why do people keep getting the Fox network and Fox News confused

Anonus

see title

Klinotaxis

because they are both called Fox

Salix Babylonika

rayman said:

because they are both called Fox

Obā-san

because they have the same name, very similar logos, and one is owned by the other

basically, they are one and the same

Odradek

rayman said:

because they are both called Fox

Anonus

:3 said:

because they have the same name, very similar logos, and one is owned by the other

basically, they are one and the same

It's still tiresome that any mention of any Fox-connected entity immediately brings out the dumbass conservatives

Obā-san

this is the fate they deserve imho

Anonus

Also, no local Fox station with a news department and a logo that looks like this avoids being mistaken for the Fox News Channel

Anonus

:3 said:

this is the fate they deserve imho

I want to be able to talk about the Fox network without dealing with dumbass conservatives

Fossilmaiden

Boris Badenov said:

:3 said:

because they have the same name, very similar logos, and one is owned by the other

basically, they are one and the same

It's still tiresome that any mention of any Fox-connected entity immediately brings out the dumbass conservatives

Well Fox is kinda owned by, yannow, a staunchly opinionated conservative.

Anonus

Yes, but Fox and Fox News still have pretty different identities

Anonus

The Fox network has always had an image of being iconoclastic and rebellious, whereas FNC does not

Sredni Vashtar

Please don't get into the corporate identity stuff. Please.

Klinotaxis

yeah dog "iconoclastic" and "multimillion" are not in the same mental universes

Obā-san

rayman said:

yeah dog "iconoclastic" and "multimillion" are not in the same mental universes

Princess Alice

This has always kinda bothered me in that a lot of Fox-affiliated stations are owned by companies other than, you know, Fox...so it's frustrating that people are eager to look at any Fox-branded newscast as though it will have a staunchly conservative bias when a lot of Fox station's newscasts are actually decent.

Also: I'm autistic.

Sredni Vashtar

Harley Quinn said:

This has always kinda bothered me in that a lot of Fox-affiliated stations are owned by companies other than, you know, Fox...so it's frustrating that people are eager to look at any Fox-branded newscast as though it will have a staunchly conservative bias when a lot of Fox station's newscasts are actually decent.

Also: I'm autistic.

That is actually completely fair, and while factual, the addendum was not necessary here.

Princess Alice

0vvvv0 said:

Harley Quinn said:

This has always kinda bothered me in that a lot of Fox-affiliated stations are owned by companies other than, you know, Fox...so it's frustrating that people are eager to look at any Fox-branded newscast as though it will have a staunchly conservative bias when a lot of Fox station's newscasts are actually decent.

Also: I'm autistic.

That is actually completely fair, and while factual, the addendum was not necessary here.

I figured it helps to explain why this relatively inconsequential thing annoys me so much more than it probably should. :P

Salix Babylonika

there are plenty of completely neurotypical people who are bothered by insane things

my uncle will go into raving at great length if anyone steps on his lawn for any reason

Anonus

0vvvv0 said:

Please don't get into the corporate identity stuff. Please.

Why not? It's relevant here.

rayman said:

yeah dog "iconoclastic" and "multimillion" are not in the same mental universes

still, though, when Fox came on the scene in the late '80s, it had a lot of shows the Big Three would never ever have touched, and has never forgotten this

Anonus

of course it's named for 20th Century Fox, a well-known brand name, but still

Sredni Vashtar

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

★ ~ S U M M E R ✿ S A U S A G E ! ~ ★

Witchy Jane said:

completely neurotypical people

idk it's called a spectrum for a reason right

Salix Babylonika

Coke Rokcz said:

Witchy Jane said:

completely neurotypical people

idk it's called a spectrum for a reason right

I guess that's true.

mostly I will just take any opportunity to talk badly about that man because he's an asshole.

Princess Alice

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

but they sure are cute!

Anonus

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

No, I mean the Fox Broadcasting Company.

Tachyon

but Fox could also mean 21st Century Fox, which includes both

that's what comes to mind for me if you say 'Fox', the whole thing

Anonus

right, you're British

Tachyon

well true

Sredni Vashtar

Boris Badenov said:

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

No, I mean the Fox Broadcasting Company.

