Thread: More bias from Fox News, aye?

There's some history between Hume and Newt i think - Newt had pretty much been involved in Hume's (now dead) son, possibly being involved in a race when Newt was Speaker/running his revolution, and Hume junior ran a story to go after ethics admonishments etc. Its gotten a lot nastier as of late with Newt (seemingly, inadvertently) outing Hume's dead son as being gay and there's some bad blood involved, to say the least. As for Charles Krauthammer, he did offer a mea culpa on some bad predictions but the nastyness is incredulous.

Originally Posted by Traveler

There's some history between Hume and Newt i think - Newt had pretty much been involved in Hume's (now dead) son, possibly being involved in a race when Newt was Speaker/running his revolution, and Hume junior ran a story to go after ethics admonishments etc. Its gotten a lot nastier as of late with Newt (seemingly, inadvertently) outing Hume's dead son as being gay and there's some bad blood involved, to say the least. As for Charles Krauthammer, he did offer a mea culpa on some bad predictions but the nastyness is incredulous.

ahoy Traveler,

is FoxNews biased or not, matey? at the very least, are they selectively biased or do ye consider thar coverage on Newt Gingrich fair and balanced?

- MeadHallPirate

Meh...Beck is also on the anybody but Newt bandwagon too as is Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and others. There is no doubt that Newt has his detractors in the GOP but the last thing we need right now is another "pretty boy".

Originally Posted by lutherf

Meh...Beck is also on the anybody but Newt bandwagon too as is Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and others. There is no doubt that Newt has his detractors in the GOP but the last thing we need right now is another "pretty boy".

ahoy Lutherf,

is FoxNews biased or not, matey? at the very least, are they selectively biased or do ye consider thar coverage on Newt Gingrich fair and balanced?

- MeadHallPirate

Their commentary is biased but it's supposed to be. That's the whole idea behind opinion "journalism". Now they haven't devolved into Ed Schultz territory yet but we'll see what time brings!

Nah i mean i don't think its neccessarily been fair on him, i guess Fox do slant a bit here and there - the commentators tend to lead to the right (Hannity, Ingraham, Crowley etc) when they hit prime time, and their other anchors like Shep and Greta, of an evening tend to lean either Libertarian or pro prosecutorial. (The folks who fill in for GVS are tend to edge that way, Kim Guilfoile, Martha, and its only when you get to Shannon Breame and Jamie Colby that the lawyers balance out a bit). The 5PM slot used to be John Gibson, a conservative's slot, then Beck and now a 3-1&1 (conservative vs liberal/libertarian) slant at that slot as well.

Problem with Newt himself is that a lot of folls who don't like him/served under him work at Fox, so that doesn't help. Its a pretty big conflict of interests but of course Fox won't say as much...which is kind of shoddy journalism. Heck Brit Hume is a conservative, and always has been and he anchored the main news show of the evening from DC for over a decade for them - and he is in a spat, with another conservative!

Of course, my biggest beef with Fox is that they are way too close to the center and give a couple of liberals i can't stand, a megaphone on Fox...what i would like, is rather than having a bash fest of left and right, to have an actual conservative advocate on Fox instead of who they have.

ahoy mateys,

FoxNews heavyweight, Laura Ingraham on Mr. Gingrich;

He looks like the “Love Child of a Cabbage Patch Doll and Chucky”

bias or "fair and balanced" from the FoxNews?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by lutherf

Their commentary is biased but it's supposed to be. That's the whole idea behind opinion "journalism". Now they haven't devolved into Ed Schultz territory yet but we'll see what time brings!

If i had seen your post first, i think i would have let you summarize it instead - i'm not good at articulating it.

I don't know what's confusing you, MHP. Fox News is saying that Newt is not a conservative, and they are correct.

PS. Of course Fox is bias. Everyone is.

Originally Posted by Traveler

Nah i mean i don't think its neccessarily been fair on him...

ahoy Traveler,

so then, unfair and unbalanced.

biased coverage, aye?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by fishjoel

I don't know what's confusing you, MHP. Fox News is saying that Newt is not a conservative, and they are correct.

ahoy Fishjoel,

thats not what the talkin' heads at Fox are sayin', Fishjoel. that is what yer sayin', but yer not a programmer, host, or contributor on FoxNews.

- MeadHallPirate

ahoy mateys,

Chris Wallace is supposed to be one 'o the "impartial and completely objective" news fellas at Fox, aye? he's not one 'o thar op-ed folks, aye?

While his fellow GOP presidential candidates were busy zinging each other, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich livened up Thursday night’s Fox Presidential Debate by throwing some haymakers at moderator Chris Wallace. Wallace dared to ask Gingrich about his faltering campaign, and Gingrich responded by asking Wallace to “put aside the ‘Gotcha!’ questions,” and accused Wallace of “playing Mickey Mouse games!”

Wallace was having none of it, though, firing back at Newt “If you think questions about your record are Mickey Mouse, I’m sorry, I think those are questions a lot of people want to hear answers to, and you’re responsible for your record.”

Newt Gingrich | Chris Wallace | Gotcha question | Mediaite

Newt supporters ravaged CNN host John King fer his question to Newt a few days ago, and i found Mr. King relatively mild...even deferential in his followup to Mr. Gingrich. Mr. Wallace 'o FoxNews, by comparison, had no compunction though in layin' right into Newt.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Traveler,

so then, unfair and unbalanced.

biased coverage, aye?

- MeadHallPirate

In the case of Newt, yes...and its even worse, its unethical journalism where that a hurrendous amounts of conflict of interest. Some of the Democratic/liberal leaning contributors on the network (Kirsten Powers, Lanny Davis, Bernhard Whitman, and on and on, as gthere are more than a couple dozen), all worked under Bill Clinton. They are bashing a guy who impeached their boss, and they should disclose that fact in the interest of full disclosure before they comment on him. Folks to the other side like Dick Morris were Clinton's pollster as well, Karl Rove and him have a history going back to the Presidency of Bush 41, and Fox doesn't let the viewers know this. Its very bad form, imo. Its kind of the equivelant of the Hillary supporter in the last cycle who asked a question in a debate about the fact he wants to know about don't ask don't tell. He didn't state that he was a Hillary backer, he didn't state that he was gay, serving in the armed services etc. He took a lot of heat from Republicans, as did CNN. Same way when Stephenopolous asked Newt about marital infidelity, he was in a conflict of interest situation where his boss was impeached by Newt, for the affair that Clinton had. Its why our media is as bad as it is today.

And in summary yes, the coverage ofNewt has been anything but fair or balanced. (That's not a critique of their entire network, but on this issue i do agree with you).