Real World Event Discussions

The Ten Most Egregious Fox News Distortions

POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Friday, November 14, 2025 20:28
VIEWED: 2501
PAGE 5 of 5

KWICKO

Saturday, October 24, 2009 2:21 AM

What I'm wondering is, where are Geezer's cites? If it were ANYONE else posting up that one news outlet or another were nothing but blatant lies, he'd be the very first one to say, "Cites would be nice."

But here's Geezer, saying that it's obvious that Huffington, MediaMatters, etc. all lie, and he hasn't provided anything by way of citation for that, other than "Google it".

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

ANTHONYT

Saturday, October 24, 2009 12:04 PM

Hello,

I like Geezer, but his commentary in this thread has been akin to-

Commentator - "Hannibal Lecter ate 23 people with a side of fava beans."

Geezer - "Well, yes, but my Uncle Jeremy ran over a jaywalker in his car."

Commentator - "What the devil has that got to do with what I'm talking about?"

Geezer - "Well... they both killed people, didn't they?"

Commentator - "By God man, how does your Uncle Jeremy remotely compare to Hannibal Lecter? I've never even heard of your Uncle Jeremy! Does he run over jaywalkers three days a week?"

Geezer - "Shame on you, sir. Now you're just being disingenuous."

Commentator - *sputters* "Me?! I'm being- Jesus Christ. Never mind."

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

CHRISISALL

Saturday, October 24, 2009 1:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

Niki, I love your emotocons, BTW.

The laughing Chrisisall

KWICKO

Saturday, October 24, 2009 3:44 PM

Quote:

Well, Duh. But there are levels. PN vs. BBC, for example.

In this examples, FoxNews=PirateNews, and Huffpost=BBC.

A great deal of the "bias" Geezer refers to is in the emphasis of the story's reporting. Whereas NPR or Huffpost might say that the recent Goldstone findings "indicated that Israel may be complicit in war crimes, and called for a further investigation," FoxNews would cover the same story by saying that "Obama Hates Jews!!"

You can see the subtle differences there, I think.

It begs the question: What's worse - lies of ommission, or lies of commission? Is it worse to emphasize one viewpoint while ignoring or under-reporting another viewpoint, or is it worse to just fabricate "facts" out of whole cloth and report them as if they were actual events?

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, October 24, 2009 4:07 PM

With Geezer it's not a matter of cites--it's a metaphysical certainty. At least here in cyberspace, his world view skirts dangerously close to the sort of assumptions that put fascism on its feet and give it traction in the world: all reality is only opinion and usually it's the meanest, ugliest opinion that wins. Cynicism is not a political ideology, but when it's used as such, fascism is where it leads.

Speaking of dinosaurs, this kinda thinking is dying out because of the Internet. Lying is just getting harder to do! We're all our own credible news gathering agencies now. At a click of the mouse and a little looking, we can have access to most of what the MSM uses as primary sources.

I don't read Huffington Post. I think this is the second link to that website I've followed. But when I see them posting primary sources as they do here, there's no reason not to take 'em seriously. Another prerequisite for fascist thinking: always discredit the messenger--always, always, always! In such a world view, a broken clock is NOT right twice a day, because it is a disreputable source; and merely associating with such an untrustworthy clock implies YOU are also disreputable in some way.

To paraphrase Senator Lindsey Graham, Geezer is not aligned with fascism, he's aligned with cynicism. And nobody ever lost an argument on the Internet by being too cynical.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

GEEZER

Saturday, October 24, 2009 6:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
What YOU're not getting is that Fixed News lies, lies a lot, PLANS to lie, and I for one don't believe it happens anything LIKE as often with other media like Huffrington, MSNBC, CNN, BBC, PR, the networks, etc.

Did I ever say they didn't? I don't follow Fox News, so I don't have any basis for judgement, but if you say so, then sure.

I have read a few articles from Huffington, usually from cites here, and they do seem to me to have a pretty strong bias.

Hmm. Interestingly, at least the first four "Distortions" on Huffington are actually copies of MediaMatters videos.

At least one of them, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_3
27140.html?slidenumber=2#slide_image seems to be reaching a bit, since Pres. Obama is obviously reading a question off the monitor he's pointing towards.

Edit to add: Hmm, upon further review the Huffington article is pretty much a re-formatting of the MediaMatters article, same videos and almost word-for-word reposting of the text. But no attribution.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

KWICKO

Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:31 AM

Seems as though reposting things without attribution or fact-checking might be a little more common than we'd like to think. Latest victim? Rush Limbaugh, who went on for more than half his show railing about "Obama's thesis" in which he disses the Constitution. Only problem? It was a hoax, a joke posted by a blogger with no sources cited nor any kind of evidence behind it.

The funniest part is Rush's reaction when he finds out he's been had, and has just spent the first half of his show prattling on about something that just never happened. His "apology"? He said that even if these weren't Obama's writings, "I know he thinks it." And then went off on a tangent about how Dan Rather said that he didn't care if the documents were forged, that it didn't matter, which I certainly can't remember him ever saying. Did Rush just make that up, too? Or does he know that Rather thinks it.

http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/93122?fp=1

Listen here:

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910230019

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NIKI2

Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:10 PM

Thanx, Chris; I love 'em too. One of the original fontaholic emoticonaholics, that's me. Got a library of 'em on Photobucket that would choke a horse. Sometimes a picture can replace an entire typed concept...and they're funnier to boot.

