My challenge: find a factually incorrect news piece from Fox!

[blackangst1]

Mods: if this is somehow not allowed, go ahead and lock it. But...

Many of you accuse Fox news of being biased. Of course they are! Every news source is to some extent. But that doesnt make the news they present factually wrong. As I have stated in the thread from Deudalus, there are many sides to a news piece, all are correct. Depending on the source, only a slice of the story is presented. So, my challenge is this:

Find a story from Fox news that is factually incorrect. OReilly, Hannady/Coombs, Greta, etc dont count: they are O P I N I O N commentaries. I'm talking news.

 

[nageov3t]

I think the core problem with FNC -- at least from my perspective -- is how they've blurred the line between news and opinion.

I can't think of his name, but that fat guy with glasses who looks like he probably got beat up a lot in school comes to mind.

but /tag and I'll take a look at the FNC when I get home from work tonight

 

[ayabe]

Fox presents very little in actual news, the bulk of their programming is talking head opinions. They get their news from the AP, same as everyone else, however they will spin that headline to fit their own purposes -this is the deliberate distortion.

They also avoid topics that paint the Administration or Republicans in general in a bad light while focusing on celebrity gossip or Democrats.

FNC covers the Iraq war much less than any other network, by a large margin. There was a study on this a few weeks ago, don't have a link handy but I'm sure you could find it pretty easy.

The Iraq war is the most important issue currently facing this country, you would think the most watched cable news channel would take note.

Edit - FNC was discussing the Jefferson case a few weeks ago and displayed a picture of John Conyers and said it was Jefferson, took them two days to issue a proper retraction. An honest mistake? Do black people all look the same? No, it was deliberate, and their lack of a real apology immediately shows this.

 

[Arkaign]

How about this

or this

or this

or this

or this?

I'm sure I could go on with 10 more seconds of google-fu

Seriously, Fox News tries to be factual, but not as much as it tries to spin things with the neocon/corporate manifesto...

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: ayabe
Fox presents very little in actual news, the bulk of their programming is talking head opinions. They get their news from the AP, same as everyone else, however they will spin that headline to fit their own purposes -this is the deliberate distortion.
They also avoid topics that paint the Administration or Republicans in general in a bad light while focusing on celebrity gossip or Democrats.

FNC covers the Iraq war much less than any other network, by a large margin. There was a study on this a few weeks ago, don't have a link handy but I'm sure you could find it pretty easy.

The Iraq war is the most important issue currently facing this country, you would think the most watched cable news channel would take note.

Edit - FNC was discussing the Jefferson case a few weeks ago and displayed a picture of John Conyers and said it was Jefferson, took them two days to issue a proper retraction. An honest mistake? Do black people all look the same? No, it was deliberate, and their lack of a real apology immediately shows this.

Note my bolded. That is exactly my point. Although its slanted doesnt make it wrong. CNN and every other news source does the same thing.

As far as your comment on not putting the current administration in a bad light...you are very wrong. One of the most hated commentaries, OReilly, criticizes Bush more than he exalts him. THAT is a fact.

But again, a slant doesnt make the story wrong.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I think the core problem with FNC -- at least from my perspective -- is how they've blurred the line between news and opinion.

I can't think of his name, but that fat guy with glasses who looks like he probably got beat up a lot in school comes to mind.

but /tag and I'll take a look at the FNC when I get home from work tonight

They have a lot of commentary type shows, round panel shows that discuss topics and people give opinions. They dont have many sit down and tell the news kind of shows. Shepard Smith is probably the closest thing you will find for that.

So yes, they will have lots of opinions on the network.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ayabe
Fox presents very little in actual news, the bulk of their programming is talking head opinions. They get their news from the AP, same as everyone else, however they will spin that headline to fit their own purposes -this is the deliberate distortion.
They also avoid topics that paint the Administration or Republicans in general in a bad light while focusing on celebrity gossip or Democrats.

FNC covers the Iraq war much less than any other network, by a large margin. There was a study on this a few weeks ago, don't have a link handy but I'm sure you could find it pretty easy.

The Iraq war is the most important issue currently facing this country, you would think the most watched cable news channel would take note.

