Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: blacken700 on September 21, 2012, 04:41:51 AM
-
-
WAAAH!! WAAAH!! WAAAH!!! A news network that doesn't kiss Obama's behind and covers for Democrats.....OH THE HORROR!!
The left no longer has a monopoly on the media. Of course, their old guard are going to bleat and whine about it.
-
WAAAH!! WAAAH!! WAAAH!!! A news network that doesn't kiss Obama's behind and covers for Democrats.....OH THE HORROR!!
The left no longer has a monopoly on the media. Of course, their old guard are going to bleat and whine about it.
Leftists and communists hate dissenting voices and hate freedom of speech.
-
Leftists and communists hate dissenting voices and hate freedom of speech.
That must be why you like MSNBC so much....the freedom of speech
-
That must be why you like MSNBC so much....the freedom of speech
I hate MSNBC because they put on the dumbest bunch of freak shows on the planet. Martin Bashir and Fat Ed and Mad Cow? LMFAO!!!!!
-
I hate MSNBC because they put on the dumbest bunch of freak shows on the planet. Martin Bashir and Fat Ed and Mad Cow? LMFAO!!!!!
you HATE them because you HATE dissenting voices and you especially HATE freedm of speech
sound familiar?
-
you HATE them because you HATE dissenting voices and you especially HATE freedm of speech
sound familiar?
Absolutely not - i love the fact that the progressive communists and socialists on MSNBC get to spout their bullshit for all the world to see and laugh at
-
Absolutely not - i love the fact that the progressive communists and socialists on MSNBC get to spout their bullshit for all the world to see and laugh at
Hey Schitzo - make up your mind
You just said you hated them 10 minutes ago
-
Hey Schitzo - make up your mind
You just said you hated them 10 minutes ago
I hate them but defend their right to be on the air and spew lies and communist bs. The two are not mutually exclusive moron.
-
I hate them but defend their right to be on the air and spew lies and communist bs. The two are not mutually exclusive moron.
That's the first time I've heard you say it
Ill try to remind you when you contradict yourself which will probably be 5 minutes from now
-
I hate them but defend their right to be on the air and spew lies and communist bs. The two are not mutually exclusive moron.
In other words, he isn't crying for them to be put out of business or silenced, unlike lefties with Fox News and talk radio.
-
In other words, he isn't crying for them to be put out of business or silences, unlike lefties with Fox News and talk radio.
most "lefties" only complain about the pattern of blatant LIES from Faux News and not to "silence" them or put them out of business. There have been attempts to boycot scumbags like Rush for the absolutely horrible shit he says but then the right wing does the exact same thing, and more often too (before you object go look at the of the nonsense boycotted by your fellow wingnut fundies)
-
most "lefties" only complain about the pattern of blatant LIES from Faux News and not to "silence" them or put them out of business. There have been attempts to boycot scumbags like Rush for the absolutely horrible shit he says but then the right wing does the exact same thing, and more often too (before you object go look at the of the nonsense boycotted by your fellow wingnut fundies)
What "blatant" lies? Weren't you asked to give some specific examples of such alleged lies on another thread?
-
What "blatant" lies? Weren't you asked to give some specific examples of such alleged lies on another thread?
are you seriously asking me for a list of blatant lies that have been seen on the air of Faux News over the years
Seriously
Are you even aware that they won a court case which basically affirmed their right to lie
-
are you seriously asking me for a list of blatant lies that have been seen on the air of Faux News over the years
Seriously
Are you even aware that they won a court case which basically affirmed their right to lie
Just what I figured. You're regurgitating liberal BS, That crap has been debunked (including here) on numerous occasions.
There was no court case about Fox News and any so-called right to lie.
One, this wasn't the Fox News Channel. It was a LOCAL TV STATION in the Tampa Bay area that carried Fox programming (WTVT, Channel 13, back in my hometown).
The suit was that two reporters for WTVT were supposedly fired because they wouldn't fabricate a story for the boss of that station, NOT the Fox News Channel.
That claim was THROWN OUT OF COURT, by a judge. But, one of the reporters won a settlement for several hundred thousand dollars, under a state whistleblowing law. WTVT appealed that to higher court, which REVERSED that portion of the lower court ruling. But, the appeals court UPHELD the lower court ruling that WTVT (not the Fox News Channel) did not ask them to lie about a story nor fire them for refusal.
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2009/11/03/fox-lies-videotape-debunking-an-internet-myth/
You didn't give any specifics then; you aren't giving any specifics now.
-
Just what I figured. You're regurgitating liberal BS, That crap has been debunked (including here) on numerous occasions.
There was no court case about Fox News and any so-called right to lie.
One, this wasn't the Fox News Channel. It was a LOCAL TV STATION in the Tampa Bay area that carried Fox programming (WTVT, Channel 13, back in my hometown).
The suit was that two reporters for WTVT were supposedly fired because they wouldn't fabricate a story for the boss of that station, NOT the Fox News Channel.
That claim was THROWN OUT OF COURT, by a judge. But, one of the reporters won a settlement for several hundred thousand dollars, under a state whistleblowing law. WTVT appealed that to higher court, which REVERSED that portion of the lower court ruling. But, the appeals court UPHELD the lower court ruling that WTVT (not the Fox News Channel) did not ask them to lie about a story nor fire them for refusal.
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2009/11/03/fox-lies-videotape-debunking-an-internet-myth/
false
the first case was won by Akre and Wilson and turned over on appeal
Fox argued there was no law against lying and that it was their right to do so and the appeals court agreed with them
This was THE ARGUMENT made by the Fox attornies in their appeal and they never denied the plaintiffs claim that she was pressured to air a false story was innacurate....rather, that it simply wasn't against the law
FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation." In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased… It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim
http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html
-
Mark Foley - (D)
Larry Craig - (D)
Breaking News WMD found in Iraq
Defending drug addict Rush - "As for seeking out illegal drug prescriptions, we should remember that for almost the entire rest of the world there is no such thing as an illegal prescription."
on and on and on...
-
Scooter Libby - Not Guilty
hahaha that was my favorite
-
false
the first case was won by Akre and Wilson and turned over on appeal
Fox argued there was no law against lying and that it was their right to do so and the appeals court agreed with them
This was THE ARGUMENT made by the Fox attornies in their appeal and they never denied the plaintiffs claim that she was pressured to air a false story was innacurate....rather, that it simply wasn't against the law
http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html
WRONG AGAIN, Straw.
Although there has been much back-and-forth among the parties about whether the jury in the employment lawsuit found that Station WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, the verdict form did not ask the jury to determine whether WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, but rather to determine whether Station WTVT(TV) fired either employee for threatening to disclose what the Petitioners reasonably believed would be a violation of the news distortion policy.....
So the trial jury never reached a conclusion on whether the FOX affiliate had violated the news distortion policy, nor did they have to in order to determine she had been fired in response to the threat by Akre and Wilson to file a complaint with the FCC.
More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of whether WTVT actually asserted a”right to lie”in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court.
And, as you apparently missed, the lower court THREW OUT HER CLAIM that the network tried to force her to air a deliberately false story.
-
McWay should get a job at Fox News
the LIE by McWay
Just what I figured. You're regurgitating liberal BS, That crap has been debunked (including here) on numerous occasions.
There was no court case about Fox News and any so-called right to lie.
One, this wasn't the Fox News Channel. It was a LOCAL TV STATION in the Tampa Bay area that carried Fox programming (WTVT, Channel 13, back in my hometown).
The suit was that two reporters for WTVT were supposedly fired because they wouldn't fabricate a story for the boss of that station, NOT the Fox News Channel.
That claim was THROWN OUT OF COURT, by a judge. But, one of the reporters won a settlement for several hundred thousand dollars, under a state whistleblowing law. WTVT appealed that to higher court, which REVERSED that portion of the lower court ruling. But, the appeals court UPHELD the lower court ruling that WTVT (not the Fox News Channel) did not ask them to lie about a story nor fire them for refusal.
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2009/11/03/fox-lies-videotape-debunking-an-internet-myth/
You didn't give any specifics then; you aren't giving any specifics now.
and the truth from his own link:
During their appeal, FOX… argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the”right to lie”or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
-
McWay should get a job at Fox News
the LIE by McWay
and the truth from his own link:
Can you actually read? The link I posted breaks down the GIBBERISH you're spewing (namely from a guy, named Michael Gaddy) and takes it apart, piece by piece.
There's no dispute, BECAUSE THE LOWER COURT ALREADY RULED in WTVT's favor on the matter.
Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging… that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT’s attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre’s claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.
