I see many times on this forum, and elsewhere, comments from people suggesting that the "liberal" MSM media, particularly MSNBC, is just as bad as Fox News. Here's a good email to Andrew Sullivan's blog disputing such comments:
Can we please stop with the false equivalency that MSNBC is a less-competent Fox? MSNBC is slanted, but here are the things that keep them distinct from Fox:
1) They acknowledge their bias.
2) They don't ignore major news stories.
3) They don't invent news from fiction.
4) They don't fund/promote/create 'grass roots' movements and then cover them as spontaneous.
5) They don't attack and undermine non-partisan fact-checking sources
6) They (particularly Maddow) attempt to get actual important figures from the right to come on, though those figures usually decline
7) They don't employ politicians who are currently running for office while covering those same politicians
These aren't distinctions of competence; they are distinctions of kind. I know you don't care for their treatment of Pat "You-Can't-Say-That-on-Television" Buchanan, but ejecting a single figure for persistent offensive speech is not the same as ejecting an entire class of commentators simply because their arguments may undermine your core propaganda message.
MSNBC is partisan. Fox is false.
I don't think my reader is wrong. But because I'm not a partisan Democrat, all I can say is that Fox is completely shameless in its propaganda and paranoia while MSNBC is just smug with its partisanship and liberalism. So Fox is worse. But forgive me for not watching either - unless for hathetic purposes.