Fox News - Why the 180 on Protesters?

I really enjoyed the women talking about the "muslims" taking over. WOW, and this is what this movement is about? For all of you Repubilcan appologist, I can't wait to hear how you defend comments like this. I had to agree 100% with Jon, it is funny how the people that were the "real Americans" that blindly followed Bush in violating the constitution, and called the people that defended our constitution UNAMERICAN (Sean Hannity was the number one example of this). But, NOW if you are again a "real American" when you do what Sean wants you to do by attacking the Obama administration. You just have to laugh at this logic.

Inconsistency from Hannity, Ingraham and Malkin? Hell yes. They're conservative and don't hide it. Beck was on CNN during the time when most anti-war protests were going on, so I don't really know how he carried it. If you're speaking of the people with opinion shows, then, of course, you will find opinion hosts to be inconsistent -- they have their respective biases. In terms of actual NEWS coverage, the only difference I see in Fox's coverage of anti-war protests and anti-government protests is the actual amount of time they're giving the latter. But showing what liberal networks fail to has been their bread and butter here recently. The more they show what other networks fail to, the more their ratings climb. I'm not sure what you're looking for in all this. People to admit Fox News is bias? Yes. Fox has some leanings. I call them NON-liberal (progressive), and liberals immediately equate that to right-wing. But when Greta, Shep and Geraldo air, as well as when Colmes pops up or Williams chimes in, the anti-government protestors (and ACORN and czars) are still getting massive news time. O'Reilly and the crew of Fox's morning news grilled the "loons" who brought out their Hitler signs. They grilled and brought attention to the birthers. The biggest difference I see is that MSNBC ONLY airs the loons and ignores the regular people -- which make up the vast majority of the crowd. And I wouldn't think that was so bad if they didn't go out of their way to ignore the loons who show up at anti-war protests. Both networks seem to have leanings here. But it certainly doesn't even out! lmao ... Kneeling down to the left so incredibly far that you won't even cover Jones or ACORN or show ANYTHING but the few crazies at protests is beyond bias, and is in no way the same thing as being a little inconsistent (which I haven't seen in their actual 'news') when it comes to protests. I'll own up to Fox being more crooked (or is it crookeder?) than the ideal version of media should be. But I don't personally subscribe to a little bias making up for the extreme leanings of multiple networks. If you want Hannity to be "fair," don't hold your breath. He's a zealot.

I guess it's good that I've only said two things about anti war protests and protesters... 1) That they do need to realize that their actions are being used as a weapon of propoganda against the US. 2) It is just as Constitutional to protest any war as it is to fight in it. ~~~~~~~~ One of the things I found pretty funny about my first few years in the Army. The Sergeants who trained me were mostly of two camps... Vietnam war vets... and Vietnam war protesters. ;~D

Please Annie. You're using a joke news show that is well known for using snippets and spliced videos to mislead people for laughs. It's sad how many people treat that show as a news source. John Stewart even addressed it once yelling "Don't do that! We make stuff up!" I like John Stewart, but he's a comedian Annie. I'm not surprised to see a stupid hate blog take it seriously, but you should know better. Bill O'Reilly addressed a similar Daily Show clip here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eslo4ItxlVs

There's a difference between news reporting and opinion. For instance, it doesn't really matter what Keith Olberman's opinion is, he can take whatever angle he likes on a story. What makes a huge difference is whether or not the news branch of the organization just refuses to REPORT a story. Everyone you named is a political commentator. People watch them to listen to their opinions and because they like the stories that are talked about. If you listen to or read Michelle Malkin, you know what side she's on before you do it. Same goes for the writers at the Huffington Post. People seek out others who share their opinions. But if you watch shows like Bill O'Reilly, you will notice that he brings in panels of people from all sides of the political spectrum and often there will be disagreements. You have to admit that's at least attempting to give both sides. News is different, news is what's happening, not just what anyone thinks about it. When it comes to news, real news, the absolute truth is that many of the major news outlets just don't even bother to report the news they would rather you didn't hear. I know because I spend a lot of time searching their websites and if you did a search this week, you'd have assumed there was only one ACORN video and that ACORN had thoroughly excoriated the naughty troublemakers who shot the video and that they were avidly pursuing charges for the illegal activities of the journalists involved. You wouldn't see that the same exact thing happened in three offices of ACORN in three different cities. You wouldn't know that in three separate offices, ACORN employees offered advice on getting a HUD loan for a brothel in which underage girls would turn tricks and that they gave out tips on defrauding the IRS. You wouldn't know that there is a fourth video. When those other news sources only show the signs they think make the protesters look bad, that's mild stuff. That just reflects the political leanings of the editorial staff. When they simply won't report on the corruption in an organization that has received $54 million in federal funds, that's just dereliction of duty.

Well I am not a FOX fan but, that sure was a good take on the events. It is the same ol same ol, good if my side does it not if the other side does it.

I'm not going to deny that MSNBC, for example, took a slightly different approach in their coverage of the protests and the march on Washington D.C. on September 12. A slightly different approach? Try pure condescension and hatred for the protesters, which was so evident in the way they covered the protests. However, I'm not posting this thread to slam Fox News or any other network for how they've handled the current events or to compare Fox to MSNBC, CNN or any of the major networks. Then why are you posting this thread? I'd never been able to find a link to post showing this comparison but not, thanks to Comedy Central's Jon Stewart of all people, I have one now!http://robsimmoralwhackyjournal.blogspot.com/ Yeah,that's hard core, impartial, completely objective journalism there. They didn't give a whole lot of air time to the nasty signs and pictures of President Obama as Hitler while CNN and MSNBC gave them possibly a bit more than "equal time", unlike the unflattering pictures and signs about former President George W. Bush during the Iraq War protests. Can you untangle that a bit? You've completely lost me. I believe protest is good and we all have the right to speak out for or against our government as long as they're peaceful and civil. What do you think?Annie Did you know that there were NO arrests during the protest in Washington? How much more peaceful can you get? Compare that to some of the protests against Prop.8 in California or some of the anti-war protests (remember Code Pink?). There is a vast difference.

it sounds that you have done your research properly and it makes me believe what you are just trying to put across concerning fox news. may be we need to think about it further!