America - The Official Thread

[Biggles]

I could not agree more, but it is what it is.

Maybe if the (for lack of a better term)main stream media were a little more fair, he wouldn't feel the need to use Twitter.

Crunch: I'm fascinated by this perspective. It's true that the MSM is, for the most part, "anti-Trump", perhaps it's even "unfair". It's called karma.

Trump created his political career by being "unfair". Was it fair that he propagated the Obama Birther lies for years? Was it fair that he suggested that McCain wasn't a war hero because he was captured? Was it fair when he called Ted Cruz a lier, Marco Rubio "little", insulted the appearance of Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, Ted Cruz's wife? Was it fair that he (apparently) manipulated the tax rules to allow him to pay no income tax for years while ordinary middle-class Americans paid theirs? The list of Trump's insults & lies is endless. Throughout all this, the MSM actually furthered Trump's rise by giving him a completely disproportionate amount of coverage, presumably because it boosted their ratings.

Trump's behaviour has been an extreme outlier from the start, in fact well before any stated intention to run politically, or even identifying as a Republican. When you're a career lier, cheat & bully you give up the right to complain about other people treating you unfairly.

 

[Northstar]

Crunch: I'm fascinated by this perspective. It's true that the MSM is, for the most part, "anti-Trump", perhaps it's even "unfair". It's called karma.

I'm not going to argue whether or not Trump deserves the treatment he has received from the media as that's a highly subjective issue. But I will say news outlets do have an obligation to remain neutral outside of commentary shows/segments no matter what and they have not even come close to doing this in the last 15 years or so.

I would say that in a way this is just as dangerous as as being blindingly pro-Trump. They've worked themselves into such a frenzy that they spend ludicrous amounts of time focusing on trivial things to the point where they are probably glancing right over serious issues that Trump has been able to keep under the radar. It's kind of like when a sports team does something obviously against the rules in the hope that the officials won't notice the other stuff.

 

[Imari]

But I will say news outlets do have an obligation to remain neutral outside of commentary shows/segments no matter what and they have not even come close to doing this in the last 15 years or so.

You should probably look at some different news outlets. If you think that every single major news outlet in the world is horribly biased, I suspect you'll find that you're wrong.

Start by looking at the ones that actually do primary reporting like the BBC, Reuters and AP. They have guidelines for how stories should be reported.

 

[Scaff]

You say tomato, I say tomato.

It is clear now that you have no idea what you are talking about. That is OK, I don't know much about Sky News or the BBC.

Fox News has 0 (zero) terrestrial stations in the US.

Fox News has 0 (zero) affiliated terrestrial stations in the US.

I have already posted and sourced Fox News viewership (about 4 million) in comparison with that of the three major networks, ABC, NBC, and CBS (about 24 million viewers). And yes the three major networks, along with CNN and most of the major newspapers all tow the same line.

ABC has 8 terrestrial stations in the US.

ABC has 238 affiliated terrestrial stations in the US.

NBC has 11 terrestrial stations in the US.

NBC has 222 affiliated terrestrial stations in the US.

CBS has 16 terrestrial stations in the US.

CBS has 222 affiliated terrestrial stations in the US.

That is a total of 717 over the air broadcast television stations. Each network has an evening news program. They each reach 97% of the households in the US.

Fox News is a cable channel, just like MTV, just like BBC America.

So not all Fox affiliates take news from Fox News itself, however some do.

Now go take a look at that world map and tell me how much it would change if you remove all the US Fox affiliates?

Not one bit.

Fox News us not marginal in any way shape or form, it's a major news network with global reach.

Oh and for the umpteenth time, what about the White House, as you seem to be avoiding answering that one like it has the clap.

How is the White House marginal? It's certainly a source of right wing propaganda, Trump's tweets alone have managed to wipe billions off the share values of companies, but somehow in you mind it's marginal.


Warning Trump fans, the following has 'triggers', snowflakes beware.


In wider news a couple that I have not seen here, the white supremacist who murdered a black guy in New York (on which Trump has been silent) and Alex Jones has apologized for his PizzaGate claims and pulled the story from Info Wars.

Which would make anyone still believing it at a level that even the arch conspiracy nut himself considers a bit much!

I also note Trump is up to 12 golf trips in 9 weeks, anyone know how many Obama managed in similar time frames as i remember Trump being a bit worked up over the amount. Then again he does need a break after the royal screw up that was the ACA replacement.

 

[Biggles]

... and Alex Jones has apologized for his PizzaGate claims and pulled the story from Info Wars.

What?!

Dotini had me convinced that Pizzagate was a thing. Does this mean that some of the other "news items" reported by Dotini might not be 100% accurate?

