|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 16:26:54 GMT -5
Fox definitely showed they had feet of clay when it came to the reporting of election results and the aftermath in the days/weeks that followed. A fear of a loss of viewership, lead them to make decisions that go against truthful reporting. That is no different than most of their competitors. The difference being, they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. The difference is that they may have been using the freedom of the press clause of the Constitution to undermine democracy itself, just to protect their stock price and viewer count. Is that any different than the bias other 24 hour news stations use to shape their narrative? CNN, in a panic over plummeting viewership, has gotten rid of anchors and, at one point, vowed to basically revamp how they tell news stories to be more "neutral". If they believe that a news story is what they say it is, why would they look to tell that story in a different way than what they believe to be the truth? |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 16:37:23 GMT -5
A fear of a loss of viewership, lead them to make decisions that go against truthful reporting. That is no different than most of their competitors. I’m sad that you feel that way. About the competitors. If you have examples, as someone else asked, I would be happy to look at them. Please do not play the false equivalency game on election results and reporting. When the lead attorney says “truth isn’t truth” you may want to avoid having him on your network anymore providing analysis. I was thinking primarily about CNN, the latest Don Lemon fiasco aside, revamping how they were going to tell and comment on news stories. Do I like when powerful people behind the scenes freakout because reporting what's true might lose them viewership? Nope, not at all. I do like that, even though it pained them to say it, Fox reporters were willing to call Arizona for Biden. That was true and shouldn't have been hidden from the public. I also found this interesting from one of the links provided... Carlson did not push the outlandish and completely unfounded conspiracy theories by Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell that Dominion’s voting machines had rigged the election for Biden; the host even pushed back against Powell during one interview segment on his primetime show. Carlson, though, also never let his viewers know the extent to which he felt the claims were “ludicrous” and “totally off the rails” at the time, as the brief reveals he did in private in text messages to his producers and fellow hosts.I'm not saying that someone should throw the laughing hyena a parade, just thought it interesting that the links all note that, at times, Fox reported angles that they knew their viewership wouldn't like. Fox should have been consistent with that. |
|
|
|
Post by vergyltantor on Feb 18, 2023 16:40:18 GMT -5
The difference is that they may have been using the freedom of the press clause of the Constitution to undermine democracy itself, just to protect their stock price and viewer count. Is that any different than the bias other 24 hour news stations use to shape their narrative? CNN, in a panic over plummeting viewership, has gotten rid of anchors and, at one point, vowed to basically revamp how they tell news stories to be more "neutral". If they believe that a news story is what they say it is, why would they look to tell that story in a different way than what they believe to be the truth? You aren't actually comparing a revamp to be more neutral to knowingly fomenting a distrust in democracy that results in a failed coup attempt. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 16:48:57 GMT -5
Is that any different than the bias other 24 hour news stations use to shape their narrative? CNN, in a panic over plummeting viewership, has gotten rid of anchors and, at one point, vowed to basically revamp how they tell news stories to be more "neutral". If they believe that a news story is what they say it is, why would they look to tell that story in a different way than what they believe to be the truth? You aren't actually comparing a revamp to be more neutral to knowingly fomenting a distrust in democracy that results in a failed coup attempt. I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Feb 18, 2023 17:26:23 GMT -5
Is that any different than the bias other 24 hour news stations use to shape their narrative? CNN, in a panic over plummeting viewership, has gotten rid of anchors and, at one point, vowed to basically revamp how they tell news stories to be more "neutral". If they believe that a news story is what they say it is, why would they look to tell that story in a different way than what they believe to be the truth? You aren't actually comparing a revamp to be more neutral to knowingly fomenting a distrust in democracy that results in a failed coup attempt. Distrust a Democracy? Good question. During the Trump presidency there were alot of things done to screw Democracy Lord Tantorly. Hilliary hiring Christopher Steele in an attempt to get Trump ousted? That is flagrantly against Democracy. James Comey leaking information to his buddy at the press. The constant leaks to the press to ruin the Trump presidency was against Democracy. Adam Schiff coming out of private secure meetings and getting on the phone immediately to the press in an attempt to ruin a president in anti-democracy. Peter Strzok , Andrew McCabe, and Lisa Paige in charge of the investigation of Donald Trump when they blatantly hated Trump? That's not a threat to Democracy? Hiring 13 Democrat strategist lawyers to investigate the RUSSIAN HOAX,and not one single solitary Republican lawyer?  ? is blatantly trying to screw Democracy. The FBI paying twitter 3.5 million to trash stories they didn't like is anti democracy. Twitter, Facebook, and Google purposely shelving the Hunter Biden story before a big election is screwing Democracy. This is exactly why I cannot stand any of you. You have such a lack of fairness and decency. How do you all live with yourselves when you know everything I said above is true and yet you are bitching about Fox news? Yuck. Disgraceful. Embarrassing. |
|
|
|
Post by blue-footedbooby on Feb 18, 2023 17:45:49 GMT -5
You aren't actually comparing a revamp to be more neutral to knowingly fomenting a distrust in democracy that results in a failed coup attempt. I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo Uh, oh, Haley just lost the 2024 US presidency because of something Don Lemon said. Give me a break. Oh, and you forgot to mention that he apologized for his sexist remark. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 18, 2023 17:58:55 GMT -5
It's pretty revealing how much FOX is like a street drug gang. They keep pushing and pushing their product, but meanwhile they despise their customers and 100% do not consume their own product.
