\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) http://www.wtov9.com...ed-colle/nWMxY/ Edited February 15, 2013 by \GoBillsInDallas/
Meathead Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 "The syllabus tells students in a West Liberty University political science course what sources they can and cannot use. Among those students are asked not to use are The Onion, an openly fictitious parody of real-life news, and Fox News, a professional news organization." thats very insulting to the onion
Koko78 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Typical looney leftist who doesn't want anyone sourcing a dissenting opinion backed by facts. Makes it much easier for her to make strawmen arguments to further her little classroom causes.
IDBillzFan Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Typical looney leftist who doesn't want anyone sourcing a dissenting opinion backed by facts. Yes, but you must believe he is being royally hailed now by the likes of HuffPost and DailyKos. This professor is a true leader. The kind of person we want molding the minds of our future leaders!!!
We Come In Peace Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Typical looney leftist who doesn't want anyone sourcing a dissenting opinion backed by facts. Makes it much easier for her to make strawmen arguments to further her little classroom causes.
meazza Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Regardless of what koko said, if the prof really wants to limit news sources, then obviously there are hundreds that should be limited. Simply pointing out Fox news reveals his own biases.
Meathead Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Regardless of what koko said, if the prof really wants to limit news sources, then obviously there are hundreds that should be limited. Simply pointing out Fox news reveals his own biases. true enough considering that msnbc is now at least as far left as fox is far right, and that fox appears to have racheted back their overt extreme right wing mantra after their humiliating defeat, i really see no reason to exclude fox i wouldnt say it was always like this. fox started the hyper partisan 'news' style and were way out in front for a long time. but a few years ago msnbc made the obvious decision to become the left version of that and after some early struggles have finally caught up. but the election debacle really has shined a light on the perils of the echo chamber phenomenon and fox appears to have learned that lesson first. excluding them now really makes no sense
We Come In Peace Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Regardless of what koko said, if the prof really wants to limit news sources, then obviously there are hundreds that should be limited. Simply pointing out Fox news reveals his own biases. For sure. But I wasn't laughing at the professor's obvious bias. I was laughing at Koko's.
meazza Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) true enough considering that msnbc is now at least as far left as fox is far right, and that fox appears to have racheted back their overt extreme right wing mantra after their humiliating defeat, i really see no reason to exclude fox i wouldnt say it was always like this. fox started the hyper partisan 'news' style and were way out in front for a long time. but a few years ago msnbc made the obvious decision to become the left version of that and after some early struggles have finally caught up. but the election debacle really has shined a light on the perils of the echo chamber phenomenon and fox appears to have learned that lesson first. excluding them now really makes no sense It depends really. I lean to the right on fiscal issues and left on social issues. That being said, I try and remain objective when I pay attention to the news sources. MSNBC seems completely nutty to me. Fox on the other hand (aside from Hannity who I can't stand) seems to have its share of honest debaters while Matthews, O'Donnell and Hayes are just so full of **** it's maddening to watch. O'Reilly, even when he has a point is annoying. Plus I now have a soft spot for Kirsten Powers since she looks like a girl I once dated. For sure. But I wasn't laughing at the professor's obvious bias. I was laughing at Koko's. Got it. Edited February 15, 2013 by meazza
3rdnlng Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 true enough considering that msnbc is now at least as far left as fox is far right, and that fox appears to have racheted back their overt extreme right wing mantra after their humiliating defeat, i really see no reason to exclude fox i wouldnt say it was always like this. fox started the hyper partisan 'news' style and were way out in front for a long time. but a few years ago msnbc made the obvious decision to become the left version of that and after some early struggles have finally caught up. but the election debacle really has shined a light on the perils of the echo chamber phenomenon and fox appears to have learned that lesson first. excluding them now really makes no sense Fox started the partisan news style, eh? Sure, the MSM has historically been even handed. They didn't even have a Dan Rather making schit up. Nor did NBC even have Obama's slogans embedded into the backgrouind of their telecasts. "There are none so blind as those who refuse to see".