Mike, you got it:

Quote:
In this examples, FoxNews=PirateNews, and Huffpost=BBC.

Whereas NPR or Huffpost might say that the recent Goldstone findings "indicated that Israel may be complicit in war crimes, and called for a further investigation," FoxNews would cover the same story by saying that "Obama Hates Jews!!"

It begs the question: What's worse - lies of ommission, or lies of commission? Is it worse to emphasize one viewpoint while ignoring or under-reporting another viewpoint, or is it worse to just fabricate "facts" out of whole cloth and report them as if they were actual events?

I LOVED the "Obama hates Jews" thing--that could be straight out of their kind of "coverage". Tho' I wouldn't give Huffpost the even-handedness of BBC, nor Fixed News quite the insanity of PN, the corollary is close.

Quote:
Speaking of dinosaurs, this kinda thinking is dying out because of the Internet. Lying is just getting harder to do! We're all our own credible news gathering agencies now.

But the other side of that is that there are more nutbags on the internet than there are credible sources. Ergo, Fixed Noise can claim there were two million at the march, and enough people post it on the internet that you really have to wend your way through to find truth.

One side can bury Google; I tried to find the numer of days Obama has taken in vacation so far to contrast it to Dumbya; three or four screens into my search engine, all I was finding were articles about the amazing number of days Dumbya took, and nothing on the actual NUMBER of days Obama's taken. That's an example from the "other side", but most often what I see are rants and posts reflecting right-wing anger and quoting the Fixed Noise "facts". (I am sure it represented the opposite when Dumbya was in power, I'm not saying left-wing nutcases are any better.)

When enough "verification" is found that there WERE two million, as was said by one pundit, the media takes it up, it smothers the internet, and somewhere down the line it might actually be ACCEPTED.

And yes,

Quote:
At a click of the mouse and a little looking, we can have access to most of what the MSM uses as primary sources.

Very valid. As I've said, if interested in something, I use MSNBC as a starting point and research further on my own; but sometimes it can take a LOT of looking to find a relatively unbaised source; if I just looked casually, often all I can find is the same things I heard on MSNBC...and that might well be a case of the above.

I don't read Huffpost either; they show up on MSNBC and CNN often enough to get their bias, same for The Nation. BUT, I discount what they report from The Nation because it is, in my opinion, as slanted as they get. Yet MSNBC uses both sources extensively, so I need other sources to be convinced. As Geezer said:

Quote:
upon further review the Huffington article is pretty much a re-formatting of the MediaMatters article, same videos and almost word-for-word reposting of the text. But no attribution.

All too often the case; nonetheless, my research has shown that, tho' they are biased in their reporting, and sometimes uderreport or omit the other side, there is no comparison whatsoever with the kind of out-and-out lying of Fixed Noise.

The example Mike gave of Limbaugh is exactly what I see in videos from "ClusterFox", as I've heard it called. Anything from anywhere that fits their agenda (or twist or make it up), then take that and blow it out of proportion; found to be wrong, they sidestep and go on ranting. I appreciate that Maddow, when found to be wrong, puts a clarification up on her show and apologizes; of course, she then often follows it up with something t

NIKI2

Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:30 PM

Just for fun and curiosity, and since I can transcribe fast, here's precisely what Limbaugh said about the matter:

Quote:
“I cited a statement from a blog…reporting the following: “”…now, I got a note from a researcher who has been SCOURING the internet….the first ten pages, which were all that Joe Klein was permitted to see…and our researcher…can’t find any sources for the quote…doesn’t have supporting info, SUPPOSEDLY…says it’s going to be from an upcoming report from Joe Klein, but the researcher can’t find anything that’s come out SINCE…so I now say that the quote from which this came has no SOURCING data …so we have to hold out the POSSIBILITY that his is not accurate. HOWEVER…”

and he goes on to say he’s had this happen to HIM, etc., etc., and talks about how the media says they don’t care if the quotes about Limbaugh are inaccurate, they know that’s what he THINKS. He follows up with

Quote:
So I can say, I don’t CARE if these quotes are made up, I know Obama thinks it. You know WHY I know that Obama thinks it? Because I’ve heard him say it; not about the Constitution, but about the Supreme Court.

The video ends there; if he gave any kind of back-up to what he heard Obama say, so I can’t judge from there. But notice he didn’t apologize, notice the inflections, the mention that the first ten pages were all they could SEE (meaning maybe it's in the rest of the thesis anyway), the caveat that it just has no “sourcing data”, that there’s been no follow-up from Klein SINCE (leaving open the possibility that there will be down the line), and the “possibility” that it’s not accurate. He doesn’t actually denounce it and leaves open the possibility that it’s not a hoax.

That's prime Fixed Noise; even if something's wrong, you leave enough doubt it might be right, shade it so that anyone who wants to can say, 'yeah, well, just 'cuz they can't prove it was a lie doesn't mean it was', and then go on to counter it and claim they know that's how it IS anyway...

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, November 14, 2025 8:28 PM

now trying to praise the ISIS al-Qaeda guy from Syria?

Trump hosts Syria's al-Sharaa at White House, U.S. waives sanctions
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/white-house-trump-syria-sharaa-sanctions
-9.6973799