And, lost in all of this, GENIUS, is that this case IS ABOUT WTVT, a LOCAL STATION in the Tampa Bay Area, NOT FOX NEWS CHANNEL
-
I posted specific lies. Any word on those?
-
Can you actually read? The link I posted breaks down the GIBBERISH you're spewing and takes it apart, piece by piece.
There's no dispute, BECAUSE THE LOWER COURT ALREADY RULED in WTVT's favor on the matter.
And, lost in all of this, GENIUS, is that this case IS ABOUT WTVT, a LOCAL STATION in the Tampa Bay Area, NOT FOX NEWS CHANNEL
your own link says FOX affiliate and owned station
YOU falsely claimed that the court determined that WTVT (A Fox affiliate and owned station) did not ask them to lie about a story nor fire them for refusal.
The court did NO SUCH THING
Foxs argument was that it was their RIGHT to LIE and there was no violatin of the law for doing so.........PERIOD
the appeals court agreed with that claim
-
Middle east is collapsing, economy collapsing, foreign policy collapsing, and you leftist turds care about Fox News.
-
I posted specific lies. Any word on those?
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
As for drug things, what was a "lie" about that? There are numerous countries where drugs that are illegal here are as easy to get as aspiring (why do you think bodybuilders go to Mexico?).
As for the WMDs, that story broke on several news stations.
It appears you can't tell the difference between mistakes and lies.
You want lies? Try NBC DELIBERATELY ALTERING the Geroge Zimmerman 911 tape.
-
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
As for drug things, what was a "lie" about that? There are numerous countries where drugs that are illegal here are as easy to get as aspiring (why do you think bodybuilders go to Mexico?).
As for the WMDs, that story broke on several news stations.
It appears you can't tell the difference between mistakes and lies.
You want lies? Try NBC DELIBERATELY ALTERING the Geroge Zimmerman 911 tape.
kind of reminds me of the time when Fox claimed to run the UN-EDITED "You Didn't Build It" clip only to then proceed to show an EDITED CLIP ?
it's starts at ~ 1:25
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-25-2012/democalypse-2012---do-we-look-stupid--don-t-answer-that-edition---grammatical-gaffes
-
-
your own link says FOX affiliate and owned station
YOU falsely claimed that the court determined that WTVT (A Fox affiliate and owned station) did not ask them to lie about a story nor fire them for refusal.
The court did NO SUCH THING
Foxs argument was that it was their RIGHT to LIE and there was no violatin of the law for doing so.........PERIOD
the appeals court agreed with that claim
Yes, genius, an affiliate. We're dealing with a specific network and station, NOT the Fox News Channel, which YOU FALSELY CLAIMED suited for the right to lie.
The lower court THREW OUT the plaintiffs' claims, except for one. RECAP:
To begin with, the popular portrayal almost always omits the rather crucial fact that Akre and Wilson lost almost every one of their claims at the trial court. As the Florida Second District Court of Appeal noted in their ruling:
Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging… that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT’s attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre’s claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.
And...
The jury of three men and three women deliberated nearly six hours before finding that Fox affiliate Channel 13 had retaliated against Jane Akre for a story about a controversial hormone manufactured by the Monsanto Corp.
However, jurors refused to give any money to Akre’s husband, Steve Wilson, an Emmy-winning reporter who also worked on the story.
And the jury did not believe the couple’s claim that the station bowed to pressure from Monsanto to alter the news report.
Despite the limited victory, Akre and Wilson found vindication in the verdict…
Notice the key word, ALLEGED. Akre and Wilson's CLAIMING that WTVT distorting the story and WTVT actually doing so are two different things. Since they have no proof, benefit of the doubt goes to the network (in case you forgot, it's innocent until proven guilty).
A careful reading of the jury instruction reveals that the jury was only answering whether they believed Akre had been fired for threatening to lodge a complaint with the FCC alleging broadcast of a false, distorted, or slanted news report, not whether the news report was in fact false, distorted, or slanted.
The lower court scrapped all of Wilson's claims. And all but two of Akre's claim got show down. One of those claims she DROPPED. The lone claim that survive is what the court ruled in her favor.
It is that claim that went to the appeals court that OVERTURNED IT, in favor of WTVT.
-
Creative editing of Romney's Wawa comment. The left has a very short memory when it comes to their own lies.
-
Creative editing of Romney's Wawa comment. The left has a very short memory when it comes to their own lies.
