NationStates Jolt Archive

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D


They also have FOX now.

Wow, another crappy TV station forking out their crappy shows from crappy execs that killed off family guy (and then brought it back because they realised that it was better than all their shows combined - which isnt saying much).

You forgot to capitalise Truth, Comrade. ;)

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D


What you mean Fox News actually went outside their little make believe box? I'm sure the Canadian government only allowed Fox broadcast in Canda for sheer entertainment value. I mean seriously has anyone ever watched a more distorted and entertaining comedy?????

What you mean Fox News actually went outside their little make believe box? I'm sure the Canadian government only allowed Fox broadcast in Canda for sheer entertainment value. I mean seriously has anyone ever watched a more distorted and entertaining comedy?????
Believe it or not but there's actually quite a few conservative in Western Canada who would be the perfect target audience for Fox News if they stop calling for boycot of Canadian product. (although I haven't heard about that in a while)

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha!

Isn't it Sean Hannity?

It's all just part of NAFTA you know.

We sent our Comedians like Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Phil Hartman, Leslie Nielson, John Candy, The Kids in the Hall, Tom Green, etc. south to you.

In return, you are now sending us Fox.

Seems about fair to me!


Did anyone catch that dork on Fox who, when the news was just breaking about the Tsunamis, asked the meteorologist if it could have been terrorist-related?

That one had me giggling all day!

What you mean Fox News actually went outside their little make believe box? I'm sure the Canadian government only allowed Fox broadcast in Canda for sheer entertainment value. I mean seriously has anyone ever watched a more distorted and entertaining comedy?????

Yes, I've watched BBC News.

Whats bad about BBC news?

Did anyone catch that dork on Fox who, when the news was just breaking about the Tsunamis, asked the meteorologist if it could have been terrorist-related?

That one had me giggling all day!
Please tell me you're joking. Somebody actually asked that?

It's about as lame as the CNN dork who thought aloud on the air about how good this would be for CNN.

It's about as lame as the CNN dork who thought aloud on the air about how good this would be for CNN.
Are you serious? I'm glad I don't really watch TV news.

Whats bad about BBC news?

In the interest of trying to get Blair out of office, they decide that Blair lied about the Iraq War. They then try to pressure a weapons expert to say that Blair lied. The expert won't go along with it.

So they publish a report that the expert says that Blair lied.

The expert still won't go along with it.

So they publish his name.

So he kills himself.

So there are two completely separate investigations - not so much into what bad things the BBC did in the interest of trying to oust the PM, but into whether Blair lied or not.

And they find that Blair did not lie. He was acting on faulty information from the intelligence services, but he did not lie.

I trust the BBC for openness, fairness, balance, and honesty about as much as I do the New York Times (which still hasn't done much to restore trust after Jayson Blair).

Please tell me you're joking. Somebody actually asked that?


I wish I were joking. Mind you, I wish the anchor had been joking too!

Too bad that Fox doesn't publish transcripts of all of their shows to the web the way CNN does so I could tell you who it was.... We just started to get Fox up here, and frankly I haven't gotten familliar with the names of many of their on-air people.

Zepp, I can't believe you would actually watch Fox.

Yes, I've watched BBC News.

Nothing wrong with the BBC News, mate. We pay for it with tax money, and it doesn't give a damn about ratings. That's why it tortures us with endless period dramas.

It's about as lame as the CNN dork who thought aloud on the air about how good this would be for CNN.


Well, they both suck in their own way.

Fox News in Canada? Man I feel sorry for you guys. I've always liked Canada... now you have to suffer this horrible fate.

We get FOX during the night on a free to air chan here (for some reason free to air chans are replacing infomercials with overseas news chans, but FOX is the only one I don't already get on cable) and its.... wierd. I remember someone made some horrible generalisation of Iraq, and someone they were talking to said 'well actually its not that simple..' and one of the presenters said 'haha we'll have to cut you off there sorry' and jumped quickly to something else. For some reason their whole format makes me uneasy, maybe its just what I've heard (and seen now heh) on fox.

Fox News now in Canada!
WOOHOO !!!

We get FOX during the night on a free to air chan here (for some reason free to air chans are replacing infomercials with overseas news chans, but FOX is the only one I don't already get on cable) and its.... wierd. I remember someone made some horrible generalisation of Iraq, and someone they were talking to said 'well actually its not that simple..' and one of the presenters said 'haha we'll have to cut you off there sorry' and jumped quickly to something else. For some reason their whole format makes me uneasy, maybe its just what I've heard (and seen now heh) on fox.
Sounds like Bill O'Reilley. He's the one who always cuts off his guests' mics.

