Jump to content

Analysis: Fox News has been exposed as a dishonest organization terrified of its own audience


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Scott said:

Teachers aren't interested in children's sexual orientation and it isn't something that would be discussed in class.  Teachers are interested in teaching and anything that affects the classroom negatively is of concern.  In my experience teaching that happens when students are actively bullying others -- that maybe about perceived sexual orientation, race, disability, economic status or any of a number of other things.  Those issues may need to be addressed in order to effectively teach.  

 

We had a student who was HIV+.  He was infected at birth and on medication that made his viral load undetectable.  When word got out he was ostracized, bullied, teased and physically assaulted.  Do you think that should have been overlooked in a classroom?

I was responding to johhnybangkok's statement "Because it limits even discussions about LGBTQ issues, it could stifle conversations for children who need to work through their own gender or sexual-identity questions" which appeared to be about discussion in a classroom, but if I was wrong and it was not, I apologise for getting it wrong.

Edited by thaibeachlovers
Posted

A post with a link that contains false or misleading information has been reported and removed. 

Posted
20 hours ago, mikebike said:

Ok. CNN virtually lead the charge of ongoing lies and omissions which resulted in the Iraq War and (debatably) 500,000+ deaths. 

Fox News, in your own words, reported on the "lies and omissions which resulted in the Iraq War and (debatably) 500,000+ deaths."  Are you going to blame Fox News for the Iraq War?

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Fox News, in your own words, reported on the "lies and omissions which resulted in the Iraq War and (debatably) 500,000+ deaths."  Are you going to blame Fox News for the Iraq War?

No. I clearly blame ALL of the MSM. 

Posted (edited)

That the leader of the House majority is cooperating with a company who is the subject of a 1.6 billion dollar lawsuit is beyond the pale.

 

 

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has turned over 41,000 hours of surveillance footage from the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol to Fox News primetime commentator Tucker Carlson, reported Axios on Monday.

"Carlson TV producers were on Capitol Hill last week to begin digging through the trove, which includes multiple camera angles from all over Capitol grounds. Excerpts will begin airing in the coming weeks," Axios reported.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/january-6-2659441803/

Edited by ozimoron
  • Like 1
Posted

One of my relatives in Canada told me that he only watches Fox News, and gets the rest of his

stuff from his computer. I asked if He heard of Q Anon, and other sources in the computer and he still

says his new sources are better than CBC, CTV, Global news in Canada, or CBS, ABC, NBC, and CNN.

He likes Rebel News and a few other twitter news sources so  he gave me a good laugh for my day.

Posted
10 hours ago, ozimoron said:

That the leader of the House majority is cooperating with a company who is the subject of a 1.6 billion dollar lawsuit is beyond the pale.

 

 

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has turned over 41,000 hours of surveillance footage from the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol to Fox News primetime commentator Tucker Carlson, reported Axios on Monday.

"Carlson TV producers were on Capitol Hill last week to begin digging through the trove, which includes multiple camera angles from all over Capitol grounds. Excerpts will begin airing in the coming weeks," Axios reported.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/january-6-2659441803/

If McCarthy can get away with giving this footage to Fox News only, instead of sharing it with all news organizations, then the House ethics rules are even more grossly inadequate than I thought.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 hour ago, heybruce said:

If McCarthy can get away with giving this footage to Fox News only, instead of sharing it with all news organizations, then the House ethics rules are even more grossly inadequate than I thought.

And about to be weakened or trashed further.

Posted
13 hours ago, ozimoron said:

That the leader of the House majority is cooperating with a company who is the subject of a 1.6 billion dollar lawsuit is beyond the pale.

 

 

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has turned over 41,000 hours of surveillance footage from the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol to Fox News primetime commentator Tucker Carlson, reported Axios on Monday.

"Carlson TV producers were on Capitol Hill last week to begin digging through the trove, which includes multiple camera angles from all over Capitol grounds. Excerpts will begin airing in the coming weeks," Axios reported.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/january-6-2659441803/

There is always two sides to a story!

Americans are very interested in hearing and seeing what Thompson is objecting too!

 

“It’s hard to overstate the potential security risks if this material were to be used irresponsibly,” Thompson said in a statement.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/hill-politics/bennie-thompson-rips-mccarthy-for-giving-tucker-carlson-jan-6-footage

Posted
Just now, riclag said:

There is always two sides to a story!

Americans are very interested in hearing and seeing what Thompson is objecting too!

