Fox News is a universal web wrapper for Windows 10 PC and Mobile

Great reply! Agreed, nothing drives me nuts more than people who try to label themselves or others as left right, liberal conservative, etc. It's extremly annoying and I think detramental to a society which should be coming together to seek common ground, not make greater enimies of themselves.

I would argue that reading two or more reasonably balanced sources (for example: Associated Press, Reuters, CNN, and BBC) is a better strategy than reading wildly unbalanced sources on opposite ends of the spectrum and trying to find the truth between them.  The unblanced sources in many cases are intentionally providing misinformation that may not always be countered by the other side.  In such cases you will simply be misinformed and left to assume the info is accurate.  Why feed yourself misinformation from a source that has proven itself to be extremely biased and unreliable?  Why provide ratings and revenue dollars to sources of propaganda when you could instead reward the sources that are making an honest attempt at real journalism? Having said that, I agree that finding the balance and facts is most important regardless of how you get there.

The sites you mentioned are very biased too. You probably don't notice because they match your personal biases. As a libertarian, I see the clear bias at CNN, but tend to find the Cato Daily Podcasts as a reasonable, unbiased viewpoint. So, I intentionally seek out viewpoints I see as biased, not to beat them up, but so I can challenge my own beliefs, not theirs. I want to learn, grow, or at least understand and empathize.

I was reffering to CNN World, not the CNN US version.  A lot of people don't know it, but the US has it's own version of CNN that caters to the short attention span of the average US viewer while the rest of the world has normal CNN.  It's probably also an attempt to compete against fake news outlets in the US that are more entertaining than plain old news.  Also, none of those sources are "very biased".  The AP and Reuters are wire services that don't have to worry about ratings and hyping things up.  The BBC has no "dog in this fight" when it comes to US politics.  Anyway, these are just some examples.  My point was that these sources are "reasonably accurate" and they are attempting to convey stories in a neutral way.  That can't be said for quite a few other media outlets. I agree that people need to challenge their beliefs, but you seem to be claiming that the handful of reasonably unbiased (as much as humans can be unbiased) media outlets are just as bad as those that are clearly pushing propaganda, fiction, and entertainment.  The most important thing is that a source is providing factual information.  They may present that information in a way that has some bias, but a rational person with critical thinking skills can seperate the opinion from the facts and make their own judgements based on the facts alone.  However, that doesn't work if you are getting information from a source that is providing misinformation that appears to be factual.

Then you got this guy, saying Americans can't pay attention to the news. No biased, foreign elitism there.

You just made my point, but vive la illusion.

@Keith, I said no such thing.  I said the "short attention span of the average US viewer​".  People are busy and media is competing for thier attention.  I am from the US for what it's worth.  I find it odd that you feel a need to prove I'm "elitist" or "foreign" (apparently that is an insult to you?) or that you "got" me when all I'm saying is that people should seek out multiple reasonably accurate sources of news and avoid the ones that have proven themselves to be inaccurate.  You clearly have your own deep seated biases if you think anything I have said is extreme. @infosage, so much for a well thought out debate.  Care to ellaborate on how I proved your point?  Honestly, I think you and I agree on most of this. We agree that people should check multiple sources of news. We agree that all media has to have *some* level of bias due to human nature. We probably agree that some sources are more biased than others and that some strive to be unbiased while others are intentionally biased due to incompetence, entertainment value, or to push a certain agenda. The part that we seem to disagree on is that you seem to be suggesting that people seek out the extremes and then average them out, while I am suggesting that people seek out the sources that have proven themselves (through one's own research of facts) to be more accurate and then average those out.  Here is an anology... Let's say there is a dart board and the bullseye represents the truth.  Then let's say we have 5 people that are pretty good at darts each make an attempt to hit the bullseye with 1 dart each.  Now let's say we let 5 more people throw 1 dart each, but they are trying to be entertaining and make the observers laugh.  Maybe they cover their eyes or stand on their head while throwing the darts.  So most likely we have 5 reasonable attempts to hit the bullseye that are fairly close.  Some are a little left or right, but pretty close none the less.  We also have 5 darts that are wildly thrown and some are not even on the dart board.  They are in the wall two feet away, on the floor, or in the ceiling.  As far as I can tell (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), you are either suggesting that people take the wildest 5, or perhaps all 10, and average them out to try to find the middle.  The problem with that is that the "average" may not even be on the dartboard, because the outliers are so far off the board. I am suggesting that people disregard the 5 that are known by them to be invalid attempts at accuracy and take an average of the valid attempts.  That approach is far more likely to be close to or on the bullseye.  I fully recognize that a person will need to re-visit and revalidate other sources from time to time, but on a daily basis I see no good reason to waste my time and possibly mislead myself with information from sources that have proven to be highly inaccurate.  Let's face it, we all have to draw the line somewhere.  The KKK has a lot to say about the world, but I would hope you don't waste too much of your time "hearing them out."

In case anyone is interested: I haven't started this podcast yet so I can't vouch for how legit it is, BUT it's called counterspin and the description says it "provides a critical examination of the major stories every week, and exposes what the mainstream media might have missed in their own coverage." 

...and do those "foreign online sources" have apps that you like, or are just letting us know your opinion of American media and TV ownership?

It's raining apps!!