Its punishment for Bryan Adams and Celine Dion.

I'm interested in seeing what all the controversy is about. Maybe I'll be entertained. The news I get sucks (Global, CTV etc)

.

Sounds like Bill O'Reilley. He's the one who always cuts off his guests' mics.

Or tells relatives of victims of 9/11 that they're "Liberal scum" and that he'll "Kill you if you don't get lost". Which is the kind of sensitive journalism that we need to see more of, obviously.

I think I would pay money to see Zepp actually sitting through a whole hour of watching O'Reilly.

I wouldn't believe it otherwise.

Yeah Fox!!!!!!!!

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D
You mean they now have access to a horrible biased news program...at least it lets them understand why so many Republicans idiotically voted for Bush.

Or tells relatives of victims of 9/11 that they're "Liberal scum" and that he'll "Kill you if you don't get lost". Which is the kind of sensitive journalism that we need to see more of, obviously.
Well of course...anybody who opposes the Iraq war MUST be Liberal scum, and that means ANYBODY. That's what Fox tells me.

I think I would pay money to see Zepp actually sitting through a whole hour of watching O'Reilly.

I wouldn't believe it otherwise.

Would he get a bonus if he doesn't scream "LET YOUR GUEST SPEAK YOU FOUL INCONSIDERATE STUPID BASTARD! YOU SUCK, O'REILLY! I HOPE YOU AND ALL THE SEMI-HUMAN SLIME LIKE YOU DIE!!!!!!!"?

all fox tries to do is tell the other side of the story. just cause fox has a more conservative slant than the liberal cnn msnbc etc, that is bad?? come on

I'm wet with excitement,
now we can finally see and hear ignorant babbling about ourselves first hand.

You mean they now have access to a horrible biased news program...at least it lets them understand why so many Republicans idiotically voted for Bush.

Yeah, in civilized countries we repackage FOX broadcasts as a gritty documentary about everything that's wrong with America.

all fox tries to do is tell the other side of the story. just cause fox has a more conservative slant than the liberal cnn msnbc etc, that is bad?? come on

No, it doesn't. All FOX tries to do is tell one side of the story, and it lies when it does it. It's even been held up in court that FOX lies. Any programme that claims to be news but actually tells half-truths and lies should be either banned, or at least advertised as a situation comedy.

Isn't it Sean Hannity?
yes it is but eutrusca is a crackpot and he was busy swooning thinking of him and fox news because it makes him hot, all the conservative bullshit does

Yeah, in civilized countries we repackage FOX broadcasts as a gritty documentary about everything that's wrong with America.

I've seen similar things about the BBC.

But, they were BBC documentaries posing as gritty documentaries about everything that's great about the BBC.

Too bad the people in the documentary (including the cameraman who was killed because he was completely stupid) looked like whining stupid people with absolutely zero common sense.

Lowered my impression of BBC hiring standards by an order of magnitude.

At least Fox reporters live through their reporting - they aren't completely stupid. But a BBC reporter who walks into the line of fire expecting to be protected by his status as a reporter has no brains at all.

Especially when his surviving companions whine about how he got killed.

Interviewee: "The increase in the activities of Iraqi Insurgents has..,
FOX Anchor: "You mean Terrorists?"
Interviewee: "Well technically they aren't..."
FOX Anchor: "I'm afraid we'll have to cut you off there. In other news dirty Liberals are actually Terrists in disguise..."

At least Fox reporters live through their reporting - they aren't completely stupid.
easy when you're hiding in a tank and get handed the ''news'' by the millitary...

We in Iceland just got Fox News.

Zepp, I can't believe you would actually watch Fox.

We don't watch it per se, we have digital cable TV, so when they went on the air here we got the channel as part of the package we have. So we aren't actually paying anything extra for it. We tune in every now and then when we are looking for a laugh. I don't find their news alerts as bad as their "shows" however even the stuff they report on as news, it's not even so much what they are reporting, it's the language they use. For example when most news outlets would report a bombing in Iraq, they'll say stuff like "Another 2 US soldiers killed in today's bombing in Iraq" Where as what I've noticed is Fox will report it like this "Two American hero's again taken in their prime defending this beautiful nation from homicidal maniacs" lol... a bit of a difference. ;)

I've seen similar things about the BBC.

But, they were BBC documentaries posing as gritty documentaries about everything that's great about the BBC.

Too bad the people in the documentary (including the cameraman who was killed because he was completely stupid) looked like whining stupid people with absolutely zero common sense.

Lowered my impression of BBC hiring standards by an order of magnitude.

At least Fox reporters live through their reporting - they aren't completely stupid. But a BBC reporter who walks into the line of fire expecting to be protected by his status as a reporter has no brains at all.