I forgot about Wawa-Gate. Add that to the list of things that supposedly spelled doom for the Romney campaign.
-
Yes, genius, an affiliate. We're dealing with a specific network and station, NOT the Fox News Channel, which YOU FALSELY CLAIMED suited for the right to lie.
The lower court THREW OUT the plaintiffs' claims, except for one. RECAP:
Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging… that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT’s attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre’s claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.
Notice the key word, ALLEGED. Akre and Wilson's CLAIMING that WTVT distorting the story and WTVT actually doing so are two different things. Since they have no proof, benefit of the doubt goes to the network (in case you forgot, it's innocent until proven guilty).
do you really think splitting hairs over Faux New makes any significant difference
Fox News Channel (FNC), also referred to as Fox News, is a cable and satellite television news channel owned by the Fox Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of News Corporation
Faux News is a division of Fox and the station was an owned affiliate of Fox
If you really want to split hairs then so be it but lawyers for Fox argued successfully that they had the right to LIE and that it was not agains the law and the case was dismissed because FCC's "news distortion policy" is not a law and therefore not covered under the whistle blowers statute
Here is the appeals court ruling (again from YOUR VERY OWN LINK)
http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February%2014,%202003/2D01-529.pdf
While WTVT has raised a number of challenges to the judgment obtained
by Akre, we need not address each challenge because we find as a threshold matter
that Akre failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. The portion of the
whistle-blower's statute pertinent to this appeal prohibits retaliation against employees
who have “[d]isclosed, or threatened to disclose,” employer conduct that “is in violation
of” a law, rule, or regulation. § 448.102(1)(3). The statute defines a “law, rule or
regulation” as “includ[ing] any statute or . . . any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to
Because the FCC’s news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation”
under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's
statute. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a
judgment in favor of WTVT.
Reversed and remanded
-
do you really think splitting hairs over Faux New makes any significant difference
Fox News Channel (FNC), also referred to as Fox News, is a cable and satellite television news channel owned by the Fox Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of News Corporation
Faux News is a division of Fox and the station was an owned affiliate of Fox
do you really think splitting hairs over Faux New makes any significant difference
We are talking about the Fox News Channel. Do you really think the lefties, like you, who are whining about Fox News are really referring a local station (unless you happen to live in the Tampa Bay area)? Trying to paint the alleged actions of one affiliate on the corporation overall, or the national cable juggernaut, the FOX NEWS CHANNEL, the actual subject of the left's angst, is downright pathetic.
I guess the next time WTSP does something stupid, or is accused of such, we should throw CBS News under the bus completely. ::)
If you really want to split hairs then so be it but lawyers for Fox argued successfully they they had the right to LIE and the it was not agains the law and the case was dismissed because FCC's "news distortion policy" is not a law and therefore not covered under the whistle blowers statute
Here is the appeals court ruling (again from YOUR VERY OWN LINK)
http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February%2014,%202003/2D01-529.pdf
Are you really this incapable of reading?
The jury of the lower court DID NOT BUY the claims that WTVT falsified a story.
The appeals court doesn't have to address each challenge that Akre brought up in the lower court......so what does that tell you, genius?
THE APPEALS COURT AGREED with the lower court's verdict and opinions on the other challenges, NAMELY THE ONE where WTVT is not seen as falsifying any news story.
The only issue the appeals court is addressing is the whislteblower part, regarding Akre's threatening to go to the FCC for an....(here's the pesky word, again).....ALLEGED distortion of the story, not an actual one. But, because Akre's claim wasn't under the whistleblower statute (thanks to the FCC policy), there was no need to go further in the case.
Why would the folks at WTVT be fighting for a "right to lie" when a lower court already stated they weren't lying in the first place?
And the jury did not believe the couple’s claim that the station bowed to pressure from Monsanto to alter the news report....
A careful reading of the jury instruction reveals that the jury was only answering whether they believed Akre had been fired for threatening to lodge a complaint with the FCC alleging broadcast of a false, distorted, or slanted news report, not whether the news report was in fact false, distorted, or slanted.
-
Creative editing of Romney's Wawa comment. The left has a very short memory when it comes to their own lies.
Haha!
-
We are talking about the Fox News Channel. Do you really think the lefties, like you, who are whining about Fox News are really referring a local station (unless you happen to live in the Tampa Bay area)? Trying to paint the alleged actions of one affiliate on the corporation overall, or the national cable juggernaut, the FOX NEWS CHANNEL, the actual subject of the left's angst, is downright pathetic.
