This study comes to mind. Fox News does serious damage to its fans. But here's the good news. According to Broockman and Kalla, when these Fox viewers watched CNN, they heard about all sorts of things Fox wasn’t telling them. They processed that information. They took it in. They became more knowledgeable about what was really going on in the United States. The experiment didn’t change their political preferences — certainly not in just one month. But it slightly altered their perceptions of certain key issues and political candidates. The study authors differentiated between “traditionally emphasized forms of media influence,” like agenda setting and framing, and what they call “partisan coverage filtering”: the choice to selectively report information about selective topics, based on what’s favorable to the network’s partisan side, and ignore everything else.
I will say that I rarely look at MSNBC's site, just not on my radar. But I just did. And it's completely full of pro-Democrat, anti-Republican stuff. Even worse than Fox. But none of the other major media outlets are anything like Fox.
Pretty much mirror images. Fox shows a bit higher in factual integrity, but also lower integrity (i.e. less consistency).
Hah! I do remember not long ago that Fox convinced people that Biden had appointed an alcohol czar who was going to limit Americans to no more than two beers a day.
Speaking of Tim Walz as a coach. During his senior year at Mankato West High School, Dan Clement quit the football team. He was drinking too much and partying more than he should have been, he said. He was skipping school; his grades were starting to slip. But one of the team’s coaches refused to let him go quietly. He hounded him between classes and in the hallways, day after day. “You’ve got to come back,” Clement recalled his coach saying over and over. “We need you.” Finally Clement did return. That decision in the late 1990s, he said, changed his life. “If Coach Walz didn’t get me back into football,” he said, “who knows what would have happened to me?” Several players said that even as Walz’s political career took off, they could still get in touch with him. Decades after he played for Walz, Clement said he reached out to the governor’s office, hoping to find a few minutes with his old coach. He ended up with a 30-minute meeting with Walz. “He said he remembered our time together and he knew how tough it was for me,” Clement said. “I just wanted to thank him and tell him the profound impact he had on me.”https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/08/14/tim-walz-football-coach-record/
I just learned on a podcast that Walz and Harris were born in the same year. He looks like 10 years older! The podcast also said that four years ago Biden wanted to pick Amy Klobucher as VP but then the George Floyd murder happened. Klobucher had been a prosecutor in Minnesota and Biden thought that might raise too many issues. So he picked Harris instead.
Seems pretty predictable to me -about what I figured the lines of attack would be. That’s one of the reasons I preferred Shapiro.
Exactly. It doesn’t matter who they picked, Fox would find ways to attack them, no matter how weak. Shapiro has more baggage than Walz.
I personally disagree that msnbc it is worse than Fox. It is equally politically biased as Fox but it doesnt have fake stories on the page. Fox is amplifying untrue stories about Walz. MSNBC is calling Trump's own words unhinged and connecting project 2025 to Trump type stuff. There's no couch f'ing accusations and what not, which is the type of stuff on fox. I have found CNNs new management has them too reserved on criticism of Trump. They try to act like he's a normal candidate too often.
I always felt CNN was pretty middle of the road, until Trump started with his "Fake News Media" crap and specifically started targeting CNN when ever they reported bad news about Trump. They took the bait and started attacking Trump, which just fed the MAGA narrative that they were liberal and anti-Trump.
For those of you who wanted Shapiro, Anthony Scaramucci said on a podcast that Shapiro’s personality was too strong. He could upstage Harris and he has his own ambitions. Walz, on the other hand, seems perfectly fine with playing second fiddle and supporting the president.
I think the only thing that matters in the eyes of the DNC was who could best energize the vote. Harris thought that person was Walz. If the idea was to truly balance the ticket, then Kelly was probably the best candidate. I have a high degree of confidence that if Shapiro was the VP pick, we would be reading all sorts of terrible things about him. That’s what negative attackers do—they create a theme and they run with it. Truth matters not.
You could be right in terms of the content of the stories. I was just looking at the numbers. MSNBC's page is all pro-Dem, anti-Rep. Fox mixes in some other things, often crime and celebrity stuff that apparently appeals to its readers. (talking about web page, not broadcast.) Fox also does something that I haven't seen other news sites do - makes full stories, often lead stories, out of people criticizing Democrats. It's usually clearly very conservative people or often a couple of anonymous posters on X. But Fox turns it into a big "Harris blasted for ..." Imagine some other site with a headline "Trump destroyed for lies ...!" and it's a guy named Citygator on Too Hot.
Don’t misunderstand Scaramucci‘s comment. He’s friends with Shapiro, but he thought that Walz was the better pick. He thinks Walz comes across as an “everyman” and voters warm up to him. He can’t stand Vance, but of course he can’t stand Trump and that might rub off onto Vance. Regarding Kelly, that would’ve been risky because it would’ve had two western candidates. Nobody to draw popularity from the east.
