Fox "News"

See what I get for believing Fox News? For weeks now, they've been reporting that Obama is a friend and confidant of "known terrorist" A J Ayer, and that Ayer bombed the Pentagon. Now, it DID cross my mind that such a person should be in jail, right? But NO!! Now I find out from Olbermann, a REAL journalist, that Ayer was never convicted of bombing anything.
{sigh} I should never watch Fox News.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
See what I get for believing Fox News? For weeks now, they've been reporting that Obama is a friend and confidant of "known terrorist" A J Ayer, and that Ayer bombed the Pentagon. Now, it DID cross my mind that such a person should be in jail, right? But NO!! Now I find out from Olbermann, a REAL journalist, that Ayer was never convicted of bombing anything.
{sigh} I should never watch Fox News.

You shouldn't watch american news at all.

Stick to BBC World News (UK), or CBC news (Canada).

Those 2 are the closest you'll find to unbiased reporting.

Originally posted by uzless
You shouldn't watch american news at all.

Stick to BBC World News (UK), or CBC news (Canada).

Those 2 are the closest you'll find to unbiased reporting.

http://www.reuters.com/

What is this doing in culture?! 😠

Fox news is as far as it gets from culture! 😛

Originally posted by Seitse
What is this doing in culture?! 😠

Fox news is as far as it gets from culture! 😛

No, no! Fiction is a part of culture, and Fox News is definitely fiction.

Originally posted by pawnhandler
No, no! Fiction is a part of culture, and Fox News is definitely fiction.

zing! zing! zing!

Zorro!

😀

Fox News has the hottest women.

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/original/kendall.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~wolf0620/image/bakhtiar8.jpg

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/images/uploads/2005files/Fox-juliette_huddy01.jpg

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/images/uploads/2005files/Fox-rebecca_gomez01.jpg

Originally posted by uzless
You shouldn't watch american news at all.

Stick to BBC World News (UK), or CBC news (Canada).

Those 2 are the closest you'll find to unbiased reporting.

It depends. For American politics, CNN is okay; C-SPAN is better. For politics in Europe and the Commonwealth, BBC is good.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
See what I get for believing Fox News? For weeks now, they've been reporting that Obama is a friend and confidant of "known terrorist" A J Ayer, and that Ayer bombed the Pentagon. Now, it DID cross my mind that such a person should be in jail, right? But NO!! Now I find out from Olbermann, a REAL journalist, that Ayer was never convicted of bombing anything.
{sigh} I should never watch Fox News.

Its because, the guy's name is William Ayers... start there

is Aj Ayer a race car driver?

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
See what I get for believing Fox News? For weeks now, they've been reporting that Obama is a friend and confidant of "known terrorist" A J Ayer, and that Ayer bombed the Pentagon. Now, it DID cross my mind that such a person should be in jail, right? But NO!! Now I find out from Olbermann, a REAL journalist, that Ayer was never convicted of bombing anything.
{sigh} I should never watch Fox News.

Some Info

In 2001, Ayers published Fugitive Days: A Memoir. One striking remark he makes early in the book is, "Memory is a 'expletive deleted'. . . I myself remember almost nothing".[4] Much of the controversy about Ayers during the decade since the year 2000 stems from an interview he gave to the New York Times on the occasion of the memoir's publication.[5] The reporter quoted him as saying "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" as saying "I don't want to discount the possibility."[3] Ayers has not denied the quotes, but he protested the interviewer's characterizations in a Letter to the Editor published September 15, 2001: "This is not a question of being misunderstood or 'taken out of context', but of deliberate distortion."[6] In the ensuing years, Ayers has repeatedly avowed that when he said he had "no regrets" and that "we didn't do enough" he was speaking only in reference to his efforts to stop the United States from waging the Vietnam War, efforts which he has described as ". . . inadequate [as] the war dragged on for a decade."[7] Ayers has maintained that the two statements were not intended to imply a wish they had set more bombs.[7][8] The interviewer also quoted some of Ayers' own sharp criticism of Weatherman in the foreword to the memoir, whereby Ayers reacts to having watched Emile de Antonio's 1976 documentary film about Weatherman, Underground: "[Ayers] was 'embarrassed by the arrogance, the solipsism, the absolute certainty that we and we alone knew the way. The rigidity and the narcissism.' "[3]

