FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

To the extent that the MSM got any of these stories wrong (they mostly didn't), they come clean and retract or correct the record and even write exposes about how they fucked up (IOW, they actually want to get things right). Wingnut News, however, has no intent/interest in getting things right (as opposed to being simply a propaganda outlet for the Right) and doubles down when caught making up fictitious stories and then conjures up more lies and/or changes the subject in a CYA attempt.

Not so much. For example, the MSM is still reporting that the 2020 riots were "mostly peaceful." When the news business is more interested in advancing a narrative than reporting facts, that's what you get.

Originally Posted by finnbow

Consider for a moment that the #1 show on Fox News, the primary news source for conservatives, admits in open court that Tucker Carlson is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' Then in a deposition Sidney Powell, a frequent Fox News guest invited on the network to spew her lies about the 2020 election, stated "no reasonable person would conclude that my statements were truly statements of fact." Conversely, Fox News fired its political editor, Chris Stirewalt, for having the nerve to tell the truth about Arizona election results instead of maintaining the fiction that its viewers wanted to hear (that Trump won).

Yeah, Tucker Calson is one of the many "bogeymen" on the left. Yes, the Tucker Carlson show is not a straight news show, and never has been. The Show - just like the Rachel Maddow show or The Situation Room - are shows that mix discussion of current events with commentary and debate. There's nothing new, novel or odd about the format that Carlson uses his show versus just about any other news commentary or "infotainment" type of show.

I didn't see Powell's comments on Fox but if she made those comments on one of the infotainment shows, then her quoted comments are likely correct in that context.

Regarding Stirewalt, yes, that's what Stirewalt has said about his termination. There are some problems with that explanation, however. One, Stirewalt didn't make that early call about Arizona all by himself. In fact, according to Jared Kushner, permission to make that early call for Arizona went all the way up to Rupert Murdoch. Two, other team members that monitored and reported polling results have not been terminated. Third, Stirewalt did make some unflattering public comments about Fox before his termination. Most employers take a pretty dim view of that kind of conduct.

So, whether he was actually fired for calling Arizona early, who really knows? Fox isn't saying - other than to call his termination part of a "restructuring". It's interesting that there are certain rules for carrying out a bona fide corporate restructure, particularly when the impacted individual(s) are 40 or more years of age. Stierwalt was certainly over 40 at the time of the "restructuring". Don't know if those rules were followed or not, but if not Stirewalt may have some legal recourse against Fox. I've not seen any reporting that suggests he's legally challenging his termination.