CDZ Fake News/Media Syndrome

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Foxfyre, Dec 9, 2017.

?

How serious is fake/biased/erroneous news in modern times?

  1. 1. Not serious at all

  2. 2. Somewhat serious

  3. 3. Serious

  4. 4. Extremely serious.

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    Fascinating the double standard you have for Fox News compared to CNN.

    CNN gets it wrong sometimes- but they they don't have a history of making things up.

    Gingrich isn't a Fox staffer but is what they call a contributor, i.e. somebody brought in to be a talking head during a news segment

    Is Gingrich a paid employee of Fox News? Yes.
    Were his remarks presented as part of Fox News? Yes.

    Did Gingrich say on Fox News:

    "We have this very strange story now of this young man who worked for the Democratic National Committee, who apparently was assassinated at 4 in the morning, having given WikiLeaks something like 53,000 emails and 17,000 attachments," Gingrich said on Fox May 21. "Nobody’s investigating that, and what does that tell you about what was going on? Because it turns out, it wasn’t the Russians."

    Was that story known to be false?
    Yes.
    having given WikiLeaks something like 53,000 emails and 17,000 attachments,"

    The only person who made that claim had recanted that a week earlier.

    Fox News was promoting fake news- maliciously harming the family of Seth Rich.

    Which is why Fox News is being sued for its fake news.

    His suit alleges Fox News defamed him by manufacturing two false quotations attributed to him and ruining his reputation by blaming him as the deceptive story fell apar
    t.
     
  2. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    LOL- pure partisan rationalization.

    You literally have now defined "Fake News" as a purely interpretative exercise- where IF you think a news organization admitted their error CORRECTLY- then it isn't Fake News but when they don't- it is Fake News.

    And clearly based upon your posts so far- CNN never meets your 'standard' and Fox always meets your 'standard'

    And as far as Fox News

    they generally admit it on their website and on air pretty much as prominently as they reported the story when they botched it.

    That clearly didn't happen with the Seth Rich story. Fox had both Gingrich and Hannity pushing this story- and this was the only 'retraction'

    Statement on coverage of Seth Rich murder investigation

    On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.




    We will continue to investigate this story and will provide updates as warranted.

    The sad thing is that the issue of Fake News deserves a real debate- but you are not willing or perhaps able to hold every news organization to the same standard- regardless of their political leaning.
     
  3. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    Quoting the Fox 'retraction' to the Seth Rich story that they aired prominently on air and on their website- and 'retracted' solely by a quiet 'retraction' on their website after the damaging fake news

    On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.




    We will continue to investigate this story and will provide updates as warranted.
     
  4. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    Fox

    Are you even interested in trying to have a real discussion on "Fake News"?

    I have been looking at your responses and trying to determine what your standard of what "Fake News" is- but you are all over the place.

    Here is my standard- Fake News is anything presented by any person or organization as 'fact' without any confirmation that it is true.

    So for example- Donald Trump's claim that 3-5 million people illegally voted in the 2016 election is "Fake News" because there was no evidence to support that claim.
     
  5. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    53,649
    Thanks Received:
    13,838
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +21,987
    Already answered. I won't type out the explanation again.
     
  6. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    53,649
    Thanks Received:
    13,838
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +21,987
    When you just keep repeating what you have said and start attacking me or somebody else you disagree with, you automatically lose the debate. But do have a pleasant day.
     
  7. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    53,649
    Thanks Received:
    13,838
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +21,987
    Every Fox anchor who had quoted the unsupported portion of that story also announced it leading their newscast that night, and the print and video statement of apology/admission of error remains on the Fox news website. Hannity spent quite some time discussing the matter and said that he was suspending his investigation into the matter for now out of respect for a request from the Rich family.

    Now you can keep hammering away at this trying to convince yourself maybe, but I will not discuss it further with you until you at least acknowledge that Fox did its best to correct its error and show that you are at least willing to try to be honest and honorable in this discussion.

    I do wish you a pleasant day.
     
  8. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    Feel free to run away from a real debate.

    That is what you have done so far when confronted with your double standards.

    I have shown how at least 2 of the 7 supposed 'fake news' of CNN were completely accurate- you of course refuse to deal with that.

    I have shown multiple stories from Fox News that are clearly Fake News- you of course rationalize why Fox News is different......

    So run away- it won't change the facts.
     
  9. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,516
    Thanks Received:
    6,368
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,731
    Another example of Fox Fake News- based upon the criteria established by the OP
    Quoting the OP:
    1. Biased to the point of dishonesty
    2. Erroneous to the point of incompetence
    Fox News’s appalling past 72 hours, analyzed

    The Mueller indictment provides many details of how the Russian operation worked. It’s not the kind of story that should spiral entirely into political speculation. And, if anything, it is concrete evidence that Mueller’s investigation isn’t just a witch hunt against Trump, as the president has often said, but rather a truth-finding endeavor.

    But that’s not the story we got on Fox News.

    On Fox News, a full-throated defense of Trump
    Instead of focusing on the details of the indictment itself, pundits on Fox News spent a good chunk of their airtime pointing out that this isn’t proof of the Trump administration colluding with Russia.

    It’s been an astounding 72 hours on Fox News
    The data paints a clear story of how damaging it is for a media outlet to prioritize its defense of the president. In the past 72 hours, Fox News:

    • Limited its coverage of what the indictment actually reveals: evidence of foreign organizations trying to undermine American democracy
    • Drastically reduced coverage of the Florida school shooting to push pundits onto TV to say this story actually vindicates President Trump, even though it does nothing of the sort
    • Used a detail of the school shooting to push the narrative that the FBI, and by extension the Muller investigation, is flawed — and gave cover to President Trump
     
  10. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    53,649
    Thanks Received:
    13,838
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +21,987
    Sorry but your source is actually putting out fake news on Fox News reporting on the indictments. They have covered them absolutely thoroughly--the pros, the cons, what they say, what they don't say, that they are not an exoneration of the Trump campaign but only dismiss Trump involvement in that part of the investigation. I have been watching the whole thing from Fox and Friends in the morning through the day and evening line up. You are getting the whole story from Fox, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Not from anybody else.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

best cameras