Fox News viewers now know for sure that Hillary is a liar, thanks to lead stories on both O’Reilly and Kelly (and Hannity comes on in a half hour, and I’ll bet my house it will be his lead story as well) saying she was caught flat-footed during her testimony today by the bombshell revelation of an email to her family on the day of the attack saying Ansar al-Sharia was responsible for the attack in Benghazi, shortly after a public statement mentioning the internet video. So she knew it was a planned attack from the very beginning, and lied to the American people.
But if you watched the hearing, she very clearly explained that shortly after the attack, Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility, so that’s what she was going on. But a day or two later, they retracted the claim. And then the CIA decided that the video had incited a riot that evolved into the attack. And then, some ten days later, they found out that that wasn’t true. She mentioned the video in that first-day statement, not as the cause of the attack, but to denounce it for the simple reason that there had been several other riots (Tunisia, Khartoum, Pakistan, Cairo) that were definitely motivated by the video, and she wanted to reiterate to a worldwide audience that it was the work of some internet nobody and not in any way associated with the US government, which people in countries with state-controlled media would not necessarily know.
But that context was missing from the Fox reports.
I know we’ve covered the job numbers announcements before, but this is really hysterical. This is what Fox anchors are like without their talking points in front of them.
Is 5 less than 5.1? Is 271,000 larger than 180,000?
“Possibly, but we’re not sure. Lets put our economists on it before we mention it again…”
I don’t know when this was captured, but TPM has a photo of a Fox News program with a graphic saying, “Student Protests Erupting As Democratic Presidential Candidates Push for Freebies.”
That’s hysterical. They didn’t have enough time for the network to prompt them on how to make this sound like bad news, so they tried to wing it and failed.
Are you aware that the percentage of the population that is actually working is exceptionally low on a historical scale? It is down to levels not seen in 35 or more years.
So the question is does 271,000 new jobs exceed what is required for an expanding population to maintain job growth at current (already low) levels. Or is it still below the break even point to maintain the current % of working population. If it is below the break even point then that means the economy is still on the downward track and getting worse.
If the latter then perhaps the word “only” is correct one to use in that context.
Not in comparison to 180,000. There is no way to parse this that doesn’t make Fox News look bad, whatever the actual state of the job market is. Frankly, you should be ashamed for trying.
NYTimes: “U.S. Adds 211,000 Jobs, Clearing Way for Fed Rate Hike”
CNBC and MSNBC: “US created 211K jobs in Nov vs 200K jobs est; unemployment rate at 5%”
Wall Street Journal: “Strong Jobs Data Paves Way for Fed to Increase Rates”
Foxnews: “…”
Another months where apparently this isn’t important enough news to report. I mean they need space on the front page for this story:
“MEDIA BUZZ: Press turns partisan after San Bernardino massacre”
If you’re comparing Fox News to CNBC and WSJ, you might want to take a look at Fox Business where the top story is: Wall Street Jumps After November Job Gains
MSNBC’s page must have changed quite a bit because there is no story about the jobs report on the homepage. Fox News has 2 stories about the jobs report linked on their homepage.
I don’t know why the jobs report is the barometer for whether a news outlet is “all that bad” in the first place. Each network has their own tilt and each is fairly obvious. Outside of political commentary, I don’t think any of them are “all that bad” at reporting actual news.
The jobs report is a regular occurence that is nonetheless newsworthy. So it’s a good barometer because a partisan outlet will only report on it when it suits their cause. The “liberal” media still reports it when it’s bad; Fox does not, as you’ll see if you look further back in the thread, but does report on it when it’s good for their side.
Because it’s news every single month. If it is better than expected, it is news and if it is worse than expected it is news. Today, it was about what was expected, and it is news. Every single news organization has it as their lead story within seconds of the numbers being released. The business day today is being driven by this data.
Foxnews does not, and as usual did not this month either. Unless the numbers are bad, and it makes it look like the economy is doing worse than anticipated. So, Foxnews viewers believe that the economy is tanking, while unemployment has decreased dramatically over the Obama administration. Because Foxnews is not real news. A litmus test for a legitimate news organization would be to report the jobs number every month. Foxnews fails this, and worse shows its ass by only reporting it when it suits their agenda.
MSNBC, considered equal and opposite (which is nonsense) reports the jobs numbers regardless of what they are. Right on top of the page as the lead story.
)