Say what you want about Jon Stewart but I always thought some of the best political conversations were when he would sit down with the likes of Bill O’Reilly or Juan Williams because there’s a thoughtlessness and line of reasoning a logical person can usually follow when Stewart does interviews or participates in them.

Good conversation. I think Williams however, defends the ideological Fox network a bit too much. I do understand its his bread and butter.

*thoughtfulness

Awesome. Two very smart people, indeed.

That was actually a really good debate.  On another note, Stewart’s got his audience trained like circus monkeys.

Stewart openly fantasized about a new network that could have Fox’s energy and excitement, but that wasn’t so partisan. And Williams seemed to be on board with the enterprise.

 
That is a total Fantasy, because at the end of the day the ones at the VERY TOP that pay all the bills do in fact have an agenda to push. And it’s to easy to replace one puppet with another.
 
Very good exchange that anyone with common sense already knew. Was good to see it aired and should be challenged more often on other channels claiming no bias.

I hate anything that makes me question the honesty and impartiality of Fox News. 

Of course you think that, you’re a bomb-thrower.  You actually demonstrate what they were debating about.

On a slightly different front, Stewart also compared Williams being
unfairly labeled a “bigot” for his Muslim comments as being similar to
how Fox News recently wondered whether Stewart was “racist” for his Herman Cain jokes.

No, Jon, it’s called playing by the guidelines you libs put in place.  If Conservatives are racist for any criticism of a black person, then you are too.  You made your bed, now you have to lie (pun intended) in it.

I would go one step further and say its not about ideology, its what sells and makes money, the truth and facts are usually not very exciting

John Stewart is at his best when he sits down with O’Reilly, I have a conservative bias, even so to me Stewart has dominated O’Reilly in the interviews that I have seen…  I think that it has much to do with O’Reilly’s lack of preparation for those interviews and Stewarts stronger wit..

bwahah then you throw a bomb 2 seconds later.. hypocrite..

I think if you weigh in the person in questions back presence up to the remarks, you find the prejudice or lack of.  In Jon’s defense as in Williams, they seem moot.

I think it has more to do with the fact that O’Reilly doesn’t really believe what he says, he just says what he needs to to appeal to his viewers.

Jon Stewart accused Williams of being a bigot?

The point Williams was trying to make is that MSNBC and NPR are just as ideological as Fox is, and that people who agree with them don’t see them as ideological because they actually share the same ideology, same as those who identify with Fox. Stewart knew that’s the argument Williams was making, but refused to acknowledge it.

Is some of FOX programming biased? Yes. Is it all biased? No. Just because they cover things that the Liberal media won’t, doesn’t make them biased. Jon is smoking crack if he thinks that MSNBC isn’t more biased than FOX. At no time have I ever heard a comentator get a thrill up their leg about ANY President on FOX. Nor, do they hear the Earth move during speeches or call someone from the other side a slut. Hands down, MSNBC wins the bias award.

No way Stewart believes that conservatives are per se racist for criticizing black people. Of course you know that. However, that does not mean that he believes that no criticism of black people by white people is racist. We both know there is some of that racism stuff on both sides. To claim that progressives or conservatives are per se racist, is silly.

Well according to the journOlist scandal, the plan of the left was to call anyone who disagrees with Obama a racist.  Do you think they actually believe it or are they just using it as a deterrent against any criticism of BO?

Juan is one of the few Democrats I like. He’s an honest liberal who’s willing to have a real debate on the issues. 

Juan is one of the few Democrats I like. He’s an honest liberal who’s willing to have a real debate on the issues. 

And so some idle talk on a blog that includes a handful of progressives, out of tens of millions, speaks for everyone? It is not reasonable to say that.

Yea, Juan is good.

It only seems that way. MSNBC is progressive, sure, but FOX is conservative. Neither network is unbiased. And there is nothing wrong with that.

So…news flash…Jon Stewart thinks everyone (and there’s a lot) who disagrees with him is not very smart and a crumby Republican. Yawn…eyes roll…head tips forward with a very slight left and right shake. Ho…Hum

Ok, but Jon is not part of the JournOlist, so him being called a racist when he has never called any conservative a racist for disagreeing with Obama is uncalled for.

