox%2Bout%2Bof%2Bthe%2BWhite%2BHouse%2B-%2BUSATODAY.com%26expire%3D%26urlID%3D412657592%26 fb%3DY%26url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnew s%2Fopinion%2Fcolumnist%2Fraasch%2F2009-10-14-common-ground_N.htm%26p) the cable channel.
“That blew me away,” says the source, who stresses the White House’s critique of Fox News “happens to be true.”

hippifried
05-12-2011, 06:21 PM
Fox News does a better job than any other news station at getting there point across

Just to the gullible.

Faldur
05-12-2011, 06:28 PM
One man's gullible is another man's MSNBC

Silcc69
05-12-2011, 06:35 PM
One man's gullible is another man's MSNBC

Right on key lol.

robertlouis
05-12-2011, 08:42 PM
No shit. What a surprise!

natina
05-12-2011, 09:28 PM
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-htsSLIZIVXM/TVUtn7BsgeI/AAAAAAAAGF8/qParlH9sHKQ/s1600/Faux-News-poster.gif


http://thoughtbites.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/faux-news.jpg

Faldur
05-12-2011, 11:32 PM
Soros ties to over 30 major news orgs (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/11/dont-hear-george-soros-ties-30-major-news-organizations/#ixzz1M8trgdMt)

Stavros
05-13-2011, 01:56 AM
Whats the point of this? Most of us know the political bias -if there is one- of newspapers, radio stations/broadcasters, tv and so on. Most of us know that there are a hundred and one stories to report on any given day and that editorial control decides what makes the cut and what doesnt and what is headlining and what isnt. We are mature and savvy enough to get to page 7 in the paper where others might only make it to page 3. Excuse me while I go to the all-night supermarket to replenish my stock of whisky.

onmyknees
05-13-2011, 03:06 AM
LMAO...It's Johnny Same Song ( aka Silcc) . You've been beating this horse for about a year now . I'll be honest...when I saw Media Matters I didn't even bother reading the text. What would the point be? They have no journalistic credibility... You of course understand that Media Matters is funded and exists for one reason and one reason alone...and it's not about opinions or journalistic standards. ....It's To bring Fox News down. That's why they're funded to the tune of millions by Soros and must please thier master. That is the sole reason for their existence. Please tell me you know that, and you're not an ignoramus. Now there's nothing illegal with what they do, but don't ya think that an organization that exists for one reason may just be a tad bias...ya think? LMAO.

If you want a bona fide example of somebody who makes stuff up...how about Dan Rather? Surely you recall that ......and he was and remains a liberal. Or how about another big Lib Rick Sanchez? Or Edward R. Olbermann ? Or the NY Times reporter Jason Blair and Steven Glass? Or big lib Jew hater Helen Thomas? Or David Schuster? That honor roll has 2 things in common...they're all progressive, and they were shitcanned for questionable ethics.

I think if this is all you got...it's pretty weak. Bring more to the table next time. Why can't you accept the fact that Fox is the largest cable news network by far ? Why can't you accept that one of the reasons they are growing so fast is that most of the other media slants far left and Fox takes a right perspective. Why can't you be content with the fact every major newspaper in the country save the WS Journal slants left, as do the 3 major networks, as do CNN and MSNBC. How much more media do you want? Look...get over it ...Fox News is here to stay. Accept that and move on. You're becoming repetitive and predictable. You're really an impressionable young dude. Do some independent research before trusting an outfit like Media Matters.

robertlouis
05-13-2011, 04:39 AM
Whats the point of this? Most of us know the political bias -if there is one- of newspapers, radio stations/broadcasters, tv and so on. Most of us know that there are a hundred and one stories to report on any given day and that editorial control decides what makes the cut and what doesnt and what is headlining and what isnt. We are mature and savvy enough to get to page 7 in the paper where others might only make it to page 3. Excuse me while I go to the all-night supermarket to replenish my stock of whisky.

All of which reminds me why I go to sleep every night thanking providence for the editorial independence of the BBC and The Guardian. Both run by independent trusts and neither of them rich man's toys to peddle one man's agenda.

