The Daily Show compares coverage of the gay rights protests to tea partiers

How would it play out? Not sure what you're trying to say.

Fox devoted far more coverage to one event than another. They also devoted more coverage to an empty lot where there was an extremely small tea bagger gathering than they did to the large civil rights march.

Why do you think that is?
 
Maybe its the fact gay rights is more a special interest that doesn't carry the weight that "fundamental change" to socialism does.

Also size matters, the gays may have had 10's of thousands while the patriot had many 100's of thousands.

inB4afiremansaid.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Maybe its the fact gay rights is more a special interest that doesn't carry the weight that "fundamental change" to socialism does.
Click to expand...

No, Tea baggers are a special interest more than civil rights is.

Also size matters, the gays may have had 10's of thousands while the patriot had many 100's of thousands.
Click to expand...

Both were in the 10's of thousands. However to drive the point home if you watched the video you will find that Fox devoted over twice as much coverage to an empty lot that held a extremely small tea bagger protest than they did to the civil rights march.

So that pretty much completely shoots down any size argument.
 
catocom said:
I will.

IT WAS GREAT! :banana:
Click to expand...

You find the disparity in coverage between the two types of events to be great?

Are you saying large civil rights marches should get less coverage than emptry lots that held a small protest the previous day?
 
Yeah join the club spike! In that "you be the judge" thread I offered two links to actual research about what is effective in criminal justice at curbing future crime and recidivism. The results shown are actually quite surprising. Even I was a bit surprised. So far as I know though, nobody clicked the links because thy are not a bit interested in "correction" or rehabilitation and reducing crime. They are only interested in knee jerk feel good revenge and creating a subhuman class for the purpose of legalized slavery, that comes out angrier, more skilled and possibly violent or more violent if they already were. May everyone who insists on harsh sentences for non violent criminals, get ripped off ROYALLY (and I mean total financial devastation and ruin and I SINCERELY wish it would happen to such fools!) by one of these folks who went to criminal school for a few years. I'll laugh my fucking ass off and the poor bastard who gets ripped will still not care a bit about what's right or wrong, and only care about making that criminal pay! Oh well such is the cycle of stupidity in America. In my opinion our arrogance, and short sightedness will bring down the empire within 50 years....Watch!
 
catocom said:
Yep

yin yang
Need it.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? We don't need a clearly biased agenda from supposedly neutral news agencies. A large civil rights march obviously warrants more coverage than an empty lot.

It is interesting that you support them being blatantly biased when they claim to be balanced.
 
It's almost as hilarious as Fox's bullshit coverage of Reagan's birthday! Fair and Balanced? Perhaps if you are politically to the right Rush the drug addict fat bastard blowhard!

I suggest watching Outfoxed. It is a great documentary on the Fox propaganda ministry, and it's mostly people who worked for them and leaked memos. I know none of the cons will watch it, being completely uninterested in actual facts, and only interested in self serving spin. Then most likely they will get up on their soapboxes armed with lies and tell us how wrong outfoxed was, not even possessing of the courage to watch it for themselves.... Typical!
 
spike said:
What are you talking about? We don't need a clearly biased agenda from supposedly neutral news agencies. A large civil rights march obviously warrants more coverage than an empty lot.

It is interesting that you support them being blatantly biased when they claim to be balanced.
Click to expand...

:laugh3:

I guess you choose not to look back at when I've supported freedom to express
views that I personally oppose.

do some digging here before you make accusations man.
I think you may be surprised, as you clearly don't Know me.
 
I'm just going by the current conversation where you approved of blatantly biased coverage of an empty lot over a large civil rights march.
 
I'd venture to say I'll approve of many more things that you don't approve of spike.

can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen

your not the sole judge of me. Get used to it.
 
you mean where the admin tried to biased to exclude fox from a meeting?

(many would know this is rhetorical, but I'd better say it...it is)
 
No, I think it was clear we were talking about the blatant bias Fox showed covering an empty lot vs. a huge civil rights march. That you approved of.
 
meh, I grow weary of the chase.

we can go around the rest of the day spike, and not one thing productive will come of it.

I'll concede that I'm incomprehensible to you.
You seem to want to draw conclusions, and make accusations from innuendo,
and I'm not going any farther with throwing your own tactics back at you.

go ahead and chalk you another one up.
 
catocom said:
I'll concede that I'm incomprehensible to you.
You seem to want to draw conclusions, and make accusations from innuendo,
Click to expand...

I'm not making any accusations and there was no innuendo. You said you think it ok for Fox to show this kind of bias against the civil rights march. Yes, I do find that incomprehensible though.
 
spike said:
So not one person yet was willing to comment on the disparity in Fox's coverage of the two events.
Click to expand...

Am I missing something? You posted a link to a comedy sketch. I don't care for wassisname so I didn't watch it. I don't see where you've asked a question based on fact (perhaps CNN needs to do a fact-check ala SNL skits)
 
randomJACKASS said:
So far as I know though, nobody clicked the links because thy are not a bit interested in "correction" or rehabilitation and reducing crime.
Click to expand...

I didn't. I also (if I recall) stayed out of that one. However, in light of your current statement, let me assure you that I, for one, am not the least bit interested in rehab.

I'm interested in punishment. Do a crime, get your ass thrown into Sheriff Joes prison. That's the answer. Get out, commit another & get thrown back in. Rinse, repeat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top