Especially when his surviving companions whine about how he got killed.


Well, some of that's inherent in all journalists. BBC reporters like to go and film whats going on on both sides, while FOX travelled around chatting only to the US-friendlies. The BBC crews want to know the whole story.

If you want to compare them, just check their respective websites. I think that they speaks for themselves.

The Beeb ain't perfect, but I'd say it's probably the most impartial news service out there.

Any reporter who goes into a war zone, and gets hurt, and complains that the soldiers shot him, is a complete idiot. No matter what their education, training, experience, or opinions, they are ultimately complete idiots.

Or tells relatives of victims of 9/11 that they're "Liberal scum" and that he'll "Kill you if you don't get lost". Which is the kind of sensitive journalism that we need to see more of, obviously.
Did you actually watch the segment you are refearing to, or are you just spouting the left's claptrap?

The young man he was interviewing was rude, spewing leftist crackpot therories, and was exploiting his fathers death in an attempt to Bash the Bush Administration.

We don't watch it per se, we have digital cable TV, so when they went on the air here we got the channel as part of the package we have. So we aren't actually paying anything extra for it. We tune in every now and then when we are looking for a laugh. I don't find their news alerts as bad as their "shows" however even the stuff they report on as news, it's not even so much what they are reporting, it's the language they use. For example when most news outlets would report a bombing in Iraq, they'll say stuff like "Another 2 US soldiers killed in today's bombing in Iraq" Where as what I've noticed is Fox will report it like this "Two American hero's again taken in their prime defending this beautiful nation from homicidal maniacs" lol... a bit of a difference. ;)

Is anyone else seeing a pattern here? About half the Americans on this thread seem to be pro-FOX, and half against. All the people from other countries seem to regard it as the best news satire since "Drop the Dead Donkey". It's not a serious news service to us. It's a joke. Let's just build that up a bit, hope it sinks in a little.

FOX IS A JOKE


I watched the run-up to the presidential election on FOX. They didn't bother showing most of Kerry's speeches. They'd bung in the occasional clip of them, but not actually the whole thing. The had six advert breaks, and a piece on when Condoleeza Rice was an ice skater, while a presidential candidate was giving a speech in the run up to an election. Can anyone else see a slight flaw in this?

Bush, on the other hand, had a half hour of unbroken coverage, which actually started BEFORE he started speaking. Bias?

When all that explosive material was stolen in Iraq, Fox didn't announce it until 12 HOURS after the BBC had. It was on the news feeder at the bottom, in between a string of economic data and something about the UN. Surely 350 tonnes of explosives going missing should be something people should know about?

What you mean Fox News actually went outside their little make believe box? I'm sure the Canadian government only allowed Fox broadcast in Canda for sheer entertainment value. I mean seriously has anyone ever watched a more distorted and entertaining comedy?????


Yeah, it's called CNN :D

Did you actually watch the segment you are refearing to, or are you just spouting the left's claptrap?

yes, I have it on my PC. It's a disgusting piece of right-wing browbeating.

The young man he was interviewing was rude, spewing leftist crackpot therories, and was exploiting his fathers death in an attempt to Bash the Bush Administration.

O'reilly is constantly rude, spews endless right-wing propaganda and nonsense, and exploited 9/11 victim's families for the sake of ratings. Did you have a point, or are you just going to sit and suck the administration's cock for the rest of your life?

If everyone in Canada is as bright as you claim, then you have nothing to fear. It would mean that unlike you, no one would watch Fox, and it would not have any viewers.

But, if you're wrong, Fox will, as it is in the US, become the number one cable news outlet.

I think what you're afraid of is that a lot of Canadians are "stupid".

all fox tries to do is tell the other side of the story. just cause fox has a more conservative slant than the liberal cnn msnbc etc, that is bad?? come on
Liberal? i've never seen much that would sugest those are Liberal? ever watch Joe Scarborogh on MSNBC he's at least as biased as anyone on fox (right wing bias). also all of the networks have a tendancy to put in centrists for their left wing counter point (acording to an article I read in the Atlantic). for the most part the media is in the center, sometimes center-right, occasianaly center-left. but I don't think you'll find many lefties who think their views are getting even equal coverage.

The BBC news reporter John Browning is referring to died while travelling with Coalition forces, in plainly marked vehicles, and died to an American aircraft that opened fire on them by mistake.

I assume FOX said that he was travelling by himself when he donned Iraqi clothes and started shooting at the US plane.

Get a grip, FOX News is the most partisan, nationalistic, and biased news channel out there.

Canadians, we've had FOX in Britain for quite a while (Murdoch has a near monopoly on Satellite broadcasting, you see).

