Unfair and unbalanced: Fox News' coverage of Obama tops the bias scale »
Posted by: ybdogsct 2 months ago372 Comments Report this Story
Fox News, whose slogan is "Fair and Balanced," seems to have gone above and beyond in its anti-Obama rhetoric. Fox News seems to be the willing source of many of the smears and have displayed an unhealthy willingness to pass on as fact any unsourced or unfounded allegation that will put the Obamas in the worst light possible.
Read Full Story at spokesman-recorder.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 372
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
[You beat me by 4 minutes!]
A comprehensive and clear listing of the VERY prejudiced reporting of Fox News.
No surprises; nevertheless a formidable collection of what in the US will probably be designated incidents of "bias" but from a European perspective looks like a deliberate, rabid campaign of racism.
Reply-
-
0%
libsRfunny2 months ago
Anyone other than me notice this "story" was written by a biased "black" newspaper? "Part of the BlackPressUSA Network"
Of course it's going to whine that mainstream media is biased against Obama when it is anything but that.
If it said "Part of the WhitePressUSA Network," the liberals on here would dismiss it as a white supremacist rag. Shoe's on the other foot, now ;)
If you want biased, take a look at what the Huffington Post - AKA: DNC West - puts out on a daily basis. Aidenag must LOVE that waste of Web space.
I'm not the least bit surprised a goof like YaleBulldogs posted this incredibly biased story in an attempt to pass it off as legitimate criticism of mainstream media and Fox News.
Reply-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
Unlike say, Omega, who ALWAYS posts such factual news from such reliable sources that you and the other haters just eat it up. Heck, she even admitted yesterday posting articles based solely on rumors and her puppets and trolls gave her positive votes for the comment and voted for the story.
You and your cohort need to get down from that high horse y'all are on and join the rest of us here in the real world. Until then, what you and the other dolts say has zero credibility.
Reply-
0%
spkguy2 months ago
Omega said:
"No, I don't like Obama and i will find any story even if it isn't true to smear him. I don't care about being truthful. I just want sensational headlines."
This caveat should be posted along with any and all of her posts here on Proppeler!
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.42 Replies
-
-
0%
Sabretooth2 months ago
Ok, after reading my post i can now honestly say i read it on the internet so it is probably true.
Reply
-
-
lovermanComment removed: User banned.32 Replies
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.11 Replies
-
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
-
lovermanComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
mntnman4442 months ago
Exactly what is Christian about intentionally spreading a rumor to as many people as possible to judge another person and knowingly attack his character?
Answer...NOTHING.
Reply
-
-
0%
Daylight2 months ago
loverman
So why post a rumor? Why didn't you dig for the truth?
Bashing Obama is just started, it will take some more time to invent new lies to tarnish his image. Even if he breathe that would be considered as racism. Fox new always claim they have more then three to four tapes of Obama's past dirty life.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
you got that right,
and nobody knows it better than her, ole AlpoGrawlWow..
caz, nobody's working this thing more than she is !!!
that ole smear mama hussy !!!
Reply
-
-
0%
joey-evans2 months ago
Ohhhh, "....it SAID that it "might" be a rumor."
So now it doesn't even HAVE to be a rumor!
Your ConMasters must be so very proud...as far as the rest of us, not so much!
You are nothing Eva if not a shill for the NeoCon agenda. earlier you said you have bi-racial grandchildren....do you ahhhh nevermind. You are shameless AlphaSocketPuppet. Go look in a mirror and tell us honestly what you see.
JOEY EVANS
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
JOEY EVANS, didn't you mean, bi-breed GRemlin-children, as in, damien omegas and pups all over the place, raising hell and ruin for people ???
*
GOP = Grim Odious Perversions
Reply
-
-
-
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
"shame"? from a minus-20%er GOP ???
*gasp*
why would any FOX entertainment/PR network piggy (rush limpback disciple) that are enjoying their roll in the mud, slinging as much slop as they can from their grimy bodies, "have" any type of "shame" ???
*
GOP = Grimy Oblivious Profaners
Reply-
-
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
aawwh, poor LuvMyDork, err,..
its DropDripADipstick, and she's flipping her wig !!!
look out .. cover your eyes..
flying fingernails !!!
Reply-
-
-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Looks like a sock puppet attack dog account that appeared suddenly.
Reply -
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
wtf !!!
are you as deaf as you are dumb, huh hog ???
didn't i tell you to stop sniffing at my crotch and MY BIG DicBoxers here Luv-Alpo-Drip you ugly piggy-dog !!!
aawwh, poor teary eye thing, dogs come home to bit you back, like you've been doing others ? now, can't believe everyone hates your miserable no-good hide sooo got-damned much, huh ?
your name(s) is dirt here, miss piggy-dog..
now move your desperate miserable funky ass out my face..
get lost, dog breath !!!
