Cast doubt on climate science

[Persia]

The directive, sent by Fox News Washington managing editor Bill Sammon, was issued less than 15 minutes after Fox correspondent...

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201012150004

[Guest]

The directive, sent by Fox News Washington managing editor Bill Sammon, was issued less than 15 minutes after Fox correspondent...

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201012150004

I wonder what skeptical comment this will illicit from our resident team. Just didn't happen-maybe, lies lies and more damn lies-probably.

We will have to wait and see.

Br Cornelius

[IamsSon]

Amazing how this news channel supposedly no one watches can counteract the Big 3 and CNN and MSNBC who are shilling for Global Warming. More power to them!

[Guest]

Amazing how this news channel supposedly no one watches can counteract the Big 3 and CNN and MSNBC who are shilling for Global Warming. More power to them!

So fox news editing the facts is good news now. I must have been asleep when they redefined truth.

Br Cornelius

[IamsSon]

So fox news editing the facts is good news now. I must have been asleep when they redefined truth.

Br Cornelius

No, Fox News editing the news in the opposite way that CNN, MSNBC and the Big 3 edit the news is better news than no one presenting the opposite view.

[+OverSword]

No, Fox News editing the news in the opposite way that CNN, MSNBC and the Big 3 edit the news is better news than no one presenting the opposite view.

Most people will not agree with you because it runs counter to thier own ideas. I , however do agree with you, however little that's actually worth.

[Guest]

No, Fox News editing the news in the opposite way that CNN, MSNBC and the Big 3 edit the news is better news than no one presenting the opposite view.

That assumes that there is an equal and opposite view to report. Simply introducing a position of doubt because it suits your agenda is called introducing bias.

Br Corneliu

[Guest]

Most people will not agree with you because it runs counter to thier own ideas. I , however do agree with you, however little that's actually worth.

What was actually documented was the taking of a facted based report and twisting the facts. Forcing journalists to alter their facts is OK for you then .

This is what I expected, so thanks for confirming the worst.

Br Cornelius

[+OverSword]

Nice!

And point taken, however the point I was agreeing with is that fox news twists the facts in the opposite direction than most other main stream media twists thier facts. I would be all for not twisting any facts at all but where is the fun in that BR? Hell your warm mongers do it all the time.

And don't get mad, I'm just having fun, not that I dont mean what I say, just that what anybody says is trivial, of the moment, and who cares anyway!

BTW, you're welcom for my confirmation of the worst.

[Wickian]

I read the article, and this is the quote that FOX told it's employees;

Given the controversy over the veracity of climate change data, we should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question. It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies.

That's not exactly all that unreasonable.

[Guest]

Nice!

And point taken, however the point I was agreeing with is that fox news twists the facts in the opposite direction than most other main stream media twists thier facts. I would be all for not twisting any facts at all but where is the fun in that BR? Hell your warm mongers do it all the time.

And don't get mad, I'm just having fun, not that I dont mean what I say, just that what anybody says is trivial, of the moment, and who cares anyway!

BTW, you're welcom for my confirmation of the worst.

Can you show me some similar evidence of where the other channels have systematically twisted the facts - otherwise its just biased opinion, because they are not reporting what you believe.

I will wait - but not to long.

Br Cornelius

[IamsSon]

That assumes that there is an equal and opposite view to report. Simply introducing a position of doubt because it suits your agenda is called introducing bias.

Br Corneliu

It's better than assuming there isn't.

[Guest]

It's better than assuming there isn't.

No assumptions need to be made - the evidence is compelling and very heavily weighted with AGW.

To give equal weight to insubstantial evidence is not fair reporting.

Its like saying that because there were a few reports that said that smoking wasn't the cause of lung cancer, and there were thousands that said it was - we should report the two sides as if their were no material difference to the claims. It would be lying and misleading the public. This is what actually happened for a long time and as a consequence no effective action was taken against tobacco for many decades. The parallels are striking.

Br Cornlius

[danielost]

media matters part of the group trying to destroy the usa ok.

[+OverSword]

Can you show me some similar evidence of where the other channels have systematically twisted the facts - otherwise its just biased opinion, because they are not reporting what you believe.

I will wait - but not to long.

Br Cornelius

You have got to be kidding? But then again I see you're in Ireland so let me just say that if you were watching the cable news chanels in the US I wouldn't have to bother showing you evidence. I wouldn't need to have seen the fox news memo to know this is what they do just as I don't need to see a CNN memo to know they do the exact same in favor of the other paradigm. What we are presented with here are two extreme ends of the truth, augmented and directed by either a liberal or conservative point of view.

edit. maybe that's why I don't really believe anything I see or hear on tv.

Edited December 15, 2010 by OverSword

[danielost]

i see nothing wrong with the press on either side questioning the validity of a report or a group or a person.

[Guest]

You have got to be kidding? But then again I see you're in Ireland so let me just say that if you were watching the cable news chanels in the US I wouldn't have to bother showing you evidence. I wouldn't need to have seen the fox news memo to know this is what they do just as I don't need to see a CNN memo to know they do the exact same in favor of the other paradigm. What we are presented with here are two extreme ends of the truth, augmented and directed by either a liberal or conservative point of view.

edit. maybe that's why I don't really believe anything I see or hear on tv.

I would have some sympathy with this position, if I didn't have access to the raw scientific research - unaltered by editorial teams with their own politico/financial agendas. And no I do not subscribe to the notion that all climate scientists are Rockafella stooges.

Br Cornelius