Fox "News" not our friend

Nope, I have found that the DAILY SHOW (and yeah, I know his leanings, but at least he has some humor) to be more balanced on guns than the factor.

O' Reilly is a huge idiot and his presence is one of the definitive moments when it is time to change the channel.

I get all of my news online. At least there I can sift through all the bullcrap and find actual news that is devoid of political agenda.

The sad pert is they are capitalizing on the gun control issue like all of the other media outlets are doing. If it gets ratings and sells more advertising, they'll report on anything good or bad. With all of us glued to the TV watching the events evolve, they see it as a prime opportunity to increase viewership. I wouldn't be surprised if ad rates have gone up because of the issue.

Keep fighting for our rights. It's not over till the fat lady sings. Hopefully we'll eventually win this battle. The sooner the better. Ammo has become a more valuable commodity than gold or silver.

Hmmm

Uh-oh...all the Righties that thought that the FOX mouthpiece was gonna stand up for them finally saw The Light!

Fox "News" was created for a pointedly conservative agenda (according to its founder) but is now only in it for The Big Money! It's all entertainment, folks!

Too bad for Hannity, too! Almost (but not quite) makes me ashamed to be Irish...

Hmmmmm 2

Or...

There may be another motive (although I doubt it, seriously)...FOX "News" (I can't hardly type that without laughing ) actually put a real introspective approach into a news article/subject and followed it to its logical conclusion. WOW!

We'll see.

Fox "News" was created for a pointedly conservative agenda (according to its founder) but is now only in it for The Big Money! It's all entertainment, folks!

Click to expand...

+1. Pre-Fox News the US media had slanted left since the Vietnam era. Fox News found a niche by slanting the same stories to the right or running stories that catered to politically conservative viewers. But it's still the same "it bleeds, it leads" story lines, not a redefinition of the media which has degenerated into info-tainment and the bizarre modern American confusion of the categories of "victim" and "hero," which even a decade of war with plenty of real honest to God heroes running around hasn't done much to dislodge.

In regards to reporting on mass shootings, Fox could have really redefined things by focusing on the stories out there where private citizens, off duty cops, prompt police response, etc., stopped or pinned down psychos with guns until overwhelming force arrived and kept the body count low.

But the problem with that is that people wouldn't care and wouldn't tune in -- Fox and every other network pump tons of money into market research and if stories about people who just manned up, showed up, or stood up when it was go time played well with viewers, there'd be more of them on the air. I suspect market research has found that stories about every day people, more or less just like the viewer, rising above and beyond in danger don't resonate with viewers because those stories make a lot of people feel inferior about their own boring lives. A mass shooting with lots of traumatized witnesses/survivors -- A) people feel lucky they weren't there, and B) get off on the evil at the petting zoo aspect as the face and life story of the latest perpetrator is splashed all over the place.

As a species we haven't changed a bit since the days when Roman military parades did not just include the winning side, but included hordes of enslaved foes and the other side's leader paraded to his execution if they could manage it. We live in a world where there are some wolves, some sheep dogs, and a whole lot of sheep -- and the sheep don't thrive on stories where the wolves get denied their drama by prompt response by sheepdogs (whether professional or volunteers who rise to the moment).

It's true. None of the television based "news entertainment cabals" have the interests of the rights of firearms owners at heart (and it's not just OUR rights, it's their rights too). CNN, FOX, MSNBC (that hurt just typing it) are not friends of the 2nd amendment to say the least. They are simply biased "Propaganda Organs" (FOX just thinly veils it's bias, except for Hannity, who is the only one who actually understands firearms, from what I have seen). Even online, it's heavily biased, but at least online you will see more stories and editorials that reflect the facts and truths of the matter. They just don't make it onto television. Cable news is not our friend. Not. At. All.

Yep, it is all "Info-tainment", sadly even Fox News, whom I thought 15 or so years ago was a breath of fresh air in a totally left leaning medium. Rupert Murdoch is as anti (legal) gun as the next foreign lib, but I's sure he loves the illegal guns that create the "news" his organizations cover.

It's not just gun control, there are only a couple people on Fox News that actually seem to authentically understand conservatism/libertarianism, And none of them are anchors...

Geraldo Rivera has always been very liberal and has always been supportative of more stringent gun control laws. His views did not change when he went to work for Fox and nor should they. "To thine own self be true."

O'Reilly doesn't seem to have a clear attitude on the subject.

I don't watch O'Reilly that often but I did see his show with Bob Costas. At that time O'Reilly made the argument that people in the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting would have been better off if they had had their own gun.