You should watch it. Its mildly amusing, until you realise that so many Americans actually believe what Fox tells them. Then it becomes scary.

If everyone in Canada is as bright as you claim, then you have nothing to fear. It would mean that unlike you, no one would watch Fox, and it would not have any viewers.

But, if you're wrong, Fox will, as it is in the US, become the number one cable news outlet.

I think what you're afraid of is that a lot of Canadians are "stupid".

I'm not worried. I trust Canadians. They can have more guns per head than the US, and yet don't run around shooting 10,000 people a year between them. In fact, they've got less guncrime than the UK, where getting hold of arms is a real pain.

And if you and Ironlock are refering to the same incident, then you should just shut up about the stupidity of reporters right now, and start talking about US fighter pilots. Anyone remember that in WW2, US troopers were ordered to fire on their own planes because of the number of friendly fire incidents they'd suffered?

In the interest of trying to get Blair out of office, they decide that Blair lied about the Iraq War. They then try to pressure a weapons expert to say that Blair lied. The expert won't go along with it.

So they publish a report that the expert says that Blair lied.

The expert still won't go along with it.

So they publish his name.

So he kills himself.

So there are two completely separate investigations - not so much into what bad things the BBC did in the interest of trying to oust the PM, but into whether Blair lied or not.

And they find that Blair did not lie. He was acting on faulty information from the intelligence services, but he did not lie.

I trust the BBC for openness, fairness, balance, and honesty about as much as I do the New York Times (which still hasn't done much to restore trust after Jayson Blair).


Timeline of events

1) David Kelly came to Andrew Gilligan and said that the government "sexed up the dossier"

2) Andrew Gilligan said on the radio 4 today program that the government “probably knew the 45 min info was wrong” (what he meant was unsound i.e. spin)

3) The head spin-doctor Alastair Campbell sent a memo to the BBC to withdraw the story.

4) Board of governors back Gilligan’s right to report the story

5) Government gives out Kelly’s name to all the papers

6) Kelly kills himself

7) Hutton set up

8) (whitewash) Hutton say the government didn’t do anything wrong and 45 min claim was based on sound intelligence mass of resignations from BBC

9) A few months later lord Butler says that the 45 min claim was based on unsound a unreliable intelligence and was critical of the government giving out Kelly’s name to press. It also says that BBC had right to report story

10) In a newspaper Butler said that if asked if Blair should go he would say yes

11) Blair and Hoon still in job

The BBC was right and I believe is it better than any other news network

Everybody -that I know- in Britain trusts the BBC.

The fact that they have exactly as many complaints saying they are biased to the right as they do saying they are biased to the left is tantamount to the Beeb's neutrality.

I think I would pay money to see Zepp actually sitting through a whole hour of watching O'Reilly.

I wouldn't believe it otherwise.


What?

Don't you think I enjoy a good farce?


If you want to pay to see it then pony up the bucks. I'll happily turn the cam on and let you watch. Of course, the idea that you would actually pay perfectly good money to watch me sit on the couch and laugh at a TV show seems a bit odd. But hey, we have kid's college educations to send for - so turning down easy money seems like a silly thing to do!



So - what's it worth to you?

In the interests of a free press, the BBC reports that Blair lied about the Iraq war. Which he had.

Blair tries to hide it.

When Blair fails, the unfortunate David Kelly's name is leaked to the papers. The BBC owns percisely NO papers. It is a publicly owned broadcasting corporation. Papers are not broadcasting. It reported Kelly's death, and it gave out the stories from the papers. Is it not to do this?

There was an investigation into whether Blair lied, because he HAD. And we all knew he had. So there had to be an investigation. Understand yet, John?

And they find that Blair did not lie. He was acting on faulty information from the intelligence services, but he did not lie. He then goes and creates and honours list with all those members of the intelligence service which gave him this faulty information, because it is standard practice to reward failures in British Intelligence. Oh, wait! No, it's not. It's a cocking stupid thing to do, isn't it?

The BBC is a non-partisan press corporation which tells people what is going on in the world. The fact it is willing to speak out against the government regardless of who is in power is a mark of it's openness and fairness. It should not even be mentioned in the same sentence as FOX, because the BBC is a SERIOUS news service.

What?

Don't you think I enjoy a good farce?


If you want to pay to see it then pony up the bucks. I'll happily turn the cam on and let you watch. Of course, the idea that you would actually pay perfectly good money to watch me sit on the couch and laugh at a TV show seems a bit odd. But hey, we have kid's college educations to send for - so turning down easy money seems like a silly thing to do!



