It does not matter which television network makes a mistake but it all gets blown out of proportion. The following is from Yahoo News about an incident on Fox.
_______________________

Eric Bolling, host of the Fox Business Network show "Follow the Money," apologized to viewers on Monday for using racist language during a segment that aired last week.

"We got a little fast and loose with the language," Bolling said, "and we know it's being interpreted as disrespectful, and for that I'm sorry."

In a segment that aired on Friday, Bolling referred to the White House as the "Hizzouse" and "Hizzy," and President Obama's guests--including Gabon President Ali Bongo--as "hoods."

"We did go a bit too far," Bolling admitted.
________________________

They got a little sloppy and funny in their commentary - but to have a "racist" spin put on it is a little ridiculous, in my opinion.

The networks are rating whores. It's not just when someone on a network makes a mistake; it's Casey Anthony, a hurricane that will never get close, anything to be dramatic and draw viewers. The reporting of news that is actually important will always be pushed aside so the sensational gets coverage. That's why I peruse the Wall Street Journal over breakfast. It seems to the most objective source of news.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

The networks are rating whores. It's not just when someone on a network makes a mistake; it's Casey Anthony, a hurricane that will never get close, anything to be dramatic and draw viewers. The reporting of news that is actually important will always be pushed aside so the sensational gets coverage. That's why I peruse the Wall Street Journal over breakfast. It seems to the most objective source of news.

Absolutely on the mark, BBQman. Network news consists of telling us what they are going to tell us, then telling us, then telling us what they told us. All of which is interrupted with mindless commercials and capped with an over-animated, long winded weather report.

Print media includes an unabashed right wing Daily Sun plus the left leaning remainder.

I might try the Wall Street Journal.

Again, Jon Stewart NAILED the media, this time CNN, on their non-coverage and specifically their non-questions getting non-answers during the debate.

He showed the "Twitter board" that had three really good questions submitted by ordinary people that were completely ignored.

If you think Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" only picks on Republicans, you're dead wrong. I think he has a special place in his heart for skewering the media. I would guess that he got more emotional about it when it was discovered that people were turning to HIS *satirical* show to get news that they couldn't get from CNN/MSNBC/Fox, etc. (The most notable case lately being his raising the issue about the health benefits bill for 9/11 first responders - noting that no network covered it AT ALL except for 30 seconds ONCE on MSNBC - and yet *AL JAZEERA* devoted a 20-minute, rather sympathetic, segment to it!)

Originally Posted by downeaster

Absolutely on the mark, BBQman. Network news consists of telling us what they are going to tell us, then telling us, then telling us what they told us. All of which is interrupted with mindless commercials and capped with an over-animated, long winded weather report.

Print media includes an unabashed right wing Daily Sun plus the left leaning remainder.

I might try the Wall Street Journal.

But isn't the WSJ owned by Fox News " fair and balanced" Rupert Murdock? When I was a subscriber over 10 years ago the editorial page was leaning to the right with a pro management slant.

The purpose of news casts on tv is to sell commercial time.