[Edited on 3/15/2015 by alloak41]
Are you sure about that?
What does "an anti-war new outlet" have to do with media bias and the fact that Fox News is the most watched and most trusted?
A cornerstone of Progressive thinking is the belief that war is bad and that most wars are driven by greed and perpetuated by profit. Unfortunately the war mongers who profit are seldom the people at risk of dying.
The media profits from war. They profit from the threat of war. War and fear of war drive ratings.
The corporate media is all about profit.
I will freely admit that many journalist are liberal. However, they do not choose what they cover. They certainly don't choose what is not covered.
During the Vietnam War journalist were able to cover, film and photograph the horror. They reported the atrocities committed by our troops. Because that war was televised, and because of the draft, all of America was impacted by that horrible war. Regular Americans were outraged by what they saw and by the loss suffered by so many families.
That liberal news coverage had a great deal to do with the United States getting out of Vietnam.
Now the people who make the weapons own the media. You will never see a corporate news media outright oppose war. In fact, they beat the war drums and convince the masses through fear and lies that war, drone strikes, bombing, etc... are all necessary because we are at risk.
The United States media is not liberal. The corporations that own the media have too much to gain by selling their weapons.
_________________________________________________________________
By your words, Fox News is a then Fair and Balanced news outlet.
From a post I made in February that some people just keep forgetting about.......
Fox News is the most watched:
From end of 2014:
Primetime
Adults 25-54 Fox News 309,000 (up 2%) CNN 187,000 (even) MSNBC 174,000 (down 17%) HLN 118,000 (down 16%)
Total Viewers Fox News 1.779 million (even) MSNBC 600,000 (down 8%) CNN 528,000 (down 8%) HLN 337,000 (down 16%)
Total-Day
Adults 25-54 Fox News 216,000 (down 4%) CNN 127,000 (down 4%) MSNBC 110,000 (down 17%) HLN 106,000 (down 6%)
Total Viewers Fox News 1.058 million (down 4%) CNN 402,000 (down 3%) MSNBC 350,000 (down 12%) HLN 259,000 (down 13%)
So, the US population is 319 million at the end of 2014.
So, .9% of all people watch cable news
.56% watch Fox, .19% watch CNN, and .16% watch MSNBC.
Wow, that is something to be proud of - less than 1% of the population care enough to watch cable news.... so the "most watched" doesn't really mean anything....... and since they tell the truth 18% of the time, most trusted is also meaningless......... lol
quote:
quote:
What does "an anti-war new outlet" have to do with media bias and the fact that Fox News is the most watched and most trusted?A cornerstone of Progressive thinking is the belief that war is bad and that most wars are driven by greed and perpetuated by profit. Unfortunately the war mongers who profit are seldom the people at risk of dying.
The media profits from war. They profit from the threat of war. War and fear of war drive ratings.
The corporate media is all about profit.
I will freely admit that many journalist are liberal. However, they do not choose what they cover. They certainly don't choose what is not covered.
During the Vietnam War journalist were able to cover, film and photograph the horror. They reported the atrocities committed by our troops. Because that war was televised, and because of the draft, all of America was impacted by that horrible war. Regular Americans were outraged by what they saw and by the loss suffered by so many families.
That liberal news coverage had a great deal to do with the United States getting out of Vietnam.
Now the people who make the weapons own the media. You will never see a corporate news media outright oppose war. In fact, they beat the war drums and convince the masses through fear and lies that war, drone strikes, bombing, etc... are all necessary because we are at risk.
The United States media is not liberal. The corporations that own the media have too much to gain by selling their weapons.
_________________________________________________________________
By your words, Fox News is a then Fair and Balanced news outlet.
Yeah, sure. You're right.
Whatever.
[Edited on 3/15/2015 by BillyBlastoff]
From a post I made in February that some people just keep forgetting about.......
