FoX attacks:

[Lanothegreat]

If you guys have not checked out these videos...please watch these

(FoX attacks obama)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms

(FoX attacks Obama part 2)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MjvNSpsPu1k

(FoX attacks BLACK AMERCICA)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UY04gIruZ4E&feature=related

[Kill]

Horrible and horribly unsurprising

[Elevz]

I'm sorry, but I want those 10 minutes of my life back. Is FoX spreading one-sided views regarding Obama? I don't know, they might be (I'm not a viewer) - all these first two videos showed was a bunch of clippings of people opposing Obama. Are you saying FoX shouldn't be allowed to air those opinions? Are you saying FoX should be forced to broadcast everyone else's opinions too? Get real now. If you don't like the stuff FoX broadcasts, then don't watch it - spread the word about them not broadcasting objectively - what's new? It's a commercial station; they can do whatever the fuck they want, so long as they don't go breaking laws. But just broadcasting one-sided gossip? Hey, if that's what your average yankee likes to watch...

Now about the racism clip... Except for the last fragment, I didn't notice the obvious racism in it. Once again, it's just a bunch of clippings of some people sharing their one-sided views. Like what this 'Mary Matalin' said:
"I think these civil rights leaders are nothing more than racists. They're keeping their neighborhoods and their 'African-American brothers' enslaved if you will. By continuing to let them think that they're [?], that they're victims, that the whole system is against them... To articulate it better, Sean, it's so sad to me!"
Shouldn't she be allowed to say that on tv? Are you all for censorship, and against the right to express your thoughts freely?

Regardless of whatever hidden agenda may be behind FoX's broadcasting, I find these YouTube actions worse than hypocritical.

[everlast1986]

Nothing new. Have you watched the documentary 'Outfoxed'?

[virtuoso]

I have read the book outfoxed and I agree with 123 they can do whatever they want but my problem with Fox News is that they convey this message that they are fair and balanced when clearly they are not, they are just catering to a particular camp of the political sphere.

[Nat Turner-reincarnated]

haha what do u expect from devils??? who gives a fuck they will get whats coming to them in due time

[virtuoso]

man stfu you racist devil

[Nat Turner-reincarnated]

man stfu you racist devil

eye am sorry the truth offends you, it was meant to. and the only devil here is you

[virtuoso]

no my friend you are a devil, i do not wish harm upon anyone and want to live in peace with others, whereas you make these wild devil like statements and comments continuously.

[Real American]

People don't like Fox News because they have the audacity to present both sides of the political spectrum, the liberal AND conservative. This is very troubling for alot of people because for years the mainstream media has really only presented the liberal side of things.

Thankfully Fox news came along as presented a more balanced picture. That is why Fox News is DOMINATING the ratings. it is also why liberals are so mad, because they can't shut out opposing viewpoints anymore. For example, the reason the whole Jeremiah Wright story became so big is because of Fox News reporting. Same thing with Obama's connections to terrorists like William Ayers. These are things that the other news networks didn't want you to know about.

[Real American]

As Eleven said, all those videos did was take clips from Fox News various debate shows and splice together all the comments that were criticizing Obama.  What exactly is the outrage? That is the point of the shows...two people with opposite views debating and criticizing the other side.

[Lanothegreat]

well..fox does not allow an equal playing field for liberals and conservs.....so..really look at the spectrum..also....i have done alot of studying on sarcasm,subtle nuances,rhetoric and diction...in the video "fox attacks black america" on the first clip...she said "they're keeping their neighborhoods and their african america brothers enslaved if you will...." by her saying brothers to discribe a social,political or racial group other than her own is a
technique used to "down play" a situation while subtly persueding other to believe what she beilieves...to further prove what im saying..to end her statement she says"articulate it better shwan...its sad to me"

in the video "fox attacks black america" clip 2...bill o' reilly says " WE cant even say YOUR articulate,WE cant even give YOU GUYS compliments"
By bill saying WE..he has put himself in the position of conveying what the average american household believe....and by saying YOUR and YOU GUYS..he'ssaying his opinion about the person whom his conversing with and everyone like him...

i mean..coime on..we cant say shit like this on t.v.....maybe back in the day on donahue could black leaders say anything but still not as out right like this...

and the other videos are the same which coincides with my opinion that the media is bullshit and has people brainwashed and blindly prejudice

the obama videos...filled with SLURS..obama smokes..SO..muthafuckas snorting coke in the white house..all kind of bullshit...

[Elevz]

Let me remind you: FoX is not part of a public-service broadcasting system like PBS, it is not owned by the American state, and not funded by tax money. It is a privately owned corporation, thus the owners can do with it whatever the fuck they want, so long as they don't go breaking laws. They can make their programming as one-sided as they please, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

well..fox does not allow an equal playing field for liberals and conservs.....so..really look at the spectrum..

It's not like the owners of a private corporation have any obligations but to their shareholders. They are not obliged to maintain any journalistic integrity whatsoever. That's up to them. If FoX chooses to abandon all principles of journalistic integrity, they're free to do so. Yet it somehow seems as if you feel like FoX should be forced to provide air time for anyone who feels yet unheard. As if FoX, being a large corporation with a huge audience, somehow doesn't have the right to its own property (which would be air time, studio time).
Imagine if your ideas were put into practice... That would mean any novelist could get sued for not turning his books into an incomprehensible mess. But hey - he forgot to add my opinion! News papers would end up the size of the yellow pages, being printed once every lustrum, because the writers would be forced to add everyone's opinion, thus having to consult every head of the population first, in order to escape from being sued for not having everyone included. How is a commercial enterprise supposed to put up with that? It would be the death of all media. No matter how passionately you may wish to go back to the stone age, I'm refusing to come with you.

And in fact, the very thing you're preaching is abandoning of all individual rights. That's the only ultimate conclusion to draw from the principle that's applied when people are refused the freedom to do as they please with their property (in this case: FoX's property through its programming). That's a principle which, when fully applied, would be more evil than the Cuban regime; more evil than China under Mao or Soviet Russia; more evil than Hitler's Third Reich. Those regimes needed the flaws in their policies to survive. It would have been the death of mankind, had they not allowed that to happen. That is the principle you use when you deny FoX its rights and freedoms... You draw the conclusion.

As for the rest of your post - I don't think anyone (except for Real American here) would deny that FoX may be - or probably is - showing a pretty one-sided picture. There's no denying the underlying content in the messages, and I don't believe anyone really here (with the same exception as above) would blindly let it slide by. But that is precisely the concept behind a country based on freedom: that it expects people to be conscious and capable. FoX has the right to broadcast as it pleases, and the audience should be critical at all times. Any consequences are the responsibility of the individual. You have the right to blank out your consciousness (i.e. not being a critical viewer), but don't condemn others for not doing so, and don't claim the right to take their rights (notice the contradiction?) just because you don't feel like fulfilling your duty to yourself as a human being. The only alternative is a society where man is degraded to a beast. Thinking wouldn't be necessary, and we would all be in a continuous struggle for survival. Let's see how long we can survive without thinking - without the hunting instincts and the claws that evolution didn't give us. Without the spears we would have to invent through thought-processes... Such are the conclusions of the debate between freedom vs control. I refuse to believe you're honestly advocating the latter.

So with that being said - with the general principles being stated and assuming a choice for freedom, you too have the right to start a television network of your own. You can broadcast sitcoms where some negro-pimp slaps blonde girls once every five minutes, and it will be your right to do so. People have the right to choose for themselves whether or not they wish to watch it, just as people have the right to watch FoX or disapprove of it. People have the right to start a campaign against your network and your show, or against FoX, to convince others to disapprove of the sickening principles that are being applied. That's freedom... Do you want it?

[dexter]

man stfu you racist devil

stupid

[Lanothegreat]

i feel like if a company such as fox wants to take part in political issues...be unbiased to the degree that what ever opposition might arise..there will still be a level playing field...it immature almost