I'll have a double please Stavros. Slainthe! :)

natina
05-13-2011, 05:10 AM
Fox News Makes You Stupid?


http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/article/fox-news-makes-you-stupid



STUDY: Watching FOX News Makes You Stupid




A new study shows (http://www.alternet.org/media/149193/study_confirms_that_fox_news_makes_you_stupid/) that viewers who get their news from Fox News are the most misinformed in the country.



World Public Opinion, a project managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, conducted a survey (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=) of American voters that shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources. What’s more, the study shows that greater exposure to Fox News increases misinformation.



So the more you watch, the less you know. Or to be precise, the more you think you know that is actually false.



Got that?



It should be noted that the cablesphere did not do terribly well in general: "CNN and the broadcast network news operations fared only slightly better in many cases. Even MSNBC, which had the best record of accurately informing viewers, has a ways to go before it can brag about it."



It should also be noted that the focus of this study was how much misleading information was presented to the public "following the first election since the Supreme Court has struck down limits on election-related advertising." Answer: a whole lot.



You can read see all the results here (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=) >





Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/extended-exposure-to-fox-news-may-be-detrimental-to-your-intelligence-2010-12#ixzz1MCIdRt1U




http://www.businessinsider.com/extended-exposure-to-fox-news-may-be-detrimental-to-your-intelligence-2010-12


http://stupidevilbastard.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/FoxBullshit.jpg

hippifried
05-13-2011, 06:10 AM
Whats the point of this?

There's supposed to be a point?
I thought this thread was just an excuse for Natina to paste in a bunch of crap that's too big for the screen.

Faldur
05-13-2011, 06:17 AM
There's supposed to be a point?
I thought this thread was just an excuse for Natina to paste in a bunch of crap that's too big for the screen.

Amen..

Silcc69
05-13-2011, 12:02 PM
LMAO...It's Johnny Same Song ( aka Silcc) . You've been beating this horse for about a year now . I'll be honest...when I saw Media Matters I didn't even bother reading the text. What would the point be? They have no journalistic credibility... You of course understand that Media Matters is funded and exists for one reason and one reason alone...and it's not about opinions or journalistic standards. ....It's To bring Fox News down. That's why they're funded to the tune of millions by Soros and must please thier master. That is the sole reason for their existence. Please tell me you know that, and you're not an ignoramus. Now there's nothing illegal with what they do, but don't ya think that an organization that exists for one reason may just be a tad bias...ya think? LMAO.

If you want a bona fide example of somebody who makes stuff up...how about Dan Rather? Surely you recall that ......and he was and remains a liberal. Or how about another big Lib Rick Sanchez? Or Edward R. Olbermann ? Or the NY Times reporter Jason Blair and Steven Glass? Or big lib Jew hater Helen Thomas? Or David Schuster? That honor roll has 2 things in common...they're all progressive, and they were shitcanned for questionable ethics.

I think if this is all you got...it's pretty weak. Bring more to the table next time. Why can't you accept the fact that Fox is the largest cable news network by far ? Why can't you accept that one of the reasons they are growing so fast is that most of the other media slants far left and Fox takes a right perspective. Why can't you be content with the fact every major newspaper in the country save the WS Journal slants left, as do the 3 major networks, as do CNN and MSNBC. How much more media do you want? Look...get over it ...Fox News is here to stay. Accept that and move on. You're becoming repetitive and predictable. You're really an impressionable young dude. Do some independent research before trusting an outfit like Media Matters.


ROFLMAO good ole onmyknees with and even more predictable reply. Right on schedule as for the other ones slanting left CNN isn't even that left. But I would'nt have issues with Faux if they didn't outright lie about being fair and balanced. More like extremely biased to the right,

Silcc69
05-13-2011, 12:08 PM
Soros ties to over 30 major news orgs (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/11/dont-hear-george-soros-ties-30-major-news-organizations/#ixzz1M8trgdMt)


YouTube - What do Walmart, FOX News, and Koch Brothers have in common? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g78ZKT-uMs)

natina
05-16-2011, 01:11 AM
exposure to Fox News makes voters stupid, university study finds


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/

The troublesome record of spin by conservative television station Fox News has long been a cause for concern to many Americans, who frequently allege that the nation's most viewed "news" network has the effect of dumbing down voters.