I guess the next time WTSP does something stupid, or is accused of such, we should throw CBS News under the bus completely. ::)
Are you really this incapable of reading?
The jury of the lower court DID NOT BUY the claims that WTVT falsified a story.
The appeals court doesn't have to address each challenge that Akre brought up in the lower court......so what does that tell you, genius?
THE APPEALS COURT AGREED with the lower court's verdict and opinions on the other challenges, NAMELY THE ONE where WTVT is not seen as falsifying any news story.
The only issue the appeals court is addressing is the whislteblower part, regarding Akre's threatening to go to the FCC for an....(here's the pesky word, again).....ALLEGED distortion of the story, not an actual one.
Why would the folks at WTVT be fighting for a "right to lie" when a lower court already stated they weren't lying in the first place?
And the jury did not believe the couple’s claim that the station bowed to pressure from Monsanto to alter the news report....
A careful reading of the jury instruction reveals that the jury was only answering whether they believed Akre had been fired for threatening to lodge a complaint with the FCC alleging broadcast of a false, distorted, or slanted news report, not whether the news report was in fact false, distorted, or slanted.
the appeals court only addressed the validity of the judgement based on the "whistleblower" status and Fox argued successfully that they had the right to lie and that it was not a violation of law or FCC rule to do so
-
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
As for drug things, what was a "lie" about that? There are numerous countries where drugs that are illegal here are as easy to get as aspiring (why do you think bodybuilders go to Mexico?).
As for the WMDs, that story broke on several news stations.
It appears you can't tell the difference between mistakes and lies.
You want lies? Try NBC DELIBERATELY ALTERING the Geroge Zimmerman 911 tape.
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH YOU ARE THE BIGGEST KNEEPADDER FOR FOX THAT I I HAVE EVER SEEN :D :D
-
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH YOU ARE THE BIGGEST KNEEPADDER FOR FOX THAT I I HAVE EVER SEEN :D :D
the weirdest part of McWays claim that somehow this wholey owned Fox Affiliate is not Fox News however when Monsanto became aware of the story they contacted Roger Ailes who is the head of Fox News
-
the weirdest part of McWays claim that somehow this wholey owned Fox Affiliate is not Fox News however when Monsanto became aware of the story they contacted Roger Ailes who is the head of Fox News
Got to laugh how you and the other kneepadders posted more posts in this thread alone than the entire Lybia and Egypt disaster.
-
Got to laugh how you and the other kneepadders posted more posts in this thread alone than the entire Lybia and Egypt disaster.
I don't have enough time in the day to devote to every delusional thing that you think is a disaster (and by disaster what you mean is Obama's disaster)
-
the appeals court only addressed the validity of the judgement based on the "whistleblower" status and Fox argued successfully that they had the right to lie and that it was not a violation of law or FCC rule to do so
WTVT argued no such thing. Once again, you're trying the whole bait-and-switch routine. This case is SPECIFICALLY ABOUT that particular network, not the Fox News Channel, which is your actual source of angst.
More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of whether WTVT actually asserted a”right to lie”in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court.
Again, why would they argue about a "right to lie", when there's no evidence WTVT was lying, as the lower court rejected those claims of Akre and Wilson?
-
I don't have enough time in the day to devote to every delusional thing that you think is a disaster (and by disaster what you mean is Obama's disaster)
Dead ambassador - 2 dead ex seals, embassies retreatd from, base attacked, 6 jets trashed, etc and you think that is not a disaster?
LOL!!!!!
-
the weirdest part of McWays claim that somehow this wholey owned Fox Affiliate is not Fox News however when Monsanto became aware of the story they contacted Roger Ailes who is the head of Fox News
You really can't read that well, can you? I specifically spelled out the difference between the FOX NEWS CHANNEL (the nationwide cable juggernaut, with shows like "The O'Reilly Factor", "Hannity", "The Five", etc) and WTVT, a affiliate in the Tampa Bay area. It's the former that gets the undies of you and other libs in a bunch, not WTVT (unless you live in Florida).
Your ridiculous attempt to intermix the two makes you look downright FOOLISH, especially when BOTH the lower trial court and appeals courts made no finding or ruling that WTVT was lying in the first place, let alone establishing some alleged wacky claim that WTVT had the so-called "right to lie" (again, the lower trial court REJECTED the claims of Akre and Wilson, that WTVT distorted the story).
-
If I wanted lies, I would turn to FAUX. But after posting lies, all I get was excuses for them?????
::)
-
If I wanted lies, I would turn to FAUX. But after posting lies, all I get was excuses for them?????
::)
Again, you can't tell the difference between lies and mistakes.
But, what else is new?
-
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH YOU ARE THE BIGGEST KNEEPADDER FOR FOX THAT I I HAVE EVER SEEN :D :D
From the screwball who gets almost as much of a thrill up his leg as Matthews does, shilling for the red-headed stepchild of cable news.
-
Dead ambassador - 2 dead ex seals, embassies retreatd from, base attacked, 6 jets trashed, etc and you think that is not a disaster?
LOL!!!!!
Nope! Romney's tax returns and statements to donors, made four months ago, are far more important.
-
From the screwball who gets almost as much of a thrill up his leg as Matthews does, shilling for the red-headed stepchild of cable news.
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
and i'll say again :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D kneepadder
-
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
and i'll say again :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D kneepadder
You're projecting again, I guess you and your alleged alter ego, are taking a break from the latest "Romney-is-finished" mantra, given by Team "Thrill up my leg".
And, congratulations! You shot yourself in the foot....AGAIN. Koppel is criticizing BOTH MSNBC and Fox.
Koppell: Fifteen years ago, there was a crying need for a network that focused more on conservative issues. Fox has done that. MSNBC has now come along and tried to provide...not because it's sort of a need for an ideological balance, but because it saw the balance sheet of Fox News!
O'Reilly: Yeah, they're getting their butt kicked!!
-
As if Fox News is the only station to mistakenly botch the party of a politician.
As for drug things, what was a "lie" about that? There are numerous countries where drugs that are illegal here are as easy to get as aspiring (why do you think bodybuilders go to Mexico?).
As for the WMDs, that story broke on several news stations.
It appears you can't tell the difference between mistakes and lies.
You want lies? Try NBC DELIBERATELY ALTERING the Geroge Zimmerman 911 tape.
lol
-
Creative editing of Romney's Wawa comment. The left has a very short memory when it comes to their own lies.
No no no..McWay said you can call them Mistakes
::)
-
No no no..McWay said you can call them Mistakes
::)
Yep, putting a "D" instead of an "R" (which was corrected for the rebroadcast of O'Reilly's show) ranks right up there with hacking out a section of a clip of a presidential campaign.
::)
-
BTW, here's the ENTIRE interview, between Koppel and O'Reilly.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/21/koppel_opinion_news_has_hurt_political_process.html
Koppell: Fifteen years ago, there was a crying need for a network that focused more on conservative issues. Fox has done that. MSNBC has now come along and tried to provide...not because it's sort of a need for an ideological balance, but because it saw the balance sheet of Fox News!
O'Reilly: Yeah, they're getting their butt kicked!!
O'Reilly: Now, if you look at all of the journalists, and we can tick them down if you want, alright--Rather, Brokaw, Kronkite--THEY'RE ALL LEFT-WINGED GUYS! All of them. And, you know that!
Koppel: Hold it!! Hold it!! I would argue that, back in the day, you didn't know what Kronkite was.
O'Reilly: If you were in Iowa you didn't know. If you were working at CBS News, you d@&m well knew, because I worked there.
Koppel: You may have known what he was OFF camera. But, you didn't know what he was ON camera.
O'Reilly: But, decisions were made about personnel, story coverage, and point of view BY Kronkite, Brokaw, and Rather who were committed left-wingers.
-
most "lefties" only complain about the pattern of blatant LIES from Faux News and not to "silence" them or put them out of business. There have been attempts to boycot scumbags like Rush for the absolutely horrible shit he says but then the right wing does the exact same thing, and more often too (before you object go look at the of the nonsense boycotted by your fellow wingnut fundies)
you libtard morons didnt call for just a boycott they called for rush to be taken off the air...theres a difference brain child.
-
you libtard morons didnt call for just a boycott they called for rush to be taken off the air...theres a difference brain child.
He's pretty stupid, isn't he? Can you believe this retard is apparently 46 years old? :-\
-
You really can't read that well, can you? I specifically spelled out the difference between the FOX NEWS CHANNEL (the nationwide cable juggernaut, with shows like "The O'Reilly Factor", "Hannity", "The Five", etc) and WTVT, a affiliate in the Tampa Bay area. It's the former that gets the undies of you and other libs in a bunch, not WTVT (unless you live in Florida).
Your ridiculous attempt to intermix the two makes you look downright FOOLISH, especially when BOTH the lower trial court and appeals courts made no finding or ruling that WTVT was lying in the first place, let alone establishing some alleged wacky claim that WTVT had the so-called "right to lie" (again, the lower trial court REJECTED the claims of Akre and Wilson, that WTVT distorted the story).
I understand that you are trying to draw some phony line of demarcation to somehow defend Faux News but it's all the same company.
When Monsanto got wind of the story on WTVT (a wholly owned affiliate of Fox Corporation) they didn't contact the manager of WTVT. They contacted Roger Ailes who is the head of Fox News Channel.
Why the desperate effort to try to defend Faux News. You can throw out this entire case and still have thousands of examples of blatant lies (or an unbelievable amount of unacknowledged and uncorrected "errors")
-
Don't they all lie?
I mean, even stations want to pander to groups... If I'm fox and I want all the conservatives to watch me... I make liberals look bad.
If I'm MSNBC and I want liberals to watch me... I make conservatives look bad.
It's about ratings and money right?
Isn't that pretty much all there is to it?
-
Don't they all lie?
I mean, even stations want to pander to groups... If I'm fox and I want all the conservatives to watch me... I make liberals look bad.
If I'm MSNBC and I want liberals to watch me... I make conservatives look bad.
It's about ratings and money right?
Isn't that pretty much all there is to it?
Bingo Bango.
-
Don't they all lie?
I mean, even stations want to pander to groups... If I'm fox and I want all the conservatives to watch me... I make liberals look bad.
If I'm MSNBC and I want liberals to watch me... I make conservatives look bad.
It's about ratings and money right?
Isn't that pretty much all there is to it?
Faux News seems to have a standard practice of lying (and basically admitted so in court)
I have not seen the same practice as a matter of apparent policy by any other network
If have seen MSNBC, NBC, CNN make errors and then issue retractions or apologies but rarely, if ever, see this from Fox
-
Faux News seems to have a standard practice of lying (and basically admitted so in court)
I have not seen the same practice as a matter of apparent policy by any other network
If have seen MSNBC, NBC, CNN make errors and then issue retractions or apologies but rarely, if ever, see this from Fox
Well, that video from MSNBC is a pretty big lie there... Don't you think?
-
Well, that video from MSNBC is a pretty big lie there... Don't you think?
Which network was it that edited the Zimmerman call so blatantly?
-
Which network was it that edited the Zimmerman call so blatantly?
and....did they apologize and fire the person who did it
Isn't that exactly what I said in my post
now tell me how often (ever ???) to you see that from Faux News
for example, how about the "you didn't build that" quote by Obama
Faux douche Steve Doocey said in response to charges they took it out of context that they would play the full clip and then proceeded to do exactly what NBC did and redact part of the clip which contained "the context" of the "you didn't build that" statement
-
and....did they apologize and fire the person who did it
Isn't that exactly what I said in my post
now tell me how often (ever ???) to you see that from Faux News
for example, how about the "you didn't build that" quote by Obama
Faux douche Steve Doocey said in response to charges they took it out of context that they would play the full clip and then proceeded to do exactly what NBC did and redact part of the clip which contained "the context" of the "you didn't build that" statement
It was a question, I couldn't remember which network it was.
Besides, I believe they only fired the dude because they got called out on it.
(Not to mention I don't see a lot of similarities between splicing a mans words together to make him sound racist and running a complete quote without the rest of the conversation.)
Again, they both lie. You're trying to justify and rationalize why one is ok but not the other. They both fucking lie.
-
It was a question, I couldn't remember which network it was.
Again, they both lie. You're trying to justify and rationalize why one is ok but not the other. They both fucking lie.
I'm not trying to rationalize anything nor do I agree with your premise that "they both lie" ie they are equivalent
Faux has what a appears to be a long term policy of lies and deception with no apologies, retractions etc..
I never said or suggested it was "ok" for NBC, et al, to lie while saying it's not OK when Fox does it
where did you get that idea from?
-
I'm not trying to rationalize anything nor do I agree with your premise that "they both lie" ie they are equivalent
Faux has what a appears to be a long term policy of lies and deception with no apologies, retractions etc..
