The fact-checks behind 'The Daily Show's' 50 Fox news 'lies'

The fact-checks behind 'The Daily Show's' 50 Fox news 'lies' | PolitiFact

I would link to Jon Stewarts show but he uses bad words, but Politifact is okay.

Jessica01 said:

The fact-checks behind 'The Daily Show's' 50 Fox news 'lies' | PolitiFact

I would link to Jon Stewarts show but he uses bad words, but Politifact is okay.

Click to expand...

Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans - US News

I'm going to be rather blunt, you're probably not going to convince conservatives, because we have pretty much reached the conclusion liberal news sites (including Politifact), have a credibility problem.

Politifact is not a liberal news site.

Jessica01 said:

Politifact is not a liberal news site.

Click to expand...

any site that says something bad about conservatives is by default a liberal news site.

IN the words of Paris Hilton, "like duh obviously"

I am of the belief that if any News organization lies they should be fined. Doesn't the FCC fine a network something like $25k every time an F-bomb is dropped. Well, why not something similar for News Orgs (to include Commentator shows like O'Reilly and Hannity or Olberman)

I'm being 100% serious. Why is it that fines and penalties only seem to be directed at the middle class and poor. Where I live, there is a tram that costs $2 per ride. Safe to say most people using the tram can't afford a car. Do you know what the penalty is if you are caught on the tram without a ticket-- $152. If you work a minimum wage job, that is about 3 days worth of pay for a 5 minute tram ride!!!!! That is completely disproportionate to the crime and what I like to think of as a penalty for being poor.

I'd like to see the same sort of draconian measure applied to "White Collar" crimes. And libel and slander are against the law, so it should be penalized. News orgs should be hit with a $25k non-refundable non-mea culpa fine. In fact, it should be $50k and then when they apologize/correct later on air for the lie then it is reduced to $25k.

Jessica01 said:

Politifact is not a liberal news site.

Click to expand...

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago. - The Washington Post

Journalist consensus: Media lean left - POLITICO.com

dgiharris said:

any site that says something bad about conservatives is be default a liberal news site.

IN the words of Paris Hilton, "like duh obviously"

Click to expand...

The Conservative Alienation from Journalism | Ten Miles Square | The Washington Monthly

When liberals outnumber conservatives in the news media by an overwhelming margin, there is a pretty good chance that a news site is liberal.

GarfieldJL said:

....
When liberals outnumber conservatives in the news media by an overwhelming margin, there is a pretty good chance that a news site is liberal.

Click to expand...

What I don't like is that conservatives use the word liberal as a synonym for everything bad to include lying.

So you link to a site that has clear evidence of wrongdoing. The conservative will often dismiss the argument as "Well, that is a liberal site."

as if that is all that is required to prove that you are wrong. I mean, if a liberal site says 2 + 2 = 4 does it automatically mean it's wrong.

I don't care if the site is liberal, conservative, or run by monkeys. Facts are facts. Facts don't care what your political affiliation is. But for whatever reason, most conservatives are incapable of accepting facts, data, or evidence from liberals. I mean, if it comes from a "liberal" then how trustworthy can it be....

There is a old saying, reality has a well known liberal bias.

loveofourlord said:

There is a old saying, reality has a well known liberal bias.

Click to expand...

That's not an old saying, its a recent one from a comedy show.

but megyn kelly is rich

nightflight said:

That's not an old saying, its a recent one from a comedy show.

Click to expand...

well online it is, I've heard it from least 10 years ago heh.

So liberals are incapable of handling the delicate "challis of truth" because all (or at least most of them) are liars?

I'd note that, despite the quoted numbers of "journalists" rarely being conservative (to be fair, only 28% labelled themselves as democrats), Fox News still reaches are greater audience than any other "liberal" news organization.

Of course then there is the debate of "how many journalists does fox ACTUALLY have?"

Another interesting question is, why are so few conservatives pursuing journalism degrees? Is it because they are victims of something?

