We need a fact based alternative to Fox News or we're boned!

I believe that America will continue its downward spiral unless Liberals provide an alternative to Fox News. Why is there no move to create a major news network highlighting the truth on all the major issues facing us. Enough of the shark attacks and other such non news.....Time for Facts.

So.....when will it happen and how will it come about?

thing?:)

and even if you get moneybags like Soros to pony up the cash, you have to get a cable network or satellite network to agree to carry your signal at a reasonable price. This might be where it gets dicey. I could see a cable company thinking ok, this means more money and addig it on, but it is their option if it will be a premium channel. Even if it starts out as part of the regular program package, if it gets too popular or management sees it as a threat, they merely place it on the highest premium package.

That's why I think pod casts and the internet are the way to go.

they have all the weapons, all the money and all the power. The only way we are ever going to stop this is grass roots style. Thank god for the internet. Can you imagine trying to fight this kind of misinformation in the 70's?

the general public would have ben more against the movement than they were.

am working out a way to get the message to them. Problem is it has to be short and easy to absorb. The talking points shopping lists are one idea, and making CDs of important topics is another. Perhaps pirate radio is another way to go. And public access, if available, is another route to take. Problem is, none of these have the glitz, glamor, and instant gratification of watching the news. What to do?

n/t

are basically uncurious, mal-educated bovines, who have no interested in truth or nuance, especially if takes more than a few seconds to explain or might mean that they have to put their brain into gear.

That's the problem with being a liberal - so much thinking and exploration of the facts at hand to come to a reasoned, holistic conclusion that the average American can't follow along, or refuses to follow along.

To present the truth would require newscasters/journalists to speak/write at a twelfth-grade level or sometimes higher, which is about six-eight grades higher than they are doing now.

A liberal, factual, honest news network would never get enough audience to make it viable; nor get enough audience to make a difference anyway. America will always swing to the least common denominator, the moist base kind of entertainment or information source that exists; America will always go for FOX, until something even more dumbed down comes along.

And I don't think an honest, factual network could dumb itself down enough for the masses.

You wrote:

To present the truth would require newscasters/journalists to speak/write at a twelfth-grade level or sometimes higher, which is about six-eight grades higher than they are doing now

I was recently shocked to find that a very sophisticated organizations has instituted a standard for their brochure/literature/advertising copy writers that states that all communications must be written on a sixth grade level.

You know.....I don't think we're ever going to overcome Republican tactics if the level to which we write our literature doesn't come up to at least a 10th grade level.

that cannot incorporate abstract thought, which psychological development occurs at about tenth grade age, plus or minus depending on the person.


And think of the good magazines out there, the ones that actually speak truth - UTNE reader, Mother Jones, The Nation - the average American simply cannot read them because they are written at a much higher level than anything else.

Or, hell, look at the difference between an Al Franken book (or other liberal book) and the usual conservative shit of Ann Coulter, Rush, or O'Reilly, etc.: the liberal are nuanced, use footnotes, do research, and expect their readers not to take everything they say as truth but to do some homework and check the sources if they aren't sure; the conservatives write hundreds pages long opinion pieces and call them "unbiased research", citing whatever they want as fact and not backing anything up with footnotes, and presenting it all as well-though and researched and just plain truth that we to believe totally and without any hermenuetic of suspicion, such as "The New York Times said so and so..." and there's no way to find out because they don't offer an article title, or a date of publication, or an author...

If I recall, Coulter was roundly criticized because the footnotes in one of her books were completely bogus?

Seems to me she would assert something as fact and a footnote number would appear next to it but when you checked, it was a quote from another one of HER speeches....

Liberals very rarely (I won't say never) settle for that kind of intellectual dishonesty.....but it seems to run rampant in Conservative literature.

reading isn't cool.

I read a lot when I was in middle and high school- I graduated in 1993- and got made fun of for that alone almost every single day. Even my mom, one of the people responsible for the fact that I love to read, says I "read too much".

Reading just. Isn't. "Cool." I think part of this is an unwillingness (or actual incapacity) on the part of parents to read to their children; some may not have the time, some may not have the will, and some may actually not have the ability. Without that motivation, realization of why good literacy is a good thing will never enter the kids' minds.

I see people constantly who either "don't like to read", get annoyed by people who read a lot, or are unable to do so with full comprehension, and it really makes me a bit sad. By allowing discouragment of reading, we're condemning our nation to what is very bluntly a dumber and dumber future. And yet, i[]even as that happens, we condemn the literary works of the past- once thought of as great- saying they are "inappropriate for young minds". What we fail to acknowledge is that unless the child is exposed to those works while still receiving primary education, the liklihood that they will go out and read those works for themnselves becomes slimmer and slimmer as they grow older.

