Non-MSM Fake News

Spindrift

Time Person of the Year, 2006
Spindrift
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
19,246
Location
Right here!
FoxNews that journalistic bastion of the Non-MSM, had a pro-Trump highly decorated, combat wounded, Vietnam vet SEAL on. Minor issue with that is that he wasn't a highly decorated, combat wounded, Vietnam vet SEAL but he was pro-Trump.

FoxNews was informed the next day that the guy was a fake. So they immediately retracted the story. Well sort of, if you think 10 days later is immediately.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-fox-news-was-a-fake/?utm_term=.3d7d80490c39
 
Spindrift said:
FoxNews that journalistic bastion of the Non-MSM, had a pro-Trump highly decorated, combat wounded, Vietnam vet SEAL on. Minor issue with that is that he wasn't a highly decorated, combat wounded, Vietnam vet SEAL but he was pro-Trump.

FoxNews was informed the next day that the guy was a fake. So they immediately retracted the story. Well sort of, if you think 10 days later is immediately.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-fox-news-was-a-fake/?utm_term=.3d7d80490c39
Click to expand...

Not fake news. Failing to check someone's background is bad, but not fake news.
 
Apparently he tried to backpedal by saying the service was covert.

If I'm reading correctly.
 
Spindrift said:
Nope. Fake news.

Terrible journalism is the part where they went with the story without really checking it out. Leaving the story for 10 days is much more than terrible journalism.
Click to expand...

I like the Wikipedia definition

Fake news is a type of yellow journalism or propaganda that consists of deliberate misinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional print and broadcast news media or online social media.[1] Fake news is written and published with the intent to mislead in order to damage an agency, entity, or person, and/or gain financially or politically, often with sensationalist, exaggerated, or patently false headlines that grab attention.[
Click to expand...

Not correcting a non deliberate story is bad. But there is nothing there about the retraction process.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I like the Wikipedia definition



Not correcting a non deliberate story is bad. But there is nothing there about the retraction process.
Click to expand...

That definition fits the story. FoxNews deliberately spread a hoax as soon as they were aware the story was fake and they continued to have it on their site.
 
My service is even more covert, so you don't have clearance to verify my several Ultraviolet Hearts, nor my Congressional Medal of Honor presented by President Washington, during my service as a Navy Sea Lion (like SEALs, but more elite). And Fox would have me on if I praised Trump for his leadership at Thermopylae (during which he personally led a helicopter rescue under fire).
 
Minoosh said:
Apparently he tried to backpedal by saying the service was covert.

If I'm reading correctly.
Click to expand...

No such animal - No suck thing as a "covert" member of a go-fast unit. If a guy was a SEAL, he graduated from BUDs, and there would be a record of it. If a guy was SF he would have graduated from JFK and there would be a record of it.

There's so many of these guys running around loose nowadys it isn't even funny.

The real SEAL noted in the news report has some vids up on YT showing him confronting fake SEALs that folks report to him asking for verification if the individual is in fact a SEAL. Some of it is funny, most simply depressing. Some guys are just lying, some working an angle for a scam.

The 10 days between broadcast and retraction most likely involved the lawyers going through material to make sure they had their foot on base - they should have done their due diligence before running the story in the first place.
 
BStrong said:
No such animal - No suck thing as a "covert" member of a go-fast unit. If a guy was a SEAL, he graduated from BUDs, and there would be a record of it. If a guy was SF he would have graduated from JFK and there would be a record of it.

There's so many of these guys running around loose nowadys it isn't even funny.

The real SEAL noted in the news report has some vids up on YT showing him confronting fake SEALs that folks report to him asking for verification if the individual is in fact a SEAL. Some of it is funny, most simply depressing. Some guys are just lying, some working an angle for a scam.

The 10 days between broadcast and retraction most likely involved the lawyers going through material to make sure they had their foot on base - they should have done their due diligence before running the story in the first place.
Click to expand...

I was in a unit so covert that I'm the only one who knows it even existed.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Not fake news. Failing to check someone's background is bad, but not fake news.
Click to expand...

You are perfectly correct. As the president of the USA has defined it "fake news" means that it's news which is true, or at least broadly accurate, but portrays the President in an unflattering light or otherwise damages his reputation.

In a sense it's fake because it's not news about his greatness and the many great things he's done that Obama the failed failure couldn't do.
 
Argumemnon said:
You're playing with words now. Fake news is created as fake intentionally. Fox does plenty of those without having to mislabel the ones they don't.
Click to expand...
Who's playing with words?
That's like saying one can't lie by omission.

The story was about a fake and they knew it and didn't correct it. Ten days is close to an eternity in today's news cycles.
 
sts60 said:
My service is even more covert, so you don't have clearance to verify my several Ultraviolet Hearts, nor my Congressional Medal of Honor presented by President Washington, during my service as a Navy Sea Lion (like SEALs, but more elite). And Fox would have me on if I praised Trump for his leadership at Thermopylae (during which he personally led a helicopter rescue under fire).
Click to expand...


Ah, but what they won't tell us is why that helicopter needed to be rescued.

Ask the hard questions, sheeple!
 
Fox News retracted the story and apologized when they found out they had been fooled. Of course, WaPo, NYT, and hundreds of others publish fake news every day and never apologize.
 
BrooklynBaby said:
Fox News retracted the story and apologized when they found out they had been fooled.
Click to expand...
Well, it did take them ten days to retract a story that wouldn't have needed retracting if they had taken the time to check into it a little more closely first. That raises an interesting point, too- with the immediate pressure to fill air time with news (that they also don't have the time to go into in any depth anyway), is TV news inherently less trustworthy, because that pressure obviates the ability, or overrides the need, to check into the stories a little more closely? (Not just picking on Fox News here, either) And this isn't really a criticism- maybe it's just the inevitable nature of the beast, that when serious news is demanded from and then conveyed by a medium that's more fundamentally one of entertainment, then we get what we pay for instead of what we ask for, and maybe what we really only wanted anyway.
Of course, WaPo, NYT, and hundreds of others publish fake news every day and never apologize.
Click to expand...
Sure. A few examples might make this a stronger tu-quoque, huh? Otherwise, it's just one of those things that people say because they've heard it repeated, usually prefaced with "of course"- sort of the reason we have fake news. (I won't even hold you to the "every day," since that just sounds like an expression- you know, one of those things people say without really thinking about or meaning seriously)
 
BStrong said:
... The 10 days between broadcast and retraction most likely involved the lawyers going through material to make sure they had their foot on