Fox News is the most watched:
From end of 2014:
Primetime
Adults 25-54 Fox News 309,000 (up 2%) CNN 187,000 (even) MSNBC 174,000 (down 17%) HLN 118,000 (down 16%)
Total Viewers Fox News 1.779 million (even) MSNBC 600,000 (down 8%) CNN 528,000 (down 8%) HLN 337,000 (down 16%)
Total-Day
Adults 25-54 Fox News 216,000 (down 4%) CNN 127,000 (down 4%) MSNBC 110,000 (down 17%) HLN 106,000 (down 6%)
Total Viewers Fox News 1.058 million (down 4%) CNN 402,000 (down 3%) MSNBC 350,000 (down 12%) HLN 259,000 (down 13%)
So, the US population is 319 million at the end of 2014.
So, .9% of all people watch cable news
.56% watch Fox, .19% watch CNN, and .16% watch MSNBC.
Wow, that is something to be proud of - less than 1% of the population care enough to watch cable news.... so the "most watched" doesn't really mean anything....... and since they tell the truth 18% of the time, most trusted is also meaningless......... lol
_______________________________________________________________________
Your inability to understand statistical analysis is quite telling.
1.) You provided no link to your data,
2.) You failed to mention that the Most Watched, Most Trusted information is for cable/satellite viewers only.
3.) You assume that the entire population watches TV news which it does not.
4.) You assume that the entire population has cable/satellite service which it does not.
5.) Your tell the truth 18% of the time comes from a far left website who’s intent often is to attack Fox News.
And on and on.
If you need help, ask a high school student.
quote:
quote:
What does "an anti-war new outlet" have to do with media bias and the fact that Fox News is the most watched and most trusted?A cornerstone of Progressive thinking is the belief that war is bad and that most wars are driven by greed and perpetuated by profit. Unfortunately the war mongers who profit are seldom the people at risk of dying.
The media profits from war. They profit from the threat of war. War and fear of war drive ratings.
The corporate media is all about profit.
I will freely admit that many journalist are liberal. However, they do not choose what they cover. They certainly don't choose what is not covered.
During the Vietnam War journalist were able to cover, film and photograph the horror. They reported the atrocities committed by our troops. Because that war was televised, and because of the draft, all of America was impacted by that horrible war. Regular Americans were outraged by what they saw and by the loss suffered by so many families.
That liberal news coverage had a great deal to do with the United States getting out of Vietnam.
Now the people who make the weapons own the media. You will never see a corporate news media outright oppose war. In fact, they beat the war drums and convince the masses through fear and lies that war, drone strikes, bombing, etc... are all necessary because we are at risk.
The United States media is not liberal. The corporations that own the media have too much to gain by selling their weapons.
_________________________________________________________________
By your words, Fox News is a then Fair and Balanced news outlet.
Yeah, sure. You're right.
Whatever.
[Edited on 3/15/2015 by BillyBlastoff]
________________________________________________________________
You stated that the news media does not have a bias.
By your own words that would include Fox news.
The news media does have a heavy bias and has been for many years now.
If you had done any research of the media analysis organizations you would have seen this.
Of course you wouldn't believe it because that does not fit your political ideology.
You stated that the news media does not have a bias.
By your own words that would include Fox news.
I stated the media DO have a bias. I said they are pro-war. That driving the drum beat to war brings the giant corporations that own the media outlets huge profits.
Wow Mule. How do you think I said the media had no bias? Just try reading that post again. Maybe read it twice and take notes. That always helped me when I was reading difficult to understand texts.
Obama and The Clintons really don’t like each other much.
Obama’s White House has been distancing itself from Hillary’s email scandal fast.
Obama’s main PAC Media Matters and its financier George Soros want Liz Warren
Politics are getting really dirty early in the Democratic Party:
NY Post: Valerie Jarrett Leaked Hillary’s Private Email Use to Press
by Katie McHugh - 14 Mar 2015
Vengeful Obama confidante Valeria Jarrett went through back channels to leak Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to the press, an explosive new report reveals.
The New York Post‘s Edward Klein reports that a source familiar with Bill Clinton said that the former president told him: “The Obamas are out to get us any way they can.”
