# Is Fox News really all that bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 3, 2012, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625 "2012-10-03T21:14:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 47
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/921 "2015-07-18T04:25:47Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Emphasis in original. > > Could I get a cite where Fox claimed it was illegal? > > Regards, > Shodan They accused PP of trafficking body parts. You are not aware that is a felony? ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/922 "2015-07-18T05:07:20Z")
They were trying to claim that an ISIS affiliated Twitter account had tweeted about #Chattanooga before the shooting happened. Until somebody explained to them about time zones. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/923 "2015-07-18T05:38:43Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Fox news dot com leads with: > > “WIN FOR PUTIN? Iran nuke deal fuels arms race, helps Russia, officials say” I thought Fox conservatives loved Putin? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/924 "2015-07-18T13:41:41Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > I thought Fox conservatives loved Putin? They hate Obama more. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/925 "2015-07-19T21:49:38Z")
Incidentally, I was rolling through random radio stations the other day and heard a political discussion and thought I recognized the female voice belonged to Elizabeth Warren. After a few minutes of them chatting about how Hillary was covering up the truth about Benghazi, I wigged to the fact that I’d tuned a Fox Radio station. It was only at the end of the interview that I discovered I’d been listening to Sean Hannity and, it turned out, Carly Fiorina. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/926 "2015-07-19T22:35:48Z")
Carly’s entire campaign is based on BENGAHZI! ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/927 "2015-07-19T22:39:00Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Carly’s entire campaign is based on BENGAHZI! Well, that’s what I’d base my campaign on, too, if I had her resume. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/928 "2015-07-21T01:36:17Z")
> [@standingwave](#): > > Another day, another Fox deception… > Megyn Kelly didn’t let a little thing like integrity stand in the way of her vicious grandstanding against **Planned Parenthood** after a deceptively edited video falsely seemed to portray the organization \*\* selling fetus’ body parts.\*\* > As documented on Media Matters, the video for public consumption is **highly edited** and the full version demonstrates that there was **nothing illegal** discussed. The version being pimped by Fox doesn’t include comments, from the Planned Parenthood employee, about how the tissue samples are used for medical research (the polio vaccine was made with fetal tissue) and obtained with the patient’s consent. > “Late in the day, the Live Action-offshoot group released a longer video. It shows that the Planned Parenthood staffer was talking in the \*\* context of stem cell research\*\*, and was talking about **standard reimbursement rates for costs associated with tissue donation** — all of which was **edited to change the meaning**.” > [Watch ‘Straight News Anchor’ Megyn Kelly’s Vicious, Dishonest Attack On Planned Parenthood - NewsHounds](http://www.newshounds.us/watch_straight_news_anchor_megyn_kelly_s_vicious_dishonest_attack_on_planned_parenthood_071615) is it time to start strengthening your libel laws so that deliberately and egregariously misleading articles can be punished? if not by the regulator - then at least make the road to civil remedies easier? Free speech is great, but inaccurate speech hurts us all ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/929 "2015-07-21T02:24:46Z")
The idea is tempting, but it puts the government in the position of determining “truth.” That’s too great a power for the establishment to be granted. (“I only wrote that the Senator is not representing us properly.” “Yes, and the Senator says that isn’t true. That’s a $50,000 fine for printing lies.”) ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/930 "2015-07-21T05:26:42Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > The idea is tempting, but it puts the government in the position of determining “truth.” That’s too great a power for the establishment to be granted. > > (“I only wrote that the Senator is not representing us properly.” > “Yes, and the Senator says that isn’t true. That’s a $50,000 fine for printing lies.”) I come from New Zealand - our media and libel laws are fairly liberal. For the last 15 years I have been living in Singapore - which is, to put it politely, “more strict”. I wouldn’t like to suggest that anybody should be following the Singapore model - but I must admit, some days when I see what gets reported in the US press, and what passes for supposedly factual news, I pine for some Singapore style control on the press. The thing is - there must be some middle ground between “the govt is no arbiter of fact - that’s too much control” and “print whatever fucked up thing you like”. Surely there must be some way to sanction people that tell outright lies, or make misleading edits to stories? it’s probably a discussion for another thread… ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/931 "2015-07-21T18:16:39Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I come from New Zealand - our media and libel laws are fairly liberal. > > For the last 15 years I have been living in Singapore - which is, to put it politely, “more strict”. I wouldn’t like to suggest that anybody should be following the Singapore model - but I must admit, some days when I see what gets reported in the US press, and what passes for supposedly factual news, I pine for some Singapore style control on the press. > > The thing is - there must be some middle ground between “the govt is no arbiter of fact - that’s too much control” and “print whatever fucked up thing you like”. Surely there must be some way to sanction people that tell outright lies, or make misleading edits to stories? > > it’s probably a discussion for another thread… Yeah, we seem to be regressing back to the 19th century, when newspapers were blatantly biased. And the Republicans have somehow managed to become a wholly owned subsidiary of Fox News. This is probably old news to most people who follow this thread, but this year is especially egregious. To recap: - The Republican debates are being hosted by Fox News. The first debate will almost certainly result in (at most) half a dozen candidates emerging with any chance at the nomination. - Fox News has unilaterally decreed that only 10 candidates will participate, in a year when there are at least 17 viable candidates, so some pretty big names will be out in the cold, e.g. Rick Santorum, John Kasich, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, and Lindsey Graham. The leader is currently believed to be Donald Trump, followed by Scott Walker. - The criterion for inclusion is being in the top ten of an average of national polls, but AFAIK they haven’t specified which polls. However, one of the most prominent national polls is conducted by — Fox News. - Because of the above, there’s really no point to eating in diners in Iowa, which candidates would normally be doing at this point in the cycle. Instead, they have to get their national numbers up. The best way to do that is run ads that reach the Republican base. And the best way to do that is to run ads on — Fox News. So the Republicans are now paying Fox News for the privilege of being told whether or not they can be in the debate. Just amazing. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/932 "2015-07-21T22:40:23Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Yeah, we seem to be regressing back to the 19th century, when newspapers were blatantly biased. . . . I’ve been a reader of the San Diego Union all my life: the 19th century never stopped. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/933 "2015-07-22T02:30:19Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > - The criterion for inclusion is being in the top ten of an average of national polls, but AFAIK they haven’t specified which polls. “[The top ten candidates will be selected by their average in the “five most recent national polls, as recognized by FOX News leading up to August 4th at 5 PM/ET,” according to a release from Fox. If any candidates are tied in the polling average, there could be more than 10 contenders onstage.](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/only-10-candidates-in-the-gops-first-2016-presidential-primary-debate/)” So, yeah. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/934 "2015-07-22T05:44:21Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > - The Republican debates are being hosted by Fox News. The first debate will almost certainly result in (at most) half a dozen candidates emerging with any chance at the nomination. > - Fox News has unilaterally decreed that only 10 candidates will participate, in a year when there are at least 17 viable candidates, so some pretty big names will be out in the cold, e.g. Rick Santorum, John Kasich, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, and Lindsey Graham. The leader is currently believed to be Donald Trump, followed by Scott Walker. Now I find this potentially interesting. Any sane person, even if they work for Fox News, has to know that Trump is a joke candidate, good only for entertaining soundbites and wackiness. Would they invite him to a debate in hopes of raising the ratings and their own visibility, even if it meant harming the Republicans? Will their business interests take priority over their political agenda? Assuming there was ever a difference between their business interests and political agenda, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Folacin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folacin/32/3195_2.png) [@Folacin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folacin)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/935 "2015-07-22T13:23:40Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Now I find this potentially interesting. Any sane person, even if they work for Fox News, has to know that Trump is a joke candidate, good only for entertaining soundbites and wackiness. Would they invite him to a debate in hopes of raising the ratings and their own visibility, even if it meant harming the Republicans? Will their business interests take priority over their political agenda? > > Assuming there was ever a difference between their business interests and political agenda, of course. He’s an announced candidate, has filed all of his forms with the FEC, including financial disclosure (which is more than some (maybe most) of the other candidates can say), who is currently leading in many/most polls. There is no way to keep him out without just blatantly saying “you can’t win so you aren’t a candidate” (which would slay a lot of the 16). ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/936 "2015-07-22T14:45:45Z")
