I just turned on Fox news and saw Israeli President Netanyahu praising President Trump in glowing terms. The caption on Fox was that President Trump was going to announce a new Middle East peace plan tomorrow. I switched to CNN to see if they were covering the story at all. (in the past, they haven't always done so when there was positive news to report on the president). This time they did, but the caption on CNN was negative. "Trump says he hasn't seen John Bolton's damning book", or words to that effect.
For debate, is this just the latest example of CNN's bias against President Trump? Haven't they been out to get him all along? First "RUSSIA" now "IMPEACHMENT" virtually 24/7?
Fox vs. CNN
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Fox vs. CNN
Post #1 My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-
- Savant
- Posts: 9863
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #11I don't disagree with much of what you said, CNN is bias, but it's ridicules to suggest that Fox is better. Here is another source https://www.adfontesmedia.com/?v=402f03a963ba, you can see their methodology here.Elijah John wrote: Yes, I realize Fox leans to the right, but CNN leans way over to the Left. Not even a contest.
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #12In my view, the best perspective to have in mind is that sometimes CNN is right and sometimes wrong. This goes for their process and the details they report.Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 8 by Elijah John]
Jus tuned into CNN after the White House defense team wrapped up their testimony, and I gotta say, CNN has been fair in their evaluation so far. They said in effect the defense was very effective and doubt very much the President will be removed.
You brought up the way CNN reported on the MAGA hat vs. Native American incident. I think the story that showed their bias the most was how they reported on the Justice Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearing. There were a lot of commentators on CNN and other mainstream (ABC, MSNBC) that were against Kavanaugh. It was so obvious why they were against Kavanaugh based on the weakest type of evidence brought up at the most 'convenient' time.
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Post #13
The problem of just watching CNN is that it doesn't give you all of the evidence if it is truly biased. They'll only report on things that supports their agenda which is seemingly anti-Trump.
The problem of this reflects in a debate. When you go into a debate on an issue, you want to know about all of the available evidence for and against your position. In this case you are well equipped, well rounded, and will have little to anything that you can't answer for or explain. But when you go into a debate with only half of the story or evidence, like the parts for your position, then you leave yourself open to the other half of the story and evidence that could discredit your side. A true and strong position should be able to account for and explain ALL relevant evidence.
To bring this back to CNN vs. Fox News, I would say that watching only one will leave you with just half of the story or evidence. But to be well-rounded by knowing and understanding all sides, their evidence, and reasons takes watching both channels or listening to both sides.
The problem of this reflects in a debate. When you go into a debate on an issue, you want to know about all of the available evidence for and against your position. In this case you are well equipped, well rounded, and will have little to anything that you can't answer for or explain. But when you go into a debate with only half of the story or evidence, like the parts for your position, then you leave yourself open to the other half of the story and evidence that could discredit your side. A true and strong position should be able to account for and explain ALL relevant evidence.
To bring this back to CNN vs. Fox News, I would say that watching only one will leave you with just half of the story or evidence. But to be well-rounded by knowing and understanding all sides, their evidence, and reasons takes watching both channels or listening to both sides.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #14[Replying to post 5 by AgnosticBoy]
It works best if you avoid their prime time propagandists: Cuomo and Don on CNN, and Hannity and Tucker on Fox.
Stick with actual news presenters who seldom push their barrow.
That is what I have tended to do since Trump became President.CNN is definitely biased as is Fox News.
It seems the only way to get real fair and balanced news is by watching both news channels so that you'll get both sides of an issue.
It works best if you avoid their prime time propagandists: Cuomo and Don on CNN, and Hannity and Tucker on Fox.
Stick with actual news presenters who seldom push their barrow.
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #15I accidentally posted twice.
Last edited by AgnosticBoy on Tue May 26, 2020 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #16They can't help admitting when the Democrats do a very horrible job. It's hard to spin a very very poor argument in a good way.Elijah John wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:08 pm [Replying to post 8 by Elijah John]
Jus tuned into CNN after the White House defense team wrapped up their testimony, and I gotta say, CNN has been fair in their evaluation so far. They said in effect the defense was very effective and doubt very much the President will be removed.
One thing to keep in mind is that CNN sometimes reports on the things that would help Trump, but when they do, they spend little time on it compared to time spent on the negatives. Take Trump's Lysol comment. They spent days on it while ignoring the other part of that press conference that involved a study that shows covid-19 doesn't last as long when exposed to light/heat.
In my view there is not one, not one, fair and balanced media coverage when it comes to the mainstream news. And this bias seems to be even effecting the scientists. These covid-19 projections may as well be as objective as sociological studies. You can make them say anything starting from how the question is framed and to how you deal with the statistics. A lot of the "expert" data on covid-19 is not even replicable nor even peer-reviewed. So much for the "experts".
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #17A CNN Democrat is no better than a Fox news Republican. Neither of the two care about truth for truth's sake, but rather they care about it up to the point that it supports their side.
We see the failures of BOTH parties along with their polarized and EXTREME thinking. We know more and more are realizing this because of the rise of Independents.
A Democrat might ask how could I vote for Trump, but I would rather ask why am I being forced to vote for the lesser of two evils. In my view, a good candidate is not one that agrees with me completely, but it is one that is not infected by partisan politics.
We see the failures of BOTH parties along with their polarized and EXTREME thinking. We know more and more are realizing this because of the rise of Independents.
A Democrat might ask how could I vote for Trump, but I would rather ask why am I being forced to vote for the lesser of two evils. In my view, a good candidate is not one that agrees with me completely, but it is one that is not infected by partisan politics.
Last edited by AgnosticBoy on Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #19Continuing from my last post... A strong independent would admit when a republican is right and a Democrat is wrong or vice versa. What you find nowadays by those infected by partisan politics are those Democrats who won't ever admit when a republican is right or admit when the Democrats are wrong. They only would do so when it's convenient so you tend to find it being done inconsistently or selectively. A true independent will admit when they don't know and not act as if their view is the absolute truth. A true independent would be willing to reconcile two very polarizing sides by developing a view that uses the strong points from both sides.
- bluegreenearth
- Guru
- Posts: 1917
- Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
- Location: Manassas, VA
- Has thanked: 681 times
- Been thanked: 470 times
Re: Fox vs. CNN
Post #20Almost every 24/7 news outlet is in the business of making advertising dollars rather than serious journalism. You can't trust the lot of them. However, there are a few traditional news organizations that are generally considered to be reliably nonpartisan by most people from all political persuasions with few exceptions. The Associated Press (AP) is one of them. There are also a couple of "fact checking" services that have well respected reputations for offering nonpartisan constructive criticism such as factcheck.org and mediabiasfactcheck.com. You may also consult the following interactive Media Bias Chart: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interacti ... 2f03a963ba