Fox News "CIA analyst" pleads guilty to fraud

[Mr Spinkles]

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e84656-0bb7-11e6-a6b6-2e6de3695b0e_story.html

Among other crimes: "Simmons also conceded in his plea that he persuaded a woman with whom he had been romantically involved to make a $125,000 real estate investment with him, then used the money for personal expenses. It was investigators’ exploration of that allegation that led to the discovery of Simmons’s allegedly fictitious claim"

... But of course and unscrupulous Fox News had him on the air many times to spread accusations against the Obama administration, based on information that he couldn't share because it was "sensitive".

https://mediamatters.org/embed/static/clips/2015/10/15/42591/fnc-20140308-benghazi

https://mediamatters.org/embed/static/clips/2015/10/15/42595/fnc-cavuto-20121102-waynesimmons

 

[metis]

There's an error in your title-- it should read:
Fox Propoganda Channel "CIA analyst" pleads guilty to fraud

 

[Sunstone]

There's an error in your title-- it should read:
Fox Propoganda Channel "CIA analyst" pleads guilty to fraud

Now, now...you know FOX News is really no more biased than MSNBC, don't you? Why, there are currently five to seven scientific studies that prove FOX is above average accurate in its reportage.*



*Want to buy some prime $8000/acre farm land in the Sahara Desert?

 

[Kartari]

... But of course and unscrupulous Fox News had him on the air many times to spread accusations against the Obama administration...

The empty can rattles the most.

 

[Acim]

I think if Fox News wasn't around, some of the other channels wouldn't exist / have anything to talk about. At least it gives them some share of the ratings.

 

[YmirGF]

Hehe. You would think that they would at least attempt to vet contributors.

 

[tytlyf]

Hehe. You would think that they would at least attempt to vet contributors.

Vetting isn't important at Fox. Ever notice all the bimbo's they hire to read a teleprompter? All one needs to do is abide by the establishment agenda at the Ailes network. Don't expect Fox to ever mention this story either. They like their audience in the dark.

 

[YmirGF]

Vetting isn't important at Fox. Ever notice all the bimbo's they hire to read a teleprompter? All one needs to do is abide by the establishment agenda at the Ailes network. Don't expect Fox to ever mention this story either. They like their audience in the dark.

Good thing you are here to set us straight. *sigh*

 

[Revoltingest]

Good thing you are here to set us straight. *sigh*

It's also important to point out that fraud is never committed by journalists in other organizations.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

It's also important to point out that fraud is never committed by journalists in other organizations.

Ah yes. The defenders of Fox are here, right on cue, to remind us that if we set the bar low enough everything Fox does is okay.

 

[YmirGF]

Ah yes. The defenders of Fox are here, right on cue, to remind us that if we set the bar low enough everything Fox does is okay.

Oddly, I've never heard of the guy or seen him on Faux Nudes.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ah yes. The defenders of Fox are here, right on cue, to remind us that if we set the bar low enough everything Fox does is okay.

I don't defend Fox.
(I dislike them.)
What I offer you is context.
I point out that this happens whenever we imperfect humans are involved.
To focus solely upon a singular instance of fraud is to ignore that NPR, NYT &
other vaunted leftish sources have the same, & even worse examples of fraud.
Accepting this can be difficult when one wants to believe that in the world of news,
there is a simple black & white world of good (liberals) & evil (Fox).
But things are not so neatly divided in the real world, & I'm here to help by alerting
you to the likes of Jayson Blair & Janet Cooke.

 

[Underhill]

I don't defend Fox.
(I dislike them.)
What I offer you is context.
I point out that this happens whenever we imperfect humans are involved.
To focus solely upon a singular instance of fraud is to ignore that NPR, NYT &
other vaunted leftish sources have the same, & even worse examples of fraud.
Accepting this can be difficult when one wants to believe that in the world of news,
there is a simple black & white world of good (liberals) & evil (Fox).
But things are not so neatly divided in the real world, & I'm here to help by alerting
you to the likes of Jayson Blair & Janet Cooke.

You always do this.

The difference is that NPR has a scandal because their exec makes a comment behind closed doors, or because they fire a commentator for saying Islamophobic comments on a talk show.

Fox has a scandal because they manipulate photos and video footage and have an accuracy rate that would make Bernie Maddof proud.

A bit of false equivalency there.

 

[Revoltingest]

You always do this.

Not always.
Sometimes less blatant Foxophobia doesn't call to me, so I annoy our populace in other ways.

The difference is that NPR has a scandal because their exec makes a comment behind closed doors, or because they fire a commentator for saying Islamophobic comments on a talk show.

You always do this, ie, focus upon differences which are irrelevant.
There are other NPR scandals, eg, the Mike Daisey v Apple scandal.
This is an even clearer example of journalistic fraud than the OP offers.

Fox has a scandal because they manipulate photos and video footage and have an accuracy rate that would make Bernie Maddof proud.
A bit of false equivalency there.

You're using the old "false false equivalency" fallacy there.
It is not false equivalence to note that 2 different situations have something in common.
And the examples I offered are even better than the one in the OP, which wasn't about journalism at all.

 

[Underhill]

Not always.
Sometimes less blatant Foxophobia doesn't call to me, so I annoy our populace in other ways.

You always do this, ie, focus upon differences which are irrelevant.
There are other NPR scandals, eg, the Mike Daisey v Apple scandal.
This is an even clearer example of journalistic fraud than the OP offers.

You're using the old "false false equivalency" fallacy there.
It is not false equivalence to note that 2 different situations have something in common.
And the examples I offered are even better than the one in the OP, which wasn't about journalism at all.

And you are using the false, false, false equivalency fallacy!

My point is that while there is no such thing as a perfect news agency there is no doubt, when you start looking at the facts, that Fox is the worst and not by a small margin. They literally give memo's to their people about how to best phrase the news for the best political impact. They specifically tailor their guest list to pit aggressive republicans against weak democrats. They advertise republican rallies and belittle democratic events. They have consistently been rated, by virtually everyone, as the least accurate, most fraudulent news source outside of the internet.

Comparing them to NPR is laughable. It's like comparing Carter and Nixon. Neither was perfect but...

 

[Revoltingest]

And you are using the false, false, false equivalency fallacy!

Oh, yeah!
You're using the faux false false false equivalency fallacy!

My point is that while there is no such thing as a perfect news agency there is no doubt, when you start looking at the facts, that Fox is the worst and not by a small margin.

The facts?
You have evidence of all the fraudulent stories in the media for comparison?

They literally give memo's to their people about how to best phrase the news for the best political impact. They specifically tailor their guest list to pit aggressive republicans against weak democrats. They advertise republican rallies and belittle democratic events. They have consistently been rated, by virtually everyone, as the least accurate, most fraudulent news source outside of the internet.
Comparing them to NPR is laughable. It's like comparing Carter and Nixon. Neither was perfect but...

I listen to NPR but not Fox.
So I can only comment upon NPR's persistent bias & dishonesty which favors Democrats.
And worse yet, they're government created & financed (partially).

 

[tytlyf]

There are no media outlets that do what Fox does. If you watch all different kinds of news outlets, you can clearly tell the difference with Fox. Fox likes to insinuate things, hyperbolic language, very carefully selected word usage. Whoever writes the teleprompter scripts knows what they're doing. Very deceptive language. And let's not forget their usage of "some say," "some critics say," etc. There are no specifics, all they care about is if 1 person in the world may have mentioned something, they'll paint is as if the view is held by millions.

 

[Underhill]

Oh, yeah!
You're using the faux false false false equivalency fallacy!

The facts?
You have evidence of all the fraudulent stories in the media for comparison?

Every story? Of course not. But it took about 20 minutes of research to come to this conclusion. Fox breaks every rule news networks have (or had in some cases) for journalistic integrity. You don't need to know every case if you understand the methodology.

I listen to NPR but not Fox.
So I can only comment upon NPR's persistent bias & dishonesty which favors Democrats.

Except that you are now trying to claim the two are equivalent. So you kind of are.

And worse yet, they're government created & financed (partially).

Which is why they go out of their way to not be biased. As the great Ed Murrow said, "you cannot make good news out of bad practice." Fox consistently uses the worst practices. NPR the best. It doesn't make them perfect, but it does make them vastly better.

 

[metis]

Every story? Of course not. But it took about 20 minutes of research to come to this conclusion. Fox breaks every rule news networks have (or had in some cases) for journalistic integrity. You don't need to know every case if you understand the methodology.



Except that you are now trying to claim the two are equivalent. So you kind of are.



Which is why they go out of their way to not be biased. As the great Ed Murrow said, "you cannot make good news out of bad practice." Fox consistently uses the worst practices. NPR the best. It doesn't make them perfect, but it does make them vastly better.

You must be talking to the Master of False Equivalences, a.k.a. "Revoltingest". I need not take him off my ignore list to pretty much know whom it must be.

 

[Revoltingest]

Every story? Of course not. But it took about 20 minutes of research to come to this conclusion. Fox breaks every rule news networks have (or had in some cases) for journalistic integrity. You don't need to know every case if you understand the methodology.

I see opinion....not "methodology" here.

Except that you are now trying to claim the two are equivalent. So you kind of are.

I did?
This is a straw man because to claim equivalency is a rather precise thing, & easy to debunk.
I claim similarity in that fraud can afflict news organizations of all political orientations.
Do you argue against what I actually claim?

Which is why they go out of their way to not be biased.

They even go further than just saying that.
During their fundraisers, they frequently claim they've no bias.
I'm sure they even believe it.
But it's not true.

As the great Ed Murrow said, "you cannot make good news out of bad practice." Fox consistently uses the worst practices. NPR the best. It doesn't make them perfect, but it does make them vastly better.

I prefer NPR to Fox, but I don't "join the team", & claim it's good against evil.
One should be skeptical of all sources.