Our country is in very deep trouble if this continues.

Now, afraid it's too late. The junta has the FCC filled with their puppets.

That's a Good Thing™. :silly:

thanks for reminding me! :hi:

Is if someone with no money suddenly gets an assload of it and bombards their way onto cable or satellite with their own brand of news (maybe internet/blog based - how about DUNN (Democratic Underground News Network) slogan: When You're DUNN with other news networks, Watch the Demoratic Undeground).

Then again, there may be something the the FCC agreements you have to sign to get on the air that actually forbid any kind of free thought, real opinion, or true investigative journalism.

Man, when I am president (that was for laughs) I am going to disband the FCC and let anyone put anything on TV they want as long as it has a rating classification. If people don't like (or don't want their kids to see it), then turn the damned box off. It would probably do our nation some good an there are better ways to get your news, and your kicks.

smirk, chuckle, wink, idiot transparent comments when they are trying to destroy a story, a position, a person.

We need to mock smirk chuckle wink and say idoiot things - just like them. It's safe and effective.

"You mean FOX - NO FACTS FOX?" and similar

Don't get angry, just get busy and show them for what they are.

"FOX? You mean the Murdoch company that claims that they are GOD on one channel while they show kids unending criminals, car chases, and every variety of guns blasting on their other channels?"

The Liberal network would need to be funny, funny, funny but also thought provoking. Colbert's recent salute to the American Worker is a good example. Colbert says what many NeoCons really think and it comes off as shockingly wrong to most regular folks. The split screen "commentary" of The Word is great, too. Bullet can say anything and Colbert doesn't seem to notice. It keeps it truly fair and balanced.

Don't forget that Jon Stewert and Stephen Colbert (and throw Al Franken in that mix too) are, in the final analysis PERFORMERS . They are actors and comedians who have found an audience...maybe Jon, Stephen and Al actually believe in our causes or our positions but in making their living, they could just as easily find a different "schtick" to woo and audience.

Fortunately, most on our side do more than "schtick"...they seem to put their money where their mouth is....

I think it's in John Nichols book Banana Republicans where he says one of the erroneous assumptions we (Progressives/Democrats) are operating under is The Truth Shall Set You Free .

The voting public isn't moved by truth.

they're moved by emotions...they're moved by symbols...they moved unfortunately by prejudices and stereotypes....

that's what we need...we need to abandon our idealistic view of how the electorate actually works and start dealing the the ugly truth.

As my old boss used to say, "Stop thinkin' bout the "Sweet bye-and-bye " and start dealing with the nasty here-and-now!"

One of the big differences between the intelligentsia of the Democratic Party and the intelligentsia of the Republican party is that they have been able to separate their ideals from their tactics. In a large sense, Republican leadership is far more willing to accept the argument that "the end justifies the means.

Personally I am torn by this.

I realize our tactics need to shift. I think Al Gore greatly overestimated the smarts and dedication to truth of the American people.

I still think that the facts of what is happening to this country need to undergird our efforts. We can utilize the NeoCons "truthiness" approach, however, to highlight our select group of facts.

but the problem is they will not put their money where their mouth is. One example is Hollywood. Most super rich people in the movie industry are liberal. A lot of them have the where-with-all to put something together like the founders of Fox but all they want to do is just give lip service.

nice!

see my sig
:toast:

This cannot be said too much.
It must be drummed into the conscience and consciousness of everyone.

I don't watch FOX news!!! Whats wrong with MSNBC or CNN for the truth?

for healthy food. (It can be found but most folks aren't really looking very hard and the "crap" is everywhere.)

And reading the OP.

Nothing was said about FOX being truthful; in fact, the opposite was posited.

And as the other responder to you said, MSNBC and CNN, while they aren't blatant liars like FOX, often obfuscate it, or bury it under a pile of shit so that it has to be dug out. It's there, but you gotta work for it.

Cause CNN has gone over to the darkside, and Turner knows it and is sickened by it.

Ted may not have the money these days to go it alone, but if Turner, Spielberg, Katzenberg and a few others got together to start a fact-based news organization, and not just a slanted commentary network, I think it would be wildly successful.

Maybe more if the RW moderates would give it a look.

Let the chips fall where they may.

they are, I'm afraid that some "reverse spin" is needed to stop the madness dead center and let the regular folks understand the situation.

The ratings for ALL the cable news channels are relatively low. I think right-wing radio is a bigger problem (we are beginning to address that), as is the rightward drift of the network news shows, which have many more viewers. We need to pressure them for real balance, which they claim to be committed to.