• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Do you Believe the Media is Biased?

<<Sure, whatever man. I like your points and posts but I just completely ostrasized you here.>>

Yeah man, and i thanked you for your reply. Is that a problem?

Also, anyone who literally goes and quotes you as saying something, then goes and quotes something else that i said, then puts those quotes in the same post to try and spin my words to prove a false point that had nothing to do with the topic is scum in my books. You dont have to agree, your agreeing with me or not agreeing with me matters less to me than you can ever imagine.
 
CreativeRandom said:
Glad you asked.

Canada has banned Fox News, but recently lifted this ban. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2004/pb2004-88.htm?Print=True

Fox and conservative opinions in the form of books and radio shows are booming and much more appraised with the dollar than their liberal counterparts.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/802270/posts

Fox News is number one, despite being new to the media market and starting out with an extremely small base.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News

The Fairness Doctrine made it so radio stations must talk about both sides of an issue. Just search, it is easy to find info about this one.

There have been many censorships of media, especially the radio. Here are links and brief summaries of many different regulations on media. Most have nothing to do with trying to sway opinion or hurt specific groups.
http://www.runet.edu/~wkovarik/class/law/1.9broadcast.html

Interesting to note, there are literally hundreds of private groups out there calling for the ban of FOX news network, from those located in Britain to all over the world.

I attacked this specific assertion you made:

"The Fox news network is one of the newest news channels. Certain democratic areas such as New York tried to refuse Fox News from being allowed."

Still unsupported. None of those links supports the above assertion. And you don't score any points by pulling up a large number of tangentially related links either.

New York is not in Canada. For that matter, the Canada link merely addresses an administrative decision to approve a request to add Fox News to Canada digital satellite service, not any "ban".

There are literally "hundreds" of private groups calling for the ban of Fox News eh? And yet you provide ZERO links substantiating either of your assertions. Yeah, you rely on facts and numbers alright. 8)

Pwned. Good day.
 
Trying to move away from loaded words is not deceptive. Deceptive would be hiding your true intentions.
 
Come on, just search "ban fox news" and you'll get all the results you'll want about private groups calling for the ban of Fox News.

Here, the link for Yahoo with keywords "Fox news broadcasting banned".
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=fox+news+broadcasting+banned&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8

Interesting to note, Canada allows Al-Jarzeera.

Can't find an article about New York's attempt to block Fox. I know there are quite a few business deals that were shady and intentionally against Fox in the area (which I can source) but that is not the same as what I said. I remember hearing it a few times on Fox News Network on it's 9th Year Anniversery. Sorry!

If you like, I can take back that statement since I cannot find a source online. Honestly, you know how hard it is to search though? Half of the sites I get back are just news articles from Fox.

But I do know that something along those lines happened in New York. One of the few times I watched TV I heard it from Fox News Channel
 
This thread is a real fucking sad indictment of certain conservatives on this board. Was I expecting too much? Like real debate and reasoned positions? Jesus fucking christ... Get out of the sandbox you goddam losers, make way for a few of your ilk that actually have brains. You are cheapening this experience for everyone. C'mon... You know you can do better.

*Shakes head*

Also, while I am here... Is it enough to ask that 'CommandingGeneral' quit masturbating to Tom Clancy novels for just five fucking minutes, so he can join us in the real world? The GI Joe metaphors are really starting to veer toward the pathological.
 
Last edited:
This thread is a real fucking sad indictment of certain conservatives on this board.

Who exactly?

Is it enough to ask that 'CommandingGeneral' quit masturbating to Tom Clancy novels for just five fucking minutes, so he can join us in the real world? The GI Joe metaphors are really starting to veer toward the pathological.

ha ha ha ha ha!
 
CreativeRandom said:
Honestly, I've never watched Fox News Channel.
...

CreativeRandom said:
I remember hearing it a few times on Fox News Network on it's 9th Year Anniversery ... One of the few times I watched TV I heard it from Fox News Channel
 
Let me restate myself: I have never watched Fox News on the Fox News Channel.

I heard what I heard on the Fox News Channel on the 9th Year Anniversary on a show on the Fox News Channel, but it was not News; it was a political pundit.
 
CreativeRandom said:
Come on, just search "ban fox news" and you'll get all the results you'll want about private groups calling for the ban of Fox News.

Here, the link for Yahoo with keywords "Fox news broadcasting banned".
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=fox+news+broadcasting+banned&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8
On the first handful of pages I did not see one single private group lobbying for the ban of Fox News, I did however find one letter on some fairly stupid looking website written by "anonymous": http://www.oreilly-sucks.com/foxenglandban.htm - one guy is hardly a private lobby organisation, unless you think an editorial website called O'Reilly Sucks qualifies. Please provide specific links, shouldn't be too hard to do your own research if there are "literally hundreds" as you previously asserted.