Olbermann is another MSNBC "journalist' who goes all wek in the knees over Obama, as if he had a schoolgirl crush on him Must be something in the water at MSNBC, they seem to fawn over Obama as if he were the Second Coming of the Messiah

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
See what I get for believing Fox News? For weeks now, they've been reporting that Obama is a friend and confidant of "known terrorist" A J Ayer, and that Ayer bombed the Pentagon. Now, it DID cross my mind that such a person should be in jail, right? But NO!! Now I find out from Olbermann, a REAL journalist, that Ayer was never convicted of bombing anything.
{sigh} I should never watch Fox News.

I did some more research for you... there is a AJ Ayer

A.J. Ayer (1910-1989) was only 24 when he wrote the book that made his philosophical name, Language, Truth, and Logic (hereafter LTL), published in 1936. In it he put forward what were understood to be the major theses of Logical Positivism, and so established himself as that movement's leading English representative. In endorsing these views Ayer saw himself as continuing in the line of British empiricism established by Locke and Hume, an empiricism whose most recent representative was Russell. Throughout his subsequent career he remained true to this tradition's rejection of the possibility of synthetic a priori knowledge, and so he saw the method of philosophy to be the analysis of the meaning of key terms, such as ‘causality’, ‘truth’, ‘knowledge’, ‘freedom’, and so on. The major portion of his work was devoted to exploring different facets of our claims to knowledge, particularly perceptual knowledge and knowledge that depended on inductive inference for its credence. Along the way he defended a ‘justified true belief’ account of knowledge, a Humean account of causation, and compatibilism with respect to freedom. In LTL he put forward an emotivist theory of ethics, one that he never abandoned. Ayer always wrote with stylish crispness and clarity; he could lay bare the bones of a philosophical difficulty in a few paragraphs of strikingly simple prose. On many a philosophical problem Ayer cannot be bettered for providing a lucid, informative, and revealing description of its contours. Above all, on reading an essay of his, whether it be on basic propositions, sense data, induction, or freedom, one comes away recognizing that the aim of the author has been to reach the truth, no matter what that turned out to be. Unfortunately, he sometimes rushed to reach it, which, together with the directness of his style, gave him a reputation for cleverness that he never lived down. Nevertheless, amongst British philosophers of the 20th Century he has been ranked as second only to Russell (by John Foster, in A.J. Ayer); Peter Strawson

I don't think he belonged to the Weathermen though

Originally posted by SMSBear716
Its because, the guy's name is William Ayers... start there

is Aj Ayer a race car driver?

The irony is that A.J. Ayer would have likely called most of FoxNews' journalism meaningless.

Ayer and his school of logical posivitism subscribed to the verification theory of meaning. By that theory, a proposition is meaningful ONLY if it can be empirically or analytically verified as either true or false. Statements like "fish have gills" and "2+2=4" are meaningful because they -- along with their false counterparts -- have verifiable truth values. But since propositions like "god exists," "killing is wrong," or "there's a ghost in the closet, but you can't see it" cannot be verified, they are meaningless.

Since most of what takes place on FoxNews is opinionated right wing bloviating by so-called "conservative" talking heads, I would guess that most of what we hear from FoxNews is not just stupid, but also meaningless.

Originally posted by shavixmir
http://www.reuters.com/

another good one but they don't have a tv station as far as i know

Originally posted by bjohnson407
The irony is that A.J. Ayer would have likely called most of FoxNews' journalism meaningless.

Ayer and his school of logical posivitism subscribed to the verification theory of meaning. By that theory, a proposition is meaningful ONLY if it can be empirically or analytically verified as either true or false. Statements like "fish have gills" and "2+2= ...[text shortened]... that most of what we hear from FoxNews is not just stupid, but also meaningless.

And maybe Obama and hillary went on Fox cause they heard 49% of the viewers label themselves as moderates with no firm political loyalty to either party. Were they trolling for votes?

And we all know that CNN and MSNBC are fair and balanced.... (smiles)

for impartiality, I'll take Fox over MSNBC any day