Difference between CNN and FOX

You may be on to something but I also don't believe Foley is technically a pedophile, was that ever determined I don't think it was....
 
Does that matter, the key issue was that he was potrayed as a Democrat but infact was a Republican. Thats how I understood the issue. I consider Saturday night live to be more of a news program then FOX. I watch FOX only to get a laugh, it's the only thing it's good for.
 
AlexKall said:
Does that matter, the key issue was that he was potrayed as a Democrat but infact was a Republican. Thats how I understood the issue. I consider Saturday night live to be more of a news program then FOX. I watch FOX only to get a laugh, it's the only thing it's good for.
Click to expand...

It does mean something just pointing out his own err, not that I am defending Fox since I don't really watch it. But if the only evidence so far is the mistakes on a teletype then well that really isn't saying much. Like I said I mostly read Fox on the net not really watched it and in what I read it wasn't to bad. The latter is what this thread is talking about the difference in CNN and FOX on there digi type.

People that use Comedy faux news programs as a source of news however trouble me.
 
Fox is faux news, at least they admit to their lies on Comedy Central. Fox is practically propoganda these days. Have an opposing viewpoint? All they'll do on Fox is let you speak for a minute then ridicule your ideas for the rest of the hour.
 
major liability said:
Fox is faux news, at least they admit to their lies on Comedy Central. Fox is practically propoganda these days. Have an opposing viewpoint? All they'll do on Fox is let you speak for a minute then ridicule your ideas for the rest of the hour.
Click to expand...

That can be said for every news organization, your point?
 
Donkey

Sending sexual emails about the size of a 15 year erection would fit most people's description of pedophile.

As for FOX, Come'on you know it was deliberate. News Organizations don't make mistakes like that more than once. Especially when they never offered a retraction or correction.

It was a attempt to mislead the public, and a pathetic one at that.
 
mmarsh said:
Donkey

Sending sexual emails about the size of a 15 year erection would fit most people's description of pedophile.

As for FOX, Come'on you know it was deliberate. News Organizations don't make mistakes like that more than once. Especially when they never offered a retraction or correction.

It was a attempt to mislead the public, and a pathetic one at that.
Click to expand...

15 years is a long time for an erection. :p

I think that difference between the two agencies is that CNN are your typical lets not say anything controversial news outlet and FOX are into tabloid journalism neither of them report the news well.
 
Don't be as bad as them I just checked the boy was 16 at the time, while it may not be up with alls morals (including mine) it is in fact not against the law in the state of occurrence and he has not as of yet been legally labeled a pedophile; the case is on going. Things like that where people mislead each other is just as detrimental if not more so then a major news outlet doing so, for you will be more apt to take a friends word.

Yeah I can see your point however I have seen things on Fox that go the other way too...

Basically all main stream news media outlets have agendas, to make money. Greed* has gotten in the way of a lot of things including the facts as they should be represented and that is all I am trying to say.

*Greed doesn't always involve money mind you
 
Last edited:
MontyB said:
15 years is a long time for an erection. :p

I think that difference between the two agencies is that CNN are your typical lets not say anything controversial news outlet and FOX are into tabloid journalism neither of them report the news well.
Click to expand...

News Corp was formerly incorporated in Australia, the company was merely re-incorporated in the US in 2004.
I view Fox as a foreign news asset, owned by an Australian, not an American News Asset.
Murdoch didn't became a naturalized US Citizen until forced by US Law in 1985 just to to satisfy the legal requirement that only United States Citizens could own American Television Stations.
That Republicans seem to like Fox is in my own opinion no great surprise, as I view Fox as not really American after all.

From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_Corporation

Moving into the United States
News Corp made its first acquisition in the United States in 1973, when it purchased the San Antonio Express-News. Soon afterwards it founded the National Star, a supermarket tabloid, and in 1976 it purchased the New York Post. In 1981 News Corp bought half the movie studio 20th Century Fox, buying the other half in 1984. In 1985 News Corp announced it was buying the Metromedia group of stations, setting the stage for the launch of a fourth U.S. broadcast network. On September 4, 1985, Murdoch became a naturalized citizen to satisfy the legal requirement that only United States citizens could own American television stations. In 1986, the Metromedia deal closed, and the Fox Broadcasting Company was launched.
This network, known on-screen as "Fox", can now be picked up in over 96% of U.S. households. In 1987 News Corp bought The Herald and Weekly Times Ltd in Australia, the company that Rupert Murdoch's father had once managed. By 1991, News Corp had amassed huge debts, which forced it to sell many of the American magazine interests it had acquired in the mid-1980s. Much of this debt came from its stake in the Sky Television satellite network in the UK, which incurred massive losses in its early years of operation, which (like many of its business interests) was heavily subsidized with profits from its other holdings until it was able to force rival satellite operator British Satellite Broadcasting to accept a merger on its terms in 1990. (The merged company, BSkyB has dominated the British pay-TV market since).
In 1995, the Fox network became the object of scrutiny from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) when it was alleged that its Australian base made Murdoch's ownership of Fox illegal. The FCC, however, ruled in Murdoch's favor, stating that his ownership of Fox was in the public's best interests. In the same year News Corp announced a deal with MCI Communications to develop a major news website as well as funding a conservative news magazine, The Weekly Standard. In the same year, News Corp launched the Foxtel pay television network in Australia in a partnership with Telstra and Publishing and Broadcasting Limited.
In 1996, Fox established the Fox News Channel, a 24-hour cable news station.
In 1999, News Corp significantly expanded its music holdings in Australia by acquiring the controlling share in a leading Australian based label, Michael Gudinski's Mushroom Records; merging it with already held Festival Records to create Festival Mushroom Records (FMR). Both Festival and FMR were managed by Rupert Murdoch's son James Murdoch for several years.
In late 2003, News Corp acquired a 34 percent stake in Hughes Electronics, operator of the largest American satellite TV system, DirecTV, from General Motors for $6 billion (USD)
Click to expand...

I view the FCC Rulling as a poor rulling, as I believe Fox has only acted how and where it is in the best interest of the Republican Party in the United States of America, not in the Publics Best Interest.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top