That said, those liberals who do call conservatives racist for disagreeing with Obama do deserve a little bit of their medicine back at them. It’s amazing at how little a person must do to be labeled a racist these days. There are plenty of words to describe conservatives. Racist is not one of them and Jon Stewart recognizes that.

““part of the strategy it seems of partisan media organizations is to de-legitimize your opponent by suggesting bias rather than dealing with the criticism.”

This is EXACTLY what Stewart does. Why does he think he has a special pass? 

Because Stewart is incapable of applying standards to himself and the people he agrees with, that he sets for everyone on “the right”. He’s just as blindly partisan and misleading to his viewers as he accuses Fox and the right of being. 

What is sam hell are you talking about?  Hallucinations again?

Ah yes…..the false equivalence of fox and msnbc. Proving once again: Libs are easily fooled useful idiots.

And that is the essence of honest debate. When you can’t control the language and choose the definition of the words that you and your opponents use, you can’t hide your “bias” or obscure your viewpoint. Juan Williams points out the prime time line up of Fox features Shep Smith and Greta Van Susteren and uses that to contrast how the MSNBC prime time line up is completely biased ideological opinion programming. Stewart acknowledges that Shep’s not biased (since everyone knows he’s a closeted homosexual) and ignores Greta (who probably has the best reputation for being fair and balanced and actually a journalist on all of cable news at least). Then Stewart immediately tries to brush off the entire point because he can’t allow a parallel to be drawn between the 2 networks, much less have Fox looking better. The reason is because MSNBC is on his side ideologically and Fox isn’t. That means MSNBC does the bad stuff to help with ratings while Fox is an evil propaganda arm. Williams is right, it’s our natural tendency to give a pass to whoever we agree with.

Even though Stewart is inadvertently proving William’s point during the interview, it’s very important to remember that this isn’t a liberal only failing. Read through the comments on any of these stories and you’ll see plenty of examples of conservative bias as well. The only way for an honest conversation to be had is for each person to decide that they are going to act honestly, with poise and respect for everyone else’s opinions. Even if people want to pretend they aren’t they know full well when they’re being partisan. I guarantee that you’ll find that people you would have long ago hit the ignore button on if you had that option may make a cogent point in response that could even cause you to reconsider your own argument. There’s just so much crap that gets posted on here (articles and comments) that are just (sometimes thinly veiled) attempts to attack those who disagree and reinforce the belief in others that that is how you successfully argue or debate. In reality, that approach is sophomoric at best and shouldn’t be excuse for the sake of alliance.

stewart isn’t biased at ALL it’s just his airhead audience right he is playing to.

I think Glenn beck wins the night
Here’s the complete list (special thanks to AllFacebook.com):
Glenn Beck, formerly of-Fox News Channel, 2,030,119Sean Hannity, Fox News Channel, 794,438Nancy Grace, HLN, 786,117Anderson Cooper, CNN, 576,164Bill O’Reilly, Fox News Channel, 455,785Jane Velez-Mitchell, HLN, 96,033Fareed Zakaria, CNN, 79,864Richelle Carey, HLN, 71,448Joy Behar, HLN, 57,565Drew Pinsky, HLN, 52,508Piers Morgan, CNN, 49,077Greta Van Susteren, Fox News Channel, 43,581Mike Galanos, HLN, 36,924Shepard Smith, Fox News Channel, 36,892Christi Paul, HLN, 32,281Soledad O’Brien, CNN, 27,177

I think he has addressed point on msnbc and what he said was that they were following the fox business model, they exist because fox exists. Yet I think the point still stands, if fox exists as a counterweight to other news stations such as nbc, or cnn, or cbs or whomever else, why don’t they have the same type of loud punditry such as sean hannity on their programming?

actually jon has said he’s uncomfortable with the accusations of racism leveled against conservatives but keep dreaming.

and jon stewart crushes all of them in ratings.

you didn’t watch the debate did you? typical moronic response.

Who said anything about useful?