Jarrett blamed the Democratic party’s 2014 midterm losses on the Clintons’ insinuations that Obama’s unpopular policies, including executive amnesty for foreigners gobbling up American jobs, made the president an “albatross” around the reigning party’s neck.
Jarrett, Obama, and Obama’s wife greeted Hillary as a triumvirate of black liberals at the White House after Democrats got thrashed at the voting booth. Under the watchful eyes of his wife and closest senior advisor, Obama told Hillary, the former first lady of Arkansas, in no uncertain terms he would remain “neutral” in the 2016 election — signaling he would not, in fact, support the Clinton candidacy that the media call “inevitable.”
Ambitious Democrats are scheming to kneecap a Hillary candidacy before she declares she’s running.
“With Obama’s approval, Valerie has been holding secret meetings with Martin O’Malley [the former Democratic governor of Maryland] and [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren,” a Klein source said. “She’s promised O’Malley and Warren the full support of the White House if they will challenge Hillary for the presidential nomination.”
The trio in the White House see Hillary as an uncommitted ideologue who might give into the demands of Republicans elected by Americans who disagree with current White House policies.
“Obama and Valerie Jarrett will go to any lengths to prevent Hillary from becoming president. They believe that Hillary, like her husband, is left of center, not a true-blue liberal,” a source Klein identifies as close the White House said.
A cunning Jarrett used Monica Lewinsky’s voluntary re-entrance into public life as a chance to humiliate Bill for the sexual indiscretions that almost ruined his presidency. Any media outlet that splashed ink covering Lewinsky’s teary declarations of love for Bill would be favored by the secretive White House, Jarrett claimed.
Klein’s source recounts Bill’s furious charges:
“My contacts and friends in newspapers and TV tell me that they’ve been contacted by the White House and offered all kinds of negative stories about us. The Obamas are behind the e-mail story, and they’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women, that Hillary promoted people at the State Department who’d done favors for our foundation, that John Kerry had to clean up diplomatic messes Hillary left behind.”
During her confirmation hearings to determine whether she was qualified to become the next Secretary of State, Hillary set up a private email server in her home, eschewing federal government regulations. Press Secretary Josh Earnest confirmed that the White House sent emails to Hillary’s private email.
Hillary sent the GOP-requested copies of her State Department emails in print form; FOIA requests involving emails she sent from a private server in official capacity as Secretary of State may only be revealed after the 2016 presidential election is decided.
Bernie Sanders, the admitted socialist?
1,) The income inequality argument from the left is a joke. Hillary paid her lat campaign staff women 76 cents on the dollar and Obama pays his White House women less than their male counterparts. Yea, it’s the GOP’s war on women. What crap.
2.) The democrats in Congress are blocking the Trans-Pacific trade agreement.
3.) High unemployment, no kidding. Obama refuses to engage with Congress and he has failed for 6 years to offer a new, living wage jobs bill. Harry Reid blocked 16 bills from the Congress that would have created good, full time jobs.
4.) Global Warming is a hoax.
5.) Citizens United was ruled on by The Supreme Court, the one part of Government that actually works. If Bernie doesn’t like it, change the law.
6.) The real issues facing our country? Fine, The Republican has been asking Obama for 6 years and he and the Democrats have refused to even allow the discussion.
7.) Hillary’s emails are not only a scandal but laws were broken. There is not a separate set of standards for The Clintons, habitual liars. Hell her husband was convicted of lying under oath.
The point of the article is that even Hillary’s own party is figuring out that she is damaged goods and they need to find someone else.
Socialist or not, he's right on this.
1,) income inequality is real and it's not just a gender issue
2.) there's more to it that that and all you can do is play the blame game without adding a thing to the conversation as usual
3.) Not true.
4.) Even less true.
5.) That doesn't mean congress is powerless to address it
6.) Your blindly partisan rants are a good example of why real issues go unaddressed.
7.) Which laws, exactly?
