I do listen to Fox News and NewsNation—not because I agree with them, but to hear what they’re saying. Two observations:
Trump's lies have escalated over the past decade due to a lack of accountability, particularly the kind that would truly impact him. I'm of the view that his 2020 election loss didn't cause him significant pain because he transformed it into fuel for his MAGA movement.
NewsNation, while covering the Ohio 'pets on the menu' issue, mentioned on Saturday that 'the claims have not been confirmed.
Really, this is so stupid. Repeating the lies CREATURE throws out as the truth is irresponsible! What happened to integrity in reporting? WE KNOW CREATURE is lying, so why does Fox swear to them? Has Fox’s income increased posted by a certain bank or is Creature paying someone under the table??…gee, that’s a crime! Yeah…..Creature feature*…it’s what he does! (FYI…since I no longer choose to call tRUMP a man…because that insults all the good men…I now call him CREATURE! Wanna see how he likes it….feel free to spread the name….I get such a kick out of others using my words!) We go forward!!🇺🇸💙🇺🇸💙🇺🇸💙
So what is worse here. Fox lying or governments censoring. Australia wants to fine platforms if social media doesn't take down what the government determines what is misinformation, hate speech etc. It's not like our government doesn't want our social media to take what someone deems misinformation even if that information might be true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et5wSnGbwnM This is 30 minutes or so but you should watch this. The main stream media here barely talks about this.
This debate is on ongoing subject of concern. Freedom of speech is a double edged sword. Perhaps we should require proof when a member of a news organization reports something, or require a clear statement that whatever they chose to say is unsupported. Even so, viewers will hear what they want to hear, especially from speakers who appear as if they are an authority.
What the fuck is so hard about requiring fairness? In 1969, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Fairness Doctrine in the Red Lion Broadcasting case, which required all news broadcasters to give fair coverage and opposing views on matters of public importance. Same thing they do now in the UK.
Balancing publishers’ first amendment rights against the right of the public to be well informed, the Red Lion Court determined that the public’s right to access full information took priority over the First Amendment concerns of broadcasters. “It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited market-place of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market.” So why can't we return to the Fairness Doctrine for all licensed broadcasters, and come up with a parallel for online "news" sources?
It would be good to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. A worthy cause. Easier said than done, now that so many disinformation sources have become so entrenched.
Another feedback loop and self fulfilling prophecy is that crack about what the streets of New York “look like to you.” Tell the viewers over and over that immigrants and people of color are criminals. They walk down the street in NY and see—lots of immigrants and people of color. The viewer would think QED had the viewer the remotest idea what that means. As it stands, they just think “yup.”
As Trump declines further and faster they have to lie harder and better (worse).
Thank you for this article. I only wish the other corporate media would call out Fox’s daily lies
Me too
Thank you Marc for your keen
observations about Fox faux
news.
I do listen to Fox News and NewsNation—not because I agree with them, but to hear what they’re saying. Two observations:
Trump's lies have escalated over the past decade due to a lack of accountability, particularly the kind that would truly impact him. I'm of the view that his 2020 election loss didn't cause him significant pain because he transformed it into fuel for his MAGA movement.
NewsNation, while covering the Ohio 'pets on the menu' issue, mentioned on Saturday that 'the claims have not been confirmed.
What’s the situation with SmartMatic?
They're going to trial. 👍
SEND OUT THE HOUNDS!
Really, this is so stupid. Repeating the lies CREATURE throws out as the truth is irresponsible! What happened to integrity in reporting? WE KNOW CREATURE is lying, so why does Fox swear to them? Has Fox’s income increased posted by a certain bank or is Creature paying someone under the table??…gee, that’s a crime! Yeah…..Creature feature*…it’s what he does! (FYI…since I no longer choose to call tRUMP a man…because that insults all the good men…I now call him CREATURE! Wanna see how he likes it….feel free to spread the name….I get such a kick out of others using my words!) We go forward!!🇺🇸💙🇺🇸💙🇺🇸💙
They removed my video….
So what is worse here. Fox lying or governments censoring. Australia wants to fine platforms if social media doesn't take down what the government determines what is misinformation, hate speech etc. It's not like our government doesn't want our social media to take what someone deems misinformation even if that information might be true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et5wSnGbwnM This is 30 minutes or so but you should watch this. The main stream media here barely talks about this.
This debate is on ongoing subject of concern. Freedom of speech is a double edged sword. Perhaps we should require proof when a member of a news organization reports something, or require a clear statement that whatever they chose to say is unsupported. Even so, viewers will hear what they want to hear, especially from speakers who appear as if they are an authority.
What the fuck is so hard about requiring fairness? In 1969, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Fairness Doctrine in the Red Lion Broadcasting case, which required all news broadcasters to give fair coverage and opposing views on matters of public importance. Same thing they do now in the UK.
Balancing publishers’ first amendment rights against the right of the public to be well informed, the Red Lion Court determined that the public’s right to access full information took priority over the First Amendment concerns of broadcasters. “It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited market-place of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market.” So why can't we return to the Fairness Doctrine for all licensed broadcasters, and come up with a parallel for online "news" sources?
It would be good to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. A worthy cause. Easier said than done, now that so many disinformation sources have become so entrenched.
I can’t watch it! 🤢
Speaks for me!
Another feedback loop and self fulfilling prophecy is that crack about what the streets of New York “look like to you.” Tell the viewers over and over that immigrants and people of color are criminals. They walk down the street in NY and see—lots of immigrants and people of color. The viewer would think QED had the viewer the remotest idea what that means. As it stands, they just think “yup.”
But is anyone at Faux News getting money directly from Putin?
How long and how far is the FOJ going to let Musk go?
Do we have to wait for an actual murder, or will just an attempted murder do?