Edit - FNC was discussing the Jefferson case a few weeks ago and displayed a picture of John Conyers and said it was Jefferson, took them two days to issue a proper retraction. An honest mistake? Do black people all look the same? No, it was deliberate, and their lack of a real apology immediately shows this.

</end quote></div>

Note my bolded. That is exactly my point. Although its slanted doesnt make it wrong. CNN and every other news source does the same thing.

As far as your comment on not putting the current administration in a bad light...you are very wrong. One of the most hated commentaries, OReilly, criticizes Bush more than he exalts him. THAT is a fact.

But again, a slant doesnt make the story wrong.

O'Reilly also refuses to cover the Iraq war, because bombings and so forth, "don't matter".

O'Reilly is also the most dishonest person on Fox, from the Malmedy thing, to the Paris Business Review. He's straight up invents facts almost on a daily basis.

You didn't address the lack of Iraq coverage or the one recent example where Fox got something wrong.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ayabe
Fox presents very little in actual news, the bulk of their programming is talking head opinions. They get their news from the AP, same as everyone else, however they will spin that headline to fit their own purposes -this is the deliberate distortion.
They also avoid topics that paint the Administration or Republicans in general in a bad light while focusing on celebrity gossip or Democrats.

FNC covers the Iraq war much less than any other network, by a large margin. There was a study on this a few weeks ago, don't have a link handy but I'm sure you could find it pretty easy.

The Iraq war is the most important issue currently facing this country, you would think the most watched cable news channel would take note.

Edit - FNC was discussing the Jefferson case a few weeks ago and displayed a picture of John Conyers and said it was Jefferson, took them two days to issue a proper retraction. An honest mistake? Do black people all look the same? No, it was deliberate, and their lack of a real apology immediately shows this.

</end quote></div>

Note my bolded. That is exactly my point. Although its slanted doesnt make it wrong. CNN and every other news source does the same thing.

As far as your comment on not putting the current administration in a bad light...you are very wrong. One of the most hated commentaries, OReilly, criticizes Bush more than he exalts him. THAT is a fact.

But again, a slant doesnt make the story wrong.

One thing it does it makes it into propaganda. A nation that believes it's own propaganda is a nation in deep trouble. Propaganda is defined as " ? noun information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view." Remember how people used to laugh at the spin put out by Pravda. Well today Fox is just as much a byword for propaganda as Pravda ever was.

I see now why you cannot see that Bush lied (i.e purposefully mislead) to promote his agenda for a US attack on Iraq. Thanks in no small part to Fox News and other slanted US media more than 40 % of US citizens still, today, believe Saddam was involved in the attack on 9/11.

Fox News markets itself as "Fair and Balanced". However these people (i.e the ruling elites) love to talk in opposites. War is Peace etc. And Fox News is exactly the opposite to "Fair and Balanced". It is a blatant propaganda outlet.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I think the core problem with FNC -- at least from my perspective -- is how they've blurred the line between news and opinion.

I can't think of his name, but that fat guy with glasses who looks like he probably got beat up a lot in school comes to mind.

but /tag and I'll take a look at the FNC when I get home from work tonight

name a news service that hasn't blurred the line.

the problem most people have with fox centers around who has opinion shows on the same channel.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
How about this

or this

or this

or this

or this?

I'm sure I could go on with 10 more seconds of google-fu

Seriously, Fox News tries to be factual, but not as much as it tries to spin things with the neocon/corporate manifesto...

In addition to this and many others that could be listed, Fox news is notorious for lying by omission, they do it all day long 7 days a week. Face it OP, you jumped in head first into a foot deep pool here if your intent is to show that other than their opinion shows, that the "news" part of fox is factually correct or unspun.

 

[ayabe]

Here's one:

Text

Outright lie.

Text

Just a slight distortion of the truth.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
How about this

or this

or this

or this

or this?

I'm sure I could go on with 10 more seconds of google-fu

Seriously, Fox News tries to be factual, but not as much as it tries to spin things with the neocon/corporate manifesto...

I wouldn't expect him to respond since he is defending who pays him to post.

 

[fskimospy]

Bad idea for a topic for many reasons. First of all, the primary problem with Fox is that they deliberately slant things, not that they knowingly provide false information.