EDIT: Instead of being instantly skeptical, there are verbatim quotes from Fox news and CITED evidence of their lie/misrepresentation. No one is expecting you to look at it, but it is your loss to not challenge your own preconceived notions.

nightflight said:

That's not an old saying, its a recent one from a comedy show.

Click to expand...

It's still true.

Let's look at some of the 'lies'

4. "Far more children died last year drowning in their bathtubs than were killed accidentally by guns."
Tucker Carlson, Aug. 9, 2014
Pants on Fire

Click to expand...

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...on/carlson-guns-dont-kill-people-bathtubs-do/

Carlson didn’t say what age children he had in mind, but in the context of the story he was responding to — and his rhetorical question about something "I want to know before I let my child go over to your house" — this is not about children under 4 years old. Parents don't let toddlers "go over" to a friend’s house.
For that age range, Carlson’s comparison is off by a factor of three. Bathtubs caused 22 deaths for kids 5 and older and guns caused 73 deaths.

Click to expand...

next 'lie'

7. "There is no good data showing secondhand smoke kills people."
John Stossel, Dec. 4, 2014
False

Click to expand...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-checks-behind-daily-shows-50-fox-news-lies/

The U.S. surgeon general has released 31 reports about the effects of smoking since 1964. These reports are extremely detailed, summarizing the latest research on smoking and peer-reviewed by dozens of the nation’s top scientists.
Consensus on secondhand smoke really began to form in the 1980s, even as the tobacco industry’s"doubt-creation machine" spun opposing talking points, said Dr. Jonathan Samet, senior scientific editor of the 2014 surgeon general report and director of the University of Southern California’s Institute for Global Health.

Click to expand...

another one

9. "The insurance industry is actually run by mostly Democrats."
Dana Perino, Oct. 31, 2013
False

Click to expand...

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ana-perino-says-health-insurance-industry-ru/

The National Association of Health Underwriters PAC, meanwhile, has contributed $1.74 million to Republicans since 2008 and $494,000 to Democrats.....Overall, the Center for Responsive Politics says that the insurance industry has contributed $94 million to Republicans since 2008 and $62 million to Democrats. .....UnitedHealthcare (70 million people served): The company’s PAC, United For Health, reported that 58 percent of its 2012 federal contributions went to Republicans, while 42 percent went to Democrats. ......Aetna (50 million people served): Aetna’s political action committee reported that it donated $285,500 to Republican candidates in 2012, compared with $170,000 to Democrats. ....WellPoint (36 million people served): The company’s political action committee, WellPAC, contributed about $1.5 million to Republican candidates since 2008 and about half as much to Democrats....

Click to expand...

They back up decisions as to why it is a false story.

I have to give conservatives credit, they have turned denial into an art form.

It's like there is a blackbelt training academy on how to deny, obfuscate, and deflect any criticism of a conservative.

This is something for the life of me I can not fathom.

Mr. Conservative believes in ABC because he watched a report on Fox News and Fox News gave evidence of XYZ. XYZ is this horrific piece of data akin to the sky is falling. Because of XYZ, Fox News puts forth the argument for ABC.

Conservatives rally around ABC, "we must have ABC" they cry in unison.

Well, a "liberal" news site researches XYZ and it turns out, XYZ is completely untrue, it is false, it never happened, the data was fabricated and new data and evidence shows that it really is JKL and JKL is a good thing.

For whatever reason, despite XYZ being disproved, Conservatives will still hold on to the position and argument for ABC. They run to the hills looking for any and all support for ABC despite the evidence of JKL. In fact, sometimes they just regurgitate XYZ ad nasuem as if repetition makes something true.

And if all else fails, since JKL came from a "liberal" news org it is not to be trusted anyway.

This is something I cannot fathom. If my whole logical argument is built upon XYZ and you prove XYZ is false, how then can I continue with my argument? To be fair, this is human nature but my perception is that the GOP does this more than liberals. In particular, Fox News has a blackbelt in this sort of thing.

There are times I watch Fox News shows and literally laugh so hard I get stomach cramps.