Bullshit. It’s intent, pure and simple.
And how can we judge Brian Ross’ intent? You insist it was just a mistake, that he had no malicious intent. What are you basing that belief on?
The apology, the retraction, the suspending of the reporter responsible, the fact the the major part of the news was accurate except for the time of occurrence.
Fake news is generally made up out of thin air.
Also, major networks don’t engage in creating fake news like Brietbart or Infowars. Fox may not make up totally false news but the reporting is highly biased as is the extent, spin and visibility of certain stories.
The same thing you are basing your belief on…unless you have some information on the subject we don’t have? Is there any reason, besides your personal prejudices, to default to “malicious intent”?
Op, how do you feel about trump posting a video of a “Muslim migrant” that turned out to be neither a Muslim nor a migrant?
“Fake news”?
Of course Not! There was retractions and suspensions and apologies!
Trump already piled on the bullshit about that. Something about even if the video is fake, the danger is real.
Sort of like the thousands of terrorists pouring over the border every day since his travel bans were stopped.
The daily carnage of hundreds of attacks across the nation have been devastating.
Damn, i must have missed those!
So if there were no retractions or suspensions or apologies… if ABC had simply said even if THIS report is fake, the collusion is real- probably ok and not Fake News?
Again, that’s not what ABC News called it. Publicly, they said it was a “serious error”, and privately (or semi-privately - on the call that got leaked):
It’s a bit bizarre to me that posters here are taking a more-defensive stance than the president of the company that made the mistake.
I’m not defaulting to malicious intent. I’m saying we don’t know either way what Brian Ross was thinking. In the absence of that knowledge, I’m comfortable defaulting to the description the company president used.
…used to describe what the tweets were saying.
Do you believe Fox News is the only organization this could be said of? Or do you think some others also bias their coverage with the “extent, spin and visibility of certain stories”?
Now imagine if the American commercial media printed retractions about Iran & Iraq’s non-existent WMD programs or if they apologized for blaming the '08 crash on poor people or for being stenographers for the police and state department for 200 years.
Thanks to the sterling leadership of our country, Trumplogic tells us that it doesn’t even matter if Brian Ross’s reporting is accurate, the threat of what Trump is doing to our country is very real.
“Look at this molehill I found!” says HurricaneDitka, as the Himalayas rise behind him.
You are only criticizing one side of this debate-it’s a little late in the game to build this fence you suddenly want to sit on.
nm
If a Planned Parenthood employee says that they are being harassed for being a baby-killer, do you take it that this employee considers himself to be a baby-killer?
I think the plain reading of remark you quoted is a reference to the criticism being levied against ABC News, not a commentary about how the president of ABC News sees his company’s reporting.
If there’s any additional context to the remarks, other than what was in the CNN article, I could change my mind, of course.
I think Fox News clearly goes into each day with an intent to relay a politically-driven narrative of the news, which is decided by the executive leadership of the company in consultation with various conservative political leaders/groups. I don’t think ABC News does anything like this. If ABC News did have such a culture, I would have expected the clandestine taping of the conference call would not have revealed a tongue-lashing. Personally, I doubt Fox News does any sort of conference call like this when they get reporting wrong.
Most recent example from Fox.
When the Flynn story broke, Clinton’s emails were the prominent story-large headline, top-middle of the page.
The Flynn story was “below the fold”, in a sidebar, small thumbnail.
I haven’t seen that kind of treatment on a major breaking story by any of the other mainstream news sites.
You’re entitled to gloat. ABC News fucked up— as legitimate news outlets sometimes do— and admitted the error, retracted the claim and held themselves responsible, as legitimate news outlets should do. I personally don’t find it the most piquant of sauces, but tidings for the Trumpenvolk have been mixed lately*, so it’s not surprising that you’d seize any opportunity to point and laugh.
It’s at the point where you’d imply that this could’ve been deliberate “fake news,” or that it marks the death of ABC’s credibility for people who otherwise get their news from Fox or Breitbart, that your bowdlerized pitting treads onto shakier ground.
- But not all bad! We can all rest easy, for now, that when we wake up each day our streets won’t be thronged by Chadians and North Koreans, and millions of middle- and working-class Americans may— Trump, McConnell and the Lord willing— finally be freed from the crushing burden of the estate tax.
See, but this is exactly what I like about mainstream media. When they fuck up, they admit it, correct it, and take disciplinary action. That’s much more than can be said about right wing media I’ve read. Unless I’m to believe right wing media doesn’t make errors. :rolleyes: The fact that they very publicly retracted the story they found to be lacking is a good, not a bad thing, to me. Yes, they shouldn’t have fucked up in the first place, but fuckups happen.