MSNBC = poison

[Anonymous]

I consider myself to be pretty moderate. I read the Washington Post and Washington Times. I watch the BBC, CNN and Fox News. At the end of the day, I get 2 view points and a good sense of the truth. MSNBC is poison. I noticed this during the democratic primary when they were crucifying Hillary for not getting out of the race. They are still bashing Bush, despite the fact that he has not made a public statement since January. Their evening hosts are arrogant and selective in their reporting. It is NOT news. It is a perverted form of entertainment.

[Anonymous]

Wish this was like Facebook and I could give you a "likes this" thumbs up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I consider myself to be pretty moderate. I read the Washington Post and Washington Times. I watch the BBC, CNN and Fox News. At the end of the day, I get 2 view points and a good sense of the truth. MSNBC is poison. I noticed this during the democratic primary when they were crucifying Hillary for not getting out of the race. They are still bashing Bush, despite the fact that he has not made a public statement since January. Their evening hosts are arrogant and selective in their reporting. It is NOT news. It is a perverted form of entertainment.

If you take Fox News seriously, I think you devalue your credentials for judging news sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IIf you take Fox News seriously, I think you devalue your credentials for judging news sources.

..and I would give this one a thumbs up.

[Anonymous]

Fox is actually pretty unbiased I think some kind of prestigious media think tank actually said so. The media research something..They always give both points of view unlike MSNBC--of course it is so distracting looking at Rachel Madox and her bizarred self important smirk. ughhhhhhhhhh

[Anonymous]

Ok, the news segments of both Fox and MSNBC are unbiased (and I really have a hard time saying that about Fox with a straight face but anyway) but the evening programming is not. This is not a secret and neither network denies this. Yes, Keith and Rachel are biased and so is O'Reilly and Hannity and Beck. Watch what you agree with avoid what you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fox is actually pretty unbiased I think some kind of prestigious media think tank actually said so. The media research something..They always give both points of view unlike MSNBC--of course it is so distracting looking at Rachel Madox and her bizarred self important smirk. ughhhhhhhhhh

I suspect the look of bemused amusement on my face as I read your reaction to Rachel MADDOW would also look like a smirk to you. From where you are looking, you see a different side of things than I see from where I look. I'm willing to admit my biases, can't you accept the idea that perhaps your idea of moderate is a bit self-centered?

Note: although I admit my biases, it's an attempt to find common ground. Of course I actually believe in my heart that I am the model of fair and unbiased moderation. But I have at least one very conservative friend, so I cling to the belief that amicable disagreement is possible.

[Anonymous]

I love Morning Joe on MSNBC. On the other hand, Kieth Olberman should be institutionalized.

[Anonymous]

I would put Olberman, Matthews, and Hannity in the same padded cell. Matthews and Hannity could consider it purgatory - I don't know if Olberman holds with such Papist views.

Maddow and Beck - equally loony in their own way, but not hateful about it generally. O'Reilly is an egotist - that is an equal opportunity offense and not ideological.

[Anonymous]

Fox is actually pretty unbiased I think some kind of prestigious media think tank actually said so. The media research something..They always give both points of view unlike MSNBC--of course it is so distracting looking at Rachel Madox and her bizarred self important smirk. ughhhhhhhhhh

I would be interested to see which "prestigious media think tank" concluded that Fox is pretty unbiased - can you provide any more specifics?

I have worked very closely with practicing newspaper and tv journalists for many, many years and I've never encountered one from a real news organization that held any regard at all for Fox. Or any of Rupert Murdoch's enterprises, for that matter.

[Anonymous]

Fox unbiased? Are you kidding? Fox and MSNBC are there to hand out their opinion (with some news highlights)..morning, noon and night. Opinion parading as news is not a new thing. If you want news with less opinion, check out BBC or anything from public radio/tv.

[Anonymous]

BBC is a joke. Fox is unbiased because it always has two perspectives when discussing with commentary. The straight out news is just straight out. Major Garrett does a great job with political news as does Karl Cameron--I have no idea of their party affiliations and I have seen Karl Cameron correct himself when he reported something that he then found contrasting information--you don't get that on any of the networks with the exception of Candy Crawley (cnn tech not network but you get the point) who is also great).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BBC is a joke. Fox is unbiased....

Are you saying that with a straight face?

Perhaps we have differing ideas on the definition of news.

[Anonymous]

MSNBC has clearly decided that the opinion industry is what makes money. Their people during the daytime lay it on thick with personal comments. (Which I find surprising. I expect opinion in the evening, especially when the show is named after the journalist, but during the day?) An executive decision was made to crank up the nonsense, and it's paying off -- MSNBC has gone up in viewership recently. I think it may have surpassed CNN.

[Anonymous]

I think this whole issue is a bit more subtle. Just using this discussion group as a sample, it seems absolutely clear that one person's truth is another person's propaganda. For a journalist to simply report what a politician says when s/he thinks the statement is a lie is irresponsible. But the statement is news, so it should be reported. yet, for the reporter to inject an opinion with every piece of news is not the solution.

I won't try to give an answer, except that serious journalists will treat each situation as best they can, and we will choose the journalists whose solutions we trust, including, perhaps, those we trust to be "wrong", just to see the opposing viewpoint.