The big problem here though is that all news organizations make mistakes and occasionally put out false info. This is true for every single one of them, but when you challenge people to find falsehoods that Fox has printed, prepare for a deluge. The thing is, that even a big pile of falsehoods doesn't really prove anything about Fox other then they publish a lot of news stories.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
How about this

or this

or this

or this

or this?

I'm sure I could go on with 10 more seconds of google-fu

Seriously, Fox News tries to be factual, but not as much as it tries to spin things with the neocon/corporate manifesto...

Did you fail reading comprehension in grade school? All those examples you gave are from OPINION pieces. We all can find opinion commentaries from EVERY network where people's opinions are factually wrong. Hell, look at some of the opinions on this board!

Now show me news articles that are not opinion pieces. Thanks. Oh and include in your Google search incorrect statements made on every other network. You know...for balance.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Find a story from Fox news that is factually incorrect.

This starts with one (actually two) of O'Reilly lies, but it spreads to Faux, itself.

On May 30, 2006, while interviewing General Wesley Clark, Bile O'Reilly opened his lying mouth to blame American troops for committing World War II atrocities at Malmédy, France. O'Reilly said:

In Malmédy, as you know, U.S. forces captured SS forces who had their hands in the air and they were unarmed, and they shot them down. You know that. That's on the record. Been documented.

The facts are exactly opposite. German troops committed those war crimes, shooting unarmed captured Americans.

In and of itself, one could write it off as typical a possible mistake or misstatement, except that O'Reilly made exactly the same "mistake" on October 3, 2005 in an earlier interview, also with the General Clark.

Faux's own lie was that, in their posted transcript of the show, they revised O'Reilly's statement, changing Malmédy to Normandy. Even with the change of venue, O'Reilly's statement wouldn't be anymore true, but in Faux's grand tradition of lies, once other media outlets brought the phony transcript to public attention, first, they pulled it, then, they replaced it with a corrected transcript, but without as much as a whisper of an apology or even annotation of the correction.

Rupert Murdoch has publicly stated that he has used his "news" outlets to attempt to influence public policy. Asked if his News Corp. managed to shape the agenda on the war in Iraq, Murdoch said: "No, I don't think so. We tried."

OReilly, Hannady/Coombs, Greta, etc dont count....

QFT! :laugh:

... they are O P I N I O N commentaries. I'm talking news.

And what makes you think using an alleged "news" channel to broadcast a continuous drone of one sided, blatantly false, blatantly inflamatory statements, accusations and implications on isn't a direct assault on the truth? :roll:

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Bad idea for a topic for many reasons. First of all, the primary problem with Fox is that they deliberately slant things, not that they knowingly provide false information.
The big problem here though is that all news organizations make mistakes and occasionally put out false info. This is true for every single one of them, but when you challenge people to find falsehoods that Fox has printed, prepare for a deluge. The thing is, that even a big pile of falsehoods doesn't really prove anything about Fox other then they publish a lot of news stories.

I agree 100%, and even said so in my opening post; however, I also stated EVERY news source does this. It's not an exclusive tactic for Fox.

 

[blackangst1]

oops double post

 

[ayabe]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Arkaign
How about this

or this

or this

or this

or this?

I'm sure I could go on with 10 more seconds of google-fu

Seriously, Fox News tries to be factual, but not as much as it tries to spin things with the neocon/corporate manifesto...</end quote></div>

Did you fail reading comprehension in grade school? All those examples you gave are from OPINION pieces. We all can find opinion commentaries from EVERY network where people's opinions are factually wrong. Hell, look at some of the opinions on this board!

Now show me news articles that are not opinion pieces. Thanks. Oh and include in your Google search incorrect statements made on every other network. You know...for balance.</end quote></div>

I posted a news article and you made this thread, you asked for examples of Fox getting the news wrong, now you are backing off from that and asking for incorrect statements from other networks to soften the blow.

Yeah CNN aired a map of the ME and labeled Syria as Afghanistan.

The only time Fox presents news, without opinions, is on their 30 seconds spots in between commercials and their opinion shows coming back from break.

The Obama Madrassa story is a great example of this, they attempted at every juncture to make it seem true that Obama went to a terrorist training school, this got wall to wall coverage for several weeks.

Edit -WTF is going on with the quotes today?