|
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Feb 18, 2023 18:01:14 GMT -5
It's pretty revealing how much FOX is like a street drug gang. They keep pushing and pushing their product, but meanwhile they despise their customers and 100% do not consume their own product. There is some truth in this...especially in the Murdoch family. |
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Feb 18, 2023 18:13:39 GMT -5
You aren't actually comparing a revamp to be more neutral to knowingly fomenting a distrust in democracy that results in a failed coup attempt. I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo The chairman of Fox, the CEO of Fox News, and Fox's three biggest on-air personalities were all caught complaining that accurate reporting damages the Fox News brand and ratings. Carlson and Hannity suggested severe repercussions for objective reporting, up to and including termination from the company - and Suzanne Scott, Fox's Chief Executive Officer, agreed with them. Those very same people made an explicit decision to feed their audience conspiracy theories in order to try and win back viewers. Fiction over fact for the sole purpose of driving up Fox's price per share. In the other corner, we have Don Lemon making an off-the-cuff comment on CNN about "women in their prime" that he immediately and profusely walked back. I don't see how any reasonable person could see these as even remotely comparable. |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Feb 18, 2023 18:23:03 GMT -5
I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo The chairman of Fox, the CEO of Fox News, and Fox's three biggest on-air personalities were all caught complaining that accurate reporting damages the Fox News brand and ratings. Carlson and Hannity suggested severe repercussions for objective reporting, up to and including termination from the company - and Suzanne Scott, Fox's Chief Executive Officer, agreed with them. Those very same people made an explicit decision to feed their audience conspiracy theories in order to try and win back viewers. Fiction over fact for the sole purpose of driving up Fox's price per share. In the other corner, we have Don Lemon making an off-the-cuff comment on CNN about "women in their prime" that he immediately and profusely walked back. I don't see how any reasonable person could see these as even remotely comparable. The one thing remotely comparable (and I still don't think it rises to the same level) is Cuomo, and his ass was fired. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 19:49:22 GMT -5
I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo Uh, oh, Haley just lost the 2024 US presidency because of something Don Lemon said. Give me a break. Oh, and you forgot to mention that he apologized for his sexist remark. Yes, Lemon did the requisite amount of damage control. And you forgot the part where I said, "The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money" |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 20:00:33 GMT -5
I'm comparing the action of shaping/ distorting the narrative because you think it will garner you more ratings. The results of those actions can be categorically different, but that doesn't mean the motivation to do so doesn't come from the same place. Ratings and money Don Lemon denigrates Nikki Haley because he thinks his audience and co-workers will obviously agree. The attempt to portray her as being past her prime was wrong and not based on any investigative reporting on his part. Does it lead to the catastrophic events of 1/6? Nope, but it's by no means any more honest. imo The chairman of Fox, the CEO of Fox News, and Fox's three biggest on-air personalities were all caught complaining that accurate reporting damages the Fox News brand and ratings. Carlson and Hannity suggested severe repercussions for objective reporting, up to and including termination from the company - and Suzanne Scott, Fox's Chief Executive Officer, agreed with them. Those very same people made an explicit decision to feed their audience conspiracy theories in order to try and win back viewers. Fiction over fact for the sole purpose of driving up Fox's price per share. In the other corner, we have Don Lemon making an off-the-cuff comment on CNN about "women in their prime" that he immediately and profusely walked back. I don't see how any reasonable person could see these as even remotely comparable. Extremely valid point. I am surprised, though, with the level of cynicism you often display, that you, carte blanche take Lemon's apology as sincere. |
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Feb 18, 2023 20:19:18 GMT -5
I am surprised, though, with the level of cynicism you often display, that you, carte blanche take Lemon's apology as sincere. Were the apologies by the Fox "News" executives and on-air personalities for their disingenuous coverage sincere? Oh, wait . . . |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Feb 18, 2023 20:21:56 GMT -5
I am surprised, though, with the level of cynicism you often display, that you, carte blanche take Lemon's apology as sincere. Were the apologies by the Fox "News" executives and on-air personalities sincere? Oh, wait . . . Is that technically a whataboutism? Does the lack of Fox apologies mean anything where the sincerity of Lemon's is concerned? |
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Feb 18, 2023 20:25:49 GMT -5
Were the apologies by the Fox "News" executives and on-air personalities sincere? Oh, wait . . . Does the lack of Fox apologies mean anything where the sincerity of Lemon's is concerned? I don't know. Is an alleged insincere apology worse than no apology at all? I don't really think so. |
|
? is blatantly trying to screw Democracy. The FBI paying twitter 3.5 million to trash stories they didn't like is anti democracy. Twitter, Facebook, and Google purposely shelving the Hunter Biden story before a big election is screwing Democracy. This is exactly why I cannot stand any of you. You have such a lack of fairness and decency. How do you all live with yourselves when you know everything I said above is true and yet you are bitching about Fox news? Yuck. Disgraceful. Embarrassing. 