Fox Newschannel

[lingyai]

I can still get Fox on a small neighborhood cable company. PM me for their telephone number. Much more newsworthy and professional than Communist News Network.

You probably believe Saddam had somthing to do with 9/11.

mediamatters.org for all those who want to get the whole story instead of a onesided presentation.

[OldAsiaHand]

The BBC TV that you see in Thailand is garbage. It's a small failed attempt to emulate the BBC that we get in the UK.....

CNN isn't even that.

The so-called international service of CNN isn't anywhere close to the quality of the CNN we get in the States, whatever you might think that is. It's a politically correct, oh-God-don't-offend-anyone summary of non-American news presented almost exclusively by news readers who aren't white and don't speak with an American accent.

The idea is apparently to convince the world CNN isn't really an American news service. At least the BBC doesn't try to pretend it's not Brit.

[cwilliam]

CNN and BBC offer much better international news coverage.

No way Fox is the best.I just spent the week-end at Sheraton Sukhumvit only a couple of Sois from my pad how do they get Fox-over.

[Michael W]

I am still getting the US version of Fox on my Pattaya cable channel. It is so superior to CNN/BBC because it presents, analyses & criticises both sides of a case - Dem/Rep, left/right whatever.

I'm not a regular Fox News viewer -- in fact, it's been over a year, when I was last in the U.S. -- so maybe you might have a better chance of explaining how something like this could happen:

[Rice_King]

I'm not a regular Fox News viewer -- in fact, it's been over a year, when I was last in the U.S. -- so maybe you might have a better chance of explaining how something like this could happen:

I am now visiting the US and I'm watching the Foley story on FoxNews daily. I have NOT seen any screenshots on Fox like the one pictured here. Because I didn't see it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. But when I saw that photo posted here, my first thought was PHOTOSHOP. As most everyone on this forum knows, using a photo editing application like Photoshop, the screenshot posted here could have (very easily) been edited by just changing the R (Republican) to make it a D (Democrat).

The fact that this "mistake" by Fox has not made headlines on the competition's network leads me to believe that it just didn't happen. Maybe... maybe not. You just can't believe ANYTHING you see anymore.

[Moonfruit]

FOX is not a news channel. It is an Infotainment channel, and one that i can sit and watch for hours if i am honest.

Any channel that has the tagline of 'fair and balanced' and then lets Bill O'Reilly loose surely doesnt live up to what it says on the can!

If i want real news, i will watch the BBC, though it is very droll with boring presentation. CNN i see as a happy medium, though the International version does suck.

[fxm88]

[geoffphuket]

Where can I find the Fox News Channel? I used to be able to get it ,but now the network that I probably can’t mention here, no longer carries it.

Does anyone know just where I can once again get it, from here in Thailand?

I have sent emails to Fox and to the satellite company that no longer carries it.

To answer your question - Download and instal the TVU player and select 'Fox' from the list of prog's

http://www.tvunetworks.com/downloads/index.htm

geoffphuket

[britmaveric]

FOX is not a news channel. It is a news Infotainment channel, and one that i can sit and watch for hours if i am honest.

Any channel that has the tagline of 'fair and balanced' and then lets Bill O'Reilly loose surely doesnt does live up to what it says on the can!

Now thats better

[sbk]

I'm not a regular Fox News viewer -- in fact, it's been over a year, when I was last in the U.S. -- so maybe you might have a better chance of explaining how something like this could happen:

I am now visiting the US and I'm watching the Foley story on FoxNews daily. I have NOT seen any screenshots on Fox like the one pictured here. Because I didn't see it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. But when I saw that photo posted here, my first thought was PHOTOSHOP. As most everyone on this forum knows, using a photo editing application like Photoshop, the screenshot posted here could have (very easily) been edited by just changing the R (Republican) to make it a D (Democrat).

The fact that this "mistake" by Fox has not made headlines on the competition's network leads me to believe that it just didn't happen. Maybe... maybe not. You just can't believe ANYTHING you see anymore.

