Man killed in deadly terror attack in London street

[RotBaron]

seriously? my fox news comment is what got your panties wadded up?            

fox doesn't simply "offer the opposing point of view" they usually get it as wrong as abc, cbs and nbc. it's usually based on someone's opinion rather than fact. i've witnessed it first hand, repeatedly. the only reason i even mentioned fox was because of the recent flap between jim carrey and fox (fux) news network, which i think is a funny situation. then you sit there and without asking me why i mentioned fox news in the first place, act as if i pulled your panties off in the middle of a parade, then you toss your education on the table as if it actually means you know something. LMFAO!!!

I never stated Fox "simply" offered the opposing point of view. I said they are the only ones that even attempt to show it.

You attacked FoxNews, and now you back track to say they usually get it as wrong as all the other mainstream media channels. Why did you specifically call out FoxNews (twice,) and not mention the others until now?

How is an opposing view based in fact(s,) preeety sure it's right there in the word view , that would equivocate it is not a fact.

How did you witness it firsthand? Were you doing Geraldo or Juan Williams, or Bill Beckel's makeup before their show?

The flap with Carrey, oh yeah I saw Gutfeld mention that ONCE, is Carrey still going on about it - guess he's the new Charlie Sheen.

Why did you mention FoxNews in the first place? You said, (what) "do you work for foxnews," (inferred in a tone one would use inflecting they believe the other to be stupid.)

My education, I only spoke about a portion of it. All I simply pointed out was that I had to spend a significant amount of time pointing out bias and opinion in my papers. I think I have a fair grasp of seeing bias and pov quickly and can't help but wonder why you choose to attack the one organization that regularly depicts the others' pov. Watch O'Reilly one night and let me know how often you see/hear him offer up the other side. It's after almost every time he makes an assertion or gives his personal opinion btw, prolly about 10-20% of his show dedicated to it.  CNN is the only "other" one that will give it a shot on a blue moon, the rest may as well fly a red star above their hq.



So where do we go from here? Ink is squarely on the money, we can't talk about the real issue here so we should really move on anyway.

[coombz]

you have to admit that it's pretty funny when someone brags about their history degree and their background in vetting research against bias and inaccuracies, and then follows that up by attacking someone for disrespecting Fox News    

[zack1234]

I have a history degree

Enough said me thinks

[Nathan60]

I have a history degree

Enough said me thinks

Don't count if it only covers The History of Uruguay.

[zack1234]

I have reported you the the proper authorities



 

[RotBaron]

you have to admit that it's pretty funny when someone brags about their history degree and their background in vetting research against bias and inaccuracies, and then follows that up by attacking someone for disrespecting Fox News    

Bragging???  


I also  , ahh nvm...

Anyhow, want to give some examples of Fox's inaccuracies? For every one you give, I'll raise you 3 by the mainstream, try me. The notion of bias was already addressed, I distinguished Fox as the only one that attempts to show the opposing pov, i.e. yes they are bias. If you one portrays the opposing pov then obviously they are bias. To be "fair and balanced," as they claim, they must show a different pov.  

I wish I could point out the inaccurate because of bias by the mainstream, but doing so would take us into a realm that has already been noted as an area we can not go (here.)