Fox News vs. Other News Outlets

[Sir Loin]

That isn't an op/ed piece, it's a regular article, and it gives a couple of examples of stories that were forged at WND then appeared on Fox which turned out to be fabricated. I also gave you the example of the Texas testbook hoax that Fox picked up from WND word for word. Looks like Fox took the article down, but here is the Texas school board responding to it- Texas Education Agency - Social studies curriculum standards

You are right, that one was not an op/ed. However, it mentions nothing about any forged stories and mentions Fox News only once, in regard to the hardly fabricated Van Jones story that WND broke. What did you think you read?

Regarding the Texas education story, whom on Fox was it that inaccurately reported those facts? Your link does not state, was it Beck or Hannity, or was it an actual reporter during a hard news segment? You are aware that news story was weeks in the making and reporting and was the subject of at least two O'Rielly Factor shows, as well as Hannity's show. Is it your stance that if a Fox news reporter did quote incorrect information at an early point in the story, it was not later corrected? Lastly, and I'm sorry to say, that ain't much of a case you have there, but it is a rather elaborate conspiracy theory. Sad fact of the matter is that news channels do get things wrong sometimes, what separates them from the as you say lower tier news sources, is their accountability and the fact that they make retractions when they are found to be in the wrong.

You stance seems muddled.. On one hand you're arguing that we shouldn't look at op/ed pieces and evaluate the credibility of the network on the basis of their factual accuracy because they're just op/ed pieces. On the other hand, you're arguing that they do fact check their pundits and nail them to the wall if they present falsehoods... You can't have it both ways.

No that is not what I am saying at all. I'm speaking with specificity about the links you have provided in this thread, which generally don't support your assertions. For example, the link you provided to the LA Times article which does not detail any "forged or fabricated" stories and refers only to Fox News as having carried the factually correct Van Jones story first broke by WND.

But, as far as nailing their pundits to the wall who present falsehoods, that certainly isn't the case... Beck, who is caught pretty much every day, has an hour long primetime show every night on Fox... They've been escalating his profile on Fox as he has gotten caught so many times that people don't really even bother catching him anymore...

You just stated that Beck is caught pretty much every day, which is quite debatable, but proves my point spot on. If an opinion pundit uses bad facts he/she gets nailed for it, by multiple sources, hence the reason they employ fact checkers to help them avoid such embarrassing moments. Though they do all still make mistakes and hyperbolic statements which often come back to bite them in the arse. A sign all is well.:2razz:

Er, what? I haven't posted any op/ed pieces. What is making you conclude that the CNN article and the LA Times article are op/ed pieces? Neither of them are.

Actually you did, it was the first link you provided, unless you think an article that calls Beck names like "idiot" is real reporting. Neither of the two articles you cite actually support the assertions you connect to them either, yet you still note them as such.

 

[teamosil]

You are right, that one was not an op/ed. However, it mentions nothing about any forged stories and mentions Fox News only once, in regard to the hardly fabricated Van Jones story that WND broke. What did you think you read?

The Van Jones articles WND published, and much of which was repeated on Fox, were indeed fabricated. WND had three main points, which were later the focus of Glen Beck's attack- that he had joined a black supremacist organization in prison, that he previously worked for a communist organization, and that he was currently an open communist. All three of these were completely false. He was never even in prison. He was detained, once, for 2 hours, along with 10 thousand other protestors who were all released as soon as the protest against police violence ended. He was not charged with anything and he certainly did not meet any black supremacist gangs or join any such organization. WND completely made it up and even 10 minutes of fact checking by Fox using any source other than WND would have revealed that he actually was never in prison... Secondly, they declined to name the "communist organization" that Van Jones had been employed by. Turns out, they were referring to the AFL-CIO... The largest labor union in the country to which every fireman, nurse, teacher, etc, belonged... The third one, that he was currently a communist, was based on an off hand comment he had made 15 years ago about being a communist. But since then he has publicly rejected communism many times and has actually been an outspoken advocate market based solutions to environment over regulatory solutions... So, yeah, it was a massive fabrication. But, guess what, a lot of people still believe it because they heard it on Fox...

