The Trouble City Forums

Full Version: Fox News - this is not satire
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(04-01-2020, 09:57 PM)Iron Maiden Wrote: [ -> ]There was some truth telling on Fox earlier, which led to some awkwardness:

Quote:How to ensure you don't get follow-up questions on Fox, apparently.

Video at the link.
The Fox News anchor lady sounds EXACTLY like my boss when I try telling her the truth about how long a task is going to take to get properly done and why. "Hm. Hrm. Hm. Uhrm."
The Murdochs know what's coming - and a suit is already here:

Quote:Amid the mushrooming coronavirus crisis, Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch are girding for a pandemic of public-interest lawsuits over misinformation and conspiracy theories dispensed by certain Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network personalities such as Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Trish Regan.

According to a top Murdoch executive, the father-and-son media moguls are ready to go to war with potential plaintiffs such as the Washington League for Increased Transparency and Ethics—aka WASHLITE—an activist non-profit that filed suit on Thursday against Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, and other defendants.

The 10-page complaint, first reported by The Times of San Diego and filed in the superior court of Washington state’s King County, seeks a judgment that the Murdoch-controlled outlets violated the state’s consumer protection laws by “falsely and deceptively disseminating ‘News’ via cable news contracts that the novel Coronavirus, COVID-19 was a ‘Hoax,’ and that the virus was otherwise not a danger to public health and safety.”

The lawsuit, which seeks “nominal damages” and “reasonable attorneys’ fees,” demands an injunction to prevent Fox outlets from “otherwise interfering with or undermining the legitimate control measures imposed within the State of Washington for the limited time period under which the pandemic is brought under control and until the pandemic is brought under control.”

The lawsuit doesn’t list specific examples of the alleged “campaign of deception spread by the Defendants”—who also include the AT&T and Comcast cable services—but WASHLITE plans to do so in a future court filing.

The conservative outlet fired back—in a statement provided to The Daily Beast, and attributed to Lily Fu Claffee, Fox News Media’s general counsel—that WASHLITE’s lawsuit is “Wrong on the facts, frivolous on the law.”

Claffee added, “We will defend vigorously and seek sanctions as appropriate.”

WASHLITE board member Arthur West, a non-lawyer and former automobile mechanic who earns what he describes as a handsome living as a professional public-interest plaintiff, told The Daily Beast that he’s not impressed by Claffee’s vow to seek retribution: “We are not afraid of the big bad Fox.”

As for possible sanctions against him and his group, “I’m pretty sure they’ll try something like that, because that’s what bullies do,” West said, noting that WASHLITE was launched by him and four other environmental, public interest, and open records activists around three years ago.

“We studied at the Rooster Cogburn school of litigation”—a reference to the fictional U.S. marshal in Charles Portis' novel True Grit and and the two John Wayne movies it inspired.

West, 59, said he has been arrested numerous times in protest and civil-disobedience incidents, but claimed the rewards of successful lawsuits have allowed him to afford a lovely house in Olympia, Wash., overlooking Puget Sound and a fleet of pricey sports cars. He insisted this latest litigation against Fox is not a public-relations stunt.

“We’re as serious as a heart attack when we go into court,” West said.
How do these real experts keep getting on Fox?

Quote:Fox anchor: Can you tell me your thoughts on the drug that is used normally to treat malaria. 

Dr. Haseltine: It's sad to me that people are promoting that drug. 

Anchor: But what about the anecdotal evidence?

Haseltine: That's complete and utter nonsense. Irresponsible.

Video at the link.
FOX bookers and anchors are stupid people that think they're smart. They really think that they've, "cracked the code" and are part of the brilliant few that realize an unverified Chinese trial of 62 people reveals the absolute truth.

So I don't think they even realize that the doctors they book might disagree with them. Their bookers probably ask at most one question to screen guests: "Are you a Republican?"
John Oliver did a bit on OAN last night.

If you thought that the FoxNews folks were idiots, you ain't seen nothing yet.

OAN seems almost too amateurish and flagrantly foolish to worry about, but hey, they’re right there in the press briefings, so I guess they merit worry.
Shouldn't their acronym have two Ns?
It's the news network you noticed your dad watching a year or so ago to placate anti-Fox sentiments from mom, or to reinforce-as-true what he already gets from Fox.

Love you Dad.
The Clinical Trial Understanders:

Dr. Oz taking twitter volunteers to test the "Kilmeade Hypothesis", which is that people who take hydroxychlorquine are immune to covid.
Man, these guys saw that article from last week about Fox trying to edge away from the whole "begging for wrongful-death suits" area and were like "NOT ON MY WATCH!!!" weren't they?
Video at the link:

Quote:Dr. Oz is using Twitter to find patients to test "the Kilmeade hypothesis" that people on hydroxychloroquine are immune to coronavirus.
I mean, if hydroxychloroquine causes you to die of heart failure, I can guarantee you won't get Covid.

Quote:Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly offered a decidedly macabre take on the mounting global death toll from coronavirus, telling his former primetime colleague Sean Hannity that many of the fatalities here in the United States and elsewhere were already close to dying.

Per Sean Hannity’s radio show, the pair were contemplating how life could return to normal when O’Reilly commented about the good news from the global pandemic.

“I want life back to normal, can you fix that in a simple way?” Hannity wondered.

“Oh man I wish I could, you know?” O’Reilly responded.

“Oh, me too.”

“But we’re making little steps,” O’Reilly said, before equating the end of the Democratic primary as a boon for the world. “Bernie Sanders, you know, — he’s gone, that’s really good for everybody. The [US death] projections that you just mentioned are down to 60,000, I don’t think it will be that high. 13,000 dead now in the USA. Many people who are dying, both here and around the world, were on their last legs anyway.”

“And I don’t want to sound callous about that,” O’Reilly quickly added.

“You’re gonna get — hold on, you’re going to get hammered for that,” Hannity predicted.

“Well, I don’t care. I mean, a simple man tells the truth,” O’Reilly shot back, sounding not very much like someone trying to not “sound callous.”

“You mean people that have underlying conditions and that have compromise immune systems, any virus would’ve…” Hannity began to add, trying to help O’Reilly out.

“Yes,” O’Reilly agreed. “And not only that, they were damaged,” he added pointing out that the death rate in Italy and Spain is 10 times higher than in the United States.

“Somebody can break this to Bernie Sanders, number one, they have socialized medicine which is not nearly as good as our private system,” O’Reilly claimed, even though life expectancy in Italy and Spain is more than three years longer than in the United States and a recent WHO study on healthcare system performance found Italy and Spain ranked in the top ten globally while the US came in 37th. “But number two, many more people smoke in Europe than here.”

“And this ravages the lungs,” Hannity noted. “And they have an older population too.”


“And they’re the ones that have been succumbing in the big numbers,” Hannity added.

“You’re going to see,” O’Reilly said, “the Centers for Disease Control, at the end of all this, is going to say this percentage of people who died from the virus, also had other things that killed them.”
I patiently await various colleagues of Chris Wallace to come to his defense:

No popcorn?!?!?!

Quote:Hannity released his plan for opening up Yankee Stadium tonight. It may seem it, but I am not joking when I say this: this screenshot is of him demonstrating how to eat a hot dog while wearing a mask, popcorn is prohibited in Hannity's re-opening plan. (Again, I'm serious.)

The Hollow Man brought a friend.
Did Hannity start using spray tan like his idol? Compare his fucking head to his hands in that screenshot.
Thinking about a private meeting with Putin like...
That may be the most disgusting thing I've ever seen.
I read not too long ago that Trump's unable to eat in front of anyone because of his dementia. Which is a nice way of saying he's a slob but now we're pretending that he hasn't always been a slob.
Ugh, I hate that Fauci has to appear on Fox News. I mean, I get it, he wants to save lives, and his messaging is even more important for people who watch Fox News. But I hate it.
It’s probably safer to just go on Fox rather than be branded as a collaborator of the fake new organizations like CNN, NBC, etc.
Dr. Phil eventually owned up to his bullshit statistics, but here's a rundown of what he pulled from his ass on a recent appearance on Laura Ingraham's show.

I guess those actual experts Fox accidentally let through the cracks weren't available.  Oh, right, that's not happening again.

Quote:In a bizarre, eerily-lit interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, celebrity talk show psychologist Dr. Phil McGraw argued for a rapid reopening of the economy and tried to justifiy the end of coronavirus mitigation measures by citing annual mortality data for car accidents and swimming pool deaths.

Ingraham has been vocally campaigning to re-open the economy and McGraw echoed that same argument on Thursday night, stepping into the role normally reserved for celebrity talk show doctor Dr. Mehmet Oz, who was notably absent. Oz had just hours earlier apologized for his misleading statements about the risk of reopening schools during an appearance on Hannity the day before.

McGraw’s focus during his appearance was the long-term health health risks of extreme isolation, a subject that he claimed is “never” discussed during the public epidemiological assessments about the coronavirus threat.

“This is invisible. I can’t show you an X-ray of depression. I can’t show you an X-ray of anxiety,” McGraw said. “But the fact of the matter is, the longer this lockdown goes on the more vulnerable people get and it’s like there’s a tipping point. There’s a point at which people start having enough problems in lockdown that it will actually create actually more destruction and actually more death across time than the actual virus will itself.”

But when McGraw pivoted to citing statistics supporting his argument, he both botched the data and made specious connections between well-established public health risks and a highly transmissible virus that has become the country’s number-one killer in the span of three months.

“Two hundred and fifty people a year die from poverty,” McGraw incorrectly claimed, an absurdly low number that stands more than 1,000 times lower than a 2011 study that put the number closer to 300,000. “The poverty line is getting such that more and more people are going to fall below that because the economy is crashing around us.”

“And they’re doing that because people are dying from the coronavirus. I get that,” McGraw then said, conceding a key point undermining his own argument. He then tried a different tack, while again offering misleading information.

“The fact of the matter is we have people dying, 45,000 people a year die from automobile accidents,” McGraw claimed, though the most recent CDC data for motor vehicle deaths puts the figure at 38,659, a yearly death toll that the coronavirus will easily surpass after having been in the U.S. population only since January. He then cited the absurdly high number of 360,000 for annual “swimming pool deaths” in the country. In fact, McGraw’s figure is roughly 100 times higher than the nation’s actual  unintentional deaths from drowning figure, not all of which involve swimming pools.

“But we don’t shut the country down for that!” McGraw exclaimed after that litany of inaccurate data and faulty reasoning. “But yet we are doing it for this and the fallout is going to last for years because people’s lives are being destroyed.”

” I come from a family that owned a small business, a car wash. And I’m always — my heart is always with the people who get, you know, frankly, screwed,” Ingraham said. “I hate that word, screwed, in situations like this, but the restaurateurs, their employees are their family. That’s their family. They’ve had the same employees for 30 years. And these are grown men in tears and they are like — I can’t believe — and these are grown men. And I’ve never seen this. I’ve never witnessed this before. Ever.”

After Ingraham’s heavy emphasis on the fate of business owners during the deadly pandemic, McGraw noted that some restaurant owners even had to throw out their produce because of the rapid onset of the outbreak.

“When it happened they got no warning. Some of them had just received huge orders of perishable foods. They didn’t even have time to give it away,” he noted, without mentioning that restaurant and food supply workers often face a heightened risk of contracting the coronavirus. “They have these, these people that have worked for them for 20 or 30 years. And they can’t afford to keep them on. And they can’t do takeout at a lot of these restaurants, they are not geared for that. And so people are just at home and, of course, it’s a perfect storm, Laura, because here you’ve got people that are in isolation. That creates problems. Loneliness actually create problems.”

“So we think we are protecting people’s lives by keeping them locked up. You keep them locked up long enough, there’s a paradoxical effect,” McGraw concluded, before suggesting that choosing not to follow quarantine or shelter-in-place guidelines could be a safer public health decision. “You actually destroy more lives than you do by letting them go out and protect themselves and opt in to their lives to fight for what they believe in.”

“I could not agree more,” Ingraham said. “I’ve been — I mean, I have not slept during this just because I’m so worried about our country.”
Can't say I ever heard of an "ironic swastika," but it still sounds pretty bad, Gutfeld:

Quote:Fox News host attacks Michigan governor for calling out swastikas at yesterday's protest against social distancing, saying that they were being displayed ironically

Video at the link.

Also, Gutfeld has a Lou Reed shirt on in the clip, and it's making me want to reassess what's cool and what's not cool. Don't take Lou from me!

Ainsley Earhardt has some concerns about Trump's new round of immigration policy, because this time she is directly affected by it:
I would be willing to bet a substantial sum of money that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the protesters who have been out and about the past couple of weeks have not had an immediate family member get seriously ill due to the coronavirus. Not giving a damn about anything that hasn't directly affected them is sort of a signature conservative characteristic.
Fox News is asking a judge to not force journalist Malia Zimmerman to be deposed in the Seth Rich civil lawsuit:

Quote:Fox News filed a motion in federal court on Wednesday asking a federal judge to keep one of their reporters from being deposed in an ongoing civil lawsuit that stems from the octopus-like legal fallout from the network’s retraction of a story about Seth Rich.

A Fox News executive told Law&Crime that this is a First Amendment issue that all news organizations should care about.

"The court’s decision goes into constitutional territory that is significant to all news organizations, and therefore needs to be vindicated for important reasons well beyond the confines of the specific case,” the executive said.

The story here begins with a conspiracy theory pushed by far-right elements that Rich, who worked for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), was gunned down at the age of 27 in Washington D.C. over his alleged but never substantiated connection to the 2016 DNC email scandal.

On May 17, 2017, Fox News breathed life into the conspiracy theory when journalist Malia Zimmerman penned a story headlined, “Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, had contact with WikiLeaks, say multiple sources.”

The first paragraph of Zimmerman’s piece laid out the thesis:

The Democratic National Committee staffer who was gunned down on July 10 on a Washington, D.C., street just steps from his home had leaked thousands of internal emails to WikiLeaks, law enforcement sources told Fox News.

On May 23, 2017, Fox News retracted the story and issued a statement which noted that Zimmerman’s piece “was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting” and had “since been removed.”

A flurry of legal filings followed that retraction and the various parties’ various legal positions eventually snowballed into the current issue before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Two weeks ago, conservative U.S. District Judge Richard Leon refused to stop Zimmerman from being deposed in a lawsuit filed by Seth Rich’s brother Aaron Rich against conservative activist and media proprietor Matthew Couch, his outlet America First Media, and frequent Fox News contributor Ed Butowsky.

Aaron Rich is suing Butowsky and Couch for statements suggesting that he was “the technological know-how behind, and financial beneficiary of” the fantasized Rich-WikiLeaks collaboration.

Butowsky is a GOP donor. He’s also the person who allegedly pushed the network to lend their name to the conspiracy theory in the first place. And, he’s definitely the person behind former homicide detective Rod Wheeler offering his services to the Rich family in order to investigate the DNC staffer’s untimely death.

Aaron Rich wants Zimmerman to testify about what she and Butowsky discussed before and after publication–and retraction–of her discredited WikiLeaks-Seth Rich article. Specifically, Rich wants to know what “Butowsky communicated to or from third parties regarding Mr. Rich, but also to determine whether Butowsky acted intentionally or recklessly…when he shifted his narrative to focus on [Aaron Rich] subsequent to the retraction of” Zimmerman’s article.

Butowsky and Couch have both thrown Zimmerman under the bus and stated in court filings that she has “knowledge about her investigation of and the article she wrote” about the murder.

Fox News moved for a protective order that would have barred Zimmerman from being deposed on the basis of the First Amendment and New York State law protecting journalists.

Judge Leon denied the request on the basis that the privilege doesn’t really apply to the issues involved in the case; that Zimmerman had largely waived any such privilege that she might have been entitled to by virtue of her discussions with Butowsky, who is “neither a journalist nor a news source,” according to the judge; and because “Rich has overcome the newsgathering privilege as to certain topics that arguably go to the heart of his claims.”

In a Wednesday filing, Fox News asked for Leon to overrule himself out of concern for the constitutional issues at stake in compelling a journalist to give testimony.

"Reconsideration is warranted because the Court’s opinion adopts an unduly narrow view of what constitutes protected newsgathering and editorial activity that is inconsistent with established precedent regarding the First Amendment privilege and the New York Press Shield Law,” the filing argues. “The Court’s ruling simultaneously takes too broad a view of the bases on which a litigant may overcome these strict privileges, allowing testimony that does not go to the heart of Mr. Rich’s claims or that is available from alternative sources.”

The network and Zimmerman also offered Leon an additional way out by way of a compromise, which would essentially accede to the court’s desire to force Zimmerman to testify as long as he vacates the findings that push First Amendment boundaries. 
"Hyrdowhata?  Never heard of it!"

Quote:For a month’s stretch, the Fox News star Laura Ingraham relentlessly promoted the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to her nearly four million nightly viewers.

The drug was “a game changer” in the fight against the coronavirus, the conservative anchor declared. She booked recovered patients to describe their “miracle turnaround” — “like Lazarus, up from the grave,” as Ms. Ingraham put it. Anyone who questioned the drug’s efficacy, she said, was “in total denial.”

“I love everybody, love the medical profession,” the host said on April 3, after listing off public health experts who questioned the cure. “But they want a double-blind controlled study on whether the sky is blue.”

But as of last Wednesday, Ms. Ingraham was no longer talking about hydroxychloroquine, and she didn’t bring it up on her show for a week.

Her fellow Fox News prime-time stars Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity also cut back on referring to the drug. In fact, since April 13, hydroxychloroquine has been mentioned about a dozen times on Fox News, compared with more than 100 times in the four previous weeks, according to a review of network transcripts.

The shift came as President Trump has dialed back his public zeal for the treatment — and as studies and health experts have increasingly cast doubt on the efficacy of the drug in treating coronavirus.

On Tuesday, a study of 368 Veterans Affairs patients showed that the use of hydroxychloroquine was associated with an increased risk of death. Mr. Trump’s own medical team, including Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s leading expert on infectious diseases, has urged caution about hydroxychloroquine, noting the drug’s potential adverse effect on patients with heart troubles.

Ms. Ingraham declined to be interviewed for this article. On Wednesday, after this article was published online, she opened her Fox News program by dismissing the results of the Veterans Affairs study, calling it “shoddy,” “shockingly irresponsible” and “agenda-driven.”

“What’s driving this blind obsession to disprove the effectiveness of a drug that is being used right now, tonight, in medical centers across America?” Ms. Ingraham said, above an onscreen graphic that read “The Truth About Hydroxychloroquine.”

She added: “Is it triggered by pure hatred of Trump? Of Fox? Of me?” (Ms. Ingraham prefaced her remarks by reminding viewers: “I’m not a doctor; I don’t play one on TV.”)

Since mid-March, hydroxychloroquine has been a staple of the right-wing news media venues that Mr. Trump follows closely, including Rush Limbaugh’s radio show and Fox News prime time.

Ms. Ingraham was an early and enthusiastic advocate. On April 2, she told her viewers that “nearly all the experts that I’ve talked to, and the studies I’ve read, review this information, the evidence, and at this point, it’s come across as pretty much of a game changer.” The next day, she met with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office to personally pitch him on the drug.

Doctors around the country have prescribed hydroxychloroquine to patients for weeks despite the lack of rigorous trials. Some physicians say, given the speed and severity of the coronavirus, they are turning to any medicinal tools they can to save lives, even as little evidence has emerged that hydroxychloroquine is a panacea. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York has allowed that, “anecdotally,” doctors have seen positive results from the treatment, while reminding people that reliable data may take months to collect.

On Fox News, though, Ms. Ingraham acknowledged those caveats in passing, leaving an impression that a skeptical bureaucracy was keeping Americans from benefiting from a miracle drug.

On April 9, she began her program by mocking the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Robert Redfield, for “essentially dismissing, trashing” hydroxychloroquine “despite all of its success stories.” She told viewers that the doctors booked on her program that night — “my medicine cabinet” — would “set the record straight.” (Fox News said on Wednesday that Ms. Ingraham’s segments about hydroxychloroquine always included a doctor or recovered coronavirus patient.)

Later on the show, she interviewed a patient, Billy Saracino, who, by his account, recovered from the coronavirus because his wife was inspired by “The Ingraham Angle” to help arrange a prescription for hydroxychloroquine.

“It is amazing that the left and the medical establishment is still in total denial about the potential of these decades old drugs,” Ms. Ingraham said.

Within a week, she had stopped talking about the drug on-air.

Mr. Hannity, while not as prominent a hydroxychloroquine cheerleader as Ms. Ingraham was, also highlighted the use of the drug, at one point citing a study that, he told viewers, showed “hydroxychloroquine is rated now the most effective therapy by doctors, over 6,300 of them surveyed, for coronavirus.”

Mr. Hannity, who likes to remind viewers that he is “not a doctor,” routinely asked guests whether they would take hydroxychloroquine for treatment if they were infected with the disease.
Even Neil Cavuto's not buying Trump's "sarcasm."

Quote:Fox Business host Neil Cavuto called out President Donald Trump’s claim that he was being sarcastic when he suggested injecting disinfectant as a means to treat the coronavirus, pointing out that there was nothing to support “the dismissal he was giving today.”

“Wow. That is a little unsettling, folks,” Cavuto said on Friday. “Got to clarify this. The president was not joking in his remarks yesterday when he talked about injecting people with disinfectant, nor were we imagining the incredulous looks he got from his medical team when he made the suggestion.”

Cavuto gave a refresher of the comments Trump made during his Thursday coronavirus press briefing, reminding viewers that the president suggested that injecting disinfectant showed “great promise” for a coronavirus treatment. Trump later clarified that because disinfectants kill the coronavirus on surfaces, experts should test it as a way to clean inside the lungs.

“There was nothing in those comments yesterday that hinted of the dismissal he was giving today,” Cavuto remarked. “He is talking about injecting products like Lysol into your body to see if that can combat the disease. That is what he said.”

Cavuto — who spent much of his Friday show on Fox News fact checking the president — then questioned why Trump would pretend to be joking instead of just admitting his mistake, especially considering that the makers of Lysol released a public statement clarifying that the product should not, “under no circumstance,” be injected into the body.

Cavuto went on to criticize Trump’s peddling of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, noting he is offering information regarding unproven drugs that flies against what is being said by the FDA.

“Now, the president has often said that with hydroxychloroquine and these others, what have you got to lose? Well, in a V.A. study with a few hundred of our veterans, the risk is they have to lose their lives,” Cavuto explained. “It’s a vulnerable group that might have had respiratory or lung or heart-related issues that caused several of them to die. But this was at the V.A., this was not in China. These findings are from the FDA.”