Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 09 Nov '12 10:55 / 1 edit
    Hint: Fox News

    http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/2012/11/five-stages-of-grief/
  2. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    09 Nov '12 18:48
    Originally posted by moon1969
    Hint: Fox News

    http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/2012/11/five-stages-of-grief/
    I don't get it.

    Who denied what? What did Fox News deny?
  3. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    09 Nov '12 19:56
    Originally posted by sh76
    What did Fox News deny?
    Reality. On a daily basis.
  4. 09 Nov '12 23:02
    Originally posted by sh76
    I don't get it.

    Who denied what? What did Fox News deny?
    The cartoon may not be completely accurate but it is funny, at least to me.

    On a different but related point, I did flip over to Fox that night, and the mood was so damper well before Ohio was called. And when Ohio was called, the Fox broadcast demeanor was priceless.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    09 Nov '12 23:37
    Originally posted by sh76
    I don't get it.

    Who denied what? What did Fox News deny?
    From what I read, one of their anchors was shown, on camera, walking off stage try to convince the people in charge of projections to "uncall" Ohio because of some Karl Rove blather.
  6. 10 Nov '12 17:18
    Originally posted by moon1969
    The cartoon may not be completely accurate but it is funny, at least to me.

    On a different but related point, I did flip over to Fox that night, and the mood was so damper well before Ohio was called. And when Ohio was called, the Fox broadcast demeanor was priceless.
    I remember back when W won his elections and thinking the same thing about Tom Brokaw's expressions. They cut away just in time, he was doing his best to hold back his tears.

    I had a great laugh that night. Enjoy these kinds of moments while they last!
  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    10 Nov '12 23:09 / 6 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    From what I read, one of their anchors was shown, on camera, walking off stage try to convince the people in charge of projections to "uncall" Ohio because of some Karl Rove blather.
    Okay, since I saw the episode live, I'll be happy to explain to what actually happened.

    Ohio had already been called by all the networks, including Fox. But with 77% in, the margin had closed at one point to under 1,000 votes as the Cincinnati suburbs were reported. After that happened, Karl Rove said something to the effect of "Hold on, the margin is only 700 votes with 23% remaining. How is Ohio called already?" and the anchor said "Well, that's what our decision desk says." So Rove says "But maybe Hamilton County is going to continue giving votes to Romney and maybe that can offset the outstanding votes in Cuyahoga. etc."

    So the anchor says "Okay, let's go to the decision desk and ask them." So she did. A man in the decision room explained that most of the outstanding vote was from Cuyahoga County and so even if Romney did well in Hamilton (which it turned out that he did not really do), there simply were not enough votes to overcome the votes Obama was going to pick up in Cuyahoga. The anchor asked "How sure are you?" and the guy in the decision room says "99.5%." That was it. The anchor didn't "try to convince the people in charge of projections to "uncall" Ohio." She asked the decision desk to help explain to the viewer why Ohio has been called even though the incoming tally was essentially a tie at that point.

    Incidentally, I remember the exact same thing happening in 2006 on CNN. With 55% in Cardin and Steele were in a virtual tie for Maryland Senate but the networks had called the race for Cardin. The anchor went to the decision desk and asked why the race had been called if the incoming results were a tie. So the decision desk guy explained that based on what was coming in thus far, Steele was not pulling in the margins in the GOP-favored counties necessary for a Republican to win in Maryland. the anchor said okay and in fact Cardin won by a comfortable margin.

    While Rove was certainly engaging in wishful thinking, not a single other person at Fox indicated anything other than asking questions of the decision desk. These guys are on for 8 straight hours with election coverage (or whatever it is). To break from the analysis to help the reader understand why the decision desk makes the calls that it does and when it not only reasonable, but helpful.

    Of course then I turn on MSNBC and Maddow and Matthews spend 10 minutes bashing Fox for denying the obvious and Matthews even went so far as to rip the personnel on Fox personally. Maddow said something about the "talent" on Fox being unwilling to concede Obama's re-election and Matthews says "Talent?? Not talent. Maybe they have that position; they don't have talent." or something equally classless to that effect.

    MSNBC is far more biased than is Fox. While Fox certain has right wing fanatics like Krauthammer and Rove, their anchors generally play is pretty close to the vest. Brett Baier, Brit Hume and Chris Wallace all have more class and objectivity than a single political anchor at MSNBC. Fox was once the standard in biased cable news, but MSNBC has long surpassed it.
  8. 10 Nov '12 23:37 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, since I saw the episode live, I'll be happy to explain to what actually happened.

    Ohio had already been called by all the networks, including Fox. But with 77% in, the margin had closed at one point to under 1,000 voted as the Cincinnati suburbs were reported. After that happened, Karl Rove said something to the effect of "Hold on, the margin is only 7 ce the standard in biased cable news, but MSNBC has long surpassed it.
    While I do think Fox is not living in reality in many, many cases I have to agree with you on this one. The network itself refused to capitulate to Rove, so that's not a fair example.