Turns out, they were right.

A University of Maryland study (PDF) published earlier this month found that people in the survey who had the most exposure to Fox News were more likely to believe falsehoods and rumors about national and world affairs when compared to those who paid attention to other news outlets.

In a summary carried by Alternet, the following falsehoods were most relayed by Fox News viewers:

91 percent believed the stimulus legislation lost jobs;

72 percent believed the health reform law will increase the deficit;

72 percent believed the economy is getting worse;

60 percent believed climate change is not occurring;

49 percent believed income taxes have gone up;

63 percent believed the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts;

56 percent believed Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout;

38 percent believed that most Republicans opposed TARP;

63 percent believed Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear).


The poll's findings seem to sync with those of an NBC News survey (PDF) taken during the height of America's health care reform debate, where Fox News viewers were found to be most likely to have believed wildly inaccurate interpretations of the legislation.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/


http://kaystreet.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/633785045117215125-foxnews.jpg

onmyknees
05-16-2011, 02:02 AM
There's supposed to be a point?
I thought this thread was just an excuse for Natina to paste in a bunch of crap that's too big for the screen.

Gawd Damn Hippy....break out the expensive brandy and the fancy glasses...we're about to have a toast . We actually are in agreement. I may stop posting now ! LOL...:Bowdown:

catherinefan
05-16-2011, 10:23 PM
...and it's not about opinions or journalistic standards. ....It's To bring Fox News down.

How could anyone possibly bring Fox News down, onmyknees? There simply is no lower level than where they are right now!

We are so lucky here in Europe. Fox News is on every available satellite here, but fortunately not FTA. So, people don't have to watch this unbalaced garbage.

Stavros
05-16-2011, 10:36 PM
There is a patronosing element to this which reminds me of the 1992 election campaign in the UK: the day after Labour failed to defeat the Conservatives, The Sun -a tabloid paper which was pro-Conservative, printed the headline: 'It was The Sun wot won it'. However proud of themselves they might have been, the question is do tabloids create political opinion or reflect it? The truth is that people did not trust Labour, The Sun undoubtedly played on this fact, but could not change it one way or another. The Conservatives lost election after election because they were divided, perceived to be weak, had a lack of credible leaders: the press didn't have to make it up. I have never seen Fox news, but I doubt it creates opinion and by doing so 'makes people stupid' - which is a feeble shorthand for saying 'the poor without an education don't think like those us wot been to university'. If the news is there, editorial selection aside, Fox will report it, but my guess is it is 'preaching to the converted' rather than taking people's minds by storm and transforming them into Republican Clones. Nobody forced anyone to watch it.

onmyknees
05-17-2011, 02:23 AM
How could anyone possibly bring Fox News down, onmyknees? There simply is no lower level than where they are right now!

We are so lucky here in Europe. Fox News is on every available satellite here, but fortunately not FTA. So, people don't have to watch this unbalaced garbage.


Really.....well it depends what your defination of "low" is...if you hold them in low regard, that's your prerogative...But how on earth could you possibly expand your mind if you listen to the same dribble that you agree with day in and day out? Your basically a cheerleader. Here's the deal...40% of Americans identify themselves as conservative, and have had to put up with the bias of the networks and CNN for years. Additionally...I ran through the cable channels ( and remember Fox News is a cable outlet) this weekend. Fox's cable competition, on one channel had the ever popular reruns of "Lock Down" and the other had a puff piece on Michelle. Fox had an actual anchor doing actual news.

If however your definition of "Low" is ratings...than frankly you don't know what the hell you're talking about. There are nights in Prime Time when Fox News approaches the audience of the 3 major networks and that's pretty astounding considering that they're only in a small fraction of homes as the major networks.

