Jump to content

How Fox News works

retread

By retread
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 10.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

I know you’re joking about the military and “wokeness” but let me tell y’all a little story. My son has been in the Marines around 18 months. COVID absolutely destroyed his path at Troy - he’s ADHD

The Royal We
The Royal We

1. No one from the Trump campaign ever had any contact with Russia. 2. Well, someone may have had contact with Russia, but the campaign/Trump didn't know about it. 3. Actually, there was con

TexArcher
TexArcher

I'm saying I'd like to get in my car and ram it into Sean Hannity at high speed.

Posted Images

hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11401

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 7/4/2018 at 2:04 PM, SmokeyTheBear said:

I feel like Fox created that framework and it's shown to drive them to be #1. CNN wants to play the counter to them but know they have to adopt that same framework. 

no. cnn created the framework with the show crossfire back in the day. it set the expectation for no holds barred, no nuance, all ideologue approach to content that we see promulgated to all platforms, including sports shows. the framework is "have a take, and never waver." there is no room for honest discussion, it's all bullshit rhetoric. crossfire, and to a even earlier degree, the mcgaughlin group was the primogenitor to what we have today. the success of those shows are now the business paradigm for news editorial. 

and, honestly, i think it has a direct impact on the rhetoric of our government. you must be this or you are definitely that. you must support separating families or you support open borders. it has driven this binary outlook that our government goes ahead and reflects right back down on the voters, because that is what we desire and consume 24/7.

and that brings me to my next point, one that was made by @Aqua Buddha. i travel internationally a few times a year. cnn international is fucking fantastic. it's news. bbc news is amazing. it's, uh, NEWS. cnn, foxnews - these networks contain "news" as part of their network name. they are not news. you watch bbn news or cnn international and you are hit with story after story of shit actually happening in the world. they will talk about venezuela, syria, the central american refugee crisis, the mexican election, and any number of other international NEWS. they may have the barest minimum of editorial, but the focus is on FACTS.

we don't apparently want that. we want an echo chamber. this happens in the UK, with the sun, dailymail, the mirror, and the guardian. the difference is that those papers/websites are more or less honest about their biases. they editorialize in their headlines and in their content.

the difference is that they do not purport to be "fair and balanced." they do not say "we report, you decide." this is a trick. get an ax.

there is so little reporting on cnn and fox. i don't watch a lot of msnbc, admittedly, because i was turned off by their far left bias back in the aughts.

another difference is that foxnews BASKS in the attention from our executive office. they are complicit, and bordering on state run media. anyone who says otherwise is fooing themselves. 

@slorch rightfully took a beating on this topic. but the real issues is on how our society views editorial panels as news, and i really think in his own way that is what he was trying to highlight rather unsuccessfully. i'm actually for a government regulation (jesus y maria, hayden, for real?) that a media outlet cannot call itself news if it spends more % of time on editorial and panels than it does on news. our society is so fucking uninformed on international affairs that we have shit like "no go sharia law zones are effective in london." nobody with any sense of international affairs thinks this. this is all informed by crazy right wing AM radio, foxnews, breitbart, et al. and, no, i will not entertain that the "left wing media" are equal to the nefarious shit that has gone down on the right wing as an answer to this imaginative threat.

i had a talk with a buddy last weekend, and we were trying to determine what has happened to our parents. my da was always a crazy right wing reactionary (the type that made me watch the clinton chronicles while i was a teenager), so i can accept that. but my ma wasn't. his dad was always conservative, but not crazy, trump supporting conservative.