You are being unspeakably pedantic right now. You know what I meant.

Harley Quinn said:

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

but they sure are cute!

D'awwwww!

Tachyon

0vvvv0 said:

Boris Badenov said:

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

No, I mean the Fox Broadcasting Company.

You are being unspeakably pedantic right now. You know what I meant.

Not really, they're not at all the same thing.

Or, the one includes the other, but it includes a lot of other things as well. As far as this thread's topic is concerned the distinction is quite relevant.

Sredni Vashtar

I get that the distinction's important but given that he hasn't explained it and any of those could be correct given what he's said, it still seems really pedantic. Like, "I'm going to be vague about a thing and then get pissy when you guess the wrong subset of that thing or use the wrong terminology."

Tachyon

well yes, if you say 'Fox' without context idk how i'm supposed to know whether you're talking about Fox News or 20th Century Fox or the Fox Broadcasting Company or what have you

but Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox *is* inclusive of Fox News, so in this context distinguishing between that and the Fox Broadcasting Company does make a difference

Anonus

I'm not being vague, at least not anymore. Look at the amended title!

Sredni Vashtar

OK, good.

Tachyon

i guess people say 'Fox' to mean the Fox Broadcasting Company because that's what it calls itself?

Anonus

Yes

Anonus

Fox News also calls itself "Fox" a lot which is supremely annoying

Tachyon

in that case they are both Fox

which is right, for the reasons naney said above, although they are different divisions of it

Salix Babylonika

but what about Micheal A.L. Fox

Princess Alice

Why are there so many people named Michael Fox

Hexartes

Witchy Jane said:

but what about Micheal A.L. Fox

You know what they say about Michael A.L. Fox

glennmagusharvey

Tucker said:

Witchy Jane said:

but what about Micheal A.L. Fox

You know what they say about Michael A.L. Fox

All toasters toast toast.

Corvina

:3 said:

because they have the same name, very similar logos, and one is owned by the other

basically, they are one and the same

Toolsie

Harley Quinn said:

0vvvv0 said:

There's a categorical difference between "willing to take risks" and "iconoclastic."

Also, I think you mean Fox Entertainment/21st Century Fox and Fox News, in the title, because just "Fox" is kind of vague.

but they sure are cute!

It's staring into your soul, plotting your demise.

Fun fact: I once got into a staring contest with a fox.

Tachyon

no but it works like this

Fox News ≠ Fox Broadcasting Company
"FOX" = Fox Broadcasting Company ⇒ "FOX" ≠ Fox News
Fox Broadcasting Company, Fox News ⊂ 21st Century Fox
Fox News ⊈ Fox Broadcasting Company
"Fox" = 21st Century Fox ⇒ Fox Broadcasting Company, Fox News ⊂ "Fox"
"Fox" = 21st Century Fox & "FOX" = Fox Broadcasting Company ⇒ "FOX" ≠ "Fox" & "FOX" ⊂ "Fox"
"fox" ∈ {{Vulpes}, {Cerdocyon}, {Lycalopex}, {Otocyon}, {Urocyon}} & "Fox" = 21st Century Fox & "FOX" = Fox Broadcasting Company ⇒ "fox" > "Fox", "FOX"
</dubious math>

Tre

...that post is a masterpiece, Tachyon, just so you're aware.

-applause-

Yarrun XIX

Tiny said:

...that post is a masterpiece, Tachyon, just so you're aware.

-applause-

Anonus

where does XOX (seizure warning) fit into this

Aliroz

Sredni, I disagree with you about pedantry.  The word, "pedantic" is one used by people who don't give a dang to shut down people who care about things.

There is no unimportant distinction.  Nothing is unimportant. 

Sredni Vashtar

There are forgivable instances of unintentional pedantry and there are instances where it is explicitly being used to insult another person's intelligence or undermine their point by suggesting that they don't know what they're talking about when the point they are making is valid but something the pedant dislikes. This was an instance of the former, but let's not pretend that the latter isn't a thing that happens, please.