    On the whole I think Fox and MSNBC are equally biased in opposite directions, but the fact that Fox tries to sell itself as "Fair and Balanced" is laughable. I also find that when you break away from the political punditry, like Maddow, Schultz, etc. MSNBC has much more detailed and accurate matter-of-fact reporting. With that being said, the punditry occupies the whole of weekday nights, and repeats throughout the night.
  9. 10 Nov '12 23:47
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dnZfV4R_qk
  10. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    10 Nov '12 23:48
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    While I do think Fox is not living in reality in many, many cases I have to agree with you on this one. The network itself refused to capitulate to Rove, so that's not a fair example.

    On the whole I think Fox and MSNBC are equally biased in opposite directions, but the fact that Fox tries to sell itself as "Fair and Balanced" is laughable. I al ...[text shortened]... ng said, the punditry occupies the whole of weekday nights, and repeats throughout the night.
    Okay, let me rephrase. I might buy the idea that Fox and MSNBC are equally biased. But the anchors on Fox like Baier, Hume and Wallace play it more down the middle than MSNBC anchors like Maddow and Matthews. Matthews, Maddow, Schultz, Sharpton and that schoolboy with the glasses whose name escapes me are comparable to O'Reilly and Hannity. But MSNBC does not have a Hume or a Chris Wallace.

    They used to. Scarborough and Buchanan at least used to bring some balance to their election coverage. But Buchanan is seemingly gone from the network and Scarborough no longer seems to have a seat the table during big broadcasts. Also Matthews himself has changed. He was always pro-Democrat, but he was always somewhat fair to Bush, IMO. He fell in love with Obama at some point in 2008 and he's been a stooge ever since. And I don't mean just against the Republicans. The way he treated Hillary during the 2008 primaries was just as unfair.
  11. 11 Nov '12 00:01 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, let me rephrase. I might buy the idea that Fox and MSNBC are equally biased. But the anchors on Fox like Baier, Hume and Wallace play it more down the middle than MSNBC anchors like Maddow and Matthews. Matthews, Maddow, Schultz, Sharpton and that schoolboy with the glasses whose name escapes me are comparable to O'Reilly and Hannity. But MSNBC does not h nst the Republicans. The way he treated Hillary during the 2008 primaries was just as unfair.
    Literally every time I turn on Fox there are anchors slamming Obama, and on occasion pumping conspiracy theories against Obama that are unfounded and untrue. Like the unprecedented accusation that the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic was lying to the public, as just one of many examples. When they repeatedly do BS like that I'm baffled how anyone can take them seriously as a news organization.

    Your list of "middle" reporters are just not quite *as* extreme to the right, from what I've seen, but I stopped watching them a while back so maybe they changed.

    How was CM unfair to Hillary Clinton?
  12. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Nov '12 00:21
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Literally every time I turn on Fox there are anchors slamming Obama, and on occasion pumping conspiracy theories against Obama that are unfounded and untrue. Like the unprecedented accusation that the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic was lying to the public, as just one of many examples. When they repeatedly do BS like that I'm baffled how any ...[text shortened]... watching them a while back so maybe they changed.

    How was CM unfair to Hillary Clinton?
    One example:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zODHaIDfPXU
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Nov '12 00:23
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, since I saw the episode live, I'll be happy to explain to what actually happened.

    Ohio had already been called by all the networks, including Fox. But with 77% in, the margin had closed at one point to under 1,000 votes as the Cincinnati suburbs were reported. After that happened, Karl Rove said something to the effect of "Hold on, the margin is only 7 ...[text shortened]... ce the standard in biased cable news, but MSNBC has long surpassed it.
    LMAO! You really have become a shill.

    I never saw anybody on any other network go question the professionals who make the calls ON CAMERA no less. Your "spin" is preposterous.
  14. Standard member Soothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    11 Nov '12 00:35
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Literally every time I turn on Fox there are anchors slamming Obama, and on occasion pumping conspiracy theories against Obama that are unfounded and untrue. Like the unprecedented accusation that the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic was lying to the public, as just one of many examples. When they repeatedly do BS like that I'm baffled how anyone can take them seriously as a news organization.
    Same here. I rarely watch Fox, but every time I do tune in, I see a bunch of talking heads slamming Obama and acting as the Mouth of Sauron for the Republican Party. It's almost comical. In fact, after the election it really was comical.

    I've also noticed that when someone on Fox badmouths Obama or a Democrat, they rarely back the allegations up with anything. Maddow routinely backs up her claims with an abundance of video or audio clips, excerpts from actual news articles, nonpartisan government statistics, and so on.
  15. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Nov '12 00:46
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    LMAO! You really have become a shill.

    I never saw anybody on any other network go question the professionals who make the calls ON CAMERA no less. Your "spin" is preposterous.
    Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. I told you I saw it on CNN in 2006. Unfortunately I can't find it on youtube.

    Your calling me a shill is a total joke. Everything I said was accurate and I'm not spinning a damn thing. You just feel compelled to act like a jerk anytime anyone implicitly contradicts you.