i think it's the echo chamber. i think that the right wing bought so hard into the "left wing media conspiracy" that they went HARD in the other direction, and now we are realizing 25 years of work of right wing media and the calcifying effects that echo chambers can have on the human brain and the way that people think. it can make a normal person crazy. and i think there's a lot to be said for the rise of cable, cable "news" and channel choice, as well as the internet. people can comfortably go to drudge, foxnews, breitbart, or their left leaning cohorts - JUST AS DANGEROUS, mind you, if not as effective - and have their world view affirmed. and this is perfect for the baby boomer generation, because of their inhernent gullibility. they grew up with three channels and no internet. now they can seek out their worldview and wrap themselves in it like a nice comfortable blanket. the information age betrayed their intellectual curiosity by destroying it, and this is exacerbated by the natural effect of "getting set in one's ways" as one ages. so it's a 1-2 punch. 

and i think this is why most centrist and left-leaning networks fail. younger people and those who are more free thinking don't like to have the scripture preached to them. and these folks tend to be more left-leaning. this ties slightly into the "why are there fewer religious people doing religious things" thread. most of the foxnews crowd attend church. they want to be told how things are. they want to accept the reality according to others.

this is not a criticism. i'm catholic, nominally. we don't go to church, because i have a hard time telling my kids what to believe, and there is my personal bias that colors my analysis above. while i feel that cnn presents stories and editorials with a certain slant, they do not do so to the degree that foxnews does, which borders on fraud. it is absurd when you look at how foxnews presents the latest trump, ah, absurdity. 

just a few thoughts. 

tl;dr: americans don't like to think critically.

Edited by hayden_horn
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKJ

SKJ 1317

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

no. cnn created the framework with the show crossfire back in the day. it set the expectation for no holds barred, no nuance, all ideologue approach to content that we see promulgated to all platforms, including sports shows. the framework is "have a take, and never waver." there is no room for honest discussion, it's all bullshit rhetoric. crossfire, and to a even earlier degree, the mcgaughlin group was the primogenitor to what we have today. the success of those shows are now the business paradigm for news editorial. 

and, honestly, i think it has a direct impact on the rhetoric of our government. you must be this or you are definitely that. you must support separating families or you support open borders. it has driven this binary outlook that our government goes ahead and reflects right back down on the voters, because that is what we desire and consume 24/7.

and that brings me to my next point, one that was made by @Aqua Buddha. i travel internationally a few times a year. cnn international is fucking fantastic. it's news. bbc news is amazing. it's, uh, NEWS. cnn, foxnews - these networks contain "news" as part of their network name. they are not news. you watch bbn news or cnn international and you are hit with story after story of shit actually happening in the world. they will talk about venezuela, syria, the central american refugee crisis, the mexican election, and any number of other international NEWS. they may have the barest minimum of editorial, but the focus is on FACTS.

we don't apparently want that. we want an echo chamber. this happens in the UK, with the sun, dailymail, the mirror, and the guardian. the difference is that those papers/websites are more or less honest about their biases. they editorialize in their headlines and in their content.

the difference is that they do not purport to be "fair and balanced." they do not say "we report, you decide." this is a trick. get an ax.

there is so little reporting on cnn and fox. i don't watch a lot of msnbc, admittedly, because i was turned off by their far left bias back in the aughts.

another difference is that foxnews BASKS in the attention from our executive office. they are complicit, and bordering on state run media. anyone who says otherwise is fooing themselves. 

@slorch rightfully took a beating on this topic. but the real issues is on how our society views editorial panels as news, and i really think in his own way that is what he was trying to highlight rather unsuccessfully. i'm actually for a government regulation (jesus y maria, hayden, for real?) that a media outlet cannot call itself news if it spends more % of time on editorial and panels than it does on news. our society is so fucking uninformed on international affairs that we have shit like "no go sharia law zones are effective in london." nobody with any sense of international affairs thinks this. this is all informed by crazy right wing AM radio, foxnews, breitbart, et al. and, no, i will not entertain that the "left wing media" are equal to the nefarious shit that has gone down on the right wing as an answer to this imaginative threat.

i had a talk with a buddy last weekend, and we were trying to determine what has happened to our parents. my da was always a crazy right wing reactionary (the type that made me watch the clinton chronicles while i was a teenager), so i can accept that. but my ma wasn't. his dad was always conservative, but not crazy, trump supporting conservative.

