July 11, 201016 yr TB, Fox does not even come close to CBS, NBC, or ABC when it comes to nightly news. they dominsate the CABLE ratings. Ahhhhh....gotcha. Good thing.
July 12, 201016 yr Are you saying that FoxNews is unbiased? If (and only if) you consider FN biased, what other news orgs do you think may be biased?
July 12, 201016 yr Are you saying that FoxNews is unbiased? Nope... but I certainly don't believe they are any more biased than the big three... just in a more conservative direction... which appears to be gaining traction across a broader swath of the viewing audience who are happy to have an alternative to the editorialized bilge presented as "neutral" news on the big networks. Just as newspapers have slowly lost subscribers, the big three networks wiill continue to lose viewers (and advertising revenues)to competitors like Fox.
July 12, 201016 yr Am I correct that it was President Bush's DOJ that dropped the charges initially? Am I correct that President Obama's DOJ obtained a default judgment against the guy? What is a default judgment? No, you're not correct that Bush's DOJ dropped the charges. At least not according to the LA Times Story. They said charges were dropped after Obama took office.
July 12, 201016 yr Just as newspapers have slowly lost subscribers, the big three networks wiill continue to lose viewers (and advertising revenues)to competitors like Fox. IMO slant has nothing to do with newspapers struggling.
July 12, 201016 yr IMO slant has nothing to do with newspapers struggling. I understand and appreciate your opinion, and I will grant that "slant" is not the entire reason for declining readership, but it is a factor for many publications. "Nothing to do with newspapers struggling" is a bit too strident... IMO... :lol:
July 12, 201016 yr I understand and appreciate your opinion, and I will grant that "slant" is not the entire reason for declining readership, but it is a factor for many publications. "Nothing to do with newspapers struggling" is a bit too strident... IMO... :lol: If Gore hadn't come up with his invention where else would we get our news even if we didn't like the slant? The web and the web alone have killed papers. If you can't get a bang for your advertising buck due to not enough eyes it doesn't matter what your slant is or isn't.
July 12, 201016 yr If Gore hadn't come up with his invention where else would we get our news even if we didn't like the slant? The web and the web alone have killed papers. If you can't get a bang for your advertising buck due to not enough eyes it doesn't matter what your slant is or isn't. I agree that the growth and access to the INTERWEB has done more than anything else to diminish newspaper readership. I still submit however, that the growth of conservative talk radio, Fox News, World magazine, Human Events and access to other more favorably "slanted" news sources has contributed at least in part to the decline of contemporary print media. For generations we had little choice, and were ignorant to the degree the mainstream news was being slanted. We were blissfully ignorant… that genie is now out of the bottle. I know for a fact that for me and a considerable number of my friends and acquaintances... News sources are selected for their “neutrality” or a “slant” we consider more reliable. We do not trust known liberal spin machines… which sadly now includes many major newspapers and electronic media. So, sorry... but just myself and my little clutch of friends and family skew the stats enough... even on a miniscule level to void the absolute of the internet and the internet alone as the cause/justification. In short, slant does matter… at least for some of us. You could have an internet full or Huffington Posts, Media Matters, Daily Kos’, etc. and a cable universe saturated with CNNs, MSNBCs, etc. and I would gladly subscribe to more balanced if not more conservative newspapers to get the full picture albeit 24 hours later rather than dragging myself through Daily Kos’ bilge and Huffington's drivel. There are other reasons newspapers are shriveling besides the Internet… but that is fodder for another thread... so I conclude in respectful disagreement. :thumb:
July 13, 201016 yr No, you're not correct that Bush's DOJ dropped the charges. At least not according to the LA Times Story. They said charges were dropped after Obama took office. No, you are not correct. Criminal case was dropped by Perez (sp) of the Bush administration. Civil Case was brought in January of 09 by the Bush administration and prosecuted by the Obama administration.
July 13, 201016 yr No, you are not correct. Criminal case was dropped by Perez (sp) of the Bush administration. Civil Case was brought in January of 09 by the Bush administration and prosecuted by the Obama administration. LA Times reported differently
July 13, 201016 yr LA Times reported differently I don't know how to review/link congressional testimony, but I watched it today.
July 13, 201016 yr Apparently the Obama administration got an injunction and then dropped the charges. I guess that was the civil suit?
July 13, 201016 yr Apparently the Obama administration got an injunction and then dropped the charges. I guess that was the civil suit? Well it surely couldn't be Obama's fault. :lol:
July 13, 201016 yr Apparently the Obama administration got an injunction and then dropped the charges. I guess that was the civil suit? link? My understanding is that the Bush administration said there was no violational of criminal statute, brought civil charges in Jan. 2009, got a ruling against the baton weilding man, and there was no evidence to pursue civil wrong-doings against the others
July 13, 201016 yr link? My understanding is that the Bush administration said there was no violational of criminal statute, brought civil charges in Jan. 2009, got a ruling against the baton weilding man, and there was no evidence to pursue civil wrong-doings against the others http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203550604574361071968458430.html
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.