• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

FOX News Once Again Proves Their Idiocy

I laugh at how Fox News flicks off other "liberal" news sources. Fox News is the one bolstering the 1%. I find it hilarious that people can watch such hypocritical news. People who watch FOX News are more ignorant than those who don't watch news at all. That's a phenomenal testimony to how foolish FOX News is. I feel that FOX just wants to grab headlines with its stupidity. I laugh at the Lorax movie being linked with Occupy Wall Street and Obama administration business. FOX is the "insidious" one here.
 
Last edited:

guapo2003

The incomparable legend
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Location
Temple of Light
I don't watch Fox News unless something grabs my attention, but I honestly think they just try and make up something that way it's "news" they can talk about. Most likely they have ran out of ideas and don't know what to do, so they make up some "stuff" so that people will be like, "wow, I never thought about it they way". But yeah this one trying to link Lorax and Obama admin together is just flat out ridiculous! Come on Fox News, get a life!
 
Just wanted to add something that I forgot about before. The Lorax is based on a Dr. Seuss book! Yes, a Dr. Seuss book! While every human being is inherently biased, I do not believe the author had any hidden intentions in this specific piece and certainly did not predict that the Obama Administration would assume power in 2009. :/ This is flat-out ridiculous.
 

Johnny Sooshi

Just a sleepy guy
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Location
a Taco Bell dumpster
Watching Fox News is like having a lobotomy but instead of anesthesia you get something that INTENSIFIES the pain of it.

Seriously Fox, you guys are why shows like The Daily Show with John Stewart (which I love) have sooooo much fodder.
 

Djinn

and Tonic
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Location
The Flying Mobile Opression fortress
Just wanted to add something that I forgot about before. The Lorax is based on a Dr. Seuss book! Yes, a Dr. Seuss book! While every human being is inherently biased, I do not believe the author had any hidden intentions in this specific piece and certainly did not predict that the Obama Administration would assume power in 2009. :/ This is flat-out ridiculous.

Not to mention Dr. Seuss began his career working for the Dept of the Army during WWII producing dozens of pro American propaganda posters, advertisements, political cartoons, and was a script writer for various Warner bros cartoons for troops. As well as instructional posters and books for things like buying war bonds, how to help save and donate materials for the war effort, produce drives for neighborhoods, etc. He was very pro American government and very pro war at the time as well as being very against American isolationism and racial prejudice.

During this time, Seuss also created posters for the American Treasury Department and the War Production Board. He joined the U.S. Army in 1943 and worked as the Commander of the Animation Department of the First Motion Picture Unit of the United States Army Air Forces. While with the military, Seuss would write Design for Death, a film for which he would win his 2nd Academy Award in 1947.

In his war cartoons, Seuss remained resolute in his position on the war, while lampooning the slow-to-act American political bureaucracy, organizations/politicians that were opposed to the war, and America’s enemies. On the home front, Seuss was especially critical of Charles Lindbergh (Lindbergh’s father was a progressive U.S. Congressman), the famous pilot, who was one of the more influential figures associated with the “America First!”, do-nothing, movement.

This is little more than sensationalist journalism on part of a small group that absolutely did not do any of their research and only saw something and overreacted immediately. It reminde me of the crazies who were so outrages when the second LOTR movie Two Towers came out and they immediately assumed it was named for the twin towers of the world trade center and thought New Line Cinema was trying to cash in on a tragedy for some more money. Never knowing that the book was written a good twenty years before the towers were even built.
 
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
This one news segment shouldn't represent the entire Fox News channel. Sure Fox News is supporting it by airing it on their television program, but this is the opinion of one man and it shouldn't represent the whole of Fox News.

I personally watch Fox News because I like some of the segments that they air. In particular, I loved watching Glenn Beck as he was a sensible, realistic man that spoke of facts and the truth. He wasn't politically correct and that's why alot of people hate him. I'm not one of those people.

I also enjoy segments such as Hannity, The Five, and sometimes the O'Reilly Factor if I'm in the mood.