> [@Folacin](#): > > He’s an announced candidate, has filed all of his forms with the FEC, including financial disclosure (which is more than some (maybe most) of the other candidates can say), who is currently leading in many/most polls. Isn’t that leadership largely a function of the publicity Fox gives him? Somewhere along the way, Fox is making the decision to keep covering Trump to an extent which is good for them and their ratings, not so much for the Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/937 "2015-07-22T15:44:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Would they invite him to a debate in hopes of raising the ratings and their own visibility, even if it meant harming the Republicans? How would letting him in, (or even promoting him for a while), harm the Republican Party? If he is out there drawing attention to hot button issues, he is keeping those issues alive at the expense of issues that may be more important but not as sexy or to positions on important issues that lean further to the Right. Both Murdoch and Ailes are probably happy about that. When he has drawn the attention and elevated those issues or positions to higher prominence than they deserve, he can be allowed to flame out. At which point, the successor candidates can continue rolling with slightly toned down, (but still Far Right) rhetoric. Any criticism of the GOP can be deflected by saying that the extreme stuff was just Donald’s mouth, not really a Party position. At the same time, successor candidates can point to Trump’s crash-and-burn, (and probably his attack on them, since he is attacking everyone), as evidence that they are serious candidates, unlike Trump. In the meantime, he is out raising awareness and cash for the party, as many donations will come to the party, in general and not directly to his campaign. This is not a Ross Perot situation, where the “candidate” claims to be independent and might draw of votes from both parties depending on any given voter’s hot button issues. If Trump pulls many voters to his side, they will more likely stick with the GOP than rebound to the Democrats. I am not saying that he cannot have a negative effect on the GOP, but I do not see an obvious one while most of his negative traits could possibly work in its favor. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/938 "2015-07-22T17:10:21Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > How would letting him in, (or even promoting him for a while), harm the Republican Party? If he is out there drawing attention to hot button issues, he is keeping those issues alive at the expense of issues that may be more important but not as sexy or to positions on important issues that lean further to the Right. Both Murdoch and Ailes are probably happy about that. > > When he has drawn the attention and elevated those issues or positions to higher prominence than they deserve, he can be allowed to flame out. At which point, the successor candidates can continue rolling with slightly toned down, (but still Far Right) rhetoric. Any criticism of the GOP can be deflected by saying that the extreme stuff was just Donald’s mouth, not really a Party position. At the same time, successor candidates can point to Trump’s crash-and-burn, (and probably his attack on them, since he is attacking everyone), as evidence that they are serious candidates, unlike Trump. > In the meantime, he is out raising awareness and cash for the party, as many donations will come to the party, in general and not directly to his campaign. > > This is not a Ross Perot situation, where the “candidate” claims to be independent and might draw of votes from both parties depending on any given voter’s hot button issues. If Trump pulls many voters to his side, they will more likely stick with the GOP than rebound to the Democrats. > > I am not saying that he cannot have a negative effect on the GOP, but I do not see an obvious one while most of his negative traits could possibly work in its favor. I’m happy to wait-and-see what effect, if any, Trump has, though I admit holding the impression (subject to revision) that the longer he stays in, the more attention he draws to the less-rational aspects of the Republican platform, which might be great for whipping up support and enthusiasm among Americans already eager to embrace these ideas (and watch Fox News), less so for the moderate Americans needed to win an election. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/939 "2015-07-22T17:50:02Z")
“Moderate” Americans have been known to be manipulated. Both the Iraq War and the Patriot Act were passed with only the tiniest opposition throughout the country. The next election may well be decided by whatever “issue” is made the centerpiece by the late summer of 2016. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/940 "2015-07-22T17:57:04Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > "the Iraq War … were passed with only the tiniest opposition throughout the country. Remind me. When the vote was taken, I was under the impression that the authorization was to allow the President to go to war against Iraq _as a last resort_. That’s how I remember it being sold. (Of course, the President attacked as his _first_resort; but the resolution didn’t say he couldn’t do that.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=46) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=48)