Who knows, maybe he really believes that or maybe it was just for ratings.

Main stream media is not our friend. None of them.

News should not have ANY agenda. Not "ours" - not "theirs." Therefore, nothing we're getting off the television qualifies as worth watching as news. And from being forced to observe a few minutes of it each week I can't imagine a media product LESS focused on providing facts and encouraging thoughtful contemplation of the surrounding issues than TV "news" as it has become.

I don't need news commentators to defend my agenda, and I don't need them to interpret events for me. If I was invested in these people's opinions, I suppose I'd be disappointed or feel betrayed, but having watched even a few moments of what they do for a living I wouldn't want them to read me the weather...or tell anyone else how I feel about it.

I watch TV news in the morning while getting ready for work so I have some idea of what is going on in the world. It's a little hard to surf the Internet and get dressed at the same time so I use the TV. Several years ago I switched to Fox in the mornings. My observations with the morning crew and my ranking on wether they are gun friendly or not are as follows;

Alisyn Camerota - HECK NO. Has said only LE and Military need access to scary black rifles.

Getchen Carlson - No.

Brian Kilmeade - mostly no.

Steve Doocy - more consistent Yes.

Tucker Carlson - BIG YES.

Sam1911 said:

News should not have ANY agenda. Not "ours" - not "theirs." Therefore, nothing we're getting off the television qualifies as worth watching as news. And from being forced to observe a few minutes of it each week I can't imagine a media product LESS focused on providing facts and encouraging thoughtful contemplation of the surrounding issues than TV "news" as it has become.

I don't need news commentators to defend my agenda, and I don't need them to interpret events for me. If I was invested in these people's opinions, I suppose I'd be disappointed or feel betrayed, but having watched even a few moments of what they do for a living I wouldn't want them to read me the weather...or tell anyone else how I feel about it.

Click to expand...

Amen. I love how get their panties in a bunch over Fox News, probably because it disrupts their regularly scheduled liberal brain washing by the rest of the media. Breaking news...all news casts are biased! All of them are in it to make money! Details at 10. Look beyond the obvious and think for yourself.

radiotom said:

It's not just gun control, there are only a couple people on Fox News that actually seem to authentically understand conservatism/libertarianism, And none of them are anchors...

Click to expand...

The only two that come to mind are no longer there or shadowed by the "stars" of the network. Judge Andrew Napolitano was great when he hosted the cancelled Freedom Watch. Also add in John Stossel. He didn't make any friends when he worked on ABC, and was considered too conservative there. He doesn't really fit in at Fox for being "too liberal". That guy used to be a liberal consumer reporter on ABC decades ago but turned into a staunch Libertarian and has been consistently upsetting the news network for decades now. He was going against the grain and running pro-2A stuff on ABC's 20/20 primetime. It's depressing to see Fox waste his talents by occasionally pitting him against Bill "Tides Go In" O'Reilly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoLuTjguJA

I agree that "news" should not have any agenda and prior to 24 hr news channels (pre-CNN), the "news" was often news but selectively provided on TV due to time limitations. Vietnam was a classic "reporting" with a biased slant. The result was GI's coming home from the war were spit on in airports.

The 24 hr cable channel news are decidely opinionated about the 2A topic, politics, social topics and so forth. They are paid to give their opinions or lead discussions where topics are discussed.

The closest thing to "fair and balanced" is in fact Fox News and I think CNN is trying to present a more balanced approach to news discussions in an attempt to gain viewers and ratings.

Al Jazeera, is probably more factual than all the msm bunch, including faux news.

cnn.com has had some surprisingly balanced articles lately. The asked why people would want to own "assault" weapons and posted their reasons without too much commentary.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/04/us/marine-gun-letter-ireport/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/21/politics/gun-owners-second-amendment-rights/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/21/us/military-style-weapons-ireport/index.html

xfyrfiter said:

Al Jazeera, is probably more factual than all the msm bunch, including faux news.

Click to expand...

I actually agree with this. Despite the "scary sounding" name, I routinely read their pieces on Al Jazeera America. It's much less fluffy opinionated crap and more factual and to-the-point than anything written by most American newspapers or the BBC.

Maybe I'm naive, but I had the expectation that Fox is "conservative" and would therefore be supportive of firearms owners.

Click to expand...

No offense..... but Yes, Thats naive to think that.

People need to STOP thinking that any political party is either pro or anti 2A.

Reporters are like career politicians, they only care about their own agenda and the world would be a better place if they were all at the bottom of the ocean.