Look in the lower right hand corner of the photo: photo provided by bradblog.com

Obviously, the commentary in the yellow is from the blog, if you check out their link showing the video it is clearly a video of a tv showing the clip, not a photoshopped pic.

[Tim207]

The flaw of the 'balanced' approached is the premise that there is always two opposing viewpoints of equal merit. And that's simply false. Sometimes there is, and sometimes there isn't. For example: gun control and abortion, two very contentious issues where it would be unfair not to give the same hearing to both sides. Or the evolution/intelligent design 'debate.' On the one side is a scientific theory, on the other is pseudo science. To present both as if they have equal credibility is simply intellectually dishonest and downright absurd. And yet Fox News is the paragon of this approach (though there's certainly plenty of guilt to spread around the larger media).

The idea is to let both sides speak and the viewers decide which side has merit. A news chanel should NOT be deciding if a viewpoint has merit. I have at times found positions that sounded absolutely idiotic on the surface to be interesting when debated. I have also seen ideas that sounded reasonable completely fall apart when questioned. The media should not be filtering ideas because they deem them to have less merit or credibility. I can decide for myself.

[Michael W]

The idea is to let both sides speak and the viewers decide which side has merit. A news chanel should NOT be deciding if a viewpoint has merit. I have at times found positions that sounded absolutely idiotic on the surface to be interesting when debated. I have also seen ideas that sounded reasonable completely fall apart when questioned. The media should not be filtering ideas because they deem them to have less merit or credibility. I can decide for myself.

Sure, equal time for flat earthers and holocaust deniers. After all why should editorial judgement enter into it.

[Michael W]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myef63LgltU

[fxm88]

According to this article the average age of a Fox News Channel viewer is 71. I wonder if that count includes all you old fossils wandering around Pattaya?

[konangrit]

If anyone's interested, Fox News and Sky News are available in Bangkok on True IPTV.

http://www.truetv.in.th/en/catagory/news/index.php

[topfield]

Fox?

All fox viewers own two hats.

Still like to decide for my self.

I hate it when somebody prevent me from looking what I want (legal) and I hate it a little bit if people don't want me to

I can understand that. I don't want to decide for you either.

I find CNN almost unwatchable and how people can think it's liberal is beyond me. BBC seems to be really bad, at least the version I get on free cable - mostly previews of their own programs. Or maybe it's just that I have so much more and so much better information right here in my computer. I love the BBC website, for example, that's excellent.

The BBC TV that you see in Thailand is garbage. It's a small failed attempt to emulate the BBC that we get in the UK. The only decent BBC overseas broadcasts are BBC World Service radio on shortwave (I think they have VHF relays too) which are funded by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (our State Department). If you want a flavour of 'serious' radio that's heard in the UK choose 'listen live' for BBC Radio 4 from the website. You'll obviously have to bear in mind that the programmes are made for a domestic audience. You may also have to make allowances for our sense (that's sense with an 's') of humour

[topfield]

Fox?

All fox viewers own two hats.

Still like to decide for my self.

I hate it when somebody prevent me from looking what I want (legal) and I hate it a little bit if people don't want me to

I can understand that. I don't want to decide for you either.

I find CNN almost unwatchable and how people can think it's liberal is beyond me. BBC seems to be really bad, at least the version I get on free cable - mostly previews of their own programs. Or maybe it's just that I have so much more and so much better information right here in my computer. I love the BBC website, for example, that's excellent.

The BBC TV that you see in Thailand is garbage. It's a small failed attempt to emulate the BBC that we get in the UK. The only decent BBC overseas broadcasts are BBC World Service radio on shortwave (I think they have VHF relays too) which are funded by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (our State Department). If you want a flavour of 'serious' radio that's heard in the UK choose 'listen live' for BBC Radio 4 from the website. You'll obviously have to bear in mind that the programmes are made for a domestic audience. You may also have to make allowances for our sense (that's sense with an 's') of humour

"The BBC TV that you see in Thailand is garbage"

Thats BBC World. You can see the UK version BBC News 24 for free here on your broadband. Look up "TVAnts" on Google. You will also get National Geographic channel which I'm watching at the moment and dozens of other channels ..