So - what's it worth to you?
I really hope he takes you up on that offer, Zeppi; it'll be fun to see his reaction when he gets back on.

actauly what bugs me about, all the news services that i have acces to, is the lack of reporting of actual news... there were 15 major conflicts (acording to the UN on a scale of over 1000 casulties in a year) during the past year. who knows what other important events occured and went uncoverd because of the Peterson trial, and Janet Jackson.... I suppose it comes down to what different people consider important but still...

Meh, I'd still rather watch Global. Allows you to get the better Fox programing without the news itself.

Don't forget that you now get to hear more of Ann Coulter!

Yay!

And can anyone who calls the main-stream media "liberal" please give me some evidence as to how this is true? There is no question that FOX is the most biased news source out there, and there are plenty of facts (some already given in this thread) to back that statement up. But I've never seen Dan Rather cut off some guest on his show from talking. I've never heard Tom Brokaw or ANYONE in the "main-stream media" call someone a "right-wing nutjob" or a "flaming liberal."

If you don't give me any facts, I'll just have to conclude that you are just like your favorite news station: all rhetoric and no facts. Sad.

FOX news is horrible, and I don't see where some of you get off on it.

Maybe it's that little thrill one feels when he gets away with lying.

Just to emphasise the point about the BBC investigation and the Hutton report and whatnot...

Blair DID lie. He insisted that he had firm, reliable evidence that Iraq had a capacity to launch WMDs - including against Western powers - that could be deployed at 45 minutes notice.

Not one of his intelligence sources EVER told him that, and indeed many of them warned him against saying it and were very angry indeed when they got the blame for it afterwards.

And if you don't think that's true, consider that a number of the Civil Servants who were 'responsible for bad intelligence' were named by Blair in the New Year's Honours List! If they were so incompetent, why did he give them honours? Only explanation I can think of is he's trying to bribe them to stop moaning to the media.

The BBC news reporter John Browning is referring to died while travelling with Coalition forces, in plainly marked vehicles, and died to an American aircraft that opened fire on them by mistake.

I assume FOX said that he was travelling by himself when he donned Iraqi clothes and started shooting at the US plane.

Get a grip, FOX News is the most partisan, nationalistic, and biased news channel out there.

I am talking about a BBC cameraman who was in the Palestinian territories when the Israelis came in at night and surrounded a nearby building.

He was safe in the building he was in, but decided to approach Israeli troops who had recently been fired on, in conditions where they would be using night vision, and he blinded them with his flashlight.

He expected them to know he was a television cameraman, but as you may know, when you're looking through night vision that's also looking at a pinpoint light source, and a man with something on his shoulder in a land where people shoot RPGs at you, well...

The Israelis shot him in the head, killing him instantly.

The BBC reporter accompanying him dedicated her whole documentary to this idiot. And she claims that reporters should NEVER be subject to any violence whatsoever during any conflict, and that whether or not the shooting was a mistake, it was criminal.

It's war. People get shot in wars. If you don't want to get shot, don't go there. There's no special *out* for reporters, either.

And I got this "story" from the BBC, not Fox.

Did you have a point, or are you just going to sit and suck the administration's cock for the rest of your life?
Nice. :rolleyes:

Or, if you ARE a reporter going to go into war - be smart about it like Fox's Giraldo was and, on live TV, start drawing little maps in the sand to pinpoint where the troops are, where they are headed, and what they will be doing when they get there....

I mean, why stop at endangering your own life when you can aim so much higher?



There were only four people that the US government ever said absolutely needed to leave Iraq:

Saddam, Uday, Qusay, and Giraldo.

Or, if you ARE a reporter going to go into war - be smart about it like Fox's Giraldo was and, on live TV, start drawing little maps in the sand to pinpoint where the troops are, where they are headed, and what they will be doing when they get there....

There were only four people that the US government ever said absolutely needed to leave Iraq:

Saddam, Uday, Qusay, and Giraldo.

It kinda goes without saying that Geraldo is an ass.

It kinda goes without saying that Geraldo is an ass.

Yes, but strangly enough still an ass with a job.... at Fox!


But back to the main subject: How much are you going to pay me to watch Oreilly?

:D

I am not sure if in social studies in the United States they teach you about propaganda or not. Here in Canada you take a basic course in it in about grade 10.

I also personally have went on to get my Masters Degree in Poli-Sci and am one Dissertation away from a Ph.D. Needless to say I know what propaganda is.

You have to listen very carefully to the language that is used, that speaks volumes to whether you can trust a news source or not to be unbiased.

