Thread: More False Info From Fox News

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

Are you suggesting that "every" news source reported this false story?

No. I am suggesting that all news sources have reported false stories!

Funny. I find those who profess to find Faux News "fair and balanced" to be just slightly to the right of Mussolini, politically-speaking. Oh well, we're never going to agree on this one.

There was once upon atime when journalists were just that-journalists interested in getting the facts.

Now that news orginizatiions are corporately owned and operated, they each "flavor" their news to suit their agenda.

FOX is no better than CNN, Nor is CNN any better than FOX. NPR is no better, nor is the BBC. Realize that any news you are getting is a product being presented to you. It will tell you a side of the story, not necessarily the whole story.

Originally Posted by Seraphim

There was once upon atime when journalists were just that-journalists interested in getting the facts.

Now that news orginizatiions are corporately owned and operated, they each "flavor" their news to suit their agenda.

FOX is no better than CNN, Nor is CNN any better than FOX. NPR is no better, nor is the BBC. Realize that any news you are getting is a product being presented to you. It will tell you a side of the story, not necessarily the whole story.

+1

John P.

Originally Posted by Seraphim

There was once upon atime when journalists were just that-journalists interested in getting the facts.

Now that news orginizatiions are corporately owned and operated, they each "flavor" their news to suit their agenda.

FOX is no better than CNN, Nor is CNN any better than FOX. NPR is no better, nor is the BBC. Realize that any news you are getting is a product being presented to you. It will tell you a side of the story, not necessarily the whole story.

Almost all news organizations get their news from only two sources, which is AP and Reuters, so most news we get is already slanted by the perspective of these two organizations!

Originally Posted by JMS

Almost all news organizations get their news from only two sources, which is AP and Reuters, so most news we get is already slanted by the perspective of these two organizations!

And this is why I like to get my news from print sources, because then when I'm done with it I pass the papers to my puppies and let them comment all over it.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

And this is why I like to get my news from print sources, because then when I'm done with it I pass the papers to my puppies and let them comment all over it.

that's awesome

I can barely stand to watch the news, and I'll only do it if my wife asks me to. I'm shocked really that a major news organization with so many viewers like FOX published a retraction, especially since it was about a political figure whose views (or lack of them) many conservatives are opposed to. I've never heard of such a thing on the commie news network

Faux News Network is far to liberal for my taste
I get all my facts straight from Stephen Colbert

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

Any credible news source wouldn't have reported the false story to begin with!
Faux news did. So did Drudge.
Nuff said...

Wasn't it the Jerusalem Post that mistranslated? The other news agencies should be ashamed of themselves for not reporting that the story was false, or at least for not even reporting that the story existed

New organizations are like politicians. They're as credible as whoever is paying the bills. That's why I like my news from PBS. They get an operating grant from the government which, until recently, didn't have strings attached, and other funds come from donations from private citizens. That means we The People are the boss at PBS, and you can be relatively sure that their bias, over time, is towards truth, where stations owned by GE or Rupert Murdoch might have other, more economic and less noble, goals they work for. It's also why it's important to keep PBS funded and competitive with private news agencies.