It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Scary: People Who Watch and Trust Fox News Will Surprise You

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:07 PM
Reply to post by Target Earth

Oh please. I don't even give these people the time of day. They have the nerve to say "oh I can't believe bible thumpers are on here!" What?!! I can't believe atheist are on here of all people!! The biggest skeptics and unbelievers in the supernatural are on a conspiracy site where everyday there is a UFO/angel/demon/chemtrail report?! Really?! Hypocrites I tell you. The biggest ones on Earth!

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:11 PM

Originally posted by ag893
Reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

You moron. I wasn't even talking to Jax!! I was adressing someone else who attacked what I believe in first! That's how the sparks start!!

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

Yep, there is that faux compassion in full view, all of which has nothing at all to do with the topic of this thread. Thumping a bible in a thread about news agencies is hardly a sign of intelligence.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:13 PM
I refuse to watch Faux News for 23 hours of the day.

However, a couple times a week I may watch a segment or even a whole episode of the Judge. Although he doesn't touch on the most important issues, he does promote Freedom of the Individual throughout most of the show.

Asking the government to be corrected by the Constitution and calling out the Federal Reserve is a start in my book, its odd that the show is aired on TV. If there are ulterior motives, they are tough to see.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:16 PM
fox news states there arguments well and in a simple enough way that simple people understand it, while msnbc tries to play mr smarty smart and they constantly bash fox news ,and people hate blatant bashing, fox news does not, they question anything and everything democrat but they do not bash and thats why people watch for those 2 reasons, they make it simple and they dont bash

of the ones that bash fox news ..... how often do you watch fox news?

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:17 PM
I dunno, pick your flavor of propaganda...

I prefer mostly to come to message boards filled with at least some highly intelligent I'm always at ATS

After I sift through opinions and gain an intersubjective view, I switch to the articles which would seem to interest me the most, and do my best to put the pieces together.

I would certainly NEVER spend a full 30 minutes aimlessly watching the tele in hopes that something cool will be shown.

That seems to be way dumb these days, imo. I catch torrents, commercial free, else watch clips online.

If I focus on any issue for more than a few minutes, I make sure to gather multiple sources.

At the end of the day, I sort through everything learned. I do a reviewing process, kind of continuously, but mostly towards passing out.

People who JUST watch Fox News... they must be retarded. I know, my dad's one. He was very smart growing up, and still has some reasoning intact because he still reads at least 40 sci-fi books each year, and runs a company. Still, the Fox News seems to have done wonders at lowering his critical thinking skills.... by quite a bit.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:23 PM
reply to post by ag893

There are a lot of Christians on this site, a lot more then the "Elite Think" I don't attack others for their beliefs, but Christians are under fire, all the time, It really does get old, I think the Christian community doesn't seem as strong, because most of us have better things to do, then grip about Christians on the internet... all day long.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:24 PM
reply to post by JaxonRoberts

Wow-are you really that blind that you don't think NBC,CBS,ABC,CNN,MSNBC,NPR,Huffington Post,NY Times,Boston Globe, on and on and on and on don't have their Liberal agendas?? Really?

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:24 PM
All the news stations are not worth watching. They ALL have an agenda.
I can not stand to watch much tv anymore. I do a lot of digging online for my news.
I do still have it on in the back ground at times though and just take turns to see who is reporting what.
To many people watch the news and rely on it to tell them who to hate, who to love, who to vote for, what to vote for, what to eat what not eat..... It is the sheep stall .

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:33 PM
I don't have TV, so I am not watching any News Channel regardless of who they say they are or what they represent.

However, I do hope folks realize that the word 'Faux' is not pronounced "Fox" but rather "Foe". So upon reading this thread and the subsequent responses it just doesn't make sense to hear "Foe News". Seriously!

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:35 PM

Originally posted by Target Earth

Originally posted by notsofunnyguy
Most of the Fox viewers are conservative Christians who read that fictional book, what's it called? Oh, yeah...

The Bible.

I'm glad you got a chance in there to throw a Jab at Christians... It's off topic, but I guess you'll try to fit your Propaganda in anywhere.... I love how open minded, the to smart for church crowd is...
I guess we can believe in NPR or hack Internet sites......

I am too smart for church. Anyone who can read is...

That said, yeah, FOX is right-winged entertainment and a tool for social control. It is well known and only those hearing what they want to hear are going to tune in. It isn't about credibility, it is about making people feel good and that is why viewers tune in.
edit on 17-3-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:39 PM
I received a phone call from one of my FOX news sheepples I knew from high school.


"Can you believe this a-hole on TV?"


"This a-hole who wants to take our nukes away! First it was oil, now nukes. These people won't be happy till we're riding bikes. F'ers!"

Wish I could say the conversation went better after that. Apparently, the propaganda-machine can still fool most of them.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by DevilJin

...None of those are actually news sources. Fox and the NYTimes are 100% editorial, and the Huffington Post is... Well, take all the dumbest things you see posted here on ATS in a day, put them on a single website, and you've got HuffPo.

If you want to get actual news, you have to go outside US sources; We've abandoned any variety of journalistic integrity in favor of advertising dollars and "EXXXTREME" programming.

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:49 PM
reply to post by Skippy1138

No. These outlets are only "liberal" if your definition of "liberal" is dramatically skewed. All of them are corporatist outlets that take their fuel from the right-wing trend. Even NPR has developed a considerable habit of only having Republicans on to present a single side of a given story, and they often get the same advertisers that Limbaugh runs.

