# 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:** 48
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/941 "2015-07-22T20:10:26Z")
> [@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? It’s not a matter of inviting him; Fox is kind of stuck with its own rule about the national polls. However, they _did_ make a late change requiring filing actual FEC financial disclosure forms rather than extensions, which many thought was targeted at Trump, but he surprised them by filing the forms, so he’s in. What I hope might happen is this: in previous elections, the RNC has orchestrated successful attempts to torpedo front-runners that the establishment GOPers dislike for some reason, e.g. Newt Gingrich. The main control they have over candidates is money. Trump can afford to run without the GOP’s blessing, and he has the ego to hit back if they try to sabotage him. It would be wonderful if the GOP did undermine him, and he responded with a third-party candidacy, the hugest and classiest third-party candidacy ever, and split the vote among Republicans, allowing an easy Dem win. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/942 "2015-07-22T23:08:09Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > - 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. The residents of certain states (_coughIowaNewHampshirecough_) have an outsized influence on the nominating process. Those states have enjoyed that privilege for some time, and fight to keep it. I’ve long thought that the parties should reform the rules to bring more states (and therefore more people) into that early part of the process.[sup]\*[/sup] Taking the extra influence away from those states should be a good thing, but then giving it to Fox News isn’t. - And when those states complain about losing their special status, the correct response from the party should be “go piss up a rope”. ---
**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, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/943 "2015-07-22T23:37:45Z")
Just to pick nits, but FOX is not the sole debates host. CNN will host the second debate, and down the line, ABC and CBS will be hosting debates. There are 12 scheduled. ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/944 "2015-07-23T13:39:46Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > 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.) I remember it being sold that way, too, but I’m having trouble finding cites to back it up. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/945 "2015-07-23T21:52:41Z")
> [@Pashnish\_Ewing](#): > > I remember [the October 2002 AUMF] being sold that way, too, but I’m having trouble finding cites to back it up. Just read the bill itself. It says that the President can’t use military force unless he first sends a letter to Congress declaring that non-military measures have failed, and that nothing short of war can protect the US from Iraq. [http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/html/PLAW-107publ243.htm](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/html/PLAW-107publ243.htm) The October 2002 bill did exactly what the anti-war contingent hoped it would do – it scared Saddam enough that he backed down, and allowed UN inspectors back into Iraq. They spent over four months looking at all the sites the CIA had identified as possible WMD sites or factories, along with any other suspicious sites, including the Presidential Palaces. They used helicopters to swoop in on sites without warning, and they used equipment like ground-penetrating radar to ensure there were no hidden rooms or basements. They found that not only were there no WMDs (other than a few rusty mustard gas shells left over from the 80’s) at any of the sites, but that some of them had clearly been abandoned for years, and that others were totally unsuitable for the purpose —an alleged chemical weapons factory didn’t even have indoor plumbing. On March 7, 2003, Hans Blix informed the UN Security council that despite some initial foot-dragging, Iraq was now “proactive” in its cooperation, including allowing the destruction of some conventional missiles that flew 110 miles instead of the allowed 93 miles (Iraq is about 6000 miles from the US), that it would just take a few more months to resolve the remaining discrepancies (mostly a lack of documentation when weapons were destroyed), and that the continuing presence of inspectors would make it impossible for Saddam to resume any WMD programs without plenty of warning to the West. In other words, the non-military measures had completely succeeded. [http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/pages/security\_council\_briefings.asp#7](http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/pages/security_council_briefings.asp#7) For reasons I don’t understand, almost nobody acknowledges this four+ month period, when it became KNOWN FOR A FACT that the CIA, whatever its good intentions, had been completely wrong in its conclusions from satellite photos, and informants like “Curveball.” I don’t blame anybody for assuming the worst before the UN inspectors went in, but the Bush Administration continued to insist that Iraq had WMDs months after it became clear that the CIA was wrong, and even today, they keep saying that they acted on their best knowledge at the time, which is absolutely false — the best knowledge after the inspectors went in was that there was no sign of WMD stockpiles, programs, or facilities anywhere in Iraq. On March 18, 2003, in spite of Hans Blix’s report that the inspections were going great, Bush (as required by the Oct 2002 bill) signed a letter to Congress saying that non-military measures had failed, and nothing short of war could protect the US from Iraq. Bush invaded Iraq the next day. No matter what you think of his artfully crafted speeches about Saddam’s WMDs and connections to Al Qaeda that were clearly designed to mislead but technically fell just short of lying, there is no doubt that he lied, in writing and over his signature, in that letter to Congress. [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html](http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/946 "2015-07-23T23:50:47Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > 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.) When I said “Iraq War . . .passed” I was posting in a hurry and was not specific on my meaning. The Patriot Act passed Congress with public support. The Iraq War was engaged with massive public support. The AUMF was not really an issue by March, 2003, (aside from providing a fig leaf for GWB as outlined by TonySinclair). There was very little public protest of the war and no organized opposition. It was a very popular war when it opened. ---
