Fox News Anchors.....

rambot · Feb 17, 2023

So now that Fox News anchors admitted in court that they knew what they were saying on the news was a lie but they "didn't want to alienate their audience", we can communally, disavow them as a news network right? Or are we just gonna focus on the SPECIFIC anchors who testified?
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/16/1157558299/fox-news-stars-false-claims-trump-election-2020

Because between them and Tucker "any reasonable person would know you can't trust" Carlson, I would hope to not see news stories featuring these ~~journalists~~celebrities.

And yes, I know "CNN DOES IT TOO". Well I "know that". But I don't "they testified under oath and that leads their integrity to come into question" know that.

Handmaid for Jesus · Feb 17, 2023

rambot said:
So now that Fox News anchors admitted in court that they knew what they were saying on the news was a lie but they "didn't want to alienate their audience", we can now, communally, disavow them as a news network right. Or are we just gonna focus on the SPECIFIC anchors who testified?
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/16/1157558299/fox-news-stars-false-claims-trump-election-2020

Because between them and Tucker "any reasonable person would know you can't trust" Carlson, I would hope to not see news stories featuring these ~~journalists~~celebrities.

And yes, I know "CNN DOES IT TOO". Well I "know that". But I don't "they testified under oath and that leads their integrity to come into question" know that.

I hope you know that it will not matter one bit to their devoted viewers.

Say it aint so · Feb 17, 2023

To FOXnews election fraud became one big grift in fear of telling their viewers the truth, meant losing market share to Newsmax and sliding stock prices. It seems to the FOXnews viewer if they can't get their blatant lies from FOX, they will go somewhere else.

The only person who told the truth come the election was the head of electoral vote counting when he called Arizona for Biden.
For that FOXnews no-no he was fired.

This case against them looks pretty strong and may go the Alex Jones way.

essentialsaltes · Feb 17, 2023

Say it aint so said:
This case against them looks pretty strong and may go the Alex Jones way.

I have no idea how this effects the legal issue of defamation and whatever burden of proof has to be met, but it certainly tells us a much more important thing about Fox News.

The network and its stars were willing to pour honeyed lies into the ears of their viewers to keep them happy.

ozso · Feb 18, 2023

After reading the article I decided to not watch FOX and not vote for Trump - mission accomplished

essentialsaltes · Feb 18, 2023

The [Fox] audience started to erode severely that fall, starting on Election Night itself [when it was the first network to correctly call the Arizona election for Biden]. Fox executives and stars equally obsessed over the threat posed by the smaller right-wing network Newsmax.

Tuur · Feb 18, 2023

essentialsaltes said:
The network and its stars were willing to pour honeyed lies into the ears of their viewers to keep them happy.

And this is different from all other news sources....how?

Well over a century ago, a relative determined a "supernatural" occurrence was due to a cat. The reporter for a newspaper who was also there refused to write about it. "Everyone wants to read about a ghost," he said. "Nobody wants to read about an old cat."

childeye 2 · Feb 18, 2023

Tuur said:
And this is different from all other news sources....how?

Well over a century ago, a relative determined a "supernatural" occurrence was due to a cat. The reporter for a newspaper who was also there refused to write about it. "Everyone wants to read about a ghost," he said. "Nobody wants to read about an old cat."

No matter who does it, it's wrong to present lies as truth or truth as lies. To say the other side does it too, to me would be the devil in my mind using a false equivalency to avoid being humbled by the fact I was duped and played.

ozso · Feb 18, 2023

How can anyone be sure that the article about all the lies is being truthful? Like someone else said, people believe what they want to hear.

Say it aint so · Feb 18, 2023

essentialsaltes said:
I have no idea how this effects the legal issue of defamation and whatever burden of proof has to be met, but it certainly tells us a much more important thing about Fox News.

The network and its stars were willing to pour honeyed lies into the ears of their viewers to keep them happy.

Burden for defamation:

To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.

Since Dominion was harmed and every criterian above has to me been met, the case looks strong. Even if FOX's lawyers in defense whip out the standard "they are opinionists, and not journalists, and no reasonable person should take what they say at face value" that might work if it was just one opinionist, but it was the whole FOX network less may Neil Caveto. They fired the one person who was truthful and made another take a fact check down. The fact Dominion's lawyers constantly warned them and FOX continued to make false statements, knew they were false, and did so because of for for the sake of market share is pretty clear.

Say it aint so · Feb 18, 2023

MMXX said:
How can anyone be sure that the article about all the lies is being truthful? Like someone else said, people believe what they want to hear.