Canada never banned Fox News, if you read the link you provided earlier to the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission):
In this context, the Commission made reference to Fox News Canada, Decision CRTC 2000-565, 14 December 2000, in which it had approved an application by Global Television Network, on behalf of a corporation to be incorporated (Global), for a licence to carry on a new Category 2 specialty programming service to be known as Fox News Canada. The Commission also noted that, in Deadline to commence operation of Category 2 specialty and pay television services, Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2003-599, 16 December 2003, it had approved a request by Global for a one-year final extension, to 24 November 2004, in the deadline date for implementation of the Fox News Canada service.
6.
In Public Notice 2004-45, the Commission further noted that the CCTA had attached to its request a letter dated 31 March 2004 from Fox News, the non-Canadian partner in Fox News Canada. In that letter, Fox News addressed the Fox News Canada service as follows: "Fox News does not intend to implement this service and therefore will not meet the extended deadline to commence operations." The Commission noted in Public Notice 2004-45 that the CCTA had not provided any information from Global concerning Global’s plans for Fox News Canada.​
It is my understanding that it is generally up to the cable companies in Canada to implement coverage of foriegn networks, and the original deal between such a company and Fox News was approved by the CRTC, however it was Fox News that refused to provide all the services that the cable company originally requested including a lot of Canada-specific programming. Later, the request for Fox News to directly broadcast was approved with ease. Doesn't sound like much of a ban to me.
Interesting to note, Canada allows Al-Jarzeera.
To quote http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1089894102595_32/?hub=TopStories
In its ruling issued Thursday, the CRTC said distributors of Al-Jazeera in Canada will be required to guard against the broadcast of "any abusive comment." That could mean the editing or deleting of some content before it airs.

"We're not going to take that liability to censor. It's not practical. For all practical purposes, that decision is as good as saying no to al-Jazeera," said Michael Hennessy of the Canadian Cable Television Association, which fought to bring the station to Canada.

If the CRTC ever decides that Al-Jazeera violated its rules, the regulator could impose consequences ranging from a reprimand to revoking permission to air the service.

Rogers Cable, a major player in Canada, has said 24/7 monitoring is too strict, and it's unlikely they'll carry the channel.​
So even if they do start broadcasting Al Jazeera, it will be exhaustively moderated by the CRTC. So heavily in fact that practically everyone agrees it would lose money and thus will probably never see air.
 
CreativeRandom said:
Let me restate myself: I have never watched Fox News on the Fox News Channel.

I heard what I heard on the Fox News Channel on the 9th Year Anniversary on a show on the Fox News Channel, but it was not News; it was a political pundit.
Fair enough. But if you are so concerned with the hard facts as you claim, why would you uncritically accept the assertions of said political pundit without researching them yourself?
 
My mistake, you can pick up Al Jazeera on satellite in Canada, but I'm fairly certain it's not on cable. You can get it in America and all through Europe on satellite as well though.
 
why would you uncritically accept the assertions of said political pundit without researching them yourself?

I think it was safe to assume that someone would not lie about his own company on national television.

Interesting stuff Meshuggah. I'll say you proved me wrong here. Good job.
 
CreativeRandom said:
I think it was safe to assume that someone would not lie about his own company on national television.

Interesting stuff Meshuggah. I'll say you proved me wrong here. Good job.
i like your posts CR (even if youre a bit smug), you make a good debate buddy
 
Commanding General said:
I will respond more later, creativerandom thanks for your post.

Also, i was wanting ALASDAIRM to go back and actually quote me so he could see that he is a liar and that i didnt contradict myself in any way. He is so pathetic that he stooped to purposely misquoting me to try and make his point...which was the only point he was trying to make. Talk about worthless.

Thanks for mentioning that it was you who said it, but i was hoping alasdairm would come back and admit like a man he was wrong, and that he quoted you and then me and made it look like it was all me.
calm down. i've been away from bluelight for a few days as i've been moving to a new city.

i just went back and reread the thread and i see that i did make a mistake - (some of) the words which i quoted were posted by another bluelighter. i didn't do it deliberately to try to make a point. i have never had a problem admitting when i've made a mistake and here i clearly i made a mistake. you have my apology.

alasdair
 
On satellite...

On Jazeera, i have aMid-East package on my satellite and Jazeera is included [actually two Jazeeras are on it]. It also has all major Israeli channales, the PA's offocial channel, and a host of other regional media.
 
CreativeRandom said:
Haha, he is an ex-Bluelighter. Did you make that post after this occured alasdair?
that doesn't alter the fact that i misquoted him and i wanted to set the record straight.

alasdair
 
I believe that the bias of the corporate media is neither liberal nor conservative, but pro-government. They rely on government for so much, for access to press conferences, to access to individual sources, to broadcasting licenses (in the case of TV and radio), to confirmation of information, and the list goes on (somebody help me here, I'm pretty tired). Over the years, it seems that the corporate media has developed a pathological reliance on official government channels to tell them what is going on instead of doing the hard, tedious, time-consuming work of researching independent (or gov't. sources that don't require as much official co-operation, like FOIA requests) Therefore, it is NO surprise that they are hesitant to criticize the people in power, because retaliation could hurt their bottom line by compromising their access to information as well as their revenue from ideologically pissed-off advertisers and readers.
 
Top