**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 24, 2015, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/947 "2015-07-24T00:21:03Z")
Thank you, **TonySinclair**. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > On March 7, 2003, Hans Blix informed the UN Security council that despite some initial foot-dragging, Iraq was now “proactive” Bush: Ya hear that? That Blix feller said Iraq is now _radioactive!_ :eek: > [@tomndebb](#): > > When I said “Iraq War . . .passed” I was posting in a hurry and was not specific on my meaning… It was a very popular war when it opened. I was not responding to you directly. It’s just that your statement made me think ‘Well, of _course_ there was little opposition. It’s for a last resort option!’ Then I wondered if I remembered correctly, so I had to ask. **TonySinclair** ’s account sounds right. As for the war being ‘very popular’, Americans are easily frightened. We’d just undergone a devastating attack, and Bush, Cheney, Rumpsmelled, and the rest were doing their best to whip up hysteria. I’d put money down that asking the ‘person on the street’ in a red state whether Saddam had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks, most would reply in the affirmative. Now that I’m thinking about it… [ul][li]September 2001: Bush vows to get bin Laden ‘dead or alive’.[/li][li]March 2002: ‘I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.’ – George W. Bush[/ul][/li]At least, that’s the way I remember it. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/948 "2015-07-24T00:38:22Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > I’d put money down that asking the ‘person on the street’ in a red state whether Saddam had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks, most would reply in the affirmative. They would have done the same in blue states, because they had their President, Veep, SecDef, and National Security advisor all telling them that he did. And as I said in my previous post, they usually did it in such a way that they were deliberately misleading the public, but were technically telling the truth. “We know that al Qaeda is in Iraq.” Kernel of truth: al Qaeda is in the Kurdish territories protected by US fighter jets (the no-fly zone), because both al Qaeda and the Kurds want to overthrow Saddam. “We know that Iraq has ties with al Qaeda going back ten years.” Kernel of truth: a lower echelon Iraqi rep had a meeting with a lower echelon AQ rep in the early 90’s, and nothing came of it. ---
**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 24, 2015, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/949 "2015-07-24T00:39:58Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > They would have done the same in blue states I mean today. ---
**Author:** ![RagingxMarmoset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@RagingxMarmoset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RagingxMarmoset)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/950 "2015-07-24T14:31:12Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > I mean today. A lot of very staunch supporters of our operations in Iraq have since changed their minds about it. No one likes being lied to, regardless of political affiliation. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/951 "2015-08-07T12:47:13Z")
Again. Jobs numbers are out this morning. They are solid, but nothing spectacular. Show that the economy is doing all right and continuing in the right direction. Big news for the morning, and every news source has it as their lead story right now. The Wall Street Journal is factual with the headline: U.S. Economy Adds 215,000 Jobs in July The New York Times takes a similar just the facts approach: U.S. economy added 215,000 jobs in July; unemployment stays at 5.3% MSNBC showing it’s lamestream bias: US jobs post solid gains; unemployment flat Foxnews is taking a decidedly different tact by announcing in the lead bannner: KC AND THE SUNSHINE BAND ROCK THE ‘ALL-AMERICAN SUMMER CONCERT STAGE’ ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/952 "2015-08-07T12:59:02Z")
In fairness, they did finally add an article toward the bottom of the page entitled: U.S. Economy Adds Fewer Jobs than Expected in July We added 215,000 jobs and expectations were 223,000, so I guess that’s technically true, though more, shall we say, legitimate new sources seem to realize that the actual number is about what was expected. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2015, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/953 "2015-08-08T00:48:03Z")
To add to the fun, a little while ago I wanted to see how Fox handled Obama’s emissions reductions announcement for power plants. As expected, it was mostly quotes from Republicans about the sheer disaster it was going to bring. But Fox always manages to exceed expectations, so they cranked it up a notch – they also named several coal companies that had declared bankruptcy “since Obama was elected”. As if the companies self-destructed out of sheer despondency over Obama’s election, before he had even done anything. In reality of course Obama was criticized by many for his lack of action on climate change. Fox also forgot to mention that coal companies were being hammered by the fact that many power generators were switching to lower-cost natural gas, the increased production of which is largely a byproduct of Republican-endorsed oil exploration policies and fracking. But hey, if you can rile up the base by implying that Democrats are wrecking the economy, it’s all good, right? Obama got elected. Coal companies went bust. The facts in between don’t matter. Whoever came up with that bit of innuendo probably got a little desk paperweight award from Roger Ailes. TL;DR version: I think after almost 1000 posts we can conclude that the answer to “Is Fox News really all that bad?” is the same as the answer to the old question about the Pope’s Catholicism and the excretory practices of woodland bears. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/954 "2015-08-09T16:44:22Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Again. Jobs numbers are out this morning. They are solid, but nothing spectacular. Show that the economy is doing all right and continuing in the right direction. Big news for the morning, and every news source has it as their lead story right now. > > The Wall Street Journal is factual with the headline: U.S. Economy Adds 215,000 Jobs in July > > The New York Times takes a similar just the facts approach: U.S. economy added 215,000 jobs in July; unemployment stays at 5.3% > > MSNBC showing it’s lamestream bias: US jobs post solid gains; unemployment flat > > Foxnews is taking a decidedly different tact by announcing in the lead bannner: KC AND THE SUNSHINE BAND ROCK THE ‘ALL-AMERICAN SUMMER CONCERT STAGE’ Well, that’s about 8 jobs right there. Maybe they’re going the micro route … ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/955 "2015-08-09T16:59:05Z")