I have to say the two most unbiased news outlets on TV I have ever seen is in fact the BBC and CBC. I tend not to trust most American news outlets, not because I per se believe all are biased as much as American television is more fine tuned to sensualism because of the level of competition they suffer. Which is really why you can't trust it. Now there is a lot of print media out there that is far more reliable than TV news. I also trust Reuters, and on the most part AP and NPR.

I point out that most Canadians won't be subjected to Fox News, even though it is on cable here. Why? Because its on the digital channels. So, unless you pay the full she-bang for all those channels (and most people don't) or have satellite TV, Fox News is still out of reach.

Yes, but strangly enough still an ass with a job.... at Fox!


But back to the main subject: How much are you going to pay me to watch Oreilly?

:D

20 dollars American.

I am not sure if in social studies in the United States they teach you about propaganda or not. Here in Canada you take a basic course in it in about grade 10.

I also personally have went on to get my Masters Degree in Poli-Sci and am one Dissertation away from a Ph.D. Needless to say I know what propaganda is.

You have to listen very carefully to the language that is used, that speaks volumes to whether you can trust a news source or not to be unbiased.

I have to say the two most unbiased news outlets on TV I have ever seen is in fact the BBC and CBC. I tend not to trust most American news outlets, not because I per se believe all are biased as much as American television is more fine tuned to sensualism because of the level of competition they suffer. Which is really why you can't trust it. Now there is a lot of print media out there that is far more reliable than TV news. I also trust Reuters, and on the most part AP and NPR.

We don't, unfortunately. We'll teach about propaganda sometimes in history classes, and occasionally in government, but for the most part we don't have a propaganda course in high school.

20 dollars American.

Okay, I'll set up my cam so you can watch Zep watching Fox and you pay his paypal account $20 American...lol :D

He's at work at the moment though, so I hope you can wait till this evening..lol haha too funny!

Okay, I'll set up my cam so you can watch Zep watching Fox and you pay his paypal account $20 American...lol :D

He's at work at the moment though, so I hope you can wait till this evening..lol haha too funny!


I dunno dear... should we require pre-payment? I'd hate to lower my IQ for nothing.....

let's see who's on.....

people discussing the Andrea Yates case? Sure, I can do that.



Of course dear - this puts you on the hook for Holly's 8:00 snack tonight. I'd hate to have John here claim that I wasn't giving Mr Bill my full attention.

Sheesh.... $20? Hell, I wouldn't work an hour for twice that and I'm gonna watch the Oreilly factor for it?

Ah well - it will buy us pizza to go with the show....

This is fun to watch; you should ask him to type out his reactions and post them here.

Of course dear - this puts you on the hook for Holly's 8:00 snack tonight. I'd hate to have John here claim that I wasn't giving Mr Bill my full attention.

Then I want half the money.. haha :D

Then I want half the money.. haha :D


What?

You will get to take some of my time with the most beautiful baby in the world.

I will have to watch Bill Oreilly!


Hardly seems fair....

yes, I have it on my PC. It's a disgusting piece of right-wing browbeating.



O'reilly is constantly rude, spews endless right-wing propaganda and nonsense, and exploited 9/11 victim's families for the sake of ratings. Did you have a point, or are you just going to sit and suck the administration's cock for the rest of your life?

Knock it off.

Knock it off.


Oh, I'm sorry. Did I not sugar-coat it in FOX style for you?

O'reilly is constantly rude, spews endless right-wing propaganda and nonsense, and exploited 9/11 victim's families for the sake of ratings.

TRANSLATION TO FOX-SPEAK

Bill O'Reilly is forthright and outspoken, with firmly-held American values, and his sympathy for 9/11 victims was heartlessly exploited by evil pseudo-terrorist liberals scum.

Happy now?

all fox tries to do is tell the other side of the story. just cause fox has a more conservative slant than the liberal cnn msnbc etc, that is bad?? come on
Actually, it is that bad. Examine the studies; PIPA got some very interesting results to the effect that watching Fox News reduces your chance of answering questions right about current events. Fox News not only fails to inform (as CNN and MSNBC) but further misinforms. This is a serious problem.

By and large, the school system of the US does not address the issue of propaganda; they sometimes give examples of "Nazi propaganda" and "Communist propaganda," but interestingly enough, historical US public propaganda is often not identified as such and little attention is paid to identifying, defining, and explaining propaganda, and very analytical attention is paid to the media at all within the school system.

I have to say the two most unbiased news outlets on TV I have ever seen is in fact the BBC and CBC. I tend not to trust most American news outlets, not because I per se believe all are biased as much as American television is more fine tuned to sensualism because of the level of competition they suffer. Which is really why you can't trust it. Now there is a lot of print media out there that is far more reliable than TV news. I also trust Reuters, and on the most part AP and NPR.