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
naawh, we all know LuvMyPrick, a-hamm,.. AlpoGrossness is the paid FUULL TiiMER, here, working oooover-time ..
so pull yourself together there ..
DorpYourSLip baby girly !!!
Reply -
-
-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Looks amazingly like a sock puppet I.D. judging from the content of your posts.
Reply -
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
still sniffing my ass and my BIG DicBoxers here miss DropSLip-Alpo-Luv the DISGRACED flea-bitten mutt ?
didn't i say get the hell away from me you NO-GOOD dirty hoe ?
now go to your dog house before you REALLY MAKE MAD and i call the dogcatcher to take you far away..
you miserable bitch, loser !!
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Warming up by molesting Conservatives until school lets out this afternoon? That sad attempt at an acronym didn't even make any sense.
Reply -
0%
KicBoxStallion2 months ago
stop it, quit looking at me,
my crotch, my butt, and studying me like a dog in heat..
we all know how perverted you repugs are, caz you ain't getting any,..
oh, gross.. dog in heat, dog in heat !!!
GOP = Groping Obsessing Perverts
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
Its rather brave of you to repost a purported analysis of your smearing techniques.
Reply -
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
Beau78902 months ago
Your mistake, and jovial's point about some of AG's stories, are perfect examples of why smears persist.
http://science.propeller.com/story/2008/06/27/h...
Reply
-
-
-
0%
jovial2 months ago
Admit it. It's what you really feel. You don't have any love for Obama and most every political story you submit has some slanderous rumor or fallacy against Obama. You really don't care whether the story is a rumor or not. You just post it and then share it with all your conservative friends to vote it up to the front page. Flinging acres of mud and hoping some will stick. I vehemently disagree with your style of politics. If Obama messes up then find stories that present facts. Obama isn't perfect. Since he has so many faults in your opinion it shouldn't be that hard to find legitimate problems. There's no need to consistently bring up rumors.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
sailr2 months ago
sorry, didn't mean to neg this post! I didn't read the bottom line! YOU ARE CORRECT!
Reply
-
-
0%
Blackacereturn2 months ago
It seems to be...that's an understatement. When will we start being what we once were? Straight talkers, I miss them days. They are garbage. That Shawn character is a hoot, that guy so doesn't know his ass from his elbows, even his sidekicks are tired of his lame ass. This guy has such a hard on for Obama, that I am starting to think he like him, like him...excuse the high school speak but it fits.
Reply -
0%
Blackacereturn2 months ago
The difference between the Huffington Post and FOX is that one of them tells the truth, and the other starts every statement with (WHAT HE REALLY MEANS WAS) May what he said is what he meant but no they are god and mind readers oh and I love the body language bit that another laughing point. Well he is looking down there maybe he was checking his notes or a stiff neck with a fox interview maybe he was just trying to keep from laughing.
Reply -
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.41 Replies
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
She didn't say that, its true, though from the way it was posted - and responded to it - it sure looked that way. Had me fooled, but I was jet-lagged.
What AG definitely did say, elsewhere was:
"Well, my hand moves faster than I read so and sometimes I don't even read a comment. Sometimes I'm only posing part of a comment and not the whole thing. lol, trust me, mine have no rhyme or reason so no one should pay any attention to my negs and poses. I have a million different stupid reasons why I neg and pos and it's never consistent. Except for a few people. Some people I have gone out of my way to NOT neg, that is, until today."
And we're to take anything that she says seriously?
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.11 Replies
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
Yesterday you also denied saying this.
As for DUH - I think what you say here is pretty DUH too.
"lol, trust me, mine have no rhyme or reason so no one should pay any attention to my negs and poses. I have a million different stupid reasons why I neg and pos and it's never consistent."
But you apparently DO expect to be taken seriously DESPITE all that?
Why?
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.6 Replies
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.4 Replies
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
"Wow, you have serious comprehension issues. I was talking about MY fly-by poses."
Your comprehension problem.
I - UNDERLINED - do not do fly-by anything.
Which doesn't mean that I never make a wrong pos or neg; I'm not perfect either.
But I do try to act from principles - and like all human's occasionally fall short.
I'm calling you on lack of principles and a willingness to support ANY disgusting story which attacks your "enemies".
Since the story about Obama smoking crack and having gay sex in a limo I have been unnable to take you seriously.
Now, that apology will help, of course, to create the possibility for a modus vivendi to exist.
As for the 15 seconds of time lost what I was trying to indicate that 15 seconds of YOUR time would have ennabled you to find for yourself what you had written - and forgotten, apparently.
Since this WAS a "written" text and not a fly-by-night act, presumably you do at least take responsibility for it?
Reply-
0%
dissent2 months ago
ag: ah, but the strawberries..... that's, that's where I had them. they laughed at me and made jokes. :|
Reply -
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
You do love to misread me don't you?
Did I say that you submitted it?
No.
You were all over it though.
And I repeat that was when I lost all respect for you completely and for every single person who voted for that story.
I even took the trouble to list them all and post them on a virtual wall of shame.
You were a better human by far as luvmyprez.
Shame.
No apologies!
And I'm still waiting for yours.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
doggammit2 months ago
And who really cares. I mean really! You deal in schoolyard defamation the way AG does and you can logically expect to get tarred and feathered with the same brush if you don't have the good sense to back away from ultra-negative messaging and provide a bit of balance - IF for no other reason than to maintain a pale image of "credibility". A little late for that though, AG, wouldn't you say?
Reply
-
-
0%
cushi2 months ago
No, I have to believe you are stupid enough to say something like that, and I do!
Reply
-
-
0%
joeeddie2 months ago
So your jet lag is more credible and worthy of serious contemplation than her fast hand? Funny...
Reply
-
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
Pulling one from your play book, I don't have to prove a thing. Prove that you didn't say it.
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.14 Replies
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
And here's yours.
No, the story actually said that it might be a rumor. Most people who actually read it would know that.
So, the stories you post are never based on rumors, huh? Your words, your story.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/06/30/...
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.5 Replies
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.3 Replies
-
0%
gamahuche2 months ago
The point is that your credibility is exhausted AG.
Too many smears already, too much willingness to go to bat for unlikely or obviously bogus stories.
Your portfolio is void of sincerity, truth and beauty.
I don't know of any serious poster here, apart from your tame clucking-team, who would believe anything that you say without checking it against a reliable source.
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
What's that matter Omega, can't refute your own words. I love that I've got your goat SO BAD! I own you! You make stupid, putrid comments and post nothing but hate. Then you're thick enough to open your bon-bon gobbling trap and stick your bunion covered foot into it up to the ankle.
Yeah, go log on to six or seven other computers and give me all of your puppet negatives. Call all of your loathsome circle-jerk buddies and have them all give me drive-by neggings. Go on, I own you!
ROTFLMAO
Reply-
0%
doggammit2 months ago
"Then you're thick enough to open your bon-bon gobbling trap and stick your bunion covered foot into it up to the ankle"
Funny but's that's the same hideous visual impression I keep having of AG - ie. self indulgence to the point of gluttony... Not a good thing if you are really and truly a "gnostic" weightwatcher. I guess we just have to admit that some folks have a morbid appetite for comfort foods - and bunions.
Reply -
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.4 Replies
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
Secret_Asian_Man2 months ago
Confucius say not to be known should not grieve you: grieve that you know not men.
Reply
-
-
0%
cushi2 months ago
It's the thriller on propeller, and Bill Smith has just managed to "rope a dope, err....dog!"
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
And then there's this posting between you and UnusualSuspect.
US:Alphy...make a deal with you...
I'll stay on topic, and you shy away from articles that "might be a rumor"...
I think that's fair...how about you?
Omega: That's fair and I have only ever done that once.
So, you admit that you've posted a minimum of one article that was based on rumors, but we're supposed to believe you have credibility on your other posts? Yeah, nice try.
You post stories that you know are lies and rumors to aggrandize yourself. Yeah, your a trustworthy person. Go peddle your schlock somewhere else Omega, I ain't buying it.
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.5 Replies
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
Me visit your threads? Let's see now, did you submit this story? Are you saying that you have yet another persona luv? I'm not the one following you around leaving negatives and lying about what I've said. See, you're the one doing that.
ROTFLMAO
Now, stop following me around you syphilitic sore.
Reply-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
-
-
0%
mntnman4442 months ago
Maybe you should start a website to counter these "smears" against you.
And no...you are not nice anymore...and you sure the hell aren't a christian.
Your credibility is zeeero and you look like a joke to everyone but your braindead little bitches.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
cushi2 months ago
It means that he'll continue tearing them to shreads - with the truth about them...and you.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
bill-smith2 months ago
Well, I proved I wasn't lying so where's the apology?
Yeah, didn't think you'd be big enough to admit that you're a lying, conniving, self-important, self-aggrandizing, hate mongering, vile, loathsome, reprobate. Maybe you should just keep chasing me around negging all my posts.
ROTFLMAO
Reply
-
-
-
0%
quackpot2 months ago
So then libs, you have no problem with the substance of the article?
It is clear from your comment that you don't like the publisher, but not a word about what is written?
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
It's laughable LIBS would attempt to attack the messenger without ANY proof. So the newspaper is biased just because it's a traditionally black newspaper?
LOL. Care to address the actual arguments of the story?
LIBS:
"I'm not the least bit surprised a goof like YaleBulldogs posted this incredibly biased story in an attempt to pass it off as legitimate criticism of mainstream media and Fox News."
This from someone who NEVER provides documentation to support his unsubstantiated bloviating?
LOL!
How is this for "legitimate criticism"?
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1072
"Perhaps the most reliable method of gauging an outlet's perspective is to study its sources. If Fox News Channel is the bastion of balance that it claims to be, then its pool of guests should reflect a full spectrum of debate, from left to right, and neither major party should dominate over the other...The numbers show an overwhelming slant on Fox towards both Republicans and conservatives. Of the 56 partisan guests on Brit Hume's Special Report between January and May, 50 were Republicans and six were Democrats -- a greater than 8 to 1 imbalance. In other words, 89 percent of guests with a party affiliation were Republicans.
As a comparison, FAIR also studied interviews on CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports over the same time period, and found a modest but significant tilt towards Republicans, and a disproportionate minority of guests who were conservatives--but in both cases, there was far more balance than was found on Special Report."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067
"When it comes to Fox News Channel, conservatives don't feel the need to 'work the ref.' The ref is already on their side. The most obvious sign of Fox's slant is its heavily right-leaning punditry.
Andrew Kirtzman, a respected New York City cable news reporter, was interviewed for a job with Fox and says that management wanted to know what his political affiliation was. 'They were afraid I was a Democrat.' When Kirtzman refused to tell Fox his party ID, 'all employment discussion ended.'
Pundit Mara Liasson--who is touted as an on-air 'liberal' by Fox executives--sits on the board of the conservative human-rights group Freedom House; New York magazine (11/17/97) cited a Fox insider as saying that Liasson assured president Roger Ailes before being hired that she was a Republican."
Reply-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
KLARISSA:
"1997 - your are reaching"
Do you have any evidence to suggest that Fox News has gotten better and that the political polarization on that network in particular hasn't become more intense within the last few years?
Do you have ANY EVIDENCE at all?
LOL. Don't worry. I won't be holding my breath.
Reply -
0%
cushi2 months ago
Klarissa, didn't I explain to you on another post that the truth has no expiration date? What has been said was true in the past and is true to this very moment.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002
"As The Washington Post reported on July 11, 'a handful of memos from a top FOX executive suggests tilting the news.' In the memos, Moody instructs employees on the approach to take on particular stories. His instructions reflect a clear interest in furthering a conservative agenda and in supporting the Bush administration. The Post quoted Larry Johnson, identified by the paper as 'a former part-time Fox commentator,' describing the Moody memos as 'talking points instructing us what the themes are supposed to be, and God help you if you stray.' On July 13, Salon.com reviewed the film, and provided "some of the most notable excerpts" from the memos, referred to as 'marching orders' by Jon DuPre, whom Salon identifies as 'formerly of Fox News.'"
Reply-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
Two reasons:
1) My argument does NOT hinge on the years on the dates, particularly since the same Fox News administrators, commentators, and "pundits" are still working there now as when this article was written.
2) If you were paying attention (and it's clear that you weren't) the date of the article can be found IN THE HYPERLINK to the article, which in this case was released 2004/07/14.
Do you have any reliable documentation that effectively refutes their conclusions, or does your entire argument really based on your conspiracy theory of the possible reasons why the date of the article wasn't mentioned in my excerpt?
LOL.
Reply-
-
-
0%
bigG2 months ago
""They're not a news organization but a propaganda organization for their ideology which is "conservative GOP", whatever that means.""
No loverman that isn't quite correct. You should have left out "conservative" as I can't remember ever having seen them blast Bush for the outrageous spending that has gone on in his Administration. Additionally, nation building and "pre-emptive wars" are not traditional conservative tenets.
Reply-
lovermanComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
KLARISSA:
"How long has obama been a formal candidate? in 1997? 2001?"
Read LOVERMAN's post above. He gets it. You do not.
Fox News' bias did not begin when Obama declared his candidacy for the presidency. It has been in place for much longer.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months ago
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/press...
"Matt Gross, now an assistant editor at New York magazine, used to work at Fox. Continuing the recent action at Romensko's Letters about The Memo, he recalls a certain day when an executive from Fox News Channel came to talk to the online troops, with a mission to better align the site with the televised Fox News. 'Seek out stories that cater to angry, middle-aged white men who listen to talk radio and yell at their televisions."
-
-
-
-
