Red1966
Well-Known Member
Anyone can claim Fox can't broadcast in Canada................it don't make it so
It's All The Fault Of Fox News
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
You completed my analogy. Thanks.
That's what I mean.
Don't get all butt hurt....but shit ppl might want to enjoy a show without the fire yelling guy.
I am not denying you saw a real fire ever.
What did you yell racist over yesterday to a new member?
Obamaphone.
He said obamaphone....had he said reganphone....or knew to say reganphone....and that poster was black....would you have accepted this racism for the republican insult?
You are the fire yeller....that was my point...on this thread, you started a fire.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
You were asked to back that up and failed to even try. You don't expect us to believe just because you repeat it?
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Reserved for billy joel.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
So far, the only one you've proven to be lying is yourself.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and i justified the case with academic research and references to modern culture.
why does obama's name get attached to food stamps, welfare, and lifeline but not social security, medicare, or unemployment insurance?
the answer is left as an exercise to the reader, but for those who have done the least amount of research it is already obvious.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Justify it with whatever. That dude simply thought that program was a new one.
Could have just asked if he new that...as another did.
Nope......THAT'S RACIST.
Btw I think red has you on ignore......sooooo there's that.
What do you tell others that get off topic in your threads? "Nature have intentionality"?
Civility is lost.
Could have just asked if he new that...as another did.
Nope......THAT'S RACIST.
Btw I think red has you on ignore......sooooo there's that.
What do you tell others that get off topic in your threads? "Nature have intentionality"?
Civility is lost.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
In contrast, political talk shows, particularly conservative talk programs, have older audiences. Large majorities of the regular viewers of Sean Hannity (66%) and The O Reilly Factor (64%) are 50 and older. Just 43% of all Americans are 50 and older. And while just 17% of the public is 65 and older, 42% of regular Hannity viewers and 40% of regular OReilly viewers are in that age category.
http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/section-4-demographics-and-political-views-of-news-audiences/
As indicated by a New York Times article, based on Nielsen statistics, Fox appears to have an aging demographic. In 2008, in the 25-54 age group, Fox News had an average of 557,000 viewers, but dropped to 379,000 in 2013 while increasing its overall audience from 1.89 million in 2010 to 2.02 million in 2013. The median age for Fox News viewers is listed as 65+ as Nielsen does not give exact figures for ages over 65.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Demographics
Clarify for me, which shows on FOX are News and which ones are opinion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Objectivity_and_bias
Knowing how and doing it are two completely different things. What percentage of FOX's demographics (65+) do you suppose fact check information?
To OP, you must have seen an entirely different interview than I did, because this is what I saw happen;
[youtube]kqzNlF87zcw[/youtube]
Also, FOX's conducting the interview with the president had nothing to do with credibility, it had to do with FOX airing the super bowl on Sunday, as the clip clarifies
Then there's no Fox News in California, or Nevada, or Arizona, or Florida, or Montana, or Maine, or Alabama, or anywhere else but New York.
You also insinuated Canada did not want Fox News because of their credibility, you were wrong on that one too.
Sounds like you better get a more reliable news source, doublejj, because wherever you're getting it now, is making you look like you are very misinformed, wouldn't you agree?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you always stick up for racists, even at the expense of civil rights and equal protection.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
canada's laws against the type of lies fox news spreads only applies to canadian broadcasters, so fox dodged that one on technicality.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I believe he is saying there is no FOX news created in Canada, it is created elsewhere
doublejj
Well-Known Member
By your own post....when fox agreed 'NOT' to open a Canadian 'Faux' news service in Canada, ONLY THEN were they allowed to broadcast American generated faux news. Canada doesn't want their kind of news.....
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
hey bettedavis there, tell me which "news" station ran with this story?
In the 2012 race for the White House President Obama is ahead, but the polls are misleading.
Republicans and Democrats alike have honed in on the fact that recent media polls are oversampling Democrats. Indeed, we have seen many polls that are heavily skewed.
One website, www.unskewedpolls.com
The assumption the pollsters are making that turnout in 2008 will be the same and even better for Obama than in 2008 is flawed.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Here is the headline from Canadian Free Press.
They erroneously insinuate Fox News did terrible in the ratings covering the State of the Union.
[h=2]Fox News Makes Up for State of the Union Disaster[/h]http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/60889
The truth is, Fox news crushed their competition, in fact, they had more viewers than MSNBC and CNN combined.
Fox News was the clear leader among the cable news networks for Tuesday night's State of the Union address, according to Nielsen.
FNC averaged 4.72 million viewers for President Obama's speech from 9:14-10:20 p.m. ET. That was followed by MSNBC with 2.29 million and CNN in third with 2.08 million.
- See more at: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/programming/sotu-ratings-fox-news-leads-cable-both-viewers-and-demo/128827#sthash.vbb3orTU.dpuf
Fox News was the clear leader among the cable news networks for Tuesday night's State of the Union address, according to Nielsen.
FNC averaged 4.72 million viewers for President Obama's speech from 9:14-10:20 p.m. ET. That was followed by MSNBC with 2.29 million and CNN in third with 2.08 million.http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/programming/sotu-ratings-fox-news-leads-cable-both-viewers-and-demo/128827
They erroneously insinuate Fox News did terrible in the ratings covering the State of the Union.
[h=2]Fox News Makes Up for State of the Union Disaster[/h]http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/60889
The truth is, Fox news crushed their competition, in fact, they had more viewers than MSNBC and CNN combined.
Fox News was the clear leader among the cable news networks for Tuesday night's State of the Union address, according to Nielsen.
FNC averaged 4.72 million viewers for President Obama's speech from 9:14-10:20 p.m. ET. That was followed by MSNBC with 2.29 million and CNN in third with 2.08 million.
- See more at: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/programming/sotu-ratings-fox-news-leads-cable-both-viewers-and-demo/128827#sthash.vbb3orTU.dpuf
Fox News was the clear leader among the cable news networks for Tuesday night's State of the Union address, according to Nielsen.
FNC averaged 4.72 million viewers for President Obama's speech from 9:14-10:20 p.m. ET. That was followed by MSNBC with 2.29 million and CNN in third with 2.08 million.http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/programming/sotu-ratings-fox-news-leads-cable-both-viewers-and-demo/128827
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what does the number of people who watch it have to do with the veracity and accuracy of it?
if 2 people watch a lie or 20 million watch a lie, it is still a lie.
try to improve your critical thinking skills, you lowly caveman.
He insinuated that Canada did not have Fox News because it was an unreliable news source, he was proven wrong.