Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

You're one of the "diehard fans" I was talking about, so I forgive you for missing the point.

Posted by bagchucker on 5/26/2017 10:01:00 AM (view original):
someone define mainstream media

not just anyone. someone with some knowledge

oh we don't have those here

i looked it up

1. NBC
2. ABC
3. Fox
4. CBS
5. CNN
6. CNBC
7. Wall Street Journal
8. MSNBC
9. New York Post
10. others amounting to 10% of the above

Posted by moy23 on 5/25/2017 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/25/2017 11:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/25/2017 6:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/25/2017 6:22:00 PM (view original):
30% of Americans believe in Bigfoot too. Doesn't mean he exists. The media does not have an opinion, but individual media members do and are entitled to have their opinions. Whether they should let those opinions influence their reporting is another question entirely.

You're pretty dense. I just said they should NOT let their opinions influence their reporting.


"The media isn't supposed to have an opinion if they are reporting the news. They should try to stay as unbiased as possible."

you must be even more dense. Did you say where I said "whether they should let those opinions influence their reporting is another question entirely"?
The individual members of the media are going to have opinions, and the odds are it is going too affect at least some of their reporting. They re human.

Again.... "The media isn't supposed to have an opinion if they are reporting the news. They should try to stay as unbiased as possible."


THEY DON'T EVEN TRY!! THAT'S WHY 65% OF VOTERS THINK THEY ARE FAKE NEWS.

The funniest thing though is the reason I called you dense... The whole premise of what I've been arguing is that the media should try to be as unbiased as possible.... Then you once again requote yourself "whether they should let those opinions influence their reporting is another question entirely"?.... Hello McFly?!?! It's not another question entirely... It's what we've been discussing the whole time.

Thanks for the laugh...

that's why I'm here ... to keep you entertained.

Posted by bagchucker on 5/26/2017 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bagchucker on 5/26/2017 10:01:00 AM (view original):
someone define mainstream media

not just anyone. someone with some knowledge

oh we don't have those here

i looked it up

1. NBC
2. ABC
3. Fox
4. CBS
5. CNN
6. CNBC
7. Wall Street Journal
8. MSNBC
9. New York Post
10. others amounting to 10% of the above

Wait, the Post and CNBC but not the Times or WaPo? This list isn't good.

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

I like that! Fox has only 52% negative coverage of Trump so they are fair and balanced. Maybe he deserves more negative coverage for continually lying, bullying, pushing heads of state out of his way so HE can be in front. Ever consider that? Of course not, as far as you are concerned, Trump can do no wrong.

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

You're one of the "diehard fans" I was talking about, so I forgive you for missing the point.

I get your point. It's flawed.

Go look at the game recaps... That's neutral reporting, not opinion or bias.... Even for the bad teams.

Announcers and fans are not responsible for 'reporting' news. They are supposed to voice their opinions and can be as negative as often as they want. You're not separating those that opine from those that report. If it's the editorial section of the paper go at it and blast Trump, if it's the comments section after an online article feel free to blast Trump... But if you're supposed to be reporting the news the front page headlines should be fact driven and unbiased.... Otherwise you're just the national inquirer (oh wait.... Mainstream media is heading that way because 65% of voters now believe they are fake news).

Posted by wylie715 on 5/26/2017 12:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

I like that! Fox has only 52% negative coverage of Trump so they are fair and balanced. Maybe he deserves more negative coverage for continually lying, bullying, pushing heads of state out of his way so HE can be in front. Ever consider that? Of course not, as far as you are concerned, Trump can do no wrong.

I would be disappointed if he started world war III

Two thirds of AMERICA has turned off FAKE NEWS. They are boycotting you.

I admit the media was just as hard on Barry and Hillary. The media really hurt them.

Crawlin' up in their ***** all the time.

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 2:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

You're one of the "diehard fans" I was talking about, so I forgive you for missing the point.

I get your point. It's flawed.

Go look at the game recaps... That's neutral reporting, not opinion or bias.... Even for the bad teams.

Announcers and fans are not responsible for 'reporting' news. They are supposed to voice their opinions and can be as negative as often as they want. You're not separating those that opine from those that report. If it's the editorial section of the paper go at it and blast Trump, if it's the comments section after an online article feel free to blast Trump... But if you're supposed to be reporting the news the front page headlines should be fact driven and unbiased.... Otherwise you're just the national inquirer (oh wait.... Mainstream media is heading that way because 65% of voters now believe they are fake news).

You're right. The media should be as unbiased as you are. Too bad it's all fake news and whatnot.

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 2:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/26/2017 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 5/26/2017 9:56:00 AM (view original):
I read an article about a Harvard study showing that most of the mainstream media was biased against Trump, with Fox News being the most "neutral" (52% negative coverage, 48% positive), the implication being that Fox News was the fairest.

I look at it this way: Trump is so awful that even Fox News has more bad than good to say about him, and they're clearly in the tank for Trump. If Trump were even halfway mediocre, Fox's coverage would be 95-99% positive.

Imagine a baseball team so awful that everyone who's not a diehard fan laughs at their ineptitude. But the team's diehard fans and homer announcers only criticize them 52% of the time. Are the diehard fans and homer announcers the "neutral" ones?

That study demonstrates that Fox news can be fair and balanced. I'm glad they are critical of Trump, every media outlet should be critical, but they should also report the positive too. The mainstream media is only reporting negatives because of their bias.

You may recall Trump wasn't exactly an angel to Fox... He went after Murdock, Ailes, and Megyn Kelly.

You're one of the "diehard fans" I was talking about, so I forgive you for missing the point.

I get your point. It's flawed.

Go look at the game recaps... That's neutral reporting, not opinion or bias.... Even for the bad teams.

Announcers and fans are not responsible for 'reporting' news. They are supposed to voice their opinions and can be as negative as often as they want. You're not separating those that opine from those that report. If it's the editorial section of the paper go at it and blast Trump, if it's the comments section after an online article feel free to blast Trump... But if you're supposed to be reporting the news the front page headlines should be fact driven and unbiased.... Otherwise you're just the national inquirer (oh wait.... Mainstream media is heading that way because 65% of voters now believe they are fake news).

You're right. The media should be as unbiased as you are. Too bad it's all fake news and whatnot.

I never said I'm unbiased. I just went through this with Wylie... I'm giving my opinions and using facts to support my arguments. I'm not reporting news.

speaking of too bad... It's a damn shame the mainstream media is putting themselves out of business.... and being replaced by the ultimate fake news sources.... social media outlets and bloggers. Once the mainstream media lose their credibility they are no different than online bloggers.