This message was self-deleted by its author

[left-of-center2012]

This message was self-deleted by its author (left-of-center2012) on Mon Oct 26, 2020, 10:12 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Claustrum]

1. I wonder if they will do a 180 when Biden takes office.

Their viewers seem to have a very short memory and will go with whatever Fox tells them at that moment, even if it completely contradicts what they said a week ago.

They will suddenly have concerns for the virus and deaths come January.

[My Pet Orangutan]

8. Yeah. January 21 - pandemic threatens America with extinction

and it is all President Biden's fault. So protest by defying his mask mandate.

[NCDem47]

14. Exactly!

Why wait until January though?

COVID-19 will become the Bubonic Plague to FOX viewers on Nov. 4.

As an aside, I'm now thinking when Trump looses, he'll cut and run. He'll have NO tolereance for sticking around for a transition. Resign, delegate to Pence, and get a pardon to inoculate against Federal crimes. He won't care about his long-term reputation. He'll be dead in a few years. His only "legacy" is what he hears and sees while he is alive.

[idziak4ever1234]

2. Orwell missed it by 36 years with his doublespeak concept. Prophecy.

[left-of-center2012]

5. ...

war is peace
freedom is slavery
ignorance is strength

[My Pet Orangutan]

12. The last one, ignorance is strength, actually comes from WWII UK IC

ie deploying spies in cells.

[left-of-center2012]

16. okie dokie ... but Google says:

Ignorance is Strength

Origin
This phrase appears in George Orwell’s novel, 1984. The author has used it as the slogan of the Party in the very first part of the novel, where it reads, “War is Peace / Freedom is Slavery / Ignorance is Strength” (Part-I, Chapter-I).

By using this slogan, Big Brother could reign supreme, destroy the past, and build up the future on account of the ignorance of people. Had they been aware, they would have understood Big Brother’s manipulations, and would not let him rule.

Hence, their ignorance blinded them, and delegated their strength and power to the Party and Big Brother.

https://literarydevices.net/ignorance-is-strength/

[My Pet Orangutan]

19. Orwell was in intelligence, that is I think where the meme originated,

that no agent could bring down C (the head of MI6), but it certainly translated beautifully into the 1984 world.

[TwilightZone]

11. No, he was pretty much spot-on.

This really started with Reagan. If anything, Orwell was a couple years late. It was in full swing by the time Newt showed up with the Contract on America.

[spanone]

3. There should be.

[dware]

10. No, there shouldn't be,

now you're talking censorship, which is a road we don't want to go down.

Imagine a law like that passed, now a R gets elected President sometime down the road, do you want that Admin. to have that kind of power?

Besides, no court in the land would uphold such a law on 1st Amendment grounds, it would be thrown out before the ink dried.

[BComplex]

18. I can't see a law stating that if you call yourself a "news" organization then you

should tell the truth....against the constitution.

If you don't want to tell the truth, then call yourself something else.

[dware]

20. And who gets to determine what that "truth" is?

Anyways, the courts would strike it down due to 1st Amendment concerns.

[better]

22. There not only should be, there MUST be.

It's vitally important to understand that we are not talking about censoring opinion.
We are talking about censoring outright false news.

News must at least TRY to be accurate.

What Fox is doing right now with the way they're treating coronavirus is not merely an issue of opinion.
It is, legitimately, a profound threat to both public health and national security.

[dware]

23. Yeah, good luck with that argument,

No court in the land would uphold such a law, and rightfully so.
I equate this with those that want hate speech laws in the US.

[better]

24. It would appear that existing law/regulation disagrees with you.

Broadcasting false information that causes substantial 'public harm'

The FCC prohibits broadcasting false information about a crime or a catastrophe if the broadcaster knows the information is false and will cause substantial "public harm" if aired.

FCC rules specifically say that "the public harm: must begin immediately and cause direct and actual damage to property or the health or safety of the general public; or divert law enforcement or public health and safety authorities from their duties."

Broadcasters may air disclaimers that clearly characterize programming as fiction to avoid violating FCC rules about public harm.

Fox's very characterization of the COVID pandemic as not being a threat is in CLEAR violation of this rule, and it has indeed caused not merely damage to public health and safety, but actual death, on a MASSIVE scale.

Broadcasting false content during news programming

The FCC is prohibited by law from engaging in censorship or infringing on First Amendment rights of the press. It is, however, illegal for broadcasters to intentionally distort the news, and the FCC may act on complaints if there is documented evidence of such behavior from persons with direct personal knowledge.

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/broadcasting-false-information

Yes, ensuring fairness in the application of such laws/regulations is tricky, but they were instituted for a reason.
Fox news is in violation of BOTH of these FCC rules when it comes to their coverage of COVID.

[dware]

25. Here's the thing,

Faux airs on cable, therefore the FCC has no authority over them, there is no license required to air on cable, satellite, or the Internet, so your info is irrelevant.

Just why do you think that President Obama didn't go after Faux? Or President Clinton?
Because they knew they would lose in court.

[Maru Kitteh]

26. You are entirely correct.

[Newest Reality]

4. I guess...

I guess that serious threats to public health and safety are not a thing at Faux Noise. They are a RW propaganda outlet.

The thing is, this is severe an serious and you could say that misinformation exacerbates the bad outcome, so then, that makes their reporting a threat to health and safety and there does not seem to be any accountability demanded of them at all.

Maybe because it should be understood that they are really infotainment?

[brooklynite]

6. "Why isn't there a law to prevent Fox lies?"

Have you heard of the First Amendment?

[melm00se]

17. 1st amendment only applies

when folks agree with the message

[dware]

21. That seems to be the case.

The RW would love such a law, can you imagine a RW Admin having that kind of power?
The power to determine what are lies and what aren't?
That is a scary thought.

[dware]

7. ...

Why isn't there a law to prevent Fox lies?

It's called the 1st Amendment, Faux Snooze has the right to air their baloney.

[OAITW r.2.0]

9. As soon as Biden takes thee oath of Office in January....

the Fox propaganda machine will immediately switch gears and blame Democrats for not solving the CV-19 virus. Trump's name and Covid will never appear in the same sentence.

[dware]

13. Luckily, most Americans know the truth and only Faux acolytes will believe it. nt

[dv421]

15. I thought they were doing that already

They were going off on how Cuomo, Newsome and Pritzker were failing to protect their states earlier this year. Not hearing that about any republican governors that have virus hot zones...

[90-percent]

27. i recall a fox news case in florida around 2003

two news anchors sued fox news because they were fired for refusing to broadcast news they knew to be false.

the ruling?

there is NO LAW that required broadcasters to be TRUTHFUL with their news broadcasts! It is the responsibility of the VIEWER to select a news source THAT DOESN'T LIE!

THEIR FIRING STOOD, THEY WERE NOT "WRONGFULLY DISMISSED".

So, kids, it's your own personal responsibility to choose a news broadcast that doesn't lie or mislead! The gov't is not in any way responsible to insure our news is factual and meets standards for MSM journalism.

And, we are now entitled to our own right or wrong, who knows? facts.

Survival of the dumbest.

-90% Jimmy