MSNBC exists because Fox exists  and it uses Fox’s business model is a cop-out saying “Well, MSNBC is the counterweight to Fox”. This is the same argument Fox uses that Stewart finds unacceptable. If you look at Fox, Sean Hannity is almost the exception. He has 1 hour a night and still has plenty of people on who disagree vociferously with him like Alan Colmes and Juan Williams himself. I’d say that Bill O’Reilly is almost as bad as him, but also has plenty of liberal guests. I’d also be more than happy to give you Fox & Friends. Otherwise from what I can think of offhand, it would be unfair to lump the rest of Fox’s programming in the same category from a host perspective and none of the programs on fox are without a liberal pundit. In comparison, CNN fired its equivalent to Hannity in Rick Sanchez, but most if not all of its anchors have what many perceive to be liberal slants just like Fox, and it’s telling in their interviews. I know you don’t really believe that democrats don’t stick to their talking points just like republicans, but I fail to see all the hard-hitting democrat interviews where they are challenged. Where are the hard questions about why there’s been no budget passed by the senate when everyone is supposed to care so much about spending and the economy? Please don’t pretend it’s the same, and also recognize that there are many Americans who don’t agree with the Democrat’s professed goals or methods. As for the network news, I believe you can only really compare the Sunday shows to cable news. Do any of them have equal ideological pundit representation? This week, for example, is normally George Will v. the world, and Amanapour is a liberal. You can’t compare the nightly news programs to channels that cover the news all day. Hannity covers politics solely because his network has already done at least 6 hours of straight news throughout the day.

Who cares about how many facebook likes someone has?

For the one millionth time, Timothy McVeigh was not a christian. Gore Vidal, who corresponded with McVeigh–and sympathized with his motivationsm, incidentally–confirmed this.

I know a lot of Americans don’t agree with my opinions. That’s not the issue here. the issue is that fox is an overreaction to such liberal bias. You’re seriously comparing christiane amanpour to straight political punditry like Sean hannity? Also you seem to have forgotten some other pundits at fox: Neil cavuto’s program, megyn kelly’s program and mike huckabee. My point about msnbc is that they weren’t the reason for fox’s extreme bias, no they’re based on the assumption that EVERY other media outlet on television is liberally inclined. And while we’re talking about liberal pundits, go look at fox’s media criticism show the five, which features one liberal pundit debating four other conservatives. Is that fair or balanced in any stretch of the imagination?  I agree about the hard hitting questions point, but again that seems to come out of laziness rather than intentional bias. That’s the problem with other news media outlets, they don’t do their own reporting anymore and they rely too much upon the patterns that other people are following.

Glad you liked it…tell me more…come on…do it…do it…lol

This is what happens when two adults sit down for a talk.

As does Stewart.. As does Beck As does Many of them

I’m saying that Amanpour is a liberal and it comes across in every interview she gives to someone who isn’t. She treats conservatives with obvious disdain. That’s not something an impartial host does. If it were just laziness in general and not bias, then the same thing would happen to the liberal and conservative guests on the other news channels, but it doesn’t. The right’s talking points are just as well known as the left, so there’s no way that every other station except Fox should get that pass or get to pretend they’re not doing what they are just because they don’t come out and say it.
I forgot about Megyn Kelly, seems like she’s been on maternity leave forever. I think she’s adopted more of a loudmouth style since she got her own show, I’m hoping she abandons it. I’ve never watched Neil cavuto for more than 2 minutes (probably 10 in total), so I’ll have to take your word for it. And Mike Huckabee has an hour a week on a 24 hour news channel, so I didn’t think he was worth mentioning. I watched the five for the first time a day or two ago and I saw 2 cons, 1 lib, a comedian and a libertarian. I thought Bob Beckel came off as an oaf and that they could have gotten someone more well-spoken and poised.

Just curious. In what way does pointing out that Fox (an organ of the Republican Party) and MSNBC (which has a liberal slant) are not directly comparable prove anything?

Just curious. In what way does pointing out that Fox (an organ of the Republican Party) and MSNBC (which has a liberal slant) are not directly comparable prove anything?

Juan, McVeigh was not a Christian.. He was agnostic. He made the statement many times to newspapers. He also said “science is my religion.” McVeigh was Catholic as a young child, but never really practiced the religion.

And he was at Waco and at the scene, he distributed pro-gun rights literature and bumper stickers and said after the bombing that he did it to avenge the Waco disaster.

Juan, McVeigh was not a Christian.. He was agnostic. He made the statement many times to newspapers. He also said “science is my religion.” McVeigh was Catholic as a young child, but never really practiced the religion.

And he was at Waco and at the scene, he distributed pro-gun rights literature and bumper stickers and said after the bombing that he did it to avenge the Waco disaster.