 

[Scaff]

Seriously......

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ny-spending-a7650636.html?cmpid=facebook-post

......not sure if Trump is actually now full on Poe or really that unaware.

 

[Dennisch]

 

[Liquid]

Allow other NATO countries to have bases in the US as an open gesture of goodwill and then we can talk invoices.

 

[Dotini]

the royal screw up that was the ACA replacement.

Libertarian hero Rand Paul is said to be doing victory laps in celebration of the Freedom Caucus defeat of Trumpcare/Ryancare. I guess this means I should be happy, too.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Allow other NATO countries to have bases in the US as an open gesture of goodwill and then we can talk invoices.

And ask him to calculate the number of Murican (Murica) jobs that are maintained by supplying the "standard" (read US) equipment to NATO. It's yuge amounts. Yuge.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Fox News us not marginal in any way shape or form, it's a major news network with global reach.

Evidently, what I just said just went through one eyeball and out the other.

Fox News is independent from Sky News, the Fox Broadcasting Network and their affiliates, FX and the like. The only common thread among them all is that they are all owned by News Corp.

Think of it like this, Disney owns ABC, ESPN, Disney Studios, Marvel, LucasFilm, but yet we don't necessarily go and lump in ESPN with ABC because we know that they are two separate entities.

So why the double standard?

 

[Scaff]

I do have to say that the upcoming series of House of Cards is going to look very tame in comparison to the reality of US politics right now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powe...0_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.a43c4bf02001

It seems that the chairman of the investigation into potential links between the Trump campaign and Russia likes briefing the Prez before his own committee and generally engaging in some odd behaviour given his assigned role.

Evidently, what I just said just went through one eyeball and out the other.

Fox News is independent from Sky News, the Fox Broadcasting Network and their affiliates, FX and the like. The only common thread among them all is that they are all owned by News Corp.

Think of it like this, Disney owns ABC, ESPN, Disney Studios, Marvel, LucasFilm, but yet we don't necessarily go and lump in ESPN with ABC because we know that they are two separate entities.

So why the double standard?

It's not going in one ear and out the other, so how about dropping the personal attacks and focusing on the facts.

As I quite clearly said, even if you ignore affiliates it doesn't change Fox News' global reach, not make it a marginal outlet in any form.

Now what about the White House (as I have asked repeatedly, only to be consistently ignored).

 

[TenEightyOne]

Evidently, what I just said just went through one eyeball and out the other.

Fox News is independent from Sky News, the Fox Broadcasting Network and their affiliates, FX and the like.

Fascinating. What does that have to do with Fox News being available in 94 million homes, those marginal swine?

 

[Scaff]

Fascinating. What does that have to do with Fox News being available in 94 million homes, those marginal swine?

Don't forget the 40+ countries around the world and those viewers, that makes it even more marginal.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Fascinating. What does that have to do with Fox News being available in 94 million homes, those marginal swine?

Being available =/= watched. Read any Neilsen ratings chart for any given night. As a matter of fact, I will cite you the ratings for Friday. (Source)

As you can see, a lot of people still watch free TV.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

So not all Fox affiliates take news from Fox News itself, however some do.

Source? A TV listing will do. My local Fox station has an hour long new program that comes on weekdays at 17:00. It is local news. In fact it has quite a liberal slant. I posted this picture earlier in this thread. I took this picture. Notice the time, this was on seven minutes into their broadcast, it was one of the lead stories.

Personally I think they were advertising the protest so they could get more people to show up so they would have something to show on their 21:00 newscast. I did not watch their later news.

I normally watch the local news on the ABC owned station here in town. Their news rarely seems biased.

Now go take a look at that world map and tell me how much it would change if you remove all the US Fox affiliates?

I don't care about the world map. I am talking about America, in a thread about America. You being able to watch Fox News in the UK has no affect what so ever on any American.

Oh and for the umpteenth time, what about the White House, as you seem to be avoiding answering that one like it has the clap.

I have not been avoiding that at all. In fact that is what I have been talking about this whole time. Everything coming out of the White House, before it is consumed by the masses of Americans, is filtered through the news media. It is condensed into a half hour show that the three major networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS) broadcast every weeknight.

ABC news is headed by the former White House Director of Communications under Bill Clinton, George Stephanopoulos.

NBC owns it's own cable news channel MSNBC. They employ "progressives" like Rachel Maddow, and Chris (thrill up leg) Matthews.



CBS news famously ran with a fake story, complete with faked document about George W. Bush. The documents were reported to have been from the early 70's and made to look old but the obvious fakes were made using MS Word.

Spoiler: annoying gif image

Yes, some people here watch Fox News, but as I have all ready said and sourced, the vast majority of Americans do not.

