So there's this group of (redundancy alert) left wing idiots, who are all pissed off because Fox News is spanking the Communist Cable News in the ratings. So what do these idiots do?
They try to say that Fox is "biased".
"What we found is not that FOX is a conservative network, but that it's a network that follows the party line of the Bush administration," said "Outfoxed" filmmaker Robert Greenwald, a Hollywood producer-director whose credits include the 2003 documentary "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War" and such TV films as "The Crooked E: The Unshredded Truth about Enron" and "Blonde," a biopic of Marilyn Monroe.
Gee, I guess he's just an unbiased film-maker without an axe to grind?
(pause for hysterical laughter to die down)
What a crock. What an utter and complete load of tripe. You want to know why Fox is doing so well? Because there's a big chunk of America who's a little tired of observing the network news anchors giving public blowjobs to the DNC on a nightly basis. There's a huge section of America who's tired of being lied to by so-called "journalists". There's a big segment of America who would like to watch some news without being hammered with propaganda dressed up as the latest story. And that segment of the population cannot identify with a group of people who think Fidel Castro is better than any US President because he "outlasted" so many. Military Veterans are tired of being depicted as murderers and thugs. And plenty of Americans are tired of being told by the networks to just grease up their assholes and bend over for whoever the Donks have running.
Maybe if the so called "journalists" were something more than Donk syncophants, we might trust them to give us the news. Maybe if we didn't see the big three (ABC, NBC, CBS) as well as CNN whore themselves out to the Democrats, we might think they're objective. But if it walks like a Donk, pukes like a Donk, and sucks communist dicks like a Donk, we'll stay away and find our news elsewhere.
Right now, the only elsewhere is Fox.
UPDATE: I knew I'd seen the figures somewhere, and I just found them in Newsweek, June 28th, 2004. It's an article written by Robert J. Samuelson. You can find it in the Newsweek Online archives, but I don't like registering everywhere or allowing too many cookies onto my computer. Here's the relevant part:
In 1988 Pew found that 58 percent of the public thought there was "no bias" in election coverage. Now that's 38 percent: 22 percent find a Democratic bias, 17 percent a Republican. Almost all major media have suffered confidence declines. Among Republicans, only 12 percent say they believe "all or most" of NEWSWEEK; for Democrats the figure is twice that, 26 percent. In 1985 the overall figure was higher (31 percent), with little partisan gap. NEWSWEEK's numbers typify mainstream media. Only 14 percent of Republicans believe "all or most" of The New York Times, versus 31 percent of Democrats.
The New York Times, the paper most likely to give the DNC's scrotum a tongue bath, is considered trustworthly by just less than a THIRD of Democrats! The writer goes on to bemoan the widening gap of partisan journalism, but doesn't once think that maybe the viewers aren't driving it. Think about it. How many people here can tell me the total number of casualties taken by the Allies in Iraq? American, British, Australian, Polish, Spanish, Japanese, Korean, all of them together, how many casualties? It just went over 1000, and I know that there are leftists holding that number up and screaming their glee into the night air. The news stations have been trumpeting our casualties left and right, uninterrupted, 24 hours a day.
Look it up on CBS, NBC, ABC, whoever, and tell me the casualty numbers. I did it in less that two minutes. Now you try it. Did it? Easy, wasn't it?
Now quick, tell me how many casualties our enemy took.
I'll be back in a few hours.