I've never even seen this man on televison before but from the video I watched on the link you provided he does seem a bit paranoid and ridiculous.
 

zeldahuman

Graphic Designer
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Location
Akkala
This is just FOX News trying to start useless controversies. FOX News does this all the time, I mean, there was the "you mad bro" story, the stuff about Anonymous, and all FOX News is is an opinionated news company that doesn't really know what exactly they're doing.
 
zeldahuman said:
there was the "you mad bro" story

That was among the most debatable topics they've brought up in awhile.

Koosholts said:
This one news segment shouldn't represent the entire Fox News channel. Sure Fox News is supporting it by airing it on their television program, but this is the opinion of one man and it shouldn't represent the whole of Fox News.

Unfortunately, the ignorant few can destroy the reputation of the many.

Djinn said:
Never knowing that the book was written a good twenty years before the towers were even built.

A source that claims to be reliable but does not fact-check has its reputation tarnished immensely. -.-
 

Johnny Sooshi

Just a sleepy guy
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Location
a Taco Bell dumpster
Another thing that should be pointed out is that FOX is very conservative in their views. That being said they will be biased against the Obama administration. They support the republican canidates wholeheartedly and will try to make Obama look bad. That's their stand as a syndicated station. Most world news stations will have some form of bias and that's the way it will be.

Also as you said Koolshots, he is rather ridiculous. The reporter featured in the video was on The Daily Show with John Stewart about a month ago (while John Stewart's show isn't meant to be serious reporting it's still reporting but simply in the form of satire) and he had some very wrong facts about Obama and the economy. John Stewart easily poked holes in those statements. While I forget the reporters name I will say that I think very little of him and his opinions because they are false.

I would like to end with a qoute from a fox analyst and while I forget her name she said something that makes me think about the idiocy of FOX's reporting she said.this in response the pepper spraying of occupy movement protesters...

"Pepper spray. It's essentially a vegetable product."

Well no s--- sherlock. And I thought kids at my school were stupid.
 

Hanyou

didn't build that
All media organizations favor sensationalism. Fox is no different.

I find the animosity toward the one prominent conservative news source to be far more obnoxious than all the right-wing pundits on the channel. No, people are not any dumber for watching Fox News than they are for watching/reading/listening to any other media outlet. Most likely have various sources of information anyway.

I also love how every time one pundit on Fox says something, "Fox News" says it. You didn't usually hear that about Keith Olbermann or Anderson Cooper. You didn't even hear it with Dan Rather. If you did, it was still absurd in those cases...large media organizations are not fully represented by one or two pundits or anchormen. I can understand how it would be rhetorically and conversationally convenient to attribute one person's views to a whole organization, but it's still misleading. Stossel is employed by Fox News. You think he agrees with the crap Sean Hannity says? Does anyone think Fox News favors his socially libertarian views?

I don't like Lou Dobbs, but he's not even really conservative, regardless of what he says about left-wing bias. Neither is O'Reilly. In this clip, he's being ridiculous. I wouldn't think it far-fetched for a children's film to host an envirionmentalist message--it happened before, quite obviously, in Happy Feet, and it was extremely annoying there. I don't know a thing about The Lorax as I never really enjoyed anything by Dr. Seuss, so I'll keep out of this debate.

Honestly, this isn't a big deal.

Edit: Oh, and even if Fox is dedicated to bashing Obama, I don't see how that could possibly be a bad thing. In general, most of the shows in the mainstream media seemed to dedicate more time to pro-Obama rhetoric than to anything that would make him look bad. Fox helped bring some balance to the rhetoric. But as I said before, speaking collectively of media organizations is a bit silly anyway.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
But FOX stretches truth or ignores the facts. Now obviously they're not the only ones but this still is over the top.

I'm going to assume you're talking about the segments that FOX News airs on their television station. If that is the case, then I highly disagree and I would like for you to give me some specific examples other than the one we're discussing in this OP. People like Glenn Beck and O'Reily, in my opinion, have some radical viewpoints but they never fail to support these viewpoints with fact.