You may not like it and I may not like it, but Hillary will be President. Mark it down.
[Edited on 3/16/2015 by gondicar]
Socialist or not, he's right on this.
1,) income inequality is real and it's not just a gender issue
2.) there's more to it that that and all you can do is play the blame game without adding a thing to the conversation as usual
3.) Not true.
4.) Even less true.
5.) That doesn't mean congress is powerless to address it
6.) Your blindly partisan rants are a good example of why real issues go unaddressed.
7.) Which laws, exactly?
You may not like it and I may not like it, but Hillary will be President. Mark it down.
[Edited on 3/16/2015 by gondicar]
there are probably a few women-abusing leaders in the Mideast who won't like it either.
if anyone thinks our standing in the international community has taken a hit (debatable) because of Obama, just wait 'til '16.
there are probably a few women-abusing leaders in the Mideast who won't like it either.
if anyone thinks our standing in the international community has taken a hit (debatable) because of Obama, just wait 'til '16.
Hillary is Dick Cheney in a pantsuit. Just wait. You guys will love it.
In the end it will be about the candidates views and ideology when it comes to important issues and none of this attack dog bs will have any affect on the election. Whether it is Hilary or anyone else vs whoever on the Republican side it will come down to who the majority agree with about the major domestic and foreign policy issues and I believe Hilary if she runs will be very strong on the major issues both at home and abroad.
In the end it will come down to who seems the more competent stronger and better leader equipped to lead the country today. The issues and sub issues won't matter so much. With rare exceptions such as the 2008 election, the candidate perceived as more moderate in both his politics and manner generally wins.
In the end it will be about the candidates views and ideology when it comes to important issues and none of this attack dog bs will have any affect on the election. Whether it is Hilary or anyone else vs whoever on the Republican side it will come down to who the majority agree with about the major domestic and foreign policy issues and I believe Hilary if she runs will be very strong on the major issues both at home and abroad.
In the end it will come down to who seems the more competent stronger and better leader equipped to lead the country today. The issues and sub issues won't matter so much. With rare exceptions such as the 2008 election, the candidate perceived as more moderate in both his politics and manner generally wins.
Issues be damned. In the end it will come down to whoever has the best chance to beat the candidate from the other party.
In the end it will be about the candidates views and ideology when it comes to important issues and none of this attack dog bs will have any affect on the election. Whether it is Hilary or anyone else vs whoever on the Republican side it will come down to who the majority agree with about the major domestic and foreign policy issues and I believe Hilary if she runs will be very strong on the major issues both at home and abroad.
In the end it will come down to who seems the more competent stronger and better leader equipped to lead the country today. The issues and sub issues won't matter so much. With rare exceptions such as the 2008 election, the candidate perceived as more moderate in both his politics and manner generally wins.
Issues be damned. In the end it will come down to whoever has the best chance to beat the candidate from the other party.
____________________________________________________________________
And which candidate or candidates campaign staff screws up first.
If it is a hillary vs. liz fight, which one side will first throw the "B" word.
If they did a cat fight pay-per-view they'd bring in millions.
Has Hillary announced yet the formation of her legal defense fund?
In the end it will be about the candidates views and ideology when it comes to important issues and none of this attack dog bs will have any affect on the election. Whether it is Hilary or anyone else vs whoever on the Republican side it will come down to who the majority agree with about the major domestic and foreign policy issues and I believe Hilary if she runs will be very strong on the major issues both at home and abroad.
In the end it will come down to who seems the more competent stronger and better leader equipped to lead the country today. The issues and sub issues won't matter so much. With rare exceptions such as the 2008 election, the candidate perceived as more moderate in both his politics and manner generally wins.
Issues be damned. In the end it will come down to whoever has the best chance to beat the candidate from the other party.
____________________________________________________________________
And which candidate or candidates campaign staff screws up first.
If it is a hillary vs. liz fight, which one side will first throw the "B" word.If they did a cat fight pay-per-view they'd bring in millions.
