Firstly, I just saw a mistake in my post. It said: "Why not just punish fact and let the reader decide?", when it should be "Why not just
publish fact and let the reader decide?"
Although I guess most knew what I meant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatedbythemail
<snip>
|
With all due respect, I think you're really stretching the argument thin to try and take an issue abour OJ and wrap it around Murdoch.
Let me ask you this... If you were a reporter, would you write a different article if it was another PR firm that wasn't backed by Murdoch? Because surely if you did, then that's bias. I could only speculate that if it didn't involve Murdoch, then the article would have a completely different spin on it, but if it could be proven, i'd stick money on it.
I am not going to say any other media outlet is better, because I don't think any are, but, I really do resent Guardian's holier-than-thou attitude of itself, but also some of its readership, when to me at least, its far from that.
Incidently, its odd you seem to hate Fox News but don't know who Bill O' Reilly is. He's a commentator for Fox News, who's punished for having an opinion different to the far-left which is unacceptable in the day-and-age. Although I think he is an a******e about it, but he's still entitled to it.