i think it's the echo chamber. i think that the right wing bought so hard into the "left wing media conspiracy" that they went HARD in the other direction, and now we are realizing 25 years of work of right wing media and the calcifying effects that echo chambers can have on the human brain and the way that people think. it can make a normal person crazy. and i think there's a lot to be said for the rise of cable, cable "news" and channel choice, as well as the internet. people can comfortably go to drudge, foxnews, breitbart, or their left leaning cohorts - JUST AS DANGEROUS, mind you, if not as effective - and have their world view affirmed. and this is perfect for the baby boomer generation, because of their inhernent gullibility. they grew up with three channels and no internet. now they can seek out their worldview and wrap themselves in it like a nice comfortable blanket. the information age betrayed their intellectual curiosity by destroying it, and this is exacerbated by the natural effect of "getting set in one's ways" as one ages. so it's a 1-2 punch. 

and i think this is why most centrist and left-leaning networks fail. younger people and those who are more free thinking don't like to have the scripture preached to them. and these folks tend to be more left-leaning. this ties slightly into the "why are there fewer religious people doing religious things" thread. most of the foxnews crowd attend church. they want to be told how things are. they want to accept the reality according to others.

this is not a criticism. i'm catholic, nominally. we don't go to church, because i have a hard time telling my kids what to believe, and there is my personal bias that colors my analysis above. while i feel that cnn presents stories and editorials with a certain slant, they do not do so to the degree that foxnews does, which borders on fraud. it is absurd when you look at how foxnews presents the latest trump, ah, absurdity. 

just a few thoughts. 

tl;dr: americans don't like to think critically.

I think Fox has gone well past borderline fraud.

They are literally stating the opposite of facts in such cases as the deficit (said it was going down...) And helping spread the lie that it was a law that children had to be detained and separated from their family...

There are quite a few examples, but anyway.

Sure, Fox spins some shit, (especially when they ignore stuff) but they also outright lie

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

 

just a few thoughts. 

tl;dr: americans don't like to think critically.

nailed it.

 

follow the script and playbook for whichever side you choose. Anyone who does not is ‘unenlightened.’  We must choose sides though...

 

Getting’hammered’ on this board is not too bad.  It’s like 100 cats running around your feet. 

Edited by slorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 21598

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, slorch said:

nailed it.

 

follow the script and playbook for whichever side you choose. Anyone who does not is ‘unenlightened.’  We must choose sides though...

 

Getting’hammered’ on this board is not too bad.  It’s like 100 cats running around your feet. 

Let's go ahead and add "lack of self-awareness" to the list of issues. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bat Guano

Bat Guano 363

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

no. cnn created the framework with the show crossfire back in the day. it set the expectation for no holds barred, no nuance, all ideologue approach to content that we see promulgated to all platforms, including sports shows. the framework is "have a take, and never waver." there is no room for honest discussion, it's all bullshit rhetoric. crossfire, and to a even earlier degree, the mcgaughlin group was the primogenitor to what we have today. the success of those shows are now the business paradigm for news editorial. 

and, honestly, i think it has a direct impact on the rhetoric of our government. you must be this or you are definitely that. you must support separating families or you support open borders. it has driven this binary outlook that our government goes ahead and reflects right back down on the voters, because that is what we desire and consume 24/7.

and that brings me to my next point, one that was made by @Aqua Buddha. i travel internationally a few times a year. cnn international is fucking fantastic. it's news. bbc news is amazing. it's, uh, NEWS. cnn, foxnews - these networks contain "news" as part of their network name. they are not news. you watch bbn news or cnn international and you are hit with story after story of shit actually happening in the world. they will talk about venezuela, syria, the central american refugee crisis, the mexican election, and any number of other international NEWS. they may have the barest minimum of editorial, but the focus is on FACTS.