Hey spazzmeister and bleached, how come Fox News didn't the memo saying that MS is ditching the platform??? :)

Hi there, I've stopping by to collect my obligatory -20 votes. To answer your question: Fox probably invested in a UWP from last year and is only now delivering. That's good news for those who want Fair and Balanced reporting. As far as news updates though, it's low on the totem pole. Count your blessings I guess. Please wake me when Prisma and Pokémon Go are available ?(2017)

Up to your standards. Good on you. 

So if those apps showed up, you'd shut up?

Add Snapchat and Medscape and yup. I'd shut up.
Could you shut up until Prism and Pokémon Go are added to the store? That is, forever keep your peace :)

Here's an idea: Why don't you go where those things exist?  What strange fetish gives you joy to hang around a site for an OS that you don't like, just to make negative comments?  It seems like a waste of time and energy. 

What about the fetish of reading and responding to comments you don't like from people you don't want around?

That would be clever if only it wasn't.  I am reading a site dedicated to a product/service that I like.  He is littering that site with negativity and I have no choice but to come across it.  Thanks for the dismissal attempt, though.

Ok bud. Enjoy your Friday evening, don't fill it with negative emotions from a tech website :)

Pssh, I'm waiting on MLB.TV and either Trillian or an IM+ update. I care nothing of SnapChat, Medscape, or Prisma. We all have different wants.

My app will be UWP, soon :)

Which is?

Nice!  #MakeWindowsGreatAgain

Repped for the political catchphrase reference, though I would have also taken "I'm with Windows".

#OlderLumiasMatter  LOL!

AllLumiasMatter

Even the devil makes UWP apps

Wow. That comment reminded of the old South Park episode where the cloud of Smug floated in from California.

George Clooney basically took credit for the civil rights movement.

Clinton Cash talks.

I wouldn't say they are devil, but ignorant for sure, just take global warming for example.

No matter what you think of the channel, This is a good looking app. Opened quick and looks great! CNN, take note.

Can't even find CNN in the store.

I think it is gone.

app uwp ESPN be next

Where is the Starbucks UWP app?

Brewing?

Lol Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

The group in front of us all must have ordered some double frapping expresso iced with Carmel topping or something else that takes forever to make.

What? No millennial bashers to make childish accusations about FNC? I'm shocked.

Why doesn't whatsapp do the same thing,make a universal app for windows 10 pc and mobile and keep the orignal app for windows phone 8.1 users?

Still waiting for BBC News uwp app...

BBC don't seem to be nterested in windows at all, they figure go use a browser.  

Download "World News", its a wrapper for BBC.

Fox Sports GO is the one I am hoping becomes universal (if it isn't already) and lands on Xbox One. That would be really nice!

I think it already is. There was a big update a couple of months ago, and it's a really nice app. Xbox support would be awesome, though!

Fox Sports GO is UWP and really, really nice.

The Fox Sports GO app is awesome. It would be awesome if they brought their Fox Sports Mobile app to windows too

I missed the "big" mentioned in the title. What exactly except no new features?

I missed the "big" mentioned in the title. What exactly except no new features?

I'm guessing they meant "big name" app (debatable). Not big as in; "big update packed with heaps of new features". Just a big name app that's made the jump to UWP for PC/Mobile.   *EDIT* I see they've amended article to say it's not a full-blown native UWP app, but rather a web-wrapper using Westmin. Tis a start I guess...   *EDIT* #2 Errr, why was I down-voted?

Ok. Same but now uwp. Guess it is newsworthy. Btw. I'm running L1520 with WP8.1 app. Stabile non beta OS & app. Delete works etc. but 'downvotes' not visible.

Don't know about downvotes as this great feature is invisible for me. That said you might have used reason & logic. Not allowed here.

Fox news is not currently available.
America only?

Nice!

Why are the same people who cry about W10M not having apps continue to cry when we get apps whether they like then or not? Their childish behavior alone is enough to make people want to leave the platform no matter how much better Microsoft had made W10M.

But it's only a web wrapper. This must be Obama's and the liberal media's fault.

Yay, a web wrapper of a site I don't use. That's EXACTLY what I wanted when I said I wanted MLB.TV! We don't have to play by your rules. It isn't your Internet.

#MakeWindowsGreatAgain :)

Awesome, that one made me laugh. :)

Great news.  Something new to help kick the habit of Daily Mail Online's atrocious writing but very timely and relevant news.

Just can't understand there are still people reading news from fox...

Some people prefer a non-liberal viewpoint. We aren't all San Fran hippies.

Fox news. Man we get news from anywhere. Give us prisma someone, anyone. ☹

Fox news. Man we get news from anywhere. Give us prisma someone, anyone. ☹

Some apps are just fine as web wrappers.. This is one of them.

Why not just make hybrid app using app studio or something lol

Why not just make hybrid app using app studio or something lol

This is nice to see. I can't help but wonder how long they plan to maintain two apps. Looking at you Instagram...

Sadly, it's no different from pinning the website using Edge. Except the Edge pin will have three recent articles while this one only has one.

Yay, faux news for mobile!

At least it isn't MSNBfeCes

Your trusted source of hypocritical crap spreading fear and terror since the dawn of time......

The DNC?

Love watching the standard hypocrisy of the left, preaching intolerance and equality through insults and hypocritical hate. This, folks, is why politics are a disaster. No one can have a discussion without name calling. The difference is now the left is the majority trying to bully others into agreement, and the right is defensively reacting in a negative fashion. Hard to have hope for America when the news article of an app is met with political bias and bigotry.

No thanks.