"

[dutch]

Still no answer on what satelite this FOX can be received.

Me ,as well as the OP(I suppose) don't have highspead landlines,so receiving on PC is not possible.

Funny how many people react on a simple question with all kind of moral preaching (pro or con )

[pampal]

Fox=Yellow Journalism

Kind of like the Hearst newspapers of old, create news to increase your

viewership and influence policy

Good for Bush the Baby Killer's propoganda

[pumpuiman]

Fox is good, but its clearly conservative while BBC and CNN are clearly liberal oriented. Watch all 3 and make up your own mind.

An excellent suggestion.

I try to get news from many sources, and try to weed out the bias and propaganda.

No single station can be considered above all others.

[Mid]

No single station can be considered above all others.

agreed ,

some are definitely below though

[nikster]

Fox is good, but its clearly conservative while BBC and CNN are clearly liberal oriented. Watch all 3 and make up your own mind.

An excellent suggestion.

I try to get news from many sources, and try to weed out the bias and propaganda.

No single station can be considered above all others.

OK - this is a little difficult so bear with me here - basically, the above were true if all stations were equal.

The problem is, they aren't. It's called the bias of balanced reporting.

Imagine a world where you have two "opinions" - spins, media bias, propaganda, call it what you will. Imagine further that one of the two is truthful, the other deceitful.

Now, if you believe the truth is in the middle, you believe 50% of a lie. The problem with this is, liars - or propaganda lobbys - know this very well. Therefore, they can create even more outrageous lies in order to shift your personal truth in their direction.

To me that means that believing that the truth lies in the middle is a mirage, a fantasy, and benefits only the liars.

The same thing holds true for programs that display two opposing "viewpoints" of any topic. One of those viewpoints might be complete propaganda, made-up stuff, or pure fiction. In this case, balanced reporting introduces a real bias towards the lies.

Of course, there are other ways to deliver lies, like that Fox show where they have two supposedly opposing opinions which come down to the exact same thing. The last - and only - Fox show I ever watched fully was Jon Steward on Crossfire. For those who haven't seen it, it's amazing - Stewart embarrassed the hosts of this "confrontational" show to the point where the show had to be canceled. Meaning that Stewart on Crossfire was the last Crossfire (maybe they revived it in the meantime, I wouldn't know )

I mean, seriously, it's a well known fact that Fox is - intentionally - nothing but propaganda. It has a war room where they decide on the phrases that people are going to hear across all programs repeatedly etc. Things that get "hammered" into the Fox audiences minds. It's leaning Republican of course but in effect it has an agenda of its own.

[topfield]

Still no answer on what satelite this FOX can be received.

Me ,as well as the OP(I suppose) don't have highspead landlines,so receiving on PC is not possible.

Funny how many people react on a simple question with all kind of moral preaching (pro or con )

It was on the Dream bouquet , Agila satellite , but came off around six months ago .

If you want to know on which satellites ANY channel is broadcast go to :

www.lyngsat.com where they have a section telling you on which sat every known prog is broadcast.

My guess is that its on on Sky Asia but Rupert only sells receivers and cards to hotels with over 100 rooms.

Of course the info above relates to Asia only

[TAWP]

Of course, there are other ways to deliver lies, like that Fox show where they have two supposedly opposing opinions which come down to the exact same thing. The last - and only - Fox show I ever watched fully was Jon Steward on Crossfire. For those who haven't seen it, it's amazing - Stewart embarrassed the hosts of this "confrontational" show to the point where the show had to be canceled. Meaning that Stewart on Crossfire was the last Crossfire (maybe they revived it in the meantime, I wouldn't know )

A small note: Crossfire ran on CNN.

About the episod you are refering too (I saw it too): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfire_%28....27s_appearance