posted by ptown_trojans_1

FFS Hannity is Fox. Just like Maddow is MSNBC. WTF are you talking about? 

I know there is two parts to Fox News, but FFS Trump follows and is influenced by the fucked up part, like Hannity, Tucker, and Fox and Friends, Just look at what they cover and his tweets. 

What is the point of the bolded when you go ahead and say "fuck" anyway? 

posted by fish82

Fox has covered Trump negatively 52-48%...pretty close to the same ratio as they did Obama over the same span. The main difference is with the rest of the networks, who cover Trump negatively about 93% of the time thus far.

What show(s)? Shepard Smith? Again, I only saw the study that analyzed the nightly news. 

posted by gut

 

I've rarely been proven wrong or ill informed here.

You, as usual, are clueless

 

Faux News has been more negative on Trump than they were on Obama.  I understand how hard that is to process when you're brainwahsed by bullshit.  

I eagerly await your irrelevant link to a Krugman article.

Fish did not say fox was more negative for Trump than Obama and it seems both of you are being obtuse and apparently this is an analysis of only the nightly news? 

posted by gut

LFMAO......what useful idiot road job.  It's 1 hour out of the entire day - Hannity IS NOT FOX (unless you're a lib, and that's what you need to believe).

I'm sorry if it destroys what you'd like your worldview to be....But Fox - as shitty as they are - ARE much more fair and balanced than the other news networks.

Ok so I found the study and my God reasoning fascinates me. Truly.

So the study only examined the nightly news reports.

The center examined the coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in three major papers—the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post—and the main newscasts of CBS, NBC, CNN and Fox News.

So they only analyzed Special Report with Bret Baier. And yet you use that to say that FOX - the entire apparatus - was more negative toward Obama.

Now you either didn't actually read it or you are using the sort of spurious reasoning you routinely bitch about.

Saying that Fox is more negative to Trump than Obama because one program is fair when they produce pro Trump propaganda all day long is like saying MSNBC is fair to Trump because they have one show with Hugh Hewitt who is a good and fair conservative while the rest of the day the spout liberal propaganda. 

posted by fish82

Fox has covered Trump negatively 52-48%...pretty close to the same ratio as they did Obama over the same span. The main difference is with the rest of the networks, who cover Trump negatively about 93% of the time thus far.

Ok yeah so I found it and this statement is not what the study found brah. They just analyzed the nightly news programs. 

The implicstion in your post is that Fox News as a whole is more negative to Trump,than Obama.

Bret Baier, unlike pretty much the rest of Fox News is a real journalist! 

posted by gut

LFMAO......what useful idiot road job.  It's 1 hour out of the entire day - Hannity IS NOT FOX (unless you're a lib, and that's what you need to believe).

I'm sorry if it destroys what you'd like your worldview to be....But Fox - as shitty as they are - ARE much more fair and balanced than the other news networks.

Which programs on Fox News save Special Report with Bret Baier and the Fox Report with Shepard Smith do you think are not as pro-conservative/GOP as MSNBC's programs are pro-liberal/dem? 

posted by CenterBHSFan

There are just too many exceptional quotes in this article so instead of filling the post with quotes, I'll just drop the link:

https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/the-video-of-the-man-saving-the-rabbit-from-the-fire-ca-1821184637

 

Garbage everywhere, per usual for “the root”.

Not sure how to post this as a picture, but this is how you get fucking Trump. Identity politics at its best

https://twitter.com/thedemocrats/status/950036099149287424?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Eios%7Ctwgr%5Ecom.apple.UIKit.activity.Message

posted by BoatShoes

Which programs on Fox News save Special Report with Bret Baier and the Fox Report with Shepard Smith do you think are not as pro-conservative/GOP as MSNBC's programs are pro-liberal/dem? 

The Five.  And pretty much any of their shows outside of Hannity and Tucker.

posted by iclfan2

Not sure how to post this as a picture, but this is how you get fucking Trump. Identity politics at its best

https://twitter.com/thedemocrats/status/950036099149287424?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Eios%7Ctwgr%5Ecom.apple.UIKit.activity.Message

 

These golden globes, Oscar type shows are brutal and reminds me of this post. Every winner and its “a black man won the award for the first time ever!!” Or “a white man won the award, shame on the golden globes for giving the award to a white man!!”

Sam Rockwell is literally getting roasted on Twitter right now because he won an award for which he PLAYED A RACIST PERSON IN THE MOVIE! Lol

LOL Natalie Portman just now: “and the all male nominees are:” and everyone’s like oooohhhh burn!! 

Conpletely taking away the accomplishments of the men she’s about to mention as nominees. Because there weren’t any women nominated. 

I gotta turn this shit off lol I’ve only been watching for 5 min and I want to leave this planet already. 

posted by BoatShoes

Fish did not say fox was more negative for Trump than Obama and it seems both of you are being obtuse and apparently this is an analysis of only the nightly news? 

I can't find it any more, but the study I saw had Fox 38% negative on Obama and 52% negative on Trump.

There are numerous studies out there.  If you can be bothered to review any of them, it's pretty clear Fox - and most of its programs - tends to be "more" and "equally" critical of both sides.  The liberal media really carried water for Obama, and if that's your standard then Fox looks incredibly biased.  Except the liberal media has been completely unhinged with Trump, and covering far less policy than ever.

I never claimed Fox was good.  I just said they are "better" than the left-wing trash out there.  Fox should hardly be the standard, but if you aren't watching Fox then you're really choosing to live in a bubble.  Fox is still too biased/unbalanced in their coverage, but they appear to be signficantly less polarized (for both Repubs and Dems) in their coverage than the liberal outlets.

posted by BoatShoes

Ok yeah so I found it and this statement is not what the study found brah. They just analyzed the nightly news programs. 

The implicstion in your post is that Fox News as a whole is more negative to Trump,than Obama.

Bret Baier, unlike pretty much the rest of Fox News is a real journalist! 

They analized all actual news coverage..not just the "nightly news programs." "Main news programs" clearly refers to news blocks as opposed to the evening talking head shows. The Shorenstein Center has done multiple such studies over the years, and their methodology is always the same. You're reading into that statement what you want to see.   I've never seen a credible media study that included the 8-11pm talking head shows, and I've never even mentioned one of them in any discussion of the issue over the years.

I wasn't "implying" anything. I said (accurately) that their coverage of Trump was fairly similar to that of Obama over the same time span.

posted by SportsAndLady

LOL Natalie Portman just now: “and the all male nominees are:” and everyone’s like oooohhhh burn!! 

Conpletely taking away the accomplishments of the men she’s about to mention as nominees. Because there weren’t any women nominated. 

I gotta turn this shit off lol I’ve only been watching for 5 min and I want to leave this planet already. 

I wouldn't waste 6 seconds on these asinine shows. 

posted by QuakerOats

I wouldn't waste 6 seconds on these asinine shows. 

Yeah, they might be one of the few things harder to take seriously than you are.

BTW - 

U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro cited "flagrant prosecutorial misconduct" in her decision to dismiss all charges against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, two of his sons and another person.
 

TY

So Oprah is now a 2020 candidate?  Unreal how dumb people are to think that jst because you spoke at the golden globes you are qualified to be PUSA

posted by Spock

So Oprah is now a 2020 candidate?  Unreal how dumb people are to think that jst because you spoke at the golden globes you are qualified to be PUSA

Says the guy legitimately in support of the businessman/reality TV star.

Just to clarify, I watched about 7 min of the golden globes. Fiancé turned it on so I watched but literally couldn’t take more than that. It was so awful. 

posted by gut

The Five.  And pretty much any of their shows outside of Hannity and Tucker.

Unsurprisingly I will have to completely disagree. Indeed, it is funny you would even pick "The Five" as your example of a non-conservative show because it even plays to the trope with four people generally amenable to conservatism with one liberal. 