 

[Phokus]

Weren't they the only news outlet that repeated the "Obama attended a madrassa" lie from that no-name rightwing online tabloid or something? And all of the other news channels called them out on the lie?

 

[blackangst1]

As pointed out, the examples are from opinion pieces. Now, I will concede the content of Fox is MOSTLY opinion talking head shows, as compared to say CNN who runs a loop of the same stories all day.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Weren't they the only news outlet that repeated the "Obama attended a madrassa" lie from that no-name rightwing online tabloid or something? And all of the other news channels called them out on the lie?

I believe they were the only mainstream source reporting it. But they didnt fabricate it. It was originally posted on http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/flash_4.html, so they just were re-reporting it.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Phokus
Weren't they the only news outlet that repeated the "Obama attended a madrassa" lie from that no-name rightwing online tabloid or something? And all of the other news channels called them out on the lie?</end quote></div>

I believe they were the only mainstream source reporting it. But they didnt fabricate it. It was originally posted on http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/flash_4.html, so they just were re-reporting it.

I know, that's what i'm saying. They repeated a lie from a highly biased and unreputable news source. If that's the standard they're using, maybe i should create a news website that claims bush eats babies in his spare time and have people send the link to CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc and hope someone reports it without fact checking it.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Phokus
Weren't they the only news outlet that repeated the "Obama attended a madrassa" lie from that no-name rightwing online tabloid or something? And all of the other news channels called them out on the lie?</end quote></div>

I believe they were the only mainstream source reporting it. But they didnt fabricate it. It was originally posted on http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/flash_4.html, so they just were re-reporting it.

What attention would the story have gotten if not for Fox? They didn't vet the story at all and pushed it as a slam dunk fact. Repeating stories from fake news sources is just as bad as inventing them straight up.

That's like CNN taking a story from the Onion and beating it 24/7 on their network.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: ayabe
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ayabe
Fox presents very little in actual news, the bulk of their programming is talking head opinions. They get their news from the AP, same as everyone else, however they will spin that headline to fit their own purposes -this is the deliberate distortion.
They also avoid topics that paint the Administration or Republicans in general in a bad light while focusing on celebrity gossip or Democrats.

FNC covers the Iraq war much less than any other network, by a large margin. There was a study on this a few weeks ago, don't have a link handy but I'm sure you could find it pretty easy.

The Iraq war is the most important issue currently facing this country, you would think the most watched cable news channel would take note.

Edit - FNC was discussing the Jefferson case a few weeks ago and displayed a picture of John Conyers and said it was Jefferson, took them two days to issue a proper retraction. An honest mistake? Do black people all look the same? No, it was deliberate, and their lack of a real apology immediately shows this.

</end quote></div>

Note my bolded. That is exactly my point. Although its slanted doesnt make it wrong. CNN and every other news source does the same thing.

As far as your comment on not putting the current administration in a bad light...you are very wrong. One of the most hated commentaries, OReilly, criticizes Bush more than he exalts him. THAT is a fact.

But again, a slant doesnt make the story wrong.</end quote></div>

O'Reilly also refuses to cover the Iraq war, because bombings and so forth, "don't matter".

O'Reilly is also the most dishonest person on Fox, from the Malmedy thing, to the Paris Business Review. He's straight up invents facts almost on a daily basis.

You didn't address the lack of Iraq coverage or the one recent example where Fox got something wrong.

I'd have to ask if you ever listen to his radio program? He does talk about the Iraq war, quite a bit actually. I havent watched the TV show in ages due to schedules but his TV show typically mimics his radio broadcast.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: ayabe
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: blackangst1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Phokus
Weren't they the only news outlet that repeated the "Obama attended a madrassa" lie from that no-name rightwing online tabloid or something? And all of the other news channels called them out on the lie?</end quote></div>

I believe they were the only mainstream source reporting it. But they didnt fabricate it. It was originally posted on http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/flash_4.html, so they just were re-reporting it.</end quote></div>

What attention would the story have gotten if not for Fox? They didn't vet the story at all and pushed it as a slam dunk fact. Repeating stories from fake news sources is just as bad as inventing them straight up.

That's like CNN taking a story from the Onion and beating it 24/7 on their network.

What network did Dan Rather work for again?