I think it has more to do with the fact that O’Reilly doesn’t really believe what he says”

And your proof is?

That’s right, ya just made that up.

I honestly believe that Stewart says what he thinks and his viewers happen to agree with him. And Beck didn’t come to his viewers’ viewpoints, they came to his for the most part. O’Reilly is the only on of the 3 of them that comes across to me as completely disingenuous. I just don’t believe that anything he says is sincere and that he’s always calculating where he should position himself in relation to whoever he’s sharing time with.

The point Williams was trying to make is that MSNBC and NPR are just as ideological as Fox is, and that people who agree with them don’t see them as ideological because they actually share the same ideology, same as those who identify with Fox.”

and that’s why Jon is as culpable as MSNBC and NPR.

I guess you missed it where the president of MSNBC said they approached things from a Progressive viewpoint.

Are you saying the president of MSNBC lied?

Snore- you are a natural soporific.

More name calling from a hateful lib.

BTW, you are a moron too.

BTW, you are a moron too.

You mean like having signs that tell people when to applaud? All comedy shows have them.
Trained like monkeys? So they pick random people off the street, drag them in and brainwash them for a few hours before turning the cameras on?

No. You must mean that anybody who accidentally comes across his show becomes instantly brainwashed.

For the thousandth time, I don’t care what religion a crazy man claims to be. I just know he is crazy.

I do not hold all Mormons responsible for Glenn Beck.

No.

lol my heart hurts, I guess. Thank you for the honest discourse.

lol my heart hurts, I guess. Thank you for the honest discourse.

There is such a network. It is called Comedy Central.
Or Fox the entertainment channel, with The Simpsons, House, Family Guy (not always great), American Dad (not so good), etc. 

Time for a reality check, you have over 6000 posts since Mediaite moved to Disqus.

Bingo!

★ good web 

===  w w w – j o r d a n f o r w o r l d – c o m

“I guess you missed it where the president of MSNBC said they approached things from a Progressive viewpoint.”
yeah it’d be a lot better if they slapped a lie like fair and balanced on their network.

“I guess you missed it where the president of MSNBC said they approached things from a Progressive viewpoint.”
yeah it’d be a lot better if they slapped a lie like fair and balanced on their network.

No, Beck believes what he’s saying. You can argue all you like as to whether he’s right or wrong, but he puts his ideological cards on the table, and he has a tendency to go all in.

O’Reilly is not afraid to bullshit his way through an interview or segment or whatever. He’s mostly interested in keeping his enormous audience. He certainly has his moments when he’s passionate, but mostly he just wants to come across as “looking out for the folks” which is why he’s always saying that’s what he does.

I happen to know people who have kids that go to school with his. He is nothing like he is on air…. As for Stewart, well his dad is in a nursing home near Red Bank NJ..the staff is told not to look him in the eye. So i guess yea, hes a prick in person also

You know MSNBC has been around longer than Fox News, right? It was built to compete with CNN.

No, he’s not. Not by a long shot. Not even close.

Even with a sellout, fake liberal, race traitor?

Sadly, it is a functional metric these days. I’m just glad that out of all of those “likes” none of them are me.

Thank you. I knew I wasn’t crazy.

McVeigh was a registered Republican, and a member of the National Rifle Association.
McVeigh was raised Roman Catholic, attended Mass regularly, confirmed at the Good Shepherd Church in Pendleton, New York, professed his belief in “a God”, and said about Catholicism: ”I do maintain core beliefs.”  Before his execution, McVeigh took the Catholic sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick.

Finally, Stewart and Williams truly reached common ground in expressing
frustration with the fact that no cable news network today actually
features the type of “honest debate” that could actually be productive
and beneficial to society.

Um, which right-wing propaganda, Obama hating network employs Juan Williams and puts him on the air?

How, exactly, is that an argument?

Are you replying to me by accident? I’m really trying not to insult you, but you’re saying the same thing that I am. Jon Stewart doesn’t think MSNBC and NPR aren’t as bad as Fox and is giving them a pass because HE IDENTIFIES WITH THEM! Learn some critical reading skills and stop always looking to fight with someone.

Are you replying to me by accident? I’m really trying not to insult you, but you’re saying the same thing that I am. Jon Stewart doesn’t think MSNBC and NPR aren’t as bad as Fox and is giving them a pass because HE IDENTIFIES WITH THEM! Learn some critical reading skills and stop always looking to fight with someone.