Alex Jones PizzaGate

 

[ryzno]

Evidently, what I just said just went through one eyeball and out the other.

Post of the year!!

 

[TenEightyOne]

Being available =/= watched. Read any Neilsen ratings chart for any given night. As a matter of fact, I will cite you the ratings for Friday. (Source)

The macro discussion concerns whether or not Fox News is a "marginal" news channel. It's the top-rating cable news channel, so describing as marginal continues to seem disingenuous.

 

[ryzno]

Figure I'll put my $0.02 in...

In a post or two, I saw a number that said Fox was 17% of the big 4 on said night.

While it is "marginal" it doesn't even break even with the other 3 networks. The other 3 stations got 83% of the viewers. Far from Fox getting the advantage.

As said before, on our local Fox station they only show Fox news Sunday 9-10am. We might get a story or two from Fox news during the week but that is it, unless you have cable or a way to stream it.

 

[Liquid]

And ask him to calculate the number of Murican (Murica) jobs that are maintained by supplying the "standard" (read US) equipment to NATO. It's yuge amounts. Yuge.

Something, something... Eisenhower... something something... military-industrial...

 

[Scaff]

Source? A TV listing will do. My local Fox station has an hour long new program that comes on weekdays at 17:00. It is local news. In fact it has quite a liberal slant. I posted this picture earlier in this thread. I took this picture. Notice the time, this was on seven minutes into their broadcast, it was one of the lead stories.



Personally I think they were advertising the protest so they could get more people to show up so they would have something to show on their 21:00 newscast. I did not watch their later news.

I normally watch the local news on the ABC owned station here in town. Their news rarely seems biased.

My apologies, it would appear that I was looking at non-terrestrial alternate sources, which do exist.

However in digging I did come across two rather obvious other was of consuming Fox News that I had forgotten about, Fox News Radio and Foxnews.com (ranked as the 58th most popular website in the US - not the No.1 news site, but neither is is a low ranked one) and its still the most popular cable news network.

http://deadline.com/2016/12/fox-news-channel-2016-most-watched-basic-cable-network-1201871574/

Its not marginal.

I don't care about the world map. I am talking about America, in a thread about America. You being able to watch Fox News in the UK has no affect what so ever on any American.

For the 4 to 9 million Americans living outside the US it has an effect, so to say it has no impact on those Americans is simply not accurate. Nor does America and its population live in a bubble that is unaffected by the outside world. How Fox News presents the US outside of its own shores most certainly is a factor (and Fox news doesn't paint it in a great light on quite a number of occasions).

So in terms of if its a marginal source of news its worldwide reach is most certainly a factor.

I have not been avoiding that at all. In fact that is what I have been talking about this whole time. Everything coming out of the White House, before it is consumed by the masses of Americans, is filtered through the news media. It is condensed into a half hour show that the three major networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS) broadcast every weeknight.

ABC news is headed by the former White House Director of Communications under Bill Clinton, George Stephanopoulos.

NBC owns it's own cable news channel MSNBC. They employ "progressives" like Rachel Maddow, and Chris (thrill up leg) Matthews.


CBS news famously ran with a fake story, complete with faked document about George W. Bush. The documents were reported to have been from the early 70's and made to look old but the obvious fakes were made using MS Word.

How does the press censor Trumps tweets?

What about his 20 million Facebook fans, how does the press censor those?

Not everything coming out of the White House is filtered via the News Media, nor is all of the new media that does filter it hostile to Trump.

Yes, some people here watch Fox News, but as I have all ready said and sourced, the vast majority of Americans do not.

The majority of Americans don't even get the news fro the TV in this day and age, 62% get it from Social Media, on Facebook Fox News has more followers than either the New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, LA Times, Reuters, AP. In fact just about the only media/news companies to beat them are CNN and the BBC. Oh and you can repeat that trend on Twitter as well.

So they broadcast to 94 million Americans (and in terms of it they are marginal then potential reach is a factor), have a global presence, broadcast across a range of mediums and are a huge presence on the platform most Americans use to consume news.

Not a marginal source at all then.

Did you even bother to read what I said about it?

Figure I'll put my $0.02 in...

In a post or two, I saw a number that said Fox was 17% of the big 4 on said night.

While it is "marginal" it doesn't even break even with the other 3 networks. The other 3 stations got 83% of the viewers. Far from Fox getting the advantage.

As said before, on our local Fox station they only show Fox news Sunday 9-10am. We might get a story or two from Fox news during the week but that is it, unless you have cable or a way to stream it.

Or access to the internet!

Fox News do have a rather large presence on the web, what with the website being in the top 50 in the US, and arguably the third largest player on social media (via which 62% of Americans use as a source of news).

Also a single night is not a good measure of what share a network gets, over the course of 2016 Fox seems to come out on top...

http://deadline.com/2016/12/fox-news-channel-2016-most-watched-basic-cable-network-1201871574/

...and adding all the other stations together doesn't make Fox marginal either, but it does show a tad of a bias.

 

[Liquid]

If you follow the tweet and read the replies, you'll see people claiming that he was actually away on another golfing trip (In Virginia this time instead of Florida).

But I like the idea that this sort of thing is even newsworthy; it should be expected.

 

[Dotini]

http://deadline.com/2016/12/fox-news-channel-2016-most-watched-basic-cable-network-1201871574/

By the by, Fox Business Network is a sister network to Fox News Channel. It's available only in NYC and nationally by premium digital cable subscription. Neil Cavuto and Maria Bartiromo are two of its most known faces. FBN hosted one of the Republican presidential debates, and appears to be scoring gains versus rivals such as CNBC and Bloomberg Television. I find FBN preferable to Fox News. For one thing, it's a lot less hyperbolic and deliberately controversial, more smoothed out.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Its not marginal.

You say tomato, I say tomato.

For the 4 to 9 million Americans living outside the US it has an effect, so to say it has no impact on those Americans is simply not accurate.

And all of them watch Fox News? I doubt it.

How does the press censor Trumps tweets?

Twitter is about the only truly uncensored vector Trump has to communicate with the American people. 140 characters at a time.

What about his 20 million Facebook fans, how does the press censor those?

The majority of Americans don't even get the news fro the TV in this day and age, 62% get it from Social Media, on Facebook Fox News has more followers than either the New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, LA Times, Reuters, AP. In fact just about the only media/news companies to beat them are CNN and the BBC.

I find your fact that CNN has a bigger web presence than Fox News to be rather shocking.

About Facebook, this is from the source you sited.

The media has been in a flurry ever since Gizmodo broke the story that Facebook’s trending news topics may not be as algorithmic as we all imagined.

Former employees said that news editors routinely decided on trending news topics (before they could be detected by the trending algorithm) and that often involved suppressing conservative news topics and sources.

This led to an inquiry from the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee investigating the allegations.

After vehement denial of any bias in trending topics, Facebook announced sweeping changes three days ago to the way the Trending system works, including greater oversight for news curators and a clearer description of how the trending topics system works in the Facebook Help Center.

So they broadcast to 94 million Americans (and in terms of it they are marginal then potential reach is a factor), have a global presence, broadcast across a range of mediums and are a huge presence on the platform most Americans use to consume news.

Being available =/= watched.

Not a marginal source at all then.

You say tomato, I say tomato.

Did you even bother to read what I said about it?

Nobody, except news geeks even know who Alex Jones is, much less know what pizzagate is. There was a news story about that whacko went into that pizza place with a gun. But they didn't say what pizzagate was, just that he was motivated by a fake news story.

edit: CBS's 60 Minutes is about to do a news story about fake news, in the teaser they showed a computer screen with pizzagate written on it.

 

[huskeR32]

I find your fact that CNN has a bigger web presence than Fox News to be rather shocking.

Why should you find that shocking, if you contend that Fox is "marginalized?"

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Why should you find that shocking, if you contend that Fox is "marginalized?"

Because Fox News beats CNN so bad in the ratings, I just assumed, their web presence would be bigger also.

 

[huskeR32]

Because Fox News beats CNN so bad in the ratings

Kinda undermines your whole "marginalized" claim though, doesn't it?

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Kinda undermines your whole "marginalized" claim though, doesn't it?

You say tomato, I say tomato.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Kinda undermines your whole "marginalized" claim though, doesn't it?

If anything, it just furthers the point. I mean, did everyone forget about this?

What Fox is making up for in the ratings, they sure have lost a heck of a lot in reputation.

 

[Biggles]

Crunch: you really don't think that right wing news sources, from Fox News through to Breibart & Alex Jones have wide currency in the US? I'm sure it's true that, unlike many of the posters participating in this forum, the majority of Americans are not news junkies, but I'm pretty sure that, nevertheless, the basic outlines of the plot filter down to a significant percentage of the population. The anti-Clinton ground had been prepared for years - decades, in fact - so whatever negative news - whether true, partially true, or a complete fabrication - was put out about Clinton, it immediately found a receptive audience. The pizzagate story is one of the most obvious examples of that.

Although there were certainly many contributing factors in Clinton's loss, not least of which was an obvious lack of enthusiasm among much of the Democratic base, I believe the "fake news" about Clinton was the factor that finally sank her campaign, convincing wavering Democrats to stay at home or even vote for Trump.