we don't apparently want that. we want an echo chamber. this happens in the UK, with the sun, dailymail, the mirror, and the guardian. the difference is that those papers/websites are more or less honest about their biases. they editorialize in their headlines and in their content.

the difference is that they do not purport to be "fair and balanced." they do not say "we report, you decide." this is a trick. get an ax.

there is so little reporting on cnn and fox. i don't watch a lot of msnbc, admittedly, because i was turned off by their far left bias back in the aughts.

another difference is that foxnews BASKS in the attention from our executive office. they are complicit, and bordering on state run media. anyone who says otherwise is fooing themselves. 

@slorch rightfully took a beating on this topic. but the real issues is on how our society views editorial panels as news, and i really think in his own way that is what he was trying to highlight rather unsuccessfully. i'm actually for a government regulation (jesus y maria, hayden, for real?) that a media outlet cannot call itself news if it spends more % of time on editorial and panels than it does on news. our society is so fucking uninformed on international affairs that we have shit like "no go sharia law zones are effective in london." nobody with any sense of international affairs thinks this. this is all informed by crazy right wing AM radio, foxnews, breitbart, et al. and, no, i will not entertain that the "left wing media" are equal to the nefarious shit that has gone down on the right wing as an answer to this imaginative threat.

i had a talk with a buddy last weekend, and we were trying to determine what has happened to our parents. my da was always a crazy right wing reactionary (the type that made me watch the clinton chronicles while i was a teenager), so i can accept that. but my ma wasn't. his dad was always conservative, but not crazy, trump supporting conservative.

i think it's the echo chamber. i think that the right wing bought so hard into the "left wing media conspiracy" that they went HARD in the other direction, and now we are realizing 25 years of work of right wing media and the calcifying effects that echo chambers can have on the human brain and the way that people think. it can make a normal person crazy. and i think there's a lot to be said for the rise of cable, cable "news" and channel choice, as well as the internet. people can comfortably go to drudge, foxnews, breitbart, or their left leaning cohorts - JUST AS DANGEROUS, mind you, if not as effective - and have their world view affirmed. and this is perfect for the baby boomer generation, because of their inhernent gullibility. they grew up with three channels and no internet. now they can seek out their worldview and wrap themselves in it like a nice comfortable blanket. the information age betrayed their intellectual curiosity by destroying it, and this is exacerbated by the natural effect of "getting set in one's ways" as one ages. so it's a 1-2 punch. 

and i think this is why most centrist and left-leaning networks fail. younger people and those who are more free thinking don't like to have the scripture preached to them. and these folks tend to be more left-leaning. this ties slightly into the "why are there fewer religious people doing religious things" thread. most of the foxnews crowd attend church. they want to be told how things are. they want to accept the reality according to others.

this is not a criticism. i'm catholic, nominally. we don't go to church, because i have a hard time telling my kids what to believe, and there is my personal bias that colors my analysis above. while i feel that cnn presents stories and editorials with a certain slant, they do not do so to the degree that foxnews does, which borders on fraud. it is absurd when you look at how foxnews presents the latest trump, ah, absurdity. 

just a few thoughts. 

tl;dr: americans don't like to think critically.

Agree with all this, but it may be useful to expand on some of the ways people fool themselves by aligning with a party and ideology to the exclusion of all else, with a bit of armchair psychology thrown in.