Here's an example. The other day I was watching the O'Reily Factor with my dad who enjoys watching FOX News because he's rather conservative. I didn't watch the whole of it but there was one particular segment of the show that I found intriguing. He had two people come onto the show (I forget their names but they were both pro-Obama and liberal) to discuss the investment Obama made into two energey companies. Obama had guaranteed that this company was going to create thousands of permanent jobs for the American people. It ended up going bankrupt and several people got layed off. O'Reily had asked these two people if they could name any success story of one of Obama's government funded projects and they simply couldn't.

This might have gone a bit off topic but I'm just trying to prove that you can't generalize all of FOX News with just specific instances that happen with certain people FOX decides to support on their network. O'Reily was complaing that his tax dollars are rising and going nowhere and he supported those complaints with fax and evidence. He never "stretched the truth and ignored the facts" as you called it.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Location
Inverness/St Andrews , UK
I'm going to assume you're talking about the segments that FOX News airs on their television station. If that is the case, then I highly disagree and I would like for you to give me some specific examples other than the one we're discussing in this OP. People like Glenn Beck and O'Reily, in my opinion, have some radical viewpoints but they never fail to support these viewpoints with fact.

Here's an example. The other day I was watching the O'Reily Factor with my dad who enjoys watching FOX News because he's rather conservative. I didn't watch the whole of it but there was one particular segment of the show that I found intriguing. He had two people come onto the show (I forget their names but they were both pro-Obama and liberal) to discuss the investment Obama made into two energey companies. Obama had guaranteed that this company was going to create thousands of permanent jobs for the American people. It ended up going bankrupt and several people got layed off. O'Reily had asked these two people if they could name any success story of one of Obama's government funded projects and they simply couldn't.

This might have gone a bit off topic but I'm just trying to prove that you can't generalize all of FOX News with just specific instances that happen with certain people FOX decides to support on their network. O'Reily was complaing that his tax dollars are rising and going nowhere and he supported those complaints with fax and evidence. He never "stretched the truth and ignored the facts" as you called it.

[video=youtube;2K139PoxG4Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=2K139PoxG4Q[/video]

[video=youtube;bpda3l2ri0Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpda3l2ri0Y&feature=related[/video]

I've never seen such streams of rubbish spewed in my life.

What we really think of Daniel Hannan and his views in the UK:

[video=youtube;gf2E2Yi58iw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf2E2Yi58iw&feature=related[/video]

[video=youtube;E07ZHWxT834]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E07ZHWxT834&feature=related[/video]

[video=youtube;XCJ4Cx1fErY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCJ4Cx1fErY&feature=related[/video]

I know I only really picked up on one issue here, but it's only a small sample of the greater lack of knowledge and tact displayed by FOX news on almost every subject.
 

Johnny Sooshi

Just a sleepy guy
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Location
a Taco Bell dumpster
I'm going to assume you're talking about the segments that FOX News airs on their television station. If that is the case, then I highly disagree and I would like for you to give me some specific examples other than the one we're discussing in this OP. People like Glenn Beck and O'Reily, in my opinion, have some radical viewpoints but they never fail to support these viewpoints with fact.

Here's an example. The other day I was watching the O'Reily Factor with my dad who enjoys watching FOX News because he's rather conservative. I didn't watch the whole of it but there was one particular segment of the show that I found intriguing. He had two people come onto the show (I forget their names but they were both pro-Obama and liberal) to discuss the investment Obama made into two energey companies. Obama had guaranteed that this company was going to create thousands of permanent jobs for the American people. It ended up going bankrupt and several people got layed off. O'Reily had asked these two people if they could name any success story of one of Obama's government funded projects and they simply couldn't.

This might have gone a bit off topic but I'm just trying to prove that you can't generalize all of FOX News with just specific instances that happen with certain people FOX decides to support on their network. O'Reily was complaing that his tax dollars are rising and going nowhere and he supported those complaints with fax and evidence. He never "stretched the truth and ignored the facts" as you called it.

It all comes down to personal opinion. I just don't like FOX but that's me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom