Talk:Fox News: Difference between revisions
Reverted vandalism |
revert vandalism |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
*[[Talk:FOX News/Archive 14|Archive 14]] |
*[[Talk:FOX News/Archive 14|Archive 14]] |
||
{{todo}} |
{{todo}} |
||
==Live stream== |
|||
For a short time this live stream very good worked: |
|||
192.5.109.51/ostn_foxnews.asx |
|||
It´s not pay tv and it´s not illegal , but the access is now blocked. Can someone bring this to work again? |
|||
Revision as of 11:33, 1 September 2006
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fox News article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 |
The Archives
- Archive 1 created Jul 14,2004 by Neutrality
- Archive 2 created Sep 6, 2004 by Rdsmith4
- Archive 3 created Oct 20,2004 by Rdsmith4
- Archive 4 created Nov 5, 2004 by
- Archive 5 created Jan 11,2005 by Jim (Trodel)
- Allegations of Bias Archive created Jan 17, 2005 by Jim (Trodel)
- Archive 7 by Kevin Baastalk 18:16, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)
- Archive 8 by Trödel 18:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Archive 9 created June 21, 2005 by crazyeddie
- Archive 10 Re-created — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 28 June 2005 17:35 (UTC)
- Individual vs share ratings, anchor/host specific bias section, "major" Kerry pen story, more misc., leadup to protection
- Archive 11 created July 18, 2005 by Shem
- Protection, "collusion," potential article RfC, minor & technical problems, misc.
- Archive 12 created September 14, 2005 by crazyeddie
- Archive 13 created January 16, 2006 by Aaron
- Archive 14
(Feel free to edit this list and add stuff into here that you think needs to be worked on)
|
Live stream
For a short time this live stream very good worked:
192.5.109.51/ostn_foxnews.asx
It´s not pay tv and it´s not illegal , but the access is now blocked. Can someone bring this to work again?
My complaint with Fox news and this article
Fox news has a clear slant or bias towards the Republican Party. This is fine. There is a radio network named Air America out there with a clear slant towards the Democratic party.
The problem is that Fox news denies their bias which is dishonest. Further this article by ignoring this whole issue is not being honest or truthful.01001 20:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that may be true during the more commentative broadcasting hours (O'Reilly, H&C, Greta, Gibson, Cavuto) but doesn't necessarily stand throughout all the broadcast day. The one point I would like to make would be that there are many out there who believe CNN has a liberal bias, but do we label them a liberal network? Chris 21:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- It may well be that CNN has a liberal bias, although a very strong logical argument can be made that it has a right wing bias or at least a corporate bias. But clearly, CNN does not pretend to be that which it isnt at least not to the extent of Fox News. It is obvious that Fox news has a bias towards the Republican party. It is not honest for Fox News to deny this bias, and it is not honest nor truthful for this article to ignore this bias also.01001 06:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- This will certainly be the argument that sways the masses!
Listen, until Fox says they’re right wing, or there is an unbiased report saying so (I believe there have been several to the contrary), the article shan’t contain “right wing”, “republican”, or “propaganda”. And now comes the time I pick apart your previous statements: 1.It may well be that CNN has a liberal bias, although a very strong logical argument can be made that it has a right wing bias or at least a corporate bias. Ok, first off…you just negated your premise, and then negated the negation. 2.But clearly, CNN does not pretend to be that which it isnt at least not to the extent of Fox News. So CNN doesn’t pretend to not be a liberal leaning network? Then they’ve admitted it, or at least have addressed it in some fashion. Oh, they haven't? Then why pick on FNC because you think they're so obviously rw. Squiggyfm 07:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
This is getting heated real quick lets step back and think about this. Try to view it from the other persons viewpoint both sides have some valid arguments thanks--Soliscjw 20:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- As a libertarian with conservative values and a fan of Fox news, I totally believe that Fox is biased towards conservatism and Republicans. I think conservatives denying Fox's bias (with a straight face) is a big joke, viewed by them as equally as ridiculous as liberals' denials that the "mainstream" media in the U.S. isn't liberally baised. I wouldn't be surprised if the inside joke behind Fox's "fair and balanced" is that they mean "we're fair and balanced because we balance the mainstream media's liberal reporting with conservative reporting". Unfortunately, it is not in the interest for someone who makes their living through supposedly objective reporting to admit they even have personal political views, let alone that they affect their reporting. Lawyer2b 21:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- How can it be maintained that the mainstream media is liberal in view of the coverage of WMDs in Iraq before the invasion? There was no evidence that Iraq had WMDs, and yet the mainstream media gave the argument that Iraq had WMDs credence. How can the mainstream media possibly be considered liberal in view of this?01001 03:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps a statement such as:
- The network appears to hold a rightist slant due to the nature of the news it mentions.
would suffice? --Nantonos 07:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Weasel word tag
In the last few edits, the addition of this tag happened to the article. I am wondering, was the addition of this article encompassing the entire article or a section of the article that needs work? Chris 04:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- The NPOV tag has been there for some time, weasle words for nearly a week, and neither LILVOKA nor the other editor have made any specific objections here or attempts to resolve, so I've taken them down. Just slapping {{totallydisputed}} on articles then disappearing is a misuse of the templates. FeloniousMonk 05:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Controversies consensus
An issue in the past of this article, and possibly to come around again, but how exactly should the article go about possibly introducing the idea of the network's bias in the introduction? One of the latest edits have returned it into the introduction. Chris (Talk) (Contribs) 23:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)