It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Foxnews- Fair and Balance in This Election

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Seems like contrary to what people say about Foxnews being in the McCain camp pocket, a recent study shows that they have been pretty fair to both candidates.


On Fox News, in contrast, coverage of Obama was more negative than the norm (40% of stories vs. 29% overall) and less positive (25% of stories vs. 36% generally). For McCain, the news channel was somewhat more positive (22% vs. 14% in the press overall) and substantially less negative (40% vs. 57% in the press overall). Yet even here, his negative stories outweighed positive ones by almost 2 to 1.


source

If you notice Foxnews stories are 40% negative for both Obama and McCain. The positive numbers are 25% for Obama and 22% for McCain.

Also notice that Foxnews has aired twice as many negative stories of McCain than positive ones.

Seems Fair and Balance to me.

The graph on the site tells the story the best. I don't know how to post it here. If anybody cares to post it, I would appreciate it.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by jam321]




posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Who funds the PEJ?

Just asking because I actually watch Fox news.

You know what, I will ammend that. I can honestly say that not all the stuff I see on Fox news is overtly anti-obama, just fox+friends in the morning, Bill O'Reilly, and all the shows Sean Hannity wormed his name into. Other than that, maybe it really is fair and balance and it is just my view that is skewed.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by Lucifer Rising]



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer Rising
 


I think Sean and the Morning crew do have vendetta against Obama.

But I have seen Greta, Shep, and Many others report pretty fairly on both.


You asked good question about who funds PEJ. It says Pew charitable Trusts.

Here is the website they direct people to.

www.pewtrusts.org...



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


You may be right, I don't watch those shows, they do not make me laugh as much. I also listen to Hannity and O'Reilly on the radio so I get it double. I could not find who funds pew, seems well respected from a little bit of searching. So maybe it all evens out. I guess I just figure that it's flagship loudmouths are representative of the channel as whole. Maybe they need to look at why people have this perception if it is so false.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:13 AM
link   
ORielly, Hannity and the F&F hosts all comment on the news that is reported. There is a difference between their shows with commentary and Fox's straight news reporting.

For those who still dont get that commentators arent reporters and reporters shouldnt be commentators.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer Rising
 


I agree, those shows are not fair and balanced but for the most part the rest of them give a fair shake.

Even if Obama The Messiah and all his followers complain about FoxNews it's a lot better to watch for the most part than CNN.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by whiskeyswiller
 


I just wish someone would tell O'Reilly that there are other shows on that network and not just him and his OPINION! I never check out CNN, it isn't interesting. I do not trust TV for news anywhere, anyway. Someone at Fox needs to tell these few people to either quiet down or let someone else speak up because they way it works is between them all, I get Obama bashing before work, and then again late at night and that is when I get to watch Fox.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


You have made a very valid point. I will have to agree with you that most people do not distinguish between the commentators and the news reporters. I have noticed over the past few days they have been showing each of them speak at their rallies and have yet to see Foxnews be unfair to any one of them.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer Rising
 


All I can suggest is dont watch/listen to them. That channel is a business like anything else and apparently the success of the business and consistently high ratings show that quite a few people like listening/watching them even if they each have essentially the same comments to make so I dont think Fox will be making any major changes anytime soon. The addition Glenn Beck should make things a little more interesting with his NWO, global conspiracy, Lou Dobbs approach to things but as per the ratings and success of the network their commentators are staying put.

Isn't' Olberman on the same slot as ORielly? You could watch that at night. I've tried a few times and all it did for me was make me hate watching football on NBC.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I am not sure why you are telling me what not to watch? Last time I checked, I was free to enjoy anything on television that I wanted to. Yes Olberman is on against O'Reilly in one of the 46 times O'Reilly's show is rerun throughout the night but there is no football so it must have been a loooooooooooong time since you have watched. I like to think I take in what both extremes have to say but apparently you are taking away my permission to watch Fox and telling me I should not watch Olberman? I am confused.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer Rising
 


Geez man I wasnt trying to tell you what to watch. I got the impression from the post that you were growing tired of the "Obama bashing" before and after work and wanted to watch something else.

The football remark was made bcause Olberman comments for NBC on the weekends and watching his show made me dislike him during my football watching.

Obviously some major wires got crossed somewhere or I dont make any sense when I attempt communication.


[edit on 31-10-2008 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
They "trick" you! FOX will make statements about Obama then turn around and say something totally opposite in the same sentence. They are very clever, those guys and gals. FOX has such a high rating because they are not boring and keep you entertained. In my opinion. I used to watch Gretas' "On the Record" until she started "swooning" over the McCains all the time. They are NOT fair and balanced!



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by PammyK
 


I don't totally agree with the trick issue.

If a person educates him/herself on the issues, the odds of somebody tricking you lessens.

Though I will admit that many people fail to get educated on the issues and as a result take the news as truth.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Fox balances it self from the noon to 5pm hours. F&F, O' Reilly, Hannity all smear obama. They are all the equivalent of MSNBC's Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 
Exactly my friend. Many narrow minded people in this country. Such a shame, we could be so much greater as a country if more people would just calm down and learn the issues. I always look to a variety of sources. I fear next week after the election, no matter who wins, I will be ashamed of many peoples actions. But I am hoping I am dead wrong.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
That may be true .. .but have you gotten or found what i asked for yesterday bk??


[edit on 31-10-2008 by SGSPatriot]



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


LOL, well I gotcha now. I am not sick of it, I was just saying that is all I see. I like to watch what 'news' loudmouths I can, especially on both sides. If I listen to Rush and Miller, then I make sure I hear some Air America too. That is what I enjoy. I get what you mean about seeing Olberman regularly and piss you off, ruining your sports that he as there for as well. Sorry, I did not get that point, I do not watch any sports shows.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by PammyK
 


I don't totally agree with the trick issue.

If a person educates him/herself on the issues, the odds of somebody tricking you lessens.

Though I will admit that many people fail to get educated on the issues and as a result take the news as truth.


A person's ability to delineate and avoid a trick does nothing to take away from actual attempt made at trickery.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321


On Fox News, in contrast, coverage of Obama was more negative than the norm (40% of stories vs. 29% overall) and less positive (25% of stories vs. 36% generally). For McCain, the news channel was somewhat more positive (22% vs. 14% in the press overall) and substantially less negative (40% vs. 57% in the press overall). Yet even here, his negative stories outweighed positive ones by almost 2 to 1.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by jam321]


I would be interested in see statistics as to HOW MANY of the news stories were about Obama as oppossed to McCain?

Example:

1000 news stories about Obama where 40% were negative
= 400 Negative Stories

100 news stories about McCain where 40% were negative
= 40 Negative Stories

SO you can have Fox news claiming balanced coverage (40%) while running 400 negative stories about Obama while only running 40 negative stories about McCain.

Just saying...we are missing a critical number here before claiming such statistics.

Also...are they just counting traditional news or do they include all news related programming?

How does the saying go? "There are lies, damn lies and statistics?"



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 



Maybe this will help It talks about the Methodology of the report. You bring up some interesting points

www.journalism.org...



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join