Bruce Feldman says that the terms yesterday were not accurate...

Submitted by SalvatoreQuattro on December 18th, 2014 at 6:43 PM

The numbers were much toonhigh per Feldman  on multiple reports on Twitter. 

 

 

Bruce Feldman ‏@BruceFeldmanCFB 5m5 minutes ago As I said on @FoxSports1 today, I was told by sources the reports on the $8M per offer by #Michigan to Jim Harbaugh are not accurate

Comments

alum96

December 18th, 2014 at 8:08 PM ^

Mark Dantonio in full Spartan gear with no mask on but smiling does not even look like Mark Dantonio.  He is like the Clark Kent of coaches, except when he smiles its like when Clark takes off his glasses.  No one can recognize him.

SalvatoreQuattro

December 18th, 2014 at 7:45 PM ^

media watchdog. If you believe that then you believe that the Tooth Fairy exists.ALL news is biased and unreliable as we have seen over and over and over again.

Secondly, they conducted a survey which found that Americans who watched CNN, MSNBC, Fox, NPR...are all at the same level of ignorance. Fox's viewers were the lowest, but it was a matter of being the shortest pygmie.

 

mb121wl

December 19th, 2014 at 1:08 AM ^

but fairness isn't.  Everyone has a point of view because everyone's experience, perceptions, needs, values, and interpretations differ.  Moreover, we shouldn't want to be impartial if, thinking critically and with full information, the truth turns out to be on one side or another--or a little bit in each.  Remember the Blind Men and the Elephant.

If you've lived out side the U.S., as I did for several years, you realize all American media have a distincively American slant on events.  To be sure, the Guardian, Die Zeit, and other European publications also have their own perspectives, but they're a useful corrective to what we read and hear every day.

It is my (biased) opinion, of course, but I think the best sources of news in the country today are Al Jazeera America and The Christian Science Monitor (which, like the WSJ, is good at analyzing the news, whatever you think of the affiliated organization).  Frontline is usually pretty good, too.

SalvatoreQuattro

December 18th, 2014 at 7:45 PM ^

People who say Fox are the worst are betraying their leftist sympathies. They revile Fox because Fox offends their political sensibilities. It isn't out of any concern for veracity or journalistic ethics that drives the criticism. It's politics plain and simple.

I do believe Fox is terrible and I refuse to watch it, but I think the same for all major news outlets.

The truth is all news outlets are biased. There is no such thing as "fair and balanced" because that doesn't sell papers or draw eyes/clicks. What they want is to promote outrage andsensationalism, so as to draw people to their site or station. That is why we are constantly seeing inflammatory or scandelous stories.

 

bluelaw2013

December 18th, 2014 at 9:15 PM ^

Fox is objectively, measurably less factually correct, on average, than the average.

It may be a shortest pygmy contest, but that doesn't change shortness into something intangible or unmeasurable. Fox is, in fact, the least factual of the major mess outlets.

Facts are not political. You can count them. And you can count misstatements. MSNBC is really bad; NPR is fairly reliable; CNN is fairly reliable; Fox is the worst. That is an actual fact; you can research it, chart it, compare the numbers, whatever.

I mean, Fox does crazy shit. They Photoshop bags under the eyes of people they don't like. They willfully deceive as part of their ongoing business model. Anyone who thinks Fox is not the worst major news outlets on the facts either hasn't done their research and is going off mere anecdotal assumptions or is suffering from their own biases.

LS And Play

December 18th, 2014 at 8:04 PM ^

Says the almost certainly leftist MSNBC watcher. They are all horribly biased. There is more of an argument, if anything, that MSNBC is the worst. At least at Fox you have people like Shep Smith and Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier, who aren't horrific partisans. At MSNBC, you have hosts like Al Sharpton. He doesn't cover poltiics, he partakes in the political events that he covers. There is no prime-time equivalent of Megyn Kelly on MSNBC. Not even close. 

JamieH

December 18th, 2014 at 11:44 PM ^

Claiming Megyn Kelly isn't a partisan hack may be the most ridiculous thing I've read on MGoBlog this month. And that is saying something given the sheer volume of ridiculous stuff posted on here this month.