Are you replying to me by accident? I’m really trying not to insult you, but you’re saying the same thing that I am. Jon Stewart doesn’t think MSNBC and NPR aren’t as bad as Fox and is giving them a pass because HE IDENTIFIES WITH THEM! Learn some critical reading skills and stop always looking to fight with someone.

It’s the same. Both networks pretend that having an ideological bent doesn’t mean that they have an agenda, but they do. They try to color the news to fit their narrative. That’s not what journalists are supposed to do. They are supposed to report the facts of what happen. If they want to give their opinions on it, that’s fine. But you don’t try to pass your opinion off as fact and you don’t selectively report the parts of the story that strengthen your narrative and then try to pretend that you’re honest or still have credibility.

lol I tell you I’m not going to introduce you to my sister, so now you want to unwrap me?

It’s impossible to have a ‘completely unbiased’ discussion with anyone employed by Fox. They can only go so far.

There are facts, ie: hard news, and then there are opinions. All networks have both.

The value I find in Fox is that they’ll report the stories other networks won’t touch, because of their ideological perspectives. Fox stands alone by that measure. That makes them useful, along with the fact that they’ll also report the same shit everyone else is running with.

Rhetorically, bitch!

So that’s what I get for giving you props. Ay yi yi!

OK, I lol’d.

Rhetorically, bitch!

So that’s what I get for giving you props. Ay yi yi!

OK, I lol’d.

too bad the comments here aren’t as honest and respectful as the exchange they are supposedly commenting on . . . .

Sounds like Jon’s researching how to start his own news network.  Frankly, I’d love to see his 10+ year vision come to fruition.  I’ve had enough of this dichotomy of political thought.  There are many many people who exist in the middle who are DYING for some reality-based news on the issues that actually matter.  I’ve had enough of the so-called news stories about Winehouse or Sheen or whoever is famous for being professionally ridiculous at the moment.  Focus.  We need to break politicians of their reliance on media outlets to not challenge their talking points. 

Argument? Who’s trying to make an argument? It’s a reality check. Yeah, see, the first 5 words, it says it right up there…

A brothas gotta eat.

A brothas gotta eat.

Something unexpected surprise:
http://www.sneaker4world.com
very good web,believe you will love it.
exquisite watches shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.We have good reputation, fashion products, 
favourable price.
FREE SHIPPING,accept paypal
 （ http://www.sneaker4world.com）

Something unexpected surprise:
http://www.sneaker4world.com
very good web,believe you will love it.
exquisite watches shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.We have good reputation, fashion products, 
favourable price.
FREE SHIPPING,accept paypal
 （ http://www.sneaker4world.com）

Excellent piece Matt Schneider.

Perhaps your best work at Mediaite.

I may disagree with your political leanings, but I have a newly found respect for your writing ability.

For the people that are arguing which news channel is more biased, I have a question. Do you guys actually watched these channels or are you getting your information second-hand. I watch the daily show and they point out fox’s biased all the time. But on the flip side, i’m pretty sure they do the same over at fox and other conservative outlets; they show instances of liberal media bias. So whos right? I’m willing to bet that your answer has alot to do with your political beliefs

But I’ll bet you think you could have one. Ha!

He does watch Beck a lot, doesn’t he? You know he’s got a GBTV subscription.

yeah pablo I know they have. However the pundit lineup they currently have was created to compete with fox. Originally it was supposed to be nbc on cable, but they’ve changed their format fairly recently in fact.

But amanpour in my mind is no way comparable to someone like neil cavuto, like hannity, like bill oreilly or glenn beck. there is nothing comparable on those networks, except msnbc, to the hyperbolic punditry that exists on fox.  I also wonder what other network has hosted a political event on their own website as fox hosted a tea party rally on theirs? Clearly there needs to be serious change in media formatting and ethics, but I feel as if the fox method to do this is extreme and ultimately destructive as media and politics becomes more personality focused rather than focused on the issues. Both jon and juan both agreed on that point.

yeah I’d agree with this statement. However the one thing that stands out is that fox doesn’t even own up to it’s slant, it’s constantly acting as if the rest of the media world is persecuting them even when someone is addressing a point that is clearly wrong. In short, it’s ok for them to judge the media landscape and call out liberal bias, but when someone counters them on a point or points out that what they’re doing isn’t objective in the slightest, it’s suddenly them against the world.

btw, you’re a complete dumbass. This guy has been agreeing with you on all points, you’re just too stupid to notice.

