8 dead - Copley OH Shooting

[C-dub]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/07/ohio.shooting/
Seven people, including an 11-year-old child, were shot and killed in a small town in northeastern Ohio on Sunday in a rampage that ended when police killed the suspected gunman, authorities said.......

I read about this yesterday, but haven't heard anything about a motive yet. Anyone?

[C-dub]

I also think FOX is conservative, but overall not by much. I think they are way closer to the middle than most liberal type networks. I like O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck, but they all drive me just a little bit crazy sometimes. Brett Baer is good and so is Cavuto and a few others, but I can't stand Shepherd Smith. I think it's his fascination with that bear bouncing on the trampoline that does it for me. Most of the ladies I like, but there's a couple of them, too, that I just can't watch or listen to. Oh, and Juan Williams, he's cool, but Alan Colmes really makes my head hurt.

[VMI77]

With conservatives like Bill O'Reilly, who supports gun confiscation "in emergencies" --such as the post Katrina gun confiscation-- you don't need as many liberals.

Yeah, it is depressing that he has some views that I disagree with, but we have to be willing to support the first ammendment as much as the second. He has 20 million plus viewers, but I bet many of them absolutely disagree with him on that issue, plus some others. I find (and fire away!) that most conservatives can think well for themselves, unlike some other groups who need the latest soundbites to establish their position.

Think about this, however, and it is just my way of looking at things...if every commentator on Fox walked the straight right line, if they did not deviate from it all, then I would think the network unworthy of being on the air. It would mean one of several things. It could mean that they force their commentators to toe the line. It might mean that they have no intention of putting a balance in place. If the network was not imposing restrictions, it would mean that the people they hired are unable to think for themselves and have adopted right-wing politics en masse. I would rather have some balance there. I am, personally, smart enough to seperate the wheat from the chaff. I can think for myself and know when to disagree. At least on Fox, it is much less often than on MSNBC, or CNN. I can not even watch those networks for the amusement value anymore. FoxNews uses the "Fair and Balanced" line. If they did not provide some balance, some Alan Colmes, some Sheps, then they would simply be selling a lie. Besides, know your enemy and hold them closer than you hold your friends.

For every O'Reilly who has an ignorant stance on gun control, there are Glenn Becks who talk about packing heat when they went to the movies. Balance. O'Reilly entertains and informs, he does not legislate. I think his ability, despite his audience, to affect gun legislation is minimal.

RJ

I look at it a little differently. I don't believe anyone who is given any significant air time in our MSM can be taken at face value. The media systemically limits the parameters of debate. The parameters are a little different on Fox because they're targeting a particular audience. I think Fox knows who its audience is and tailors what it broadcasts to appeal to that demographic. I'm betting they take plenty of polls and surveys and tune their content to match. And I don't think it's as simple at telling one segment of their audience everything they want to hear --I think ratings also depend on some manufactured controversy.

No one in the MSM can say whatever they want to, including the commentators on Fox. Their allowed parameters of discussion are a little different than those on say, MSNBC, but if they stray too far off message, they're going to get reined in or fired. Fox exists to make money. Commentators like O'Reilly are there to make money. They know what they can and can't say on the job just like I know what I can and can't say on my job. My job allows me a lot of latitude to act on principle and say what I want but I know there are still things I can't say.

Bottom line, I don't take these guys as being men of principle --I don't think men of principle work for the MSM-- and I don't think we know where they really stand on much of anything.

[speedsix]

...I thank God we have choices instead of only the gov't version...and the ability to dig out whatever's missing...fair and accurate reporting is kinda like a pig with wings...they've ALL got their ratings-driven agendas...but I like Fox most of the time...if they'd only get rid of Shepherd Smith...he's put out more wrong cwap than most...too lazy to do his research...

[johnson0317]

Yeah, it took me awhile, once I started seeing his face, to realize I was not on the wrong channel. Speedsix is right, it is all MSM, no matter what they say. Also, think of who owns Fox, and think of the hot water he is in for doing some of the most unprincipled things imaginable (or his employees doing them, which is the same thing). For the most part, though, I will stick with Fox for news reporting.

[C-dub]

Yeah, it took me awhile, once I started seeing his face, to realize I was not on the wrong channel. Speedsix is right, it is all MSM, no matter what they say. Also, think of who owns Fox, and think of the hot water he is in for doing some of the most unprincipled things imaginable (or his employees doing them, which is the same thing). For the most part, though, I will stick with Fox for news reporting.

I don't know about that. Isn't he just the guy that owns the company that owns the company that owns Fox? I doubt he has much to do with Fox's operation.