2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Roy Karrde]

Roy, you're getting dangerously close to sounding like the morons who try to insult our intelligence with conspiracy theories about the President.

Careful with the flaming

The media was "hiding" a story about the economy that Fox and other conservative networks didn't know anything about so that Obama would win? Come on... You'd think that some news agency that was supporting the GOP would have found out something about this if it had been known for that long.

I'm sorry last time I checked the media does not pick up too many stories from Fox, the Benguazi thing being pretty good proof of that. But apparently it is Fox's job to do the job of the media for them.

Link to Fox & Friends footage

Kilmeade states USA is shallow and heavily implies that Obama photo-op changed minds of voters. Also the poll itself has the usual problems that polling exit voters has, and no indication of how the question was set out to the voters, so it shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Is changing your vote based merely on a photo op not something shallow? Especially as he correctly points out, the actual storm isn't handled well. Also both Fox and CBS reported the same thing with their exit polls, are you saying that both are wrong?

Mind you this is also the finding of PEW as well.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...ld-off-romney/

This isn't really my main point, you'll probably argue with me and say that I'm wrong but that's how I see it, the point is if you want to talk about journalistic malpractice, don't start inventing conspiracy theories on how 'THE MEDIA' is suppressing bad economic news with no evidence to back up the claim, there's ample evidence at Fox News alone of passing off complete garbage as journalism.

So as I asked Dark Sage, I ask you. Is it Fox News' job to put out all the stories the media wont cover or misses?

[Heald]

I'm sorry last time I checked the media does not pick up too many stories from Fox, the Benguazi thing being pretty good proof of that. But apparently it is Fox's job to do the job of the media for them.

I'd really recommend reading this blog post featured in the leading UK conservative daily paper today. It gives a pretty good explanation about why Fox News is doing more harm than good to the American right-wing agenda.

Is changing your vote based merely on a photo op not something shallow? Especially as he correctly points out, the actual storm isn't handled well. Also both Fox and CBS reported the same thing with their exit polls, are you saying that both are wrong?

It is, but there's no evidence that anyone who was going to vote Romney changed their mind and voted Obama instead because of Obama's photo-op. I'm not saying the polls are wrong, just that there are inherent flaws in such polls and Fox drew incorrect assumptions from the poll's results and then reported on them in an incredibly offensive manner.

So as I asked Dark Sage, I ask you. Is it Fox News' job to put out all the stories the media wont cover or misses?

No but that wasn't really the point I was making.

[Roy Karrde]

I'd really recommend reading this blog post featured in the leading UK conservative daily paper today. It gives a pretty good explanation about why Fox News is doing more harm than good to the American right-wing agenda.

So by that logic is MSNBC and the New York Times killing or doing more harm than good to the Democratic Party?

It is, but there's no evidence that anyone who was going to vote Romney changed their mind and voted Obama instead because of Obama's photo-op. I'm not saying the polls are wrong, just that there are inherent flaws in such polls and Fox drew incorrect assumptions from the poll's results and then reported on them in an incredibly offensive manner.

I point you to this Pew poll

"In the Pew Research Center’s election weekend survey after the storm, Obama held a 48 percent to 45 percent lead over Romney among likely voters.

A week before, the race was deadlocked with each candidate drawing support from 47 percent of the likely electorate. Interviewing for the final pre-election survey was conducted Oct. 31- Nov. 3 among 2,709 likely voters. The previous survey was conducted Oct. 24-28, before Hurricane Sandy made landfall along the East Coast.

...

Obama’s handling of the storm’s aftermath may have contributed to his improved showing.

According to the Pew Research Center, 69 percent of all likely voters approve of the way Obama is handling the storm’s impact. Even a plurality of Romney supporters (46 percent) approve of Obama’s handling of the situation; more important, so too do 63 percent of swing voters."

His actions brought major changes to swing voters by several percentage points

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...ld-off-romney/

[Heald]

So by that logic is MSNBC and the New York Times killing or doing more harm than good to the Democratic Party?

I take it you didn't read the blog post given your quick response, but the general point is CNN, NY Times and MSNBC are perceived as far more reliable and less partisan than Fox News. The problem is Fox News is an entertainment channel first, and providing serious and well-researched journalism and investigation takes a back-seat to sensationalism and partisan mudslinging.

[Dark Sage]

Roy, take a look at this:

http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=8187

"Fair and balanced" my foot.

[Roy Karrde]

I take it you didn't read the blog post given your quick response, but the general point is CNN, NY Times and MSNBC are perceived as far more reliable and less partisan than Fox News. The problem is Fox News is an entertainment channel first, and providing serious and well-researched journalism and investigation takes a back-seat to sensationalism and partisan mudslinging.

That seems to be based more on a lack of knowledge of the NY Times and MSNBC than Fox News.

[Heald]

That seems to be based more on a lack of knowledge of the NY Times and MSNBC than Fox News.

MSNBC perhaps, although I gather not many people really take that too seriously, but the NY Times is held in high regard as the standard of quality journalism that all others should hold themselves to. Even if you personally disagree with this, this is the perception both amongst the general public and in the journalism industry as a whole.

[Roy Karrde]

MSNBC perhaps, although I gather not many people really take that too seriously, but the NY Times is held in high regard as the standard of quality journalism that all others should hold themselves to. Even if you personally disagree with this, this is the perception both amongst the general public and in the journalism industry as a whole.

Which again as I said deals more with under informed public than anything else.

Lets start with MSNBC, this is their reaction to the Hurricane on election night.

"I’m so glad we had that storm last week.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/chri...k-politically/

Now I ask you, you got mad at Fox News for a commentator for calling voters shallow for possibly changing their vote for a photo op. Is that worse than saying "I am glad we had that storm" when that storm has killed dozens of people, destroyed thousands of homes, and left many with nothing?

Can you imagine the outrage if say Hannity had come on in 2002 after the Republicans won the election decisively and said "I'm so glad we had that terror attack last year"

Now onto New York Times

Here is what their obudsman said about his own newspaper

"When The Times covers a national presidential campaign, I have found that the lead editors and reporters are disciplined about enforcing fairness and balance, and usually succeed in doing so. Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times."

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/2...hive-mind-huh/

Do you want me to start posting their greatest hits as well?