Liz will not run against Hillary. She probably doesn't intend to run either way since she has done none of the groundwork that almost all candidates have done by now, but in any case she'd only run if Hillary does not.
[Edited on 3/16/2015 by gondicar]
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
3.) You assume that the entire population watches TV news which it does not.
4.) You assume that the entire population has cable/satellite service which it does not.
If it only counts such a small sample, such as only Americans with cable, who watch cable news, then what does the #1 ranking even prove?
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
3.) You assume that the entire population watches TV news which it does not.
4.) You assume that the entire population has cable/satellite service which it does not.If it only counts such a small sample, such as only Americans with cable, who watch cable news, then what does the #1 ranking even prove?
_____________________________________________________________________
It shows that the people prefer the Fair and Balanced news of Fox News far more than the left-wing CNN, MSNBC, HLN and all others.
Other than Fox News, the other news outlets only offer the liberal spin as opposed to Fox News who, if it is political issue, generally has both a conservative and a liberal to present their opinions.
The people want to know what both sides are saying and prefer to make up their own minds after being well informed.
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
_________________________________________________
The data is clearly posted on their websites.
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
_________________________________________________
The data is clearly posted on their websites.
Then go get it. Your word is worthless.
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
_________________________________________________
The data is clearly posted on their websites.
Then go get it. Your word is worthless.
_______________________________________________
I don't do research for those too lazy or too stupid to do it for themselves.
The “Most Watched” ranking comes from The Nielson Ratings and the “Most Trusted” comes from a Quinnipiac poll.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
_________________________________________________
The data is clearly posted on their websites.
Then go get it. Your word is worthless.
_______________________________________________
I don't do research for those too lazy or too stupid to do it for themselves.
I guess that means you don't do your own research. It actually explains your lies and misinformation. 😛 😛 😛
[Edited on 3/17/2015 by jkeller]
Boynton simply asked a question Mule. No research required. He just wants clarity. I'll repost his question so you can specifically answer.
In which demos and dayparts are you referring to? Are you referring to its overall cume audience or AQH?
See the curvy thing at the end of the sentence with a dot underneath? That indicates a question.
If Hillary signed form OF-109 before leaving the State Department she has committed a felony. Can't get an answer to that question yet. Nobody seems to know if she signed it or not.
If Hillary signed form OF-109 before leaving the State Department she has committed a felony. Can't get an answer to that question yet. Nobody seems to know if she signed it or not.
It's amazing, this administration stonewalls everything, it is really simple, did she sign it or not? What has it been a week? and still we don't have the answer to that. It is a really simple question.
The state department should be able to produce the document within hours.
If Hillary signed form OF-109 before leaving the State Department she has committed a felony. Can't get an answer to that question yet. Nobody seems to know if she signed it or not.
It's amazing, this administration stonewalls everything, it is really simple, did she sign it or not? What has it been a week? and still we don't have the answer to that. It is a really simple question.
The state department should be able to produce the document within hours.
__________________________________________________________
One would think...
However, The State Department is loaded with Hillary's people and is still run by her party.
After all this time that form ain't gonna appear.
The interesting thing will be the how and why spin goes.
The "I have no information on that today" line can't last much longer.
Hillary really need to make a change in her crisis management team.
Right now she looks arrogant, evasive, uncooperative and has that "how dare you question me, I'm Hillary Clinton!" look.
Who ever is advising her is either not getting thru the to her or she can't be reasoned with.
Whatever is happening in the Hillary camp, it ain't workin'.
If Hillary signed form OF-109 before leaving the State Department she has committed a felony. Can't get an answer to that question yet. Nobody seems to know if she signed it or not.
It's amazing, this administration stonewalls everything, it is really simple, did she sign it or not? What has it been a week? and still we don't have the answer to that. It is a really simple question.
The state department should be able to produce the document within hours.
On the flip side, I'm sure they could produce a printout of Tea Partiers and key GOP donors to put
the IRS in touch with. That would take all of 15 seconds.
