Add new comment

Go reread my post. In it I said that I don't like the way either Fox or MSNBC deliver news. Fox panders to their crowd the same way MSNBC does to theirs. Sure, there is some real news on either station, but they both choose what news to put on. To me it's pandering, but you think that's too strong a word, so how about appease? What do you call it when an organization intentionally airs a story or doesn't based on how they think their viewers will like it? Whatever that is, that's the word I'm trying to come up with. Both sides do it and it gets tiring to watch. This whole "Fox only tries to uncover the stories the MSM doesn't want us to see" narrative is bunk. Both sides have an agenda.
As to the opinion=fact formula....what? Don't you write on a site where you give opinions on a daily basis? Do you prime every statement with an "opinion tag" before you send it off into the world? Where was I claiming that my beliefs were facts? Isn't anything written on here taken as an opinion unless otherwise stated? Geesh.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your PBS analogy, but what PBS does and what Fox and MSNBC does is easily distinguishable. Equating PBS's mission to Fox's is just soooo far off base. PBS is actually the station I watch the most, between NOVA, Downton Abbey, Chicago Tonight, Check Please and the countless British murder mystery shows. PBS isn't driven by ideology, it's driven by information and entertainment. The cable news shows are driven by all three plus power and influence.
.
.
I don't think what I wrote is grounds for you being so hostile. I reread my first couple sentences and I notice that what I said could be seen as a straw man argument. That wasn't my intention. My opening statement was that I think Fox is in some ways an extension of the Republican Party. You said you thought otherwise, so we can argue about that. You got hung up on "pander" and our very brief history and from there launched. I don't think what I wrote warranted all of this condescension and vitriol. (did I use that word right?) Seriously, does anyone else care to read my little 3 paragraph post and point out to me where are the straw man arguments are, or where all my sneering insinuations about your integrity are located? Your reaction to what I wrote was 5 times more insulting than what I originally wrote.
I like to post when I feel that one side of the story is getting too much coverage, especially when I feel that side is wrong. You clearly have an audience, and you're comfortable with your audience, and they are comfortable with you. Everyone is just snug as a bug. That's why when I come in I usually have to read the "we respect polite and honest dialogue" posts that usually follow an exchange between you and I. This site is of the mind that to disagree you must always do so politely and without any semblance of direct confrontation. I don't live that way in real life and I don't do that online either. I'm not a rude person, but I am blunt and direct most of the time, and would muuuuuch rather people speak the same way to me. It appears my style of conversation has upset the community now for the 2nd or 3rd time, so I will quietly bow out of future discussions.
.
.
I'll just leave with this, per Merriam-Webster.
pan·der
intransitive verb \ˈpan-dər\
: to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable
You're telling me that neither Fox nor MSNBC has ever been guilty of this? For real?