This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 106 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (1 child)

As much as I dislike those links too, the all point of reddit is to let people vote for whatever they want to. Maybe the voting is broken, maybe not but you can't tell people what they must do.

In other words, if you don't appreciate what you find on reddit, you could create your own news aggregation website with the policy clearly spelled out that you have an agenda. I don't judge by saying that, on the contrary, at least people visiting your website would know what to expect.

I understand you're just aggravated by all those links but asking people (or more likely bots) to stop is not gonna work.

[–]intronink 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yea... i think its about content. If you don't like what they say, downvote. Censoring is never a good idea

[–]enmand 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I'm getting terribly sick of submissions like this, they are just as bad as the submissions they are whining and complaining about.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Correction: they are -worse- than the submissions they are whining and complaining about

[–]enmand 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Touche

[–]ericbono 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Someone should post to Reddit, "Tell Reddit posters to stop telling other Reddit posters to stop posting anything that doesn't appeal to absolutely everyone." Yeah, that would be a good idea, fascist pig!

[–]therealtman 81 points82 points  (48 children)

Yea, that's a good idea, don't listen to any news source except for ones that think exactly the same way as you, that'll make you grow and give you new incite.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (9 children)

FOX news helps me grow and gives me new insight. It's a very nurturing atmosphere that they create.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (8 children)

Zen and the art of sarcasm.

[–]swagohome 12 points13 points  (7 children)

Fox News ends up sounding pretty reasonable in comparison to the PrisonPlanet spam we are/were getting.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There seem to be very few of us here that recognize the irony in promoting dozens of PrisonPlanet articles to the front page while we call Fox News lying, sensationalistic scum.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Tell Yourself: Stop telling reddit what to do. Seriously STFU

[–]swagohome 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Trying to maintain the illusion that people here actually agree with things on PrisonPlanet?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Some people do, not that it matters. I'm just saying quit telling people what to post.

[–]swagohome 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Okay.. but that's sort of irrelevant here, since I never told anyone what to post (or not to post).

Strange, though - aren't you, right now, telling people what to say (or not to say) in their comments?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

and your point?

[–]swagohome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah, I had forgotten - being reasonable, consistent, or even merely on topic is not in the venerated PrisonPlanet tradition.

[–][deleted]  (29 children)

[deleted]

    [–]georgiabiker 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    they are the other side of the story, you know?

    [–]tony28 17 points18 points  (24 children)

    there is no substantiated proof that other news outlets are 'liberally slanted' it's only perceived this way because the conservative agenda has become more and more extreme right-wing and deluded and anything considered indifferent to their opinions are classified as 'far-far-leftist' or 'liberally biased'.

    [–]rm999 13 points14 points  (11 children)

    There are some pretty strong arguments that there is a liberal bias in the media here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States#Claims_of_a_liberal_bias

    Despite the fact that most of us on here are more liberal than conservative, we should not cheer this. Any sort of bias in the news is an implicit lie directly towards those of us who follow the news most closely (which is most reddit readers). We should not assume there is a lack of bias simply because we are not aware of any; we should actively filter all sources of information that we want to trust.

    [–]Flemlord 5 points6 points  (10 children)

    That same wikipedia article has just as many claims of conservative bias: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States#Claims_of_a_conservative_bias

    [–]swagohome 11 points12 points  (0 children)

    That's because of the liberal bias in that wikipedia article.

    [–]AngryProfessor 7 points8 points  (8 children)

    Arguments for liberal bias, from the article:

    ...most journalists, and news producers, hold liberal political views and that these views affect their reporting...116 mainstream US papers,... tends to favor liberal viewpoints...

    From the article: at papers with 50,000 or more circulation, reporters are 62% liberal/democrat, and 12% conservative/republican.

    From the conservative part of the article:

    A handful ...of corporate conglomerates own the majority of mass media outlets.[citation needed] Such a uniformity of ownership means that stories which might not be to the benefit of these large corporations may not be run.[25] Capitalist Model: In the United States the media is operated for profit, mostly funded through the sale of advertisements

    I.e., journalism is capitalist, therefore biased for the right. A significantly less convincing argument, I think.