“watched the five for the first time a day or two ago and I saw 2 cons, 1
lib, a comedian and a libertarian. I thought Bob Beckel came off as an
oaf and that they could have gotten someone more well-spoken and poised.”
yeah honestly I saw Bob beckel talking about the figures of norwegian gun violence and he was just completely unprepared. But just about everyone in that group was agreeing with each other except for beckel, it was like an echo chamber but with one clown to make the other side of the debate look as stupid as possible. in my mind there are really only two really intelligent liberals over there, and that’s shepherd smith and juan williams. Most of the other employed liberals are there as punching bags.

yeah I’d agree with this statement. However the one thing that stands
out is that fox doesn’t even own up to it’s slant, it’s constantly
acting as if the rest of the media world is persecuting them even when
someone is addressing a point that is clearly wrong. In short, it’s ok
for them to judge the media landscape and call out liberal bias, but
when someone counters them on a point or points out that what they’re
doing isn’t objective in the slightest, it’s suddenly them against the
world.

I totally agree with your statement as well. Having a different viewpoint doesn’t mean that someone is persecuting you. Both sides pretend like they have a monopoly on the truth so that they get to avoid explaining why they are right, instead just proclaiming it.

“EVERY other media outlet on television is liberally inclined” could simply be a case of mistaken identity of networks that are not conservatively inclined.

Stewart covered that by saying that the goal of the network would be to show “corruption in politics”. Who doesn’t find that exciting?!

Kind of a waste of time.  It is well-known that the uneducated lower-classes never listen to NPR.

Ahoy there, just wanted to say that I’ve been to see the Daily Show being filmed and there was not one single sign telling me to applaud.

The most they asked me to do was laugh my ass off as loudly as possible, to help fuel the performance Stewart was giving. And given that the showing was free I considered doing this a simple courtesy.

Woo hoo the “hateful lib” cliche, if you really are that much better than this individual then why don’t you show it and raise the level of the debate.

And what gives you the basis to state that as a fact? Your side isn’t as bad right? Because they tell you so? If anything its greater the other way around seeing who GE is in bed with and all. But then again facts get in the way of repeated rhetoric that they try to push.

Agreed, my side isn’t as bad.

But that wasn’t my point.

Fox News is closely allied with known Republican activists and Republican talking points are regularly circulated to the on-air talent. Its ownership follows the same pattern in every country in which it has outlets of fostering rightwing politicians and rightwing talking points.

MSNBC has hired and promotes center-left and solidly liberal hosts and producers and within the demands of the marketplace gives them a reasonably high level of autonomy. GE is in no way a liberal angel, but senior GE leadership doesn’t give notes to the talent or the producers.

In that sense, the two organizations are not comparable as the OP suggested.

Maybe you only think that because its ‘your side’. Keep living with your phony rationalization if you will. You are basically saying that there is a conspiracy between all the right wing media while ‘your side’ is just slanted. You got anything to back that up? Because it appears that you are just repeating msnbc narrative. You obviously haven’t a clue what you are talking about. One can watch fox prime time and get completely contradicting viewpoints generally from the right between the different hosts that come from very different perspectives. No shit that its right wing points from a right slanted network. Do you not see left wing talking points on your good now not as bad network that ‘isn’t as bad’ because they say so and you agree?Center left liberal hosts? Oh that’s right people like you think you are the center, and anyone on the other side is extreme. Even though you think they all say the same thing, which is false narrative that you so surely repeat without any reference at all. The GE remark obviously went over your head. You have also failed to back up your ‘organ of the republican party’ assertion. Because they agree with a side generally? You know, when in fact the owners of your favorite ‘not the same’(according to them) channel. Again, you called them an organ. That they are attached to it(though you failed to back how). GE gets billions of dollars from the federal government. They get massive governmental contracts, subsidies from a democrat administration, and doesn’t pay taxes. Talk about being an organ. They work for them. Their network generally pushes democrat agenda, while attacking the other side. Didn’t Cenk Uygur point that out as well? But then again he isn’t owned by the only slightly not fair channel anyone. Don’t listen to him now!But according to you they are fair and only trying be a little bit biased unlike the other guys for reasons you failed to supply. So they are not comparable because of what? Because you only watch them, haven’t a clue about the other guys you falsely label with no reference at all, you agree, and because they say so. Got it. Nice try though trying to push the ‘false equivalency its not the same’-MSNBC hosts/channel doctrine.