I never said or suggested it was "ok" for NBC, et al, to lie while saying it's not OK when Fox does it
where did you get that idea from?
You don't think saying "make ERRORS and then issue retractions or apologies" is justification? Splicing a mans words together is not a fucking ERROR, its a blatant lie.
You're setting yourself a double standard, its and ERROR when one network does it, but its a LIE when fox does it.
-
You don't think saying "make ERRORS and then issue retractions or apologies" is justification? Splicing a mans words together is not a fucking ERROR, its a blatant lie.
You're setting yourself a double standard, its and ERROR when one network does it, but its a LIE when fox does it.
no it's not "justification"
it's what you do when you fuck up
Faux does not ever issue retractions or apologies (or so rarely that I can't remember)
that's the difference
they have a culture of lying and misleading
-
I understand that you are trying to draw some phony line of demarcation to somehow defend Faux News but it's all the same company.
Correction: YOU are parroting liberal tripe that has been shot to pieces, long ago, yapping about a LOCAL TV station, not the Fox News Channel. Everyone knows it's the FOX NEWS CHANNEL, not WTVT, that gets lefties undies in a bunch, because they aren't slobbering over Obama (or any other Democrat), sugar-coating his screwups
When Monsanto got wind of the story on WTVT (a wholly owned affiliate of Fox Corporation) they didn't contact the manager of WTVT. They contacted Roger Ailes who is the head of Fox News Channel.
Why the desperate effort to try to defend Faux News. You can throw out this entire case and still have thousands of examples of blatant lies (or an unbelievable amount of unacknowledged and uncorrected "errors")
WRONG!! One, you've been asked to produce a few, on two different threads, yet came up with zilch. When Lurker tried to pinch-hit for you, his pitiful examples were just as easily taken apart.
The fact remains there was no case in court for any so-called "right to lie", despite your pitiful musings to the contrary. The two reporters accused WTVT of trying to force them to falsify a story and it got THROWN OUT IN COURT, period. The lower trial court didn't buy it and neither did the appeals court. Basically, they lost their case. Yet, liberals have been spewing this gibberish ever since then, because they loathe the fact, as apparently do you, that they no longer hold the monopoly in the news media.
And, it really gets their goat to watch Fox News pound MSNBC (a blatantly far-left network) and CNN (a left-leaning-but-pretending-to-be-objective one) into the ground YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.
Though I'd like to know what the numbers currently are, as of at least Oct 2009, Fox News has the most balanced audience, according to Pew Research. In terms of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, Fox's viewership (percentage-wise) goes 33-39-22, respectively. MSNBC goes 45-18-27; CNN goes 51-18-23.
So, if those numbers still hold, it's safe to say Fox News lives up to the "Fair and Balanced" moniker, at least on the surface.
-
no it's not "justification"
it's what you do when you fuck up
Faux does not ever issue retractions or apologies (or so rarely that I can't remember)
that's the difference
they have a culture of lying and misleading
it wasnt a fuck you moron, it was intentional...I bet you think media matters was never in bed with the obama admin either right?
fuking delusional moron!!!
-
-
Mal did you say something?
-
it wasnt a fuck you moron, it was intentional...I bet you think media matters was never in bed with the obama admin either right?
fuking delusional moron!!!
if only some day you could learn to read it would be a big help in your life
here is what I said
Faux News seems to have a standard practice of lying (and basically admitted so in court)
I have not seen the same practice as a matter of apparent policy by any other network
If have seen MSNBC, NBC, CNN make errors and then issue retractions or apologies but rarely, if ever, see this from Fox
I don't know if the person who edited the 911 call made an error in judgement or he was intentionally trying to mislead but let's assume for the sake of argument he was trying to mislead. I still don't see a pattern of this as I do at Fox News and I do see the person being fired and the station issuing an apology unlike Fox News
As I said before you virtually never see Fox news issues an apology for their "errors" and no one ever gets fired
One simple example, how many times did the play an edited version of the "you didn't build that" statement and at times even claim it was the complete and unedited statement.
Did you see any aplogies for that or anyone getting fired?
I guess here is where I add the standard GB.com statement that you're a fucking delusional moron
-
Leftists and communists hate dissenting voices and hate freedom of speech.
Oh yes, FOX News that bastion of free speech....where any nut job can and does say anything they want, regardless if it is true or not.
-
[ Invalid YouTube link ]