The trick is, they're not as extremely swamped in it as FOX, they don't scream into your face, so FOX turns this into its competitors being liberal dishrags. And the Fox Viewers believe it, 'cause, well, Fox is their Jesus-in-a-Box, I guess.

You're not going to find "liberal" media outlets in the national discourse, Skippy. They tend to not have the massive corporate funding that allows for such distribution

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:57 PM
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

If you want to get actual news, you have to go outside US sources; We've abandoned any variety of journalistic integrity in favor of advertising dollars and "EXXXTREME" programming.

Journalistic integrity is a fairy tale told to adults who prefer to remain naive little children. Walter Cronkite was touted as the "most trusted man in America" as if his journalistic integrity was sound, but when reporting on the Tet Offensive he allowed his own personal bias to enter into the reporting and subsequently made it appear as if the United States military succumbed to the Viet Cong during the Tet Offensive, but plenty of historical accounts tell a much different story.

Woodstein -- Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein - brought down a President largely based on an unnamed source, which in turn became the standard practice of journalism, to not name the actual sources being used to report the facts. While Nixon obviously deserved what he got in that Watergate scandal, the dubious practice of using unnamed sources as a legitimate form of investigative journalism is hardly integrity. In fact, the practice condones the government using legislation to criminalize whistle blowers in the name of "national security" more than it does anything else.

I do not offer these observations as criticisms, I only offer them to question the notion that "journalistic integrity" should be expected from news sources. It is a naive expectation, and at best all people will get is the appearance of integrity, and at worst the people will come to believe that the news source can be trusted because of a fairy told about "integrity".

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 11:58 PM
Funny as they may appear, they ARE the ONLY outlet (or at least Shepard Smith) reporting the closet version of what is really going on in Japan and how it could possibly affect ordinary citizens on US soil in my opinion...

Just my $ .02.

Here he is slamming his OWN news station on their reporting of the situation in the gulf!
edit on 18-3-2011 by 573v0 because: To add the specific names of reporters doing more good than harm...

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 12:10 AM
"Most trusted.." If that refers to the people that watch it, I'm not surprised. I just means they are willing to accept whatever Fox says (sorry I can't in all seriousness call it Fox News) without question.

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 12:27 AM
I have to give fox credit they were smart they figured out there are more right and center then there is on the left. For people in the middle like me they have Brit Baier Special Report. And then theres sheppard smith watch him he tells it like it is. Example today he was discussing nuclear plants here in the untied states and was discussing how they needed to be evaluated to prevent this in the US. While the right is screaming we need to go nuclear.

And hold on to your hat here but believe it or not oriely is a registered independent. Examples he regularly bashes big oil on price gouging as well as big business for bashing the little guy. Fox isn't scared to give liberals air time either. Whens the last time you seen a conservative on any of the major news networks? Yet on fox you get Heraldo Rivera going to argue hes not liberal? More liberals news analyst Marvin Kalb, and Eleanor Clift, Alan Colmes, and of course Juan Williams are affiliated with the channel. In general, Fox News is closer to mainstream America than CBS, ABC, NBC or CNN, its founding mission. And of course they cover the right with Hannity for example.And well cover the conspiracy nuts with beck.

Now If you want to try something i found BBC as a great source of news very little spin involving the United States anyway. Compare what they say to the major networks and see who's the closest you may be surprised.The reason fox is attacked is obvious people who lean to the left tend to attack when they cant argue. You see it here on ATS if you pay attention they go to name calling when they cant dispute the facts attack the source.

Heres Sheppard on Media Bias and hes 100 % right.

edit on 3/18/11 by dragonridr because: fixed video

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 12:39 AM
reply to post by JaxonRoberts

Bare with me, this does eventually connect to the topic. I was watching the documentary called "Michael Moore Hates America", and in this documentary Michael Wilson interviews a few people who stand outside an auditorium, waiting to hear Michael Moore speak. When he brings to their attention that some of Michael Moore's movies contain outright lies and he asks whether they would reconsider trusting Moore, some of these people responded that they didn't care whether the facts in his movies were true or not, because they considered the picture as a whole, true.

These people were willing to ignore the fibs, because they believed that Moore's message as a whole was the truth. It may be this same mentality that keeps Fox News watchers watching. They don't care whether Fox News presented a few lies, because they believe that despite these fibs the opposing political party is as rotten as Fox News presents them to be. Just a thought.

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:28 AM
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

If you expect perfection, you're doomed to despair.

Draw whatever criticisms you like. I'm sure Conkite had his biases and opinions - everyone does. The issue isn't whether he, or other journalists of the "old school" achieved robotic perfection and suffered no bias, opinion, or viewpoint, but whether or not he did a better job than oh say, Wolf Blitzer. Tom Brokaw of 1986 did a far better job conveying the news as an anchor than Tom Brokaw of 2010 does.

Standards have slipped HUGELY in America, and you have to go outside our borders to find better good stuff. I can go to CNN to get a three-paragraph nothing about the crisis at the Fukushima reactor from a single uncredited source... or I can go to al-Jazeera and get a big, thick, very informative article from multiple credited sources.

Think of what I'm saying this way; the US media is cotton candy - it comes in a wide variety of shapes and colors, but it's still just worthless sugary fluff. Outside the US you find meat and potatoes, which - even if you hate meat and potatoes - you can still admit is more substantive than cotton candy.
edit on 18/3/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:43 AM
Remember what Hilary Clinton said about Al Jazeera english? She was right... I cant stand Fox News, especially Bill O'Reilly and the rest of the muppets. Al Jazeera is by far the best news channel at this moment of time and if the others keep popping out the same old bullsh!t, they will be there for a very long time.

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in