And just to give another example. When they sought to replace Tucker's slot after Megyn Kelly left - they openly made it known they wanted a "Pro-Trump Conservative Woman to align themselves with the new administration" and went with Martha MacCallum. 

Amazing if you really believe this really. 

LOL at this $380 sweater:

http://www.eonline.com/news/904521/connie-britton-wears-poverty-is-sexist-shirt-to-2018-golden-globes-what-it-means

Poverty isn't sexist. It's the natural state of mankind.

"Nature is sexist."

posted by fish82

They analized all actual news coverage..not just the "nightly news programs." "Main news programs" clearly refers to news blocks as opposed to the evening talking head shows.

Unless you and Gut are referring to some other study on Trump other than this one linked below your statement is incorrect. 

From the Abstract 

A new report from Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

The report is based on an analysis of news reports in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets (The UK’s Financial Times and BBC, and Germany’s ARD).

Further down it clarifies that "Main Newscasts" = the nightly news cast programs: 

This paper examines Trump’s first 100 days in office, not through the lens of what he said about the news media, but what they reported about him. The research is based on news coverage in the print editions of three U.S. daily papers (The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post), the main newscasts of four U.S. television networks (CBS Evening News, CNN’s The Situation Room, Fox’s Special Report, and NBC Nightly News), and three European news outlets (Financial Times, based in London; BBC, Britain’s public service broadcaster; and ARD, Germany’s oldest public service broadcaster). The president’s role as a global leader, and Trump’s pledge to redefine that role, prompted the inclusion of European news in the study.

So to reiterate - just the nightly news programs and not all main news blocks. In other words, like I said earlier in these posts - a single program on Fox News was analyzed under this study.

Here is the link: 

https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/

posted by gut

I can't find it any more, but the study I saw had Fox 38% negative on Obama and 52% negative on Trump.

There are numerous studies out there.  If you can be bothered to review any of them, it's pretty clear Fox - and most of its programs - tends to be "more" and "equally" critical of both sides.  The liberal media really carried water for Obama, and if that's your standard then Fox looks incredibly biased.  Except the liberal media has been completely unhinged with Trump, and covering far less policy than ever.

I never claimed Fox was good.  I just said they are "better" than the left-wing trash out there.  Fox should hardly be the standard, but if you aren't watching Fox then you're really choosing to live in a bubble.  Fox is still too biased/unbalanced in their coverage, but they appear to be signficantly less polarized (for both Repubs and Dems) in their coverage than the liberal outlets.

"Numerous studies" and yet neither you nor I can find them. And the only one I can find regarding Trump shows that one Fox News program was analyzed. https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/

(See the post above in reply to Fish82). 

And again - to nearly everyone except you apparently - it is anything but true that Fox News is equally critical of both Democrats and Republicans. To say that Fox News is "less polarized" than the liberal media is really a mind boggling statement to read. It is every bit the Pro-Trump water-carrier that the liberal media was for Obama. 

They beat the liberal media at their own game!

I agree the liberal media has let Trump put them on tilt but that doesn't mean Fox News is any less polarized - just in the opposite direction.

posted by Spock

So Oprah is now a 2020 candidate?  Unreal how dumb people are to think that jst because you spoke at the golden globes you are qualified to be PUSA

Correct.  You need to successfull host a reality show for a few years in order to become qualified.  

posted by BoatShoes

Unsurprisingly I will have to completely disagree. Indeed, it is funny you would even pick "The Five" as your example of a non-conservative show because it even plays to the trope with four people generally amenable to conservatism with one liberal. 

I would say that besides Juan Williams, Dana Perino isn't really a "conservative". I personally don't think she's all that bright and her job with Bush was really just a reader (she had a brief stint actually speaking).

Greg Gutfeld is conservative but even he makes fun of Trump. Kim Guilfoille (I think I spelled that wrong) is kinda sorta over the top with her conservatism.

The last two times I watched the Five the fifth person was two different people so I don't know if that show rotates that fifth person or not.