No, I’m saying that there’s a conspiracy centered around Fox News, headed by Rupert Murdoch and family and enabled by Roger Ailes, to promote a corporatist, right-wing agenda at the expense of the economic and social interests of the American people. This conspiracy includes officials of the Republican Party — although their involvement is so blatant, perhaps “conspiracy” no longer applies. The rest of the rightwing media align with Fox because they mostly agree with what’s being said and following the Fox current means they don’t have to swim as hard.

I don’t follow MSNBC’s “narrative” (I dip into clips of their programs from time to time); what I’m describing is based on my broad reading across the spectrum of information sources.

I also don’t watch Fox extensively (certainly not for hours on end), but I have *never* seen a serious news story on Fox that was unslanted. I have *never* seen an evenhanded exchange between left and right. I have seen token liberals apparently selected for their ineffecuality on air (Alan Colmes, et al) and I have seen thoughtful center-left commentators, outnumbered, sitting opposite mad dogs. I have observed a consistent pattern of top-of-the-lungs hard right advocacy and vicious trashing of political opponents — and in the case of the sanctimonious bully Bill O’Reilly, just plain people who he delights in defaming.

I have seen some comparable nastiness and unprofessionalism on MSNBC (Shultz in particular and the now-departed Olbermann upon occasion), but nothing like the consistency and intensity that predominates on Fox.

With regard to “center-left,” no, I don’t consider everyone outside of that space to be extremist. Center-right, liberal and small-c conservatives (the few who have not been driven out of the Repubican Party) are not, IMO, extreme. True independents tend to clump around the center. On the other hand, the shouters and foamers on Fox are far to the right of conservative.

There’s a high level of cognitive dissonance in your characterization of GE as a Democrat-favoring organization. GE is, as you have rightly pointed out, a corporate bully, a tax avoider, and a globalizer par excellence. MSNBC’s liberal slant exists solely because the parent company expects the network to make money by providing a source of news that’s neither apolitical nor rightist. Democratic Party operatives don’t direct the content.

I will admit to not watching any news channel for hours at a time, and for getting my impressions from extracts pointed out second-hand.

But when something attracts my attention, I go and watch the clip in question. Over time, a pretty clear picture emerges.

So I might not have the same perspective as someone who watches 12 hours of Fox on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and 12 hours of MSNBC on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays (with Sundays reserved for NFL and ladies’ beach volleyball). Nevertheless, I feel I have an accurate perception of the nature and extent of media biases.

Stewart makes no secret of his perception of bias. He goes way past “suggesting” into demonstrating it — almost nightly — on his program, using the network’s own footage to convict them.

Can you tell me how you acquired the psychic powers that have given you such clear insight into what Jon Stewart thinks? I could use such an ability in my job. Does it involve radioactive spiders? Because I think I know where I can get some.

My observation is that Stewart behaves in a particular way toward hypocrisy, mendacity, disrespect for people, and cruelty by savaging those who exhibit such traits.

What he thinks about such people is really his own business.

Not to mention that Stewart is usually so funny that *not* laughing your ass off would be harder.

Just out of curiosity, did they have a warm-up comic?

“Progressive” is not directly comparable to “fair and balanced.” One is a discription, the other a bald-faced lie. Distinctions matter.

It would seem that the premise of FOX News of being a counterbalance to the Mainstream is that conservatives are the victim of Unfair and Unbalanced big three News.  It is much more fair and balanced to say that MSNBC is the counterbalance to FOX News.   And Comedy Central is the only place to get “honest debate” like Stewart and Colbert.  Isn’t competition great?
  

You try to be clever, but you’re not very good at it.  If this is how you perform in your chosen profession it’s no wonder that you’re asking for help from someone you don’t even know.  And as far as Stewarts misguided and prejudiced thoughts being his own business, he lost that luxury the moment he began publicly spewing them.  See you in the funny papers, fella!