General Discussion

calimary

(90,186 posts)

43. YES. They need to be classified differently.

Mon Mar 9, 2015, 01:31 PM

Mar 2015

If they call themselves "Fox", or "Fox Entertainment" or "Fox Propaganda" then seems to me they're okay. The whole truth-in-advertising thing steps in here. They are simply NOT qualified to call themselves a "News" channel. It doesn't fit with the product they serve 24/7/365.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fox News is not a news channel - it is a propaganda channel that should be regulated. [View all] xocet Mar 2015 OP

Two words ffr Mar 2015 #1

cable providers should move the Fox channel from the news category to the procon Mar 2015 #16

The sooner they get stripped of News from fox the better it will be for everyone. Hutzpa Mar 2015 #2

Is someone regulating FOXNews? JaneyVee Mar 2015 #3

Yes, you are correct. Murdoch is the propaganda arm of the Global Corporate Power brokers. News is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #4

YES. They need to be classified differently. calimary Mar 2015 #43

Well, that would require a regulatory body being able to regulate Scootaloo Mar 2015 #5

This is the kind of nonsense that anything with the word Democrat in its name should be ashamed of. CBGLuthier Mar 2015 #6

That is valid only up to a point DFW Mar 2015 #9

No, Fox News didn't go to court to defend their right to lie SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #12

Internet Myth: Fox did not defend the right to call themselves News. onenote Mar 2015 #25

X+10 840high Mar 2015 #34

No. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #7

Not regulated, just not a news channel. Rex Mar 2015 #8

Most MSM channels fit the description of propaganda channels: they call it "the narrative" Wella Mar 2015 #10

No. Should we also regulate EWTN (the Catholic Cable channel) and the 700 Club? progressoid Mar 2015 #11

Cringingly embarrassing, anti-First Amendment nonsense. Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #13

There is something that should be opposed JonLP24 Mar 2015 #44

The biggest problem is no one can define exactly what is "news." Archae Mar 2015 #14

There's no way to regulate it treestar Mar 2015 #15

Fairness Doctrine. Enforce divestiture. Break up media monoliths. Orsino Mar 2015 #19

The Fairness a Doctrine only applied to broadcast channels not cable. n/t tammywammy Mar 2015 #20

Since a new one would have to be created anyway, why would we omit cable? n/t Orsino Mar 2015 #21

You'd want to expand the FCC's powers? tammywammy Mar 2015 #23

Fuck, yeah. Orsino Mar 2015 #24

Technically the media has no hold on us treestar Mar 2015 #31

I think you've just agreed that media do have an enormous hold on us. n/t Orsino Mar 2015 #32

Well, hell then. Let's include newspapers and the Internet while we're at it. onenote Mar 2015 #26

Yes. When I say to bust up media monoliths, I mean all of them. Orsino Mar 2015 #27

You seem to be contradicting yourself. progressoid Mar 2015 #30

No contradiction at all. Orsino Mar 2015 #33

I was referring to your call to impose the Fairness Doctrine on cable onenote Mar 2015 #38

DU is a customer, not an ISP, and certainly not a media monolith. Orsino Mar 2015 #39

So you are saying cable operators and ISPs should be required to transmit varying points of view onenote Mar 2015 #40

That's a fair sacrifice. Orsino Mar 2015 #42

Lots of hateful crap on religious TV, don't care for that but I do support the First Amendment Bluenorthwest Mar 2015 #17

Agreed. What's that old saying? WillowTree Mar 2015 #29

How long before people learn the difference between over the air (TV/radio) and Cable that CK_John Mar 2015 #18

Two Words: First Amendment onenote Mar 2015 #22

Not this shit again. nt Codeine Mar 2015 #28

The First Amendment is either the law of the land or it is not. MineralMan Mar 2015 #35

The First Amendment says we can't do that. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2015 #36

Alex, I'll take "Things that make DU look stupid" for $500 Throd Mar 2015 #37

Propaganda is bad for you JonLP24 Mar 2015 #41

This authoritarian drive to silence opponents with government power is beyond scary. tritsofme Mar 2015 #45

I'm appalled by how many can't see how this might be used against us at a future date. Throd Mar 2015 #46