Yeah, thats about how i feel, unfortuently I only get BBC nightly news on PBS at school. And at Home the CBC only in Frech (being American i don't speak french) Even then, without understanding it's more informational then US news. better then nothing i guess...
Point in Case. Breaking News on Fox a few minutes ago... the Bushes have a New Puppy, named after another TV dinosaur (not Barney)

Edit :
CSPAN is also quite good, esentialy a televised primary document, at the moment the house and senate are both debating the out come of the Ohio election results

Fox is to America as loudspeaker towers are to communist china.

Actually, it is that bad. Examine the studies; PIPA got some very interesting results to the effect that watching Fox News reduces your chance of answering questions right about current events. Fox News not only fails to inform (as CNN and MSNBC) but further misinforms. This is a serious problem.

I will have to agree given I seen the same study. People who watched Fox as their main news source tended not only to answer questions wrong, but tended to have very limited knowledge about world affairs in general. Also believed some very interesting things that have already been disproved about Iraq and Al Qaeda ties and believe on an alarming rate that Iraq had some thing to do with global terrorism.

My drawing a connection between Iraq and terrorism you can draw from globalsecurity.org.

The practice airliner for terrorists at Salman Pak I learned from that page.

The support for Palestinian suicide bombers by Saddam I learned from that page.

Hardly from Fox.

The young man he was interviewing was rude, spewing leftist crackpot therories, and was exploiting his fathers death in an attempt to Bash the Bush Administration.
Crackpot theories like "Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11"? Sorry man, that's neither crackpot nor just a theory.

www.newamericancentury.org

The BBC was right and I believe is it better than any other news network
That's true. Kelly and Gilligan were victims of Blair's warmongering agenda.

It is quite comedic to me, mind you I don't watch the news because they are clearly biased, that and I get most of my news via multiple sources on the net and from my law teacher...

My drawing a connection between Iraq and terrorism you can draw from globalsecurity.org.

The practice airliner for terrorists at Salman Pak I learned from that page.

The support for Palestinian suicide bombers by Saddam I learned from that page.

Hardly from Fox.

Thats a good site. havn't looked at what they have to say about that though *goes and looks*

Oh, I'm sorry. Did I not sugar-coat it in FOX style for you?

O'reilly is constantly rude, spews endless right-wing propaganda and nonsense, and exploited 9/11 victim's families for the sake of ratings.

TRANSLATION TO FOX-SPEAK

Bill O'Reilly is forthright and outspoken, with firmly-held American values, and his sympathy for 9/11 victims was heartlessly exploited by evil pseudo-terrorist liberals scum.

Happy now?

Good, very good. I admire your determination.

The BBC is a non-partisan press corporation which tells people what is going on in the world. The fact it is willing to speak out against the government regardless of who is in power is a mark of it's openness and fairness. It should not even be mentioned in the same sentence as FOX, because the BBC is a SERIOUS news service.
I find it very interesting that a privately-owned TV station (FOX) becomes a propaganda channel for the government, but a state-owned station does not become a propaganda channel for the government that owns it.

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D
it's retarded that they were allowed in without meeting the canadian content requirement.

the rules shouldn't be bent for fear of ridicule on a stupid television station. by the way, did they recant what they said about canada censoring them? or did they just act like they never said that?

Do any Canadians in here watch Fox Sports World?

Whenever I need to go to sleep, i flip to that channel and watch soccer.

hehe

If

I find it very interesting that a privately-owned TV station (FOX) becomes a propaganda channel for the government, but a state-owned station does not become a propaganda channel for the government that owns it.

Firstly this is probably because the BBC isn't run by the government, it is independant but held by Royal charter. Secondly, big business like the american media own the US Government.

I find it very interesting that a privately-owned TV station (FOX) becomes a propaganda channel for the government, but a state-owned station does not become a propaganda channel for the government that owns it.

You have to look at who owns FOX, Rupert Murdock. All you Brits know Rupert, that's why you get new Simpsons on Sky. I remember Sky News back in 2001 as being far more liberal than the BBC, but then it was catering to New Labor. In China his media outlets do the same thing for the communist government that it does for Bush. Fox may be red white and blue in the States, but it's pure anti American in China.

That's because Murdock is a whore. In order to get around laws that limit foriegn ownership of the airwaves he caters to the interests of who ever is in power. If a liberal Democrat was in the White House, Fox news would be anchored by Jane Fonda and Tom Haydn. When the wheels of power turn and in America they always do, you'll see a format change on Fox. It may give every Conservative a massive coronary, but like I said Murdock is a whore.

Oh, I see. I thought Blair was a whore...