And if that wasn't enough...here's this.....CNN has an analyst named Farheed Zukaria . This dude is on giving his opinion on everything from the middle east to fiscal matters on every show on every day. Nothing wrong with that...he's a news analyst...right? Well......We recently find out quite by accident that he had been advising Obama on policy for some time. Now I don't know what journalism school you attended, but by any standard that's needs to be disclosed lest the public thinks he's impartial as he has attempted to pass himself off as.. Get it? That's just one of many reasons why CNN's audience is shrinking and Fox's in increasing. Deal with it...or you can always look for Olbermann on channel 989 right near QVC! LMAO

Silcc69
05-17-2011, 04:40 PM
Really.....well it depends what your defination of "low" is...if you hold them in low regard, that's your prerogative...But how on earth could you possibly expand your mind if you listen to the same dribble that you agree with day in and day out? Your basically a cheerleader. Here's the deal...40% of Americans identify themselves as conservative, and have had to put up with the bias of the networks and CNN for years. Additionally...I ran through the cable channels ( and remember Fox News is a cable outlet) this weekend. Fox's cable competition, on one channel had the ever popular reruns of "Lock Down" and the other had a puff piece on Michelle. Fox had an actual anchor doing actual news.

If however your definition of "Low" is ratings...than frankly you don't know what the hell you're talking about. There are nights in Prime Time when Fox News approaches the audience of the 3 major networks and that's pretty astounding considering that they're only in a small fraction of homes as the major networks.

And if that wasn't enough...here's this.....CNN has an analyst named Farheed Zukaria . This dude is on giving his opinion on everything from the middle east to fiscal matters on every show on every day. Nothing wrong with that...he's a news analyst...right? Well......We recently find out quite by accident that he had been advising Obama on policy for some time. Now I don't know what journalism school you attended, but by any standard that's needs to be disclosed lest the public thinks he's impartial as he has attempted to pass himself off as.. Get it? That's just one of many reasons why CNN's audience is shrinking and Fox's in increasing. Deal with it...or you can always look for Olbermann on channel 989 right near QVC! LMAO

I have never seen somebody laughs at their own jokes I mean srsly. Anyways you fail to mention this http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025255.php and this and this http://mediamatters.org/blog/201011050034 at least MSNBC does have a policy against this but hey Fox says ethics be damned we support the right and aint a got damn thing u can do.

Faldur
05-17-2011, 04:42 PM
Not sure Media Matters can be considered a viable source Silcc.

Silcc69
05-17-2011, 06:50 PM
Not sure Media Matters can be considered a viable source Silcc.

Of course not since you don't consider anything liberal to be viable, but I can tell you didn't click the link as it says who on Fox News has donated to what republicans.

onmyknees
05-21-2011, 03:07 AM
Of course not since you don't consider anything liberal to be viable, but I can tell you didn't click the link as it says who on Fox News has donated to what republicans.

"at least MSNBC does have a policy against this but hey Fox says ethics be damned we support the right and aint a got damn thing u can do. "


That's fall down drunk funny...no really ......you can't be serious. MSNBC shills for the Obama Administration every day all day , week in week out and hand picks it's guests to do the same thing, and you point to a policy that says they can't donate a few bucks to political candidates as if that is supposed to convince people of thier objectivity??? A candidate couldn't afford to buy the amount of favorable coverage the shills give him. Too bad they don't have a policy about that ! LMAO

Silcc69
05-22-2011, 06:33 AM
"at least MSNBC does have a policy against this but hey Fox says ethics be damned we support the right and aint a got damn thing u can do. "


That's fall down drunk funny...no really ......you can't be serious. MSNBC shills for the Obama Administration every day all day , week in week out and hand picks it's guests to do the same thing, and you point to a policy that says they can't donate a few bucks to political candidates as if that is supposed to convince people of thier objectivity??? A candidate couldn't afford to buy the amount of favorable coverage the shills give him. Too bad they don't have a policy about that ! LMAO

Just as Fox was shilling for Bush back when he was in office. Jesus H Christ onmyknees can I some objectivity from you rather than simple minded thoughts of MSNBC=LIBERAL LIARS and Fox News=100% truth.