Just to be clear about "fair and balanced" in their lying - I never said that.
Once again - we have a difference of opinion here, and perhaps a difference of perspective. I don't think there have been any instances of Fox perpetrating hoaxes on their viewers and the world in general that are anywhere near as egregious as Rathergate (CBS), the phony exploding pickup trucks (NBC) and the Food Lion fraud (ABC), and I've offered sources to support that position. ABC had to pay a $5.5 Mil settlement as a result of their intentionally fabricated slander. Referring to the Clemens quote - there are lies and there are da***d lies. My opinion is there are degrees of credibility to be seen in the media, and none of them are snow-white pure.
I emphasized the first sentence in the above block because it's a false premise. What follows it - to use a previously employed phrase - is a load of crap. If it's meant to imply that anyone who prefers to watch one network over another is an "easily manipulated fool" is nonsense. Liberals may find MSNBC to be more credible while conservatives obviously prefer Fox News. But the MSNBC audience is not comprised totally of fools and neither is that of Fox. The difference is that Liberals have established a campaign to promote a stereotype of conservatives as haters, rednecks, racists, backward hicks, etc while portraying themselves as enlightened, tolerant and compassionate. Those that buy into that notion could be considered "easily manipulated fools" and really don't offer substance for any sort of discussion.
That would only apply to someone who looks at things in black & white and chooses to believe everything they hear from their preferred source of info.
I believe my answer has already been provided, but I'll go over it again. My opinion (and that of S.L. Clemens) is that there are degrees in the maliciousness of lies, and our legal system supports this notion. With that in mind, it's my opinion that some news sources are more credible than others; my opinion is that Fox News is more likely to offer factual content than CBS, and the same for The Wall Street Journal compared to The National Enquirer. It doesn't make sense to label them all as totally incredible because they sometimes lie or make mistakes. The world of news and information is not, and never has been black & white. In business, I don't trust liars; when I'm reading the newspaper or listening to a network it's my responsibility to digest information with a generous helping of skepticism. However, comparing business to the news - especially political news - is apples and oranges.
Now back to the topic at hand. Well said Pilgrim. I really don't think there is a major difference in opinion with Turtle regarding the News Networks and their biases. Fox News leans right. The others lean left. I would also agree that at times Fox News has been sloppy sometimes when editing their news story. They have even admitted as much when they have made mistakes. The fact is ALL of the news agencies have been sloppy at one time or another. My biggest criticism of the other liberal news networks is that they don't present the counter or other side of the story from the political spectrum often enough. They omit it or don't present it accurately. Fox News definitely presents the republican side or and the conservative side, but they also provide the other side's voice as well more than the others. The only other major disagreement with Turtle is his interpretation that when Fox News makes a mistake with a story that is intentional and calls is a lie. I don't think it is intentional,which is the essence of a lie, so it is merely a mistake.