 

“It’s hard to overstate the potential security risks if this material were to be used irresponsibly,” Thompson said in a statement.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/hill-politics/bennie-thompson-rips-mccarthy-for-giving-tucker-carlson-jan-6-footage

Most of it is public anyway. You didn't address my point about the court case and house ethics. Furthermore, why only Fox?

Posted
10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Most of it is public anyway. You didn't address my point about the court case and house ethics. Furthermore, why only Fox?

Its a law suit its not criminal in nature. They happen all the time! Imop

Ethics, meh ! They threw out ethics when Nancy wouldn’t allow jim banks and Jim  jordan on the sham committee  imop

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-bans-jim-jordan-jim-banks-jan-6-committee

  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That's because they were implicated in the crime that was being investigated. It would have been insane to allow them to be on that committee.

Wrong! Read the article from Fox, Nancy wanted control of the narrative imop

“Pelosi, who has the final say on select committee appointments, said she's rejecting both Banks and Jordan to preserve the "integrity" of the committee's work”.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-bans-jim-jordan-jim-banks-jan-6-committee

 

Enough of this probably off topic 

 

Edited by riclag
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

LOL, the OP is about Fox news being deliberately dishonest yet you quote them as a credible source. I can't stop laughing.

 

Keeping the fox away from the hens (the accused off the committee) is protecting the integrity of the committee. Just like a judge needs to recuse himself from a case he's involved in.

Stop trying to bait me into arguing with you about what this forum is “allowed to use” as a source.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
16 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

One of my relatives in Canada told me that he only watches Fox News, and gets the rest of his

stuff from his computer. I asked if He heard of Q Anon, and other sources in the computer and he still

says his new sources are better than CBC, CTV, Global news in Canada, or CBS, ABC, NBC, and CNN.

He likes Rebel News and a few other twitter news sources so  he gave me a good laugh for my day.

I never had tv access to any of the others listed, but I watched CNN occasionally for a laugh. I certainly never took it more seriously than Fox, but neither IMO were a source of serious news. IMO the crown for serious news belongs to Al Jazeera, the one widely available news source not beholden to advertisers.

Posted
11 hours ago, amexpat said:

I know some non-Americans who like to watch it. They consider it comedy.

I used to watch the Greg Gutfeld show as it was extremely funny when it exposed the Democrats for what they are, but that was the only "comedy" show on the channel. The rest of the opinion shows were entertaining, but not particularly amusing.

Posted
24 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I never had tv access to any of the others listed, but I watched CNN occasionally for a laugh. I certainly never took it more seriously than Fox, but neither IMO were a source of serious news. IMO the crown for serious news belongs to Al Jazeera, the one widely available news source not beholden to advertisers.

False equivalence. CNN is surely not perfect but not comparable to Fox News. You cannot cite similar cases as in the OP, of CNN knowingly  and repeatedly (no retractations) lying about an issue of similar importance with widespread evidence contradicting what has been diffused.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I used to watch the Greg Gutfeld show as it was extremely funny when it exposed the Democrats for what they are, but that was the only "comedy" show on the channel. The rest of the opinion shows were entertaining, but not particularly amusing.

Gutfield exposing the democrats. He's a shallow mouth for hire. As shallow as a roadside puddle after a shower. So, what are the Democrats?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Gutfield exposing the democrats. He's a shallow mouth for hire. As shallow as a roadside puddle after a shower. So, what are the Democrats?

I've been saying it for years:   the right can't do political satire, and the left can't do the "hair on fire!" political urgency.  Gutfield isn't really satire, it's junior high school level insults, or "rank outs." 

But I have to take part of it back, the left has been doing well with the backlash to Roe being cancelled.

The only right-winger I can give credit to for satire was Al Capp, in the 1960s I enjoyed picking subtle digs out of his Li'l Abner comic strip.  But that was more than 50 years ago, and post-mortem word has circulated he was quite the odious b*stard.  Hear what Goldie Hawn has to say: https://people.com/movies/goldie-hawn-recalls-being-sexually-harassed-by-famous-cartoonist-al-capp-i-walked-out/

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 2/19/2023 at 7:15 PM, Tug said:

I’d love to see Fox News after they pay dommion their 1.7 billion fine that the first 2 minutes of each and every (news) program they air should be spent telling their viewers they willfully lied to them about the election and betrayed the country in the quest for money and ratings an absolutely despicable group of sleazy $&*@ people 

What I'd like to see is Fox (and Fox Biz) ordered by the FCC to run a chyron to the effective of "WARNING: the information in this program may not be true!"

 

And today brings this: https://www.rawstory.com/fox-news-dominion-ban/

The word is recusal, Howard.  I have no doubt you would be using the word frequently if another news entity was in a similar position.

 

 

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...