Koko78 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Fox started the partisan news style, eh? Sure, the MSM has historically been even handed. They didn't even have a Dan Rather making schit up. Nor did NBC even have Obama's slogans embedded into the backgrouind of their telecasts. "There are none so blind as those who refuse to see". ...but I'm the obviously biased one.
We Come In Peace Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 ...but I'm the obviously biased one. No, 3rding is right there with you. As are a handful of others that frequent PPP. You're not alone. But not being able to see Fox's obvious and consistent slant is as silly as not being able to see MSNBC's. Not being able to see your own bias when making fun of the professor's is equally as ironic.
....lybob Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I wouldn't exclude Fox news - BS abounds everywhere and misinformation is often given on the front page in bold letters while corrections appear in small letters at the bottom of page 17 section C, there is a reason why 70% of the country thought Iraq had something to do with 9/11 until about 2007,- Iraqis throwing Kuwaiti infants out of incubators before Desert Storm, distortions of Pat Tilmans death or Jessica Lynch's capture, the story of Osama Bin Laden using his wife as a human shield- this BS gets out for a reason and it's not all on FOX- what the professor should have said is get your facts from as many sources as possible including foreign sources, including from sources who have a point of view you don't agree with and understand every source is biased and that bias doesn't have to be intentional - and even with multiple sources at best we can approximate the truth.
BillsFanM.D. Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Freedom....so long as you agree with me!
3rdnlng Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 No, 3rding is right there with you. As are a handful of others that frequent PPP. You're not alone. But not being able to see Fox's obvious and consistent slant is as silly as not being able to see MSNBC's. Not being able to see your own bias when making fun of the professor's is equally as ironic. You clearly must be confusing talk shows with news shows. Regardless, I was pointing out that the media bias didn't start with Fox. Dan Rather made schit up in an attempt to derail Bush. NBC used Obama slogans as a backdrop. The MSM bias goes back decades. BTW, my screen name is 3rdnlng---3rd and long.
Koko78 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 You clearly must be confusing talk shows with news shows. Regardless, I was pointing out that the media bias didn't start with Fox. Dan Rather made schit up in an attempt to derail Bush. NBC used Obama slogans as a backdrop. The MSM bias goes back decades. BTW, my screen name is 3rdnlng---3rd and long. They don't quite understand that bit. They think Hannity and O'Reilly are doing news (rather than commentary) because it fits their bias.
GG Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 ... what the professor should have said is get your facts from as many sources as possible including foreign sources, including from sources who have a point of view you don't agree with and understand every source is biased and that bias doesn't have to be intentional - and even with multiple sources at best we can approximate the truth. But he didn't...
Dean Cain Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Now the left is trying to infringe on the 1st Amendment. Their arrogance after Obama reelection is palpable.
meazza Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) Now the left is trying to infringe on the 1st Amendment. Their arrogance after Obama reelection is palpable. Go away you !@#$ing troll. At least the other trolls were entertaining. Edited February 15, 2013 by meazza
Dante Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 true enough considering that msnbc is now at least as far left as fox is far right, and that fox appears to have racheted back their overt extreme right wing mantra after their humiliating defeat, i really see no reason to exclude fox i wouldnt say it was always like this. fox started the hyper partisan 'news' style and were way out in front for a long time. but a few years ago msnbc made the obvious decision to become the left version of that and after some early struggles have finally caught up. but the election debacle really has shined a light on the perils of the echo chamber phenomenon and fox appears to have learned that lesson first. excluding them now really makes no sense The language of the left is delusional as their outlook. What was the margin of victory? 51-49 % or something like that. Hardly humiliating. Anyway, how bad the msm is the professor should have told the students to exclude them all and use their own brains and do some reading instead. But that would suggest independence and he really doesn't want that either.
Recommended Posts