New low for Fox News -- Doctoring photos

[Bang]

Oh boo, hoo! How about being men and stop crying and whining all the time about FOX NEWS? Put your soaked crying towels away little kids .....if you don't like watching FOX why are you noticing and watching FOX? Change the channel and simply go back to watching the Clinton News Network instead.

I must say your responses are ridiculously puerile. It's almost as if you're doing a parody of a close minded goose-stepper.

People watch and notice Fox because they engage in propaganda that turns the weak of mind into drones who answer legitimate concerns with words like "boo hoo".

It's almost funny that you want everyone to act like men, but your responses have about as much maturity as would be expected out of a five year old.

~Bang

[DarrellsMyHero28]

The LA Times put a doctored photo from the Iraq war on its front page a few years back and had to apologize for it. This stunt by Fox News is comical by comparison.

Except the difference is the LA Times owned up and apologized.

FoxNews rarely apologizes for this stuff. Why do you think theres a Fox Attacks group? There's bias in all the major media networks but Fox hardly even tries to hide it. They have become a joke of a news network and the need to have their journalistic licenses revoked (if there even is such a thing).

I am a Democrat and probably have a harder time seeing the 'liberal bias' than those who are more conservative but I was one of the first to call for Dan Rather to be fired after the Killian document incident. We cannot have people lying in the media, we need to fight to have the fair and balenced news that Fox claims to have...enough of the opinionated facts, Americans deserve better.

[ntotoro]

What the... ? Are those even real?

[slackermike]

But what is to be expected from the propaganda channel?

~Bang

They are ALL propaganda channels, not just Fox News.

[Larry Brown #43]

Except the difference is the LA Times owned up and apologized.

FoxNews rarely apologizes for this stuff. Why do you think theres a Fox Attacks group? There's bias in all the major media networks but Fox hardly even tries to hide it. They have become a joke of a news network and the need to have their journalistic licenses revoked (if there even is such a thing).

I think you just touched on the key here. The other networks do a better job of hiding it, which actually makes them more dangerous, because people assume they're credible. They don't hit you over the head with their bias, but instead they just allow it to silently seep into your head over time. That's a lot more dangerous than an almost cartoonish left-wing or right-wing network. I agree that Fox News does a lousy job of hiding its bias, but that makes them less threatening, because anyone who's paying any attention at all can detect the bias.

You seem like a smart guy, yet you admitted that you have a hard time detecting the liberal bias of other outlets. That's my point exactly. It's harder to detect, and therefore more dangerous. Kinda like carbon monoxide.

[Hooper]

I think the "terrorist fist bump" or "I wish Obama was assassinated" beats this by a mile.

Hey, those things were said "accidentally" remember?

Several times.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I think you just touched on the key here. The other networks do a better job of hiding it, which actually makes them more dangerous, because people assume they're credible. They don't hit you over the head with their bias, but instead they just allow it to silently seep into your head over time. That's a lot more dangerous than an almost cartoonish left-wing or right-wing network. I agree that Fox News does a lousy job of hiding its bias, but that makes them less threatening, because anyone who's paying any attention at all can detect the bias.

You seem like a smart guy, yet you admitted that you have a hard time detecting the liberal bias of other outlets. That's my point exactly. It's harder to detect, and therefore more dangerous. Kinda like carbon monoxide.

I see what you're saying and agree with you to a point.

I have a harder time recognizing subtle things because I agree with them.

I can easily wade through the bull**** that either side throws out there when they have their attack dog pundits (Olbermann to O'Riley) rip into the opposite side.

I think that Fox is by far the least credible of the major news networks, I don't think its a matter of the other groups 'hiding' things, though I'm sure they have, I think its just a lack of class and integrity on the part of Fox.

It is sad in some ways because there are plenty of stupid people in this country who watch the news and take every thing as the word of God.

Those people are hopeless, they will never believe anything the other side says, they listen to people like Rush and believe every word.

Its just almost sad to see that a major news network would do something this childish. When you look at the photos side by side with the originals, they didn't even do a good job with it. It seems like this station is run by a bunch of ignorant teenagers who believe their only job is to bash anything and everything left of center.

FoxNews should be ashamed, they may apologize but its not going to change. They'll continue to be a joke.

[Burgold]

I think you just touched on the key here. The other networks do a better job of hiding it, which actually makes them more dangerous, because people assume they're credible.

This is the con man's fallacy. Con men generally assume because they are liars and always working a scheme that everybody else is. Sometimes they're right, but quite often they're wrong. Not everybody is working an angle.

Reports and reporters do have biases, but that is different than intentionally biasing information. I think that is an important distinction.

[Popeman38]

Yeah Arianna claims everyday how fair and balanced she is, huh? She's a political blogger that what they do bro. Fox is supposed to be news - not a blog.

Umm, those photos ran on CNN and ion the NY Times. Real news sources.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Umm, those photos ran on CNN and ion the NY Times. Real news sources.

But were they aware that the photos were doctored?

This is FoxNews doctoring the pictures themselves.

Reuters was the one that changed those pictures, not CNN or the NY Times.

[Larry Brown #43]

This is the con man's fallacy. Con men generally assume because they are liars and always working a scheme that everybody else is. Sometimes they're right, but quite often they're wrong. Not everybody is working an angle.

Reports and reporters do have biases, but that is different than intentionally biasing information. I think that is an important distinction.

Fair point. Take a look at Dan Rather, though. Here's a guy who, because of his own political agenda, decided that a story about a U.S. Congressman (Gary Condit) who was being questioned--and his apartment searched--in connection with the disappearance of a staff member to which he was romantically linked, WAS NOT NEWS. He refused to broadcast this story that was so obviously news. Yet how many people consider him cartoonishly left-leaning? Well, some conservatives do. But most people just see him as a respectable journalist, because he did a decent job of making it appear to the average person that he wasn't biased.

I just generally think a news outlet that's cartoonishly biased is less dangerous than one that's quietly, deceptively biased. And I'm not saying this to defend Fox News. I think they're a joke of a news outlet. But I think there are other outlets that are just as biased, but they just do a better job of making people believe they're not.

[Corcaigh]

Someone retaliates with some modified photos of Fox News presenters:

[JimmyConway]

I think the "terrorist fist bump" or "I wish Obama was assassinated" beats this by a mile.

I second that.