You have to look at who owns FOX, Rupert Murdock.

For those who don't know.. Murdock is also a signatory member of PNAC! That's some scary shit!

Although I don't like Blair and what he does, I think in the long run it may be for the best. Hopefully he can persuade Bush that certain courses of action are unwise. Otherwise I can see large swaithes of the world having the **** liberated out of them.

Oh, I see. I thought Blair was a whore...

Only to BP and Shell. :D

I find it very interesting that a privately-owned TV station (FOX) becomes a propaganda channel for the government, but a state-owned station does not become a propaganda channel for the government that owns it.It's very interesting, yes. You might note how (curiously enough) "state" media NPR isn't considered a propaganda station either - of course, NPR doesn't actually get much public funding, most comes from private individual and corporate donations.

As far as the concerns of Fox being a pro-government propaganda station - it has to do with who owns what and who believes what. A pandering propagandistic station gets opportunities offered it by the government that perhaps more critical stations are less likely to.

Is it so difficult to believe in private influence on government, or that a corporatist party would find a corporation supporting it? Hardly.

20 dollars American.

We always keep our word and we expect you to keep yours!

Zep watching the trash that is O'Reilly...

Click to view (http://steph9.camarades.com/)

My eyes are burning, my eyes, my eyes!

We always keep our word and we expect you to keep yours!

Zep watching the trash that is O'Reilly...

Click to view (http://steph9.camarades.com/)

My eyes are burning, my eyes, my eyes!



I can't see the tv, it's just a blur :(.

I can't see the tv, it's just a blur :(.

Well that not even a TV camera man can fix.. TV doesn't show up on cam very well. It's a pixel issue. But I assure you I'm being subjected to Fox.. :(

Well that not even a TV camera man can fix.. TV doesn't show up on cam very well. It's a pixel issue. But I assure you I'm being subjected to Fox.. :(



The only show I like on Fox is 24, well that and Family Guy but that whole Jewish thing kinda got them in trouble. Believe it or not, I was watching Fox when I heard the US got Saddam.

The only show I like on Fox is 24, well that and Family Guy but that whole Jewish thing kinda got them in trouble. Believe it or not, I was watching Fox when I heard the US got Saddam.

Yeah, but that's different.. it's not the same as Fox News channel on Cable.

Yeah, but that's different.. it's not the same as Fox News channel on Cable.


I just get Fox, not the news. I guess I should be counting my blessings.

20 dollars American.

Okay, that was the worst hour of TV I have ever had to go through, I can't believe we agreed to do it for $20..lol Holy crap is that man O'Reilly full of shit or what? He brings on a Canadian chick who might represent Alberta..lol if that and asks her if she feels "safe" , Yes Mr. O'Rielly, Canada is just like Russia, our KGB plans to attack her in the night.. OMFG! The worse a Canadian might do is be rude to her and then apologize..lol But keep the bullshit going, I'm sure Fox will be a smash in Canada because other then us being so god damn polite, we have one hell of a sense of humour!

Now.. Mr. Browning, I believe you owe Zep $20!

The only show I like on Fox is 24, well that and Family Guy but that whole Jewish thing kinda got them in trouble. Believe it or not, I was watching Fox when I heard the US got Saddam.
they got rid of family guy because they're retards. i don't think the show did so well because they kept moving its timeslot so no one knew when it was on.

but the simpsons is kinda alright. it used to be so much better...

They also have FOX now.

That was brilliant!

That really was one of the most clever things I have heard in a LOOONG time!

I am not being sarcastic, that was perfect!!!!!

Well.



THAT was 60 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.


I couldn't make up my mind. Is it comedy? Is it real? How hard did he have to look to find that woman who claimed that there was no conservative media in Canada? Has she never heard of Conrad Black? Barbra Amiel? Peter Worthington? The Sun Newspaper chain? Hell - Bush's speechwriter who coined the term "Axis of Evil" is a Canadian journalist who started with the Sun chain. No conservative talk radio? Come to Ottawa and listen to Lowell Green.


At least with Jon Stewart you are told off the top that it's the fake news.....


So.

Where's my $20?



Goddamn but I deserve it!

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha! :D

I am so very sorry...

Haha!

Did anyone catch that dork on Fox who, when the news was just breaking about the Tsunamis, asked the meteorologist if it could have been terrorist-related?

That one had me giggling all day!

Are you kidding? OMG. How can anyone say that Bushies are smart educated people after that.

"Where the tsunamis terrorist related?"

"We should investigate that right away!!!!!!"

Canadians now have access to the truth ... and an opportunity to buy Shawn Hannity tshirts! Mwahahahaha!
you misspelled sean
jesus would not approve