Every news site in the US: Mueller files his first charges!
Fox: Pressure builds for Mueller to resign among scandal.
I worked in the news industry for a dozen years. True, it was in Thailand, but it was the English-language media. And I worked with news people from all over the world including the US. Without exception, and I mean even the few American Republican newsmen I worked with, Fox News was considered nothing more than a sad joke. Within the industry, only Fox employees have any regard for Fox News.
Boo fucking hoo. Anybody who joined Fox News in this century had to know it was a right wing propaganda machine. If they had to feed their family and couldn’t get honest work, OK, but they can’t pretend this comes as a shock to them.
Huh. Weird. A senior employee who wasn’t there during the Bush years ? 
watching CBS this morning made me hopeful it’s ONLY the fox “news” or nothing crowd that are completely mal-informed. wonder how many people that is?
and how soon they will all die off just from old age and bitterness.
Hannity devotes 20 minutes to discussing the indictments. Oh wait, he spends maybe 5 minutes on it and then devolves into 15 minutes of Obama/Clinton/Russia conspiracy theories. Fox is barely a step above Alex Jones at this point. It is really that bad.
Found this in the comments section:
Ha! Very fitting!
This is how very good their reportage is
A bit of an exaggeration when they say “… Democrats … in damage control mode …” maybe. But F-News does not link out of their own site, so a curious person might investigate their sources. I was wanted to know about this “Campaign Legal Center”, so I looked them up; the first story I found on their site, right up front there, had this to say:
In other words, the F-News story references a source and tells you something the source said but does not link to that source; in this case, you go to the source on your own and find that their content almost completely burns the meat of the original F-News story.
They are not “fake news”, which is a matter of art and satire, they are inaccurate or distorted news that relies on the reader to simply trust them.
Ah, excellent! This makes me admire Cleese just that much more. More silly walks, sir John!
Well now I have a better understanding of how so many single news source republicans simultaneously became concerned about a group most people had never heard of- “antifa”. Fox told them. Anyway, this morning’s headline is really scary:
Antifa apocalypse? Anarchist group’s plan to overthrow Trump ‘regime’ starts Saturday
I like the question mark in the headline. Almost like it comes with an embedded “many people are saying” or “just asking questions”.
I imagine that in 32 pages someone has pointed out that FoxNews and MSNBC do about 1 minute of news reporting at the top (and maybe bottom) of each hour. All the rest is commentary and analysis (ie. opinion).
I would say during the non-news portions, there’s much more distortion and outright fiction on FoxNews, but there’s plenty of lazy pandering on MSNBC. Joy Reid is horrible, and Maddow’s never seen three dots she won’t try to connect.
I do not consider MSNBC to be a reliable source. But a study posted much earlier in this thread shows that they’re more reliable than FOX ‘News’. That just shows how bad FOX ‘News’ really is.
It’s an interesting characteristic of the right wing media that they have to have a boogey-man, many of whom you’ll never hear mentioned anywhere else: ISIS, MS-13, the New Black Panthers, Antifa. If something bad happens that can’t be pinned on one of those (like Las Vegas) they don’t know what to say.
What’s wrong with MSNBC’s journalism?
This sounds like more “both sides do it,” and I have to say, as an American, I’m so done with that. One of these networks is mendacious and devoted to big lie propaganda, and the other does news with a lean. Let’s not go into the clouds here.
it’s notable that you don’t consider MSNBC to be a “reliable source” but you cite you heard something “much earlier in the thread that they are more reliable than FOX news.” How is that “reliable” ?
It’s a pretty common tactic to equate two misdeeds in order to minimize your sides crimes and outsize those of your opponent.
“Sure, my guy killed and ate 14 orphans, but yours failed to come to a complete stop at the stop sign. Both sides have committed crimes, so lets move on with it.”
It’s not ‘something I heard much earlier’. It was a study by PunditFact. (Granted, their study was from September, 2015, but it’s not as if it’s ‘something I heard’ from a Facebook meme.) Statements by FOX ‘News’ were ‘Mostly false’ 21% of the time, ‘False’ 31% of the time, and ‘Pants on fire’ 9% of the time. So FOX is giving people fake news 61% of the time. MSNBC’s statements were ‘Mostly false’ 22% of the time, ‘False’ 18% of the time, and ‘Pants on fire’ 4% of the time. So MSNBC is giving people fake news 44% of the time.
Forty-four percent ‘fake news’ is not what I consider reliable. This is not a case of ‘Well, both sides do it,’ and if you’ve read my opinions in the past, then you will have seen that I am a critic of the False Equivalence fallacy. While I agree with the sentiments of the commentators on MSNBC, and disagree with the ones at FOX ‘News’, it would be dishonest to accept what MSNBC says without seeking verification for their claims.
This PunditFact of which you speak? Did you googlefy them? Check them out? They don’t look all that great, in the non-partisan. truth-above-all kind of way. A bit vague from the git-go, where they say that PunditFact is a joint project of the Tampa newspaper and the Poynter Institute, when the paper is owned by the Poynter Institute.
For instance, I vaguely recall a fluttering kerfluffle about a micro-scandal around Obama saluting servicepersons in a less than respectful fashion. I remember thinking that civilians were not supposed to use the military salute towards military personnel, at all. Not actually bad, just not right. A tempest in a toss-pot, perhaps.
Here is Rachel Maddow’s letter to them when they rated her reporting “Mostly False”.
Money quote here…
(I’m getting fewer restraining orders these days, and not as quickly! So, you could say things are getting pretty serious!)
Neither one is a source of news, except when they have a reporter on who’s providing information that hasn’t been published yet.
What you’re really talking about is who spins more blatantly, more frequently, and more ludicrously, and Fox wins that contest like Secretariat won the Belmont.