Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politicus USA)   So why isn't it prosecuted for failing to register as a PAC?   (politicususa.com) divider line
    More: Murica, News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch, Fox News Channel, Mass media, Legendary journalist Dan, Roger Ailes, steady stream of hatred, New York Post  
•       •       •

3787 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 May 2022 at 12:20 AM (12 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



25 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-05-22 10:17:23 PM  
That site should register as a sex offender because it just did awful things to my phone.
 
2022-05-22 11:51:36 PM  
Uh huh, Dan Rather, the perfect reference point for neutral political reporting.
 
2022-05-23 12:22:49 AM  
Same answer as always.

Because anyone who can do anything about it simply does not give a fark.
 
2022-05-23 12:26:23 AM  

Weatherkiss: Same answer as always.

Because anyone who can do anything about it simply does not give a fark.


Meanwhile Faux will go into a tizzy if "librul msm media" people donate money.
 
2022-05-23 12:48:46 AM  
i.redd.itView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 1:02:36 AM  

Lsherm: Uh huh, Dan Rather, the perfect reference point for neutral political reporting.


Uh huh.  He's dead nuts on.

Especially with this, as you so coyly illustrate:

To try to bring a sense of perspective to what Fox News is doing is to risk coming into their sights. And they can unleash all sorts of hell. Oftentimes they pick on people without a public presence who find their lives turned upside down. Even those of us more accustomed to the public spotlight can find ourselves battered by their attention. They throw up a smokescreen of "bias" to excuse their actions.
 
2022-05-23 1:09:50 AM  
Rupert Murdoch disrupted the news industry with this one wierd trick.
 
2022-05-23 1:20:22 AM  
Subby, the thing about laws, is they need to be enforced, and a lot of people in power only use laws to stay in power
 
2022-05-23 1:29:05 AM  
A they white? I eat their white
 
2022-05-23 1:33:11 AM  

ReaverZ: A they white? I eat their white


I'm gonna need some hot sauce with that.
 
2022-05-23 1:43:04 AM  

rosekolodny: ReaverZ: A they white? I eat their white

I'm gonna need some hot sauce with that.


Mayo maybe too spicy for most Fox viewsers.
 
2022-05-23 1:51:03 AM  
And if anyone tries to do anything about it, there'd be no end to the persecution-complex wailing from Republicans.

/ I really dislike these people.
 
2022-05-23 1:56:41 AM  
It isn't because it would inconvenience a lot of rich assholes, subby. HTH, HAND.
 
2022-05-23 2:00:51 AM  
They're not prosecuted because they haven't done anything illegal.

It's not illegal to be really, really shifty biased pseudo-journalists who don't give a fig about truth. It's not illegal to be untalented and unprincipled hacks who masquerade as commentators. It's not illegal to undermine democracy and the rule of law.

Those things aren't illegal in America -- or at least haven't been -- because you can never know who's doing the deciding about what's illegal.

But things are becoming different. There is an entire authoritarian wing of the Republican Party that wants to criminalize speech that it doesn't like: Ron DeathSantis has tried to make it illegal to report on COVID deaths in Florida, for example, and to demand that private publishers carry opinions he likes. Ronnie's not alone. Similar efforts are under way in almost every state controlled by MAGAts.

There's a reason such things are so repellent to real Americans: We don't trust government to decide who gets to hear what.

That's especially true for anybody operating under the penumbra of "news." Critical-thinking Americans don't want  government deciding what constitutes "real" news because we know that government can't be trusted to tell the truth, which is an important reason journalists exist.

MAGAts also don't want government deciding what constitutes real news because they might have to hear facts that challenge their world-view. So Fox ensures they don't.

That makes Fox bad journalists and -- more important -- bad citizens. They undermine democratic principles and attack anyone who stands for the rule of law. That makes them parrot white supremacy and antisemitism and every other bigotry that exists, just so they can make a buck. That makes them attack with outraged thunder anyone who calls them out on their racket.

All of which, in America, is legal.
 
2022-05-23 2:22:40 AM  
The "news" part of the Fox operation is just a cover, not only to provide a facade of respectability, but as a way of luring people in to their pitches. The extreme disconnect from ethics while pushing around hundreds of millions of dollars is a little scary. Sinclair and OAN are not much different, just less polished.
 
2022-05-23 2:53:58 AM  

Lsherm: Uh huh, Dan Rather, the perfect reference point for neutral political reporting.


We caught you in - literally - hundreds of more lies than Dan Rather ever tried to report. So cry harder.
 
2022-05-23 5:35:04 AM  
...and failing to register as an agent of a foreign power, considering how many times they've literally regurgitated RT propaganda pieces...
 
2022-05-23 5:59:50 AM  

nytmare: The "news" part of the Fox operation is just a cover, not only to provide a facade of respectability, but as a way of luring people in to their pitches. The extreme disconnect from ethics while pushing around hundreds of millions of dollars is a little scary. Sinclair and OAN are not much different, just less polished.


Nowadays  - for some time now, really -- "news" at Fox functions in the same capacity that edgy comedy programming and an aggressive pursuit of the NFL served in their early days in the 90s:  to draw you in.

Because it ceased to inform in any real way a long time ago - if ever
 
2022-05-23 6:52:36 AM  

bughunter: Lsherm: Uh huh, Dan Rather, the perfect reference point for neutral political reporting.

Uh huh.  He's dead nuts on.

Especially with this, as you so coyly illustrate:

To try to bring a sense of perspective to what Fox News is doing is to risk coming into their sights. And they can unleash all sorts of hell. Oftentimes they pick on people without a public presence who find their lives turned upside down. Even those of us more accustomed to the public spotlight can find ourselves battered by their attention. They throw up a smokescreen of "bias" to excuse their actions.


It's not that he's wrong. He's not. It's that he's old.

Fox news itself has argued in court it's not news, shouldn't be held to standards of news or truth, and it's your fault if you believe them.
 
2022-05-23 7:26:03 AM  
Just like WWE is wrestling entertainment, Fox should have to advertise as news entertainment.
 
2022-05-23 7:26:51 AM  
p 41440615620
 
2022-05-23 7:38:26 AM  

mcmnky: Fox news itself has argued in court it's not news, shouldn't be held to standards of news or truth, and it's your fault if you believe them.


Which was a bad decision to allow through in the first place - right up there with Citizens United.  Sometimes you do need to go with, "While perhaps technically in line with past precedent, your use of that is the weaponized version doing nothing but harm to the entire damn country since day 1."  These legal decisions love to pretend that everyone is a smarty that can carefully and critically evaluate the shiat that's being spit at them on a constant basis - and a farkload of a lot of people either can't, won't, or just don't care.  Much like food regulations and other shiat that people love to biatch about - "That's stupid anyone would know that hurhurr" that stuff needs to be there for a reason - the law needs to acknowledge that a large percentage of the human race is in fact pretty farking dumb.  And that another large percentage is intermittently dumb
 
2022-05-23 8:43:04 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 9:13:33 AM  
You know fire IS an option. Start burning rich peoples property and they will start enforcing laws.
 
2022-05-23 10:38:39 AM  

animal color: They're not prosecuted because they haven't done anything illegal.

It's not illegal to be really, really shifty biased pseudo-journalists who don't give a fig about truth. It's not illegal to be untalented and unprincipled hacks who masquerade as commentators. It's not illegal to undermine democracy and the rule of law.

Those things aren't illegal in America -- or at least haven't been -- because you can never know who's doing the deciding about what's illegal.

But things are becoming different. There is an entire authoritarian wing of the Republican Party that wants to criminalize speech that it doesn't like: Ron DeathSantis has tried to make it illegal to report on COVID deaths in Florida, for example, and to demand that private publishers carry opinions he likes. Ronnie's not alone. Similar efforts are under way in almost every state controlled by MAGAts.

There's a reason such things are so repellent to real Americans: We don't trust government to decide who gets to hear what.

That's especially true for anybody operating under the penumbra of "news." Critical-thinking Americans don't want  government deciding what constitutes "real" news because we know that government can't be trusted to tell the truth, which is an important reason journalists exist.

MAGAts also don't want government deciding what constitutes real news because they might have to hear facts that challenge their world-view. So Fox ensures they don't.

That makes Fox bad journalists and -- more important -- bad citizens. They undermine democratic principles and attack anyone who stands for the rule of law. That makes them parrot white supremacy and antisemitism and every other bigotry that exists, just so they can make a buck. That makes them attack with outraged thunder anyone who calls them out on their racket.

All of which, in America, is legal.


I suspect, given that the way Faux distinguishes between its news and its  "infotainment", that the infotainment side - Tukkker, Ingrham, Hannity, et. al. - could be considered a donation in kind to particular campaigns.  That would be illegal.
 
Displayed 25 of 25 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.