Fox News is Biased and Inaccurate Reporting

Megyn Kelly to Bill Burton:

"You attack, I'll defend."

"You save that for your friends on the other channels."

"Fox News has it fair and balanced, as always."

This interview / clash is a perfect example of why Fox News is most certainly not a bipartisan source of news.

Kelly literally shouts-down Burton as if it was talk radio, and then repeats the corporate motto like a good little Fox-minion.

I have been a long-time viewer (on and off) of Fox News and they have never been "fair and balanced." Recently they have become nothing more than the media-wing of the GOP; these people make up the “news” to suit their now very obvious political agenda.

I love how they all try to excuse their lack of evidence by the fact that their are a million-plus viewers of Fox.

As if their credibility record and their ratings scores are one and the same. It's just pure comedy to this as the retort from the Fox News Loyalists.

Almost everything Megyn Kelly said in fact applies were I to be speaking to the network-at-large:

You just keep attacking the truth, I'll just keep defending the truth.

You save this racist code language & these fearmonger-screeds for your friends in the White Supremacy movement and the zany antics of talk radio, where it belongs.

No element of Fox News, Fox News Talk, & the NY Post is in any way "fair and balanced." False advertising from the top-down. The network can repair it’s image by simply stating itself to be in favor toward the anti-Obama movement and in disfavor of the liberal-progressive movement. It is that simple.

And you guys just can't help yourselves, you just can't stand to ethical when being unethical is just so much more provocative!

Fox News has a long way to go before it can say it does anything but promote preconceived notions as reality and sell a pro-conservative, anti-Obama narrative.

These neoconservatives always talk about the "media is in the tank for Obama" but not one of them is willing to address just how heavily Fox News is in the tank for Palin / McCain / Bush / Cheney. They won't even address all these times when clearly, under review, Fox News failed to cover the story with the widely available credible evidence and footage.

Dishonesty and misinformation are the currency Fox News chooses to deal in.

Partisanship and political pandering is all the other networks are guilty of.

Add to that the matter of the New York Post being taken to court over allegations of promoting a hostile environment toward African-Americans and promoting a workplace environment friendly to sexual harassment and you have some of the final elements of this puzzle that the people at Fox Broadcasting are trying their hardest to scramble up before anyone takes a close look.

--

If I spread enough American Flags and say "God" enough times on this weblog, will I also be unchallengeable in the value in all of my blog-content and all of my internet-claims?

I'd like that very much.

If that were so it would be pure statement of fact to say that TEA Party members mainly did not vote in the Presidential 2008 Election.

I like where this is going…

Drudge is no good! (Then everyone just ignores Drudge from here out because I said so.)

--

Who the heck started The News Wars, anyway?

Oppositional Research certainly didn't start with Fox News, but they most certainly fired the first shot in this "war" of the commercialized-news.

What I detect is the same thing again and again that I heard expressed by Keith Olbermann of MSNBC:

"When we do, we're cool, but when you do you're Hitler." (In regards to some of Glenn Beck comments)

When they bring in oppositional researcher--Inside Edition smear merchant--Bill O'Reilly in and start letting him call himself a "journalist," the dam began to crack and when a Democratic President took office we then finally saw the true colors of Fox Broadcasting Company.

They will use any tactic they see fit to push through their political-social agenda and when called out on their actions they intend to label all who point out their inaccurate & biased coverage as the source of the problem instead of focusing on the issue.

An example: When I used a Beck-tactic on my weblog, and clearly labeled it as "satire," some people took huge offense and some tried to claim I was using the very tactic of "defamation" that I was decrying so often.

But it's a "comedic roast" on Glenn Beck, nothing more.

It was a "joke" when I said you should tell everyone.

The only reason I did it, is to show how very easy it is to just throw around wild rumors and place anybody you want on the “hot-seat” to explain themselves.

Some people were trying to say to me in course of throwing up red flags as Glenn Beck crusades against America that it: “doesn‘t matter.”

Oh, it matters. Who will they come after next? Who is the next target for them to demonize and spin? Maybe tomorrow it will be just everyone who is not in a “tea party” who is a “racist,” trying to “destroy” this nation with “socialism / communism.” If one dares to even call themselves a Republican instead of TEA Party or Conservative Party then they will have the attack-dogs unleashed to sew fear about them?

Opinions are great, but pure political-extremism combined with the bitter rejection of looking at the issue from multiple sources of information gathering is just plain willful ignorance. Not an opinion. Glenn Beck is an enabler for fringe anti-government groups, anti-black groups, anti-liberal groups and other hate-based organizations.

I once said I might sot down and talk broadcasting with him and other of the conservative-media feed. I take it back.

I have nothing to learn from these broadcasting-jackals that I could not learn reading Mad Magazine or listening to late-night AM Radio.

...

The News Wars started before there even was such a beast as MSNBC to bite back at that wild dog of "Fox News."

The News Wars started with people like me, and much more importantly people like LiberalViewer, who spoke truth to network-power and demanded better coverage from any network that would make such a bold claim as to be "fair & balanced news."

It may not be clear to millions of Americans what a "fabricated conspiracy theory" is, exactly.

But it is perfectly clear to me.

Barack Obama is no more a "socialist," than George W. Bush is a "fascist."

If people in the public insist on extremist labeling then so be it, but no recognized network should be promoting this notion that extremist political labeling is an action of "fairness" or an element of "balance."

--

The irony of satire...

I have put on my "Colbert-suit" for a blog post, or two.

They circulated (to the best of my knowledge) in conservative-internet circles rather quickly.

But if I mimic the vile tactics of their new poster-boy Glenn Beck, I am a naughty & vile person.

I believe my form of internet-satire has some small value only that I will admit outright that is satire thereby meaning entirely ambiguous information. However, I believe I will lean away from internet-satire in that it goes greatly misunderstood even when clearly declared as just pure hyperbolic nonsense.

Unbeknownst to them of course that the one they were linking to would much such statements as:

The monopolistic-corporate power structure in companies like Monsanto and Fox pose a threat to the public if left unchecked and buried with corporate dollars at every turn.

--

I recently checked the pay-outs to Democrats versus Republicans in terms of Monsanto campaign slush-money, and while the totals are not significant the individual contributions to Congressmen are quite significant.

Two Democratic Congressmen took $500 each, one from my home state, and two Republican took $10,000+ each. Both in states where the corn market is more significant to the "big-agriculture" industry.

The fact remains that Canada has discussed banning the use of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) in their food and Britain has a labeling procedure in place while North America continues to ignore the matter by and large.

Like many of a somewhat scientific persuasion, I believe further research is needed on the usefulness of GMOs and primarily concerned the matter of the repeated failure to disclose both sides of the story on the matter by major news outlets across the U.S.

I see now the great failing in alarmism and it more important to have a public making informed decisions on matters regarding our food, or even matters regarding our health care insurance, rather than being given misleading and omitted coverage from any news group.

It is important to note in a discussion of media-finance and corporate hush-money that the Public Broadcasting Station (PBS) recently started receiving corporate-donations from Monsanto. I am of the persuasion to believe that an entity like PBS would likely graciously turn down the money if only they had the public support in donations to do such a thing.

As it stands PBS remains a credible news source despite some amount of corporate funding and Fox (News Corp) is the least credible of any television broadcasting to date.