♫ Do a little dance, make a little lie Get Fox tonight, get Fox tonight, baby! ♩ ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/956 "2015-08-10T03:02:30Z")
I just started a [new Elections thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=764636) where I scored the debate – the moderators, not the candidates. It seems pretty clear to me that they were trying to promote Bush and Rubio, and trash Trump. I also suspect they may have been trying to help Walker, but it backfired, because he showed the world how clueless he is on foreign policy. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/957 "2015-08-10T04:11:31Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > I just started a [new Elections thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=764636) where I scored the debate – the moderators, not the candidates. It seems pretty clear to me that they were trying to promote Bush and Rubio, and trash Trump. > > I also suspect they may have been trying to help Walker, but it backfired, because he showed the world how clueless he is on foreign policy. At the same time, they have a vested interest in not trashing Trump too badly. Him in the race brings in ratings for them. Their main business is still news entertainment. Running the GOP is just a side gig. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/958 "2015-08-10T05:03:00Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > I just started a [new Elections thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=764636) where I scored the debate – the moderators, not the candidates. It seems pretty clear to me that they were trying to promote Bush and Rubio, and trash Trump. > > I also suspect they may have been trying to help Walker, but it backfired, because he showed the world how clueless he is on foreign policy. In case you missed my quote in the other thread: “We need to control the debates. The Party needs to control the debates” – RNC chairman Reince Preibus, August 5, 2013 > [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > At the same time, they have a vested interest in not trashing Trump too badly. Him in the race brings in ratings for them. Their main business is still news entertainment. Running the GOP is just a side gig. Depends on who “they” means. To Murdoch now it’s all about ideology. To Ailes and his management, it’s a happy convergence where driving the ideology also drives the ratings among the fools who like hearing what they want to hear – and they don’t get to hear it on the danged lib’rul mainstream media – media that is so danged socialist that occasionally some thoughtful patriot will put a bullet through his TV screen out of sheer unbridled patriotism. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2015, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/959 "2015-10-07T20:18:29Z")
Headline currently on Fox News front page: **[European smugglers shop nuclear material to ISIS](http://www.foxnews.com/)** Well, that’s about as scary as anything I’ve read all week. Except that if you bother to read the [story](http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/10/07/fbi-has-helped-stop-nuclear-smugglers-attempts-to-sell-material-to-terrorists/?intcmp=hpbt2&intcmp=latestnews), you find that the material was not nuclear, and that the customers were not ISIS. I guess if it bleeds, it leads, but if it lies, it flies. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2015, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625/960 "2015-10-07T21:20:44Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Headline currently on Fox News front page: > **[European smugglers shop nuclear material to ISIS](http://www.foxnews.com/)** > > Well, that’s about as scary as anything I’ve read all week. > > Except that if you bother to read the [story](http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/10/07/fbi-has-helped-stop-nuclear-smugglers-attempts-to-sell-material-to-terrorists/?intcmp=hpbt2&intcmp=latestnews), you find that the material was not nuclear, and that the customers were not ISIS. In fairness to Fox :eek: their story is based off an AP story… which on my reading most decidedly did NOT pass the smell test.\* The Fox account actually cites a law enforcement source partially debunking the AP’s story, which is [here](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9f77a17c001f4cf3baeb28990b0d92eb/ap-investigation-nuclear-smugglers-sought-terrorist-buyers). So, headline notwithstanding, the article itself is actually not that misleading by Fox standards. \*For example, from the original AP story: > [@](#): > > But their successes were undercut by striking shortcomings: **Kingpins got away** , and those arrested evaded long prison sentences, sometimes quickly returning to nuclear smuggling, AP found. Uh-oh, the kingpins got away? By any chance did they match these [pictures](https://www.google.com/search?q=cartoon+criminal&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAWoVChMI3dna66OxyAIVBh0eCh0xEg7j&biw=1173&bih=874#tbm=isch&q=cartoon+criminal+running)? Please continue. > [@](#): > > For strategic reasons, in most of the operations arrests were made after samples of nuclear material had been obtained rather than the larger quantities. That means that if smugglers did have access to the bulk of material they offered, it remains in criminal hands. > > The repeated attempts to peddle radioactive materials signal that a \*\*thriving nuclear black market \*\*has emerged in an impoverished corner of Eastern Europe on the fringes of the former Soviet Union. Moldova, which borders Romania, is a former Soviet republic. “Thriving,” you say? Is that why we’ve seen such a spate of radioactive attacks by terrorists and other evildoers lately? 😕 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=47) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-fox-news-really-all-that-bad/636625.md?page=49)