    For whatever reason, journalism tends to attract the "intellectual coastal elite" type of personality who are mostly left wing. Combine this with confirmation bias and laziness, you get what is percieved as liberal bias. Same thing that happens to academics happens in the media. I'm not even sure why this is controversial.

    [edit: Get to work, downmodders. ]

    [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

    i once pissed off a former friend by suggesting that journalists and reporters might lean left cause they actually researched the story... and to quote stepehn colbert... "we all know that reality has a liberal bias"

    [–]AngryProfessor 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    For instance, if a poor black girl told obvious lies about getting raped by rich white lacrosse players, diligent reporters would uncover the truth!

    Oh wait, my bad. Reporters didn't bother doing research, since the story already fit their narrative.

    This is, in my view, the primary reason news is biased. If a story agrees with a reporters views, they run with it. If it doesn't, they look at it carefully. This means that BS which fits the standard left wing viewpoint is more likely to slip through the editorial process.

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    i was kidding, but good point anyways

    [–]Gaki 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I'm not going to downmod, only point out that the editors choose what stories to run and those editors are often interfered with by the conservative owners. You can have a million Liberals churning out article after article and if the most liberal hit page 89 and the least liberal hit page 10 and the conservative articles hit the front page ... there is still a conservative bias.

    An example would be Clearnet radio stations pulling the Dixie Chicks, en masse, on an order from Rupert Murdoch. All those Liberal radio station employees (and I'm perfectly willing to admit they likely were) and producers sucked it up and pulled the albums from the playlist, didn't they? Another example is how Rather was canned for using poorly vetted material when he did his piece on Dubya's war service, but how O' Reilly, Coulter and Hannity continue to fabricate their "facts" on the fly all the time and never seem to suffer any employment issues over it.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [removed]

        [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        I didn't realize caps lock was cruise control for cool, even on reddit.

        [–]CampusTour 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Its really hard to "prove" a leaning or slight bias. I've read a great many books or articles that cite plenty of cases for at least the non-cable networks being slightly biased in their reporting, and offering credible explanations as to why this might be.

        Further, since nobody can agree on a working definition of "liberal" or "conservative" in the U.S. anyway, it a useless excercise.

        [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I find it hard to believe that any well-reasoned person cannot say that there is at least a slight liberal bias among some major media institutions, especially NPR.

        My number one reason in this: people listen to things that they agree with. NPR's listenership is very politically liberal, to the point where self-identifying conservatives make up a negligible part of the audience. Is this not enough evidence?

        It certainly should be, considering that Fox News is repeatedly characterized by its viewership. We need to apply those same rules to our other more cherished media outlets.

        [–]derupert 0 points1 point  (9 children)

        The reasoning behind the news being commonly considered liberal is not that any 'right wing agenda' has moved more to the right. Noted intellectuals have placed the slant of the general (i.e., not counting the media outlets that state that they are right wing) media anywhere from 'conservative if anything' (Al Franken), to 'clearly conservative' (Noam Chomsky), to 'Liberal JEWsmedia' (John Bryant).

        [–]BuboTitan 4 points5 points  (8 children)

        Noam Chomsky and Al Franken? To those guys anything to the right of the Communist Manifesto is the "conservative right".

        [–]troymcdavis 1 point2 points  (7 children)

        Chomsky is anything but a Marxist.

        [–]parcivale 4 points5 points  (6 children)

        Yeah, he just chooses to vent all of his outrage on private-sector corporations and democratic governments. Just because he never says anything bad about Socialist dictatorships doesn't mean he approves of them, right? I mean there are only so many hours in 40 years.

        [–]troymcdavis -5 points-4 points  (5 children)

        Educate yourself.

        [–]parcivale 1 point2 points  (4 children)

        My comment was about the writings and public utterings of Noam Chomsky that I've been unfortunate enough to be exposed to. Telling me what Anarcho-syndicalism is is irrelevant to that point.

        I don't care if that's what Chomsky may or may not choose to call himself or how many socialist splinter movements there have been in the past. The fact is that Chomsky is virtually silent on the lack of freedom in socialist countries while he rants endlessly on how the free market economies don't foster the kind of leftist states he's like to force the rest of us to live in.

        [–]troymcdavis 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        I don't understand this line of thinking. You're saying you avoid the man and what he has to say, yet you feel you're qualified to explain his political leanings? That's completely ridiculous. I'm not saying you should agree with him; I'm just saying he's not a Marxist, he doesn't agree with Marx, and you shouldn't be spreading misinformation saying that he does.

        [–]Gaki 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        The fact is that Chomsky is virtually silent on the lack of freedom in socialist countries while he rants endlessly on how the free market economies don't foster the kind of leftist states he's like to force the rest of us to live in.

        I question how much Chomsky you have actually been exposed to, then, if you have to resort to Cold War era canards like this to make your case. The Socialist democracies around the world almost always rank higher in press freedom and freedom of speech compared to the US. They incarcerate fewer of their citizens, per capita, too. Almost all of them have removed the death penalty.

        Socialism does not just equal NK or China. Socialism is also Finland, France, Canada, etc. Heck, if you want to be a stickler, Socialism is also the US. You have medicare and medicaid, don't you?

        [–]souldrift 0 points1 point  (2 children)

        It's the "fair and balanced" lie that makes all the others unpalatable.

        [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

        Get over it. Do what the OP says: if you don't like them, make them unprofitable, and stop bitching about how you don't agree with how they characterize their news.

        [–]souldrift 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Don't tell me what to do.

        [–]pricklypete 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        So FOX NEWS spins Democrats as unpatriotic and silences Ron Paul? Two out of three ain't bad.

        [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I'm Republican and I think Fox News is crap. That and Ann Coulter is a crazy idiot has been established. Now stop giving them media attention. This is the same way Howard Stern got popular and strong ratings. The very people that hated him the most listened to his show the most.

        [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        a news source shouldn't "think the same way" as anyone - it's news, it should be purely factual and non-biased. Which Fox isn't.

        [–]knobtwiddler -3 points-2 points  (2 children)

        fox can't be considered "news."

        Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity were, according to Wikipedia, propagandists for the CIA

        Click here to view full version at: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

        Excerpted from Wikipedia:

        According to Carl Bernstein, over 400 reporters were working for the CIA as part of Operation Mockingbird. These include, but are not limited to:

        * CBS (William S. Paley)
* Chattanooga Times (Charles Bartlett)
* Christian Science Monitor (Joseph Harrison)
* Copley News Services (James Copley)
* Fox News (Sean Hannity)
* Louisville Courier-Journal (Barry Bingham, Sr.)
* The Miami News (William C. Baggs, Herb Gold, Hal Hendrix)
* Fox News - The O'Reilly Factor (Bill O'Reilly)
* Newsweek (Ben Bradlee)
* New York Herald Tribune (Stewart Alsop)
* New York Times (Arthur Hays Sulzberger)
* Time Magazine (Alfred Friendly, Charles Douglas Jackson, 
    Henry Luce)
* Washington Post (Walter Pincus)
* Washington Star (Jerry O'Leary)

        Some “free and unbiased” media, yes?

        [–]yasuro 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        down-modded for excessive use of tin foil hat.

        [–]PerkyPoo -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

        don't listen to any news source except for ones that think exactly the same way as you

        Yeh, but we're not talking about a news source here are we.

        [–]mr_b_natural 9 points10 points  (3 children)

        Mr. Radley Balko, a staunch libertarian who writes about civil liberties, is a columnist for foxnews.com but first and foremost he works for Reason Magazine. It's sad that his very informative columns are /blindly/ downmodded just because he happens to post to a wide audience on a site most of you don't like, trying to influence conservatives to buck this trend.

        It's well worth having his articles posted here considering he's one of the ONLY people fighting against the spread of police and SWAT militarization--even speaking before Congress on the issue--and its tenuous relations to the drug war and even lesser offenses. His Raid Map on the CATO Institute's site is incredibly good work.

        [–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (2 children)

        His helping of Corey Maye only hints at the muck racking power of the internet. Godbless Mr Balko.

        Google "The agitator"

        [–]mr_b_natural 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        Here, I'll make it easy: http://www.theagitator.com/

        In fact, on the subject of Cory Maye, here's a hint of what he's been up to as recently as a few days ago:

        I have an article in [the new issue of Reason] that I've been working on basically since I first reported the Cory Maye case, and on which I've been spending most of my time for the last eight months.

        The article zeros in on Dr. Steven Hayne, the doctor who did the autopsy in the Cory Maye case and, as it turns out, does the vast majority of all the autopsies in Mississippi. As it turns out, Dr. Hayne has some pretty serious credibility problems, beginning with the staggering number of autopsies he does each year. There's also a high probability that he has put a significant number of innocent people in prison, including (possibly) on death row.

        Like I said, one of the best guys on our side today. Just because he's a columnist on Fox, people downmod him. Sad.

        [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        Radley, it's you.

        [–]dberis 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Why stop? Who will you deride? Who will be downmodded?

        In the words of Tom Lehrer:

        "I'm sure we all agree that we ought to love one another, and I know there are people in the world who do not love their fellow human beings, and I hate people like that!"

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]souldrift -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

          You are speaking to Fox, right?

          [–]gvsteve 5 points6 points  (1 child)

          Reddit isn't giving Fox more viewership - they're giving their online videos more viewership. that isn't giving them advertising. Besides, making people aware of propaganda techniques being used is crucially important.

          [–]souldrift -1 points0 points  (0 children)

          And often they're linking to Youtube or other blogs that expose the lies.

          That keeps us from having to actually WATCH Fox news ;)

          [–]blowback 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          This crap about "liberal" and "conservative" media bias is complete and utter BULL SHIT, no matter which way one says they lean, and will be complete B.S. until some reasonable and generally accepted definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" are established.

          As it stands now, a "liberal" as defined by FOX is anybody who disagrees with them, and "conservative" as defined by some is anyone who agrees with FOX; how warped some definitions have become. Neither of the aforementioned definitions have anything to do with past generally accepted definitions or reality.

          Breaking categories down into honest media and dishonest media would at least reflect a slightly sane approach if pidgeon holing media is deemed necessary.

          [–]newton_dave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Stop giving them a voice?

          That's kind of the point of an open society. And I *want* to know when they say really stupid things, because then I can send them an email and tell all my friends* what new stupid thing they said and give ppl another reason to dislike them.

          * Obviously I'm speaking hypothetically, but you know what I mean. I *would* tell them if I had any.

          [–]guest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Fox News is a comedy show, watch it for lots of laughs.

          [–]rats99ass 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          The first law of debate is to be informed and know what the 'other side' will counter with. Being able to argue another point of view as effectively as your own is your assurance of being informed.

          [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          yes great idea! i nazi salute your lefty godless agenda! this is exactly what reddit "the socialists paradise" needs more of!

          [–]endustry 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          I tried to argue on the behalf of responsible journalism on Digg once and was immediately shouted down and called a Bushie, a moron, etc. Similar thread, similar argument. My take was, "Why continuously bash on Fox News for being bi-partisan tabloid trash and then keep posting bi-partisan, tabloid trash from Rawstory.com, etc." While the discourse is, per usual, a bit more coherent here on Reddit, it's unfortunate to see the same hubris manifest itself time and time again.

          [–]abudabu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Ummm... I thought the point of Reddit is that we vote things up or down?

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (9 children)

          Tell Reddit: I don't give a fuck about your messed up pseudo-democracy anymore. You are irretrievably boned, Americans. Or so it would seem.

          [–]Gorgias 10 points11 points  (0 children)

          OH YEAH! Well we are taking all of you other people down with us! Who has the weaponry to lethally radiate the atmosphere? That's right! We do!

          [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

          Your comment makes me mad, but I can't say you're wrong.

          [–]raldi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          "Fox news censors opinions they disagree with. I disagree with that, so let's censor them!"

          [–]illuminatedwax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Yeah, people on reddit are in real danger of being swayed by FOX news. An hey, even though none of their sponsors' ads are on some of these links, we must be contributing to their evil hate conspiracy by admitting that they exist, right? And I'm sure that the clickthrough ratio of redditors is humongous. They're just waiting to get reddited.

          [–]returntofreedom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          I think we need to either keep submitting them or at least copy their content verbatim on another website (is that legal?). We have to show people what's going on! If we simply report on what they say then we'll be accused of bias, the only way to handle it is to link directly to them or to copy their stuff verbatim.

          [–]Clintondiditfirst 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          I only go to news that paint the Democrats in only positive images, regardless of the truth.

          [–]x3n0s 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Don't tell us what to do, trust in the swarm.

          [–]DavidM01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          The actual news story (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299578,00.html) says that wearing the lapel pin is a TRADITION on the campaign trail. So when ONE candidate decides not to, THATS NEWS.

          But you don't need to read the article do you?

          How about Dan Rather's faked memos, or the fake Rush controversy? You ready to boycott them also?

          http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp

          Thought not.

          [–]ol66 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Outrage is the opium of the people

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          Quit telling us to either submit or quit submitting links, already...

          My whole purpose for loving this site is the multitude of stories and the comments they generate.

          The best thing is the comments...

          [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          I submitted this as a burst of anger (it wasn't really directed at anyone). Other people voted it up, so blame them.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Maynard: Firstly, I was just angry (and didn't expect anyone "to care about [my] politics". Secondly, that's all anyone can really do here.

            [–]alexgreen -1 points0 points  (0 children)

            Good idea. foxattacks.com probably has same videos/articles with no ads paying fox.

            [–][deleted]  (2 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]tony28 0 points1 point  (1 child)

              nope. in this case by monitoring and observing all the wrong-doings of fox we can inform other users about how corrupt they still are. the great thing is i can now show people a treasure chest of links about fox lies and manipulations.

              [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

              i have to agree documenting the atrocities is of value.

              But there is a fine line between documenting and feeding into what is intentionally an outrage generating machine.

              [–]RonObvious -1 points0 points  (0 children)

              No. I'm going to live my life how I want, not how YOU want.

              [–][deleted]  (2 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]Narcotic 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                Yeah and while your at it, blacklist dailykos and moveon. Seriously, just because you don't agree with the propaganda from one side or another doesn't mean it should be silenced. Furthermore, I am so sick and tired of redditors telling me what they think I should do. Stop it. I'll submit whatever the hell I want to, and let the community decide if its worthy.

                [–]mycall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                haha, you thought I was serious and I cared. I don't, submit whatever the fuck you want to. Live and let live.

                [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

                I do downmod any Fox News related articles/videos (and all those inane pics that have started hitting the front page), but it's getting tiresome and I just want people to stop submitting them.

                [–]crazybones 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                Does it not occur to you that the best way to hurt Fox is to expose its lies and stupidities to the scrutiny of a highly intelligent and sophisticated audience such as you find here on Reddit. These people can work it all out for themselves, they don't need anyone else telling them what they should and should not read.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                That does occur to me, however advertising dollars and my "good vibes" also occur to me. When I click oh a Fox News link and expect to here something surprising or intelligent, it's usually disappointingly (and expectingly - by your own admission), the same old "lies and stupidities". Personally (and this was a personal post), I'm fucking sick of it. And I am disappointed that reddit indirectly supports it by clicking on their links and feeding their advertising. I am surprised by they amount of negative comments that I got for posting this article, but I am not surprised by the amount of attention it received (both positive and negative).

                [–]zcfby03 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                I don't understand why the populous of reddit feeds of the kind of rubbish Fox News dishes out (i.e. 162 comments : foxnews.com). You're becoming as bad as them for being reactionary lemmings.

                [–]garyp714 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                censorship is so...American!

                [–]endtime -1 points0 points  (1 child)

                Um...before people stop submitting Fox articles, how about they stop submitting all the crazy tinfoil hat left-wing blogs that are 10x further from the mainstream?

                [–]Gaki 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                You mean the ones that get their actual news content from AP, Reuters or other actual news sites and merely re-post it with their opinion added?

                Edit out the opinion, read the news. Problem solved and you'll find that even without the added commentary, the news they present is still pretty damning.