I've been having long, detailed political and current-events discussions by email with a small group for decades, mostly driven by one hard-right former conservative, now Trumper. He's all in on the Fox and Breitbart talking points, and sends out various blog posts in that vein every day. Yes, really - every day; I read most of them, just to stay in touch with how these people think (or "think," to be more accurate). I used to argue against the more ridiculous ones, mustering facts and logic and all those things that are supposed to matter, and I found it was counterproductive - when this guy is confronted with sound arguments against his team, he hardens his position. His arguments usually consist of stuff that Fox or Breitbart or their ilk made up, which are easily disproved, and accusations that Obama or Clinton or some other Democrat or random lefty did something worse - you know, the kind of stuff you see on this board all the time. I eventually realized that he literally cannot admit any wrongdoing or malfeasance on the part of his team; when I force him to see a lie that he believed, he'll deny it or downplay it (he says Trump 'sometimes stretches the truth.' That's as far as he'll go). One time I got him, in the course of defending some R initiative or other, to argue in favor of hypocrisy. After that he stopped communicating with me for several years; I think I actually made him see that he'd become exactly what he thought he was fighting against, and he didn't like it, although he wouldn't admit it.

There have been several psychological studies showing that conservatives are motivated by loyalty to their group over most or all other considerations, while liberals are at least somewhat open to rational argument. This is considered to be the main difference between the 'sides,' along with cons being driven by fear and favoring authoritarianism and established hierarchical structures, and libs being more compassionate, empathetic, and impulsive. 

So the way I see it is that the hardcore Trumpers cannot give an inch on their team; once they start accepting the validity of any criticism of one of theirs, they'll have to ask themselves how many other things they have been told, and believe, that will turn out to be untrue. That's why they retreat to the echo chamber: it's not entirely the other way around, although of course there is plenty of feedback, but they create the echo chamber as much as the echo chamber creates them.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31992

Posted
Posted
On 7/8/2018 at 12:20 AM, MaybeACoordinator said:

I went past their family cemetery a few weeks ago. They aren't hill folk. They are SW Arkansas lowland folk, and if there's a more godforsaken patch of the south out there I haven't seen it yet, and I have divided my life between Tennessee and Texas and extensively traveled recently on backroads from Laredo to Richmond, VA.  

SW Arkansas makes rural West Virginia look like the Hamptons. Well, that's laying it on a little thick, but I remember crossing the border into rural Bossier Parish Louisiana and thinking I'd arrived back in civilization. Let that sink in. 

Just for the record, he's from the same town as WIlliam Jefferson Clinton (and my Dad).  And SW Ark is virtually indistinguishable from most of east Texas.  Pine Bluff is kind of an extra-special shithole, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

Hannity and Tucker and the rest of the shitbirds at FOX should hang by the neck.

The worst thing about them is that they do what they do for ratings and advertising dollars. They aren’t “true believers” - they’re just greedy fame whore carnival hucksters.

There should be a class action lawsuit for those of us who have lost a parent to FOX’s brainwashing bullshittery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kyrie Eleison

Kyrie Eleison 9312

Posted
Posted
Hannity and Tucker and the rest of the shitbirds at FOX should hang by the neck.

The worst thing about them is that they do what they do for ratings and advertising dollars. They aren’t “true believers” - they’re just greedy fame whore carnival hucksters.

There should be a class action lawsuit for those of us who have lost a parent to FOX’s brainwashing bullshittery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hannity is in fact a true believer.

Tucker is just a whore as you describe.

which one is worse is up to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5165

Posted
Posted
On 7/19/2018 at 9:14 AM, relapse98 said:

Its kind of hard to take serious a "news channel" that has those potato heads on as commentators.

Except millions take them seriously. It’s one of the things that’s fucked up this country. Why anyone would trust an Australian to give them the best news product in the US is beyond me, but here we are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

Not technically fox but a fox segment was showing Rush  going on a tangent about how democrats keep taking about meddling because they eventually want to get rid of elections permanently. 

Every accusation is a confession. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gengs1

Gengs1 2583

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

Not technically fox but a fox segment was showing Rush  going on a tangent about how democrats keep taking about meddling because they eventually want to get rid of elections permanently. 

 

W

T

F

Yes and before he said how Obama was going to do a coup for a 3rd term

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

He also said that if Obama was elected he was going to emigrate to another country. 

Not disputing this, but i find it very, very difficult to believe  Cape Girardeau boy would throw leaving 'Merica out there.

 

( credible) Link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...