Regarding the Texas education story, whom on Fox was it that inaccurately reported those facts? Your link does not state, was it Beck or Hannity, or was it an actual reporter during a hard news segment? You are aware that news story was weeks in the making and reporting and was the subject of at least two O'Rielly Factor shows, as well as Hannity's show. Is it your stance that if a Fox news reporter did quote incorrect information at an early point in the story, it was not later corrected? Lastly, and I'm sorry to say, that ain't much of a case you have there, but it is a rather elaborate conspiracy theory. Sad fact of the matter is that news channels do get things wrong sometimes, what separates them from the as you say lower tier news sources, is their accountability and the fact that they make retractions when they are found to be in the wrong.

I am not aware of any retraction, but if they had actually done even 10 seconds of fact checking they would have at least called up somebody associated with the board of ed and found out that there was in fact no such vote and that they were not even reviewing text books for years... It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a clear cut flaw in Fox's fact checking policy. They treat WND as credible, so their journalistic integrity is by definition no better than WND's. They regurgitate whatever WND says with no additional fact checking, even when the WND story is just laughably, obviously, false.

You just stated that Beck is caught pretty much every day, which is quite debatable, but proves my point spot on. If an opinion pundit uses bad facts he/she gets nailed for it, by multiple sources, hence the reason they employ fact checkers to help them avoid such embarrassing moments.

So what the hell is wrong with these fact checkers you contend they are employing that they never seem to catch even the most blatant lies by the pundits?

 

[Sir Loin]

The Van Jones articles WND published, and much of which was repeated on Fox, were indeed fabricated. WND had three main points, which were later the focus of Glen Beck's attack- that he had joined a black supremacist organization in prison, that he previously worked for a communist organization, and that he was currently an open communist. All three of these were completely false. He was never even in prison. He was detained, once, for 2 hours, along with 10 thousand other protestors who were all released as soon as the protest against police violence ended. He was not charged with anything and he certainly did not meet any black supremacist gangs or join any such organization. WND completely made it up and even 10 minutes of fact checking by Fox using any source other than WND would have revealed that he actually was never in prison... Secondly, they declined to name the "communist organization" that Van Jones had been employed by. Turns out, they were referring to the AFL-CIO... The largest labor union in the country to which every fireman, nurse, teacher, etc, belonged... The third one, that he was currently a communist, was based on an off hand comment he had made 15 years ago about being a communist. But since then he has publicly rejected communism many times and has actually been an outspoken advocate market based solutions to environment over regulatory solutions... So, yeah, it was a massive fabrication. But, guess what, a lot of people still believe it because they heard it on Fox...

Opps there you go again, confusing Glen Beck as being Fox News. Van Jones resigned because of the controversy surrounding some of his statements and affiliations, which as it turns out happened to be factual. When you sign your name to petitions that allege our POTUS deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen, you get what comes to you.To quote White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, "President Obama doesn't endorse Jones' previous association with the 9/11 Truth movement, his comments regarding race relations and politics, and his support for Mumia Abu-Jamal."

And away went Mr. Jones. A sign all is well.

I am not aware of any retraction, but if they had actually done even 10 seconds of fact checking they would have at least called up somebody associated with the board of ed and found out that there was in fact no such vote and that they were not even reviewing text books for years... It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a clear cut flaw in Fox's fact checking policy. They treat WND as credible, so their journalistic integrity is by definition no better than WND's. They regurgitate whatever WND says with no additional fact checking, even when the WND story is just laughably, obviously, false.

Not only are you not aware of any retraction but you can't actually detail for me whom at Fox was supposed to have reported the erroneous information.

So what the hell is wrong with these fact checkers you contend they are employing that they never seem to catch even the most blatant lies by the pundits?

If you really think that it is just my contention that news networks and individual show hosts employ fact checkers/producers, you are not arguing rationally in the first place.

 

[Sir Loin]

.... It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a clear cut flaw in Fox's fact checking policy. They treat WND as credible, so their journalistic integrity is by definition no better than WND's. They regurgitate whatever WND says with no additional fact checking, even when the WND story is just laughably, obviously, false.

You've not demonstrated that Fox News regurgitates whatever WND says. In fact that claim is as absurd as it is irrational. You have demonstrated that you chose not to admit or intellectually recognize the very real differences between news reporting and opinion punditry. Which does not lend you credibility, as you speak about credibility.