The basis for the story are FOX's own internal memos and their own depositions.

childeye 2 · Feb 18, 2023

MMXX said:
How can anyone be sure that the article about all the lies is being truthful? Like someone else said, people believe what they want to hear.

That's a good question even though the article is characterizing the people who deceived the public using their own sworn testimony.

To begin with, people are ignorant in their innocence, which makes them gullible and easily manipulated. Hence others may not know this, but I do know, that if I reason upon something false as true, it ultimately will end in a contradiction wherein I oppose my own self. It makes sense to me that propaganda is more common where someone wants to persuade others to buy in, or to vote, against their own interests.

An important fact to factor in is that opinions are suggestive while facts are taught, so there's a difference between facts and opinions that needs to be understood. Facts are things that are learned, while opinions are created in one's imagination. Hence an opinion only forms in the void where there's not enough information. If someone is presenting an opinion as if it's a fact, they are deceived and untrustworthy. In those instances where I don't know who to believe, it should be noted which voice is speaking out of faith in brotherly love, and which one is speaking out of cynicism. A demagogue is one who plays to the negative side of prejudice towards others.

essentialsaltes · Feb 18, 2023

Tuur said:
And this is different from all other news sources....how?

That would be for you to demonstrate. That execs and talking heads believed one thing, but told their viewers another.

Pommer · Feb 18, 2023

essentialsaltes said:
That would be for you to demonstrate. That execs and talking heads believed one thing, but told their viewers another.

This calls to mind the “hot mic” scene from Kazan’s “A Face in the Crowd”, where “media star” Lonesome Rhodes tells the reporter “I’ll tell them what to think!”

ozso · Feb 18, 2023

Say it aint so said:
The basis for the story are FOX's own internal memos and their own depositions.

How much of that is select excepts and hearsay I wonder.

Tuur · Feb 18, 2023

essentialsaltes said:
That would be for you to demonstrate. That execs and talking heads believed one thing, but told their viewers another.

Oh my. You've never heard of William Randolph Hearst and "You furnish the pictures, and I'll furnish the war?"

Pommer · Feb 18, 2023

MMXX said:
How much of that is select excepts and hearsay I wonder.

There were text messages too.
No claims yet of being [checks notes] “hacked”.

ozso · Feb 18, 2023

Pommer said:
There were text messages too.
No claims yet of being [checks notes] “hacked”.

So far I'm not really seeing anything of substance, just sensationalism.

Here apparently are the top "totally off the rails" "mind blowingly nuts" on air comments made:

Sean Hannity, FOX News Anchor:
Tonight, every American should be angry. You should be outraged. You should be worried. You should be concerned at what has happened in the election.

Jeanine Pirro, FOX News Anchor:
The Dominion software system has been tagged as one allegedly capable of flipping votes.

Tucker Carlson, FOX News Anchor:
How, for example, did senile hermit Joe Biden get 15 million more votes than his former boss, rock star crowd surfer for Barack Obama?

Pommer · Feb 18, 2023

MMXX said:
So far I'm not really seeing anything of substance, just sensationalism.

Here apparently are the top "totally off the rails" "mind blowingly nuts" on air comments made:

Sean Hannity, FOX News Anchor:
Tonight, every American should be angry. You should be outraged. You should be worried. You should be concerned at what has happened in the election.

Jeanine Pirro, FOX News Anchor:
The Dominion software system has been tagged as one allegedly capable of flipping votes.

Tucker Carlson, FOX News Anchor:
How, for example, did senile hermit Joe Biden get 15 million more votes than his former boss, rock star crowd surfer for Barack Obama?

Believe what you like, friend.

ThatRobGuy · Feb 18, 2023

Many conservatives have disavowed Fox...however, not in the way that you'd like

They've just moved to even whackier sources like InfoWars, OAN, and Newsmax.

It's a strategic blunder to assume you can subvert populists from the other side to abandon 100% of their values and join your side just because you proved one of their mainstream allies is fraudulent.

They have no intention of joining the other side in its current state, tearing down their "establishment" allies just pushes them into even more polarized echo chambers than the ones they were already in.

The only way to win some people over from the other side...and this answer is gonna sting for the people who think they can shame and/or bludgeon the other side into compliance... is to compromise and employ some moderation on certain policies.

It all comes down to prioritization of policies. Both sides have some "winnable votes" from the other side with regards to certain policies if they're willing to moderate themselves on some less consequential policy preferences.

Fox News Anchors.....

Senior Member

You can't steal my joy

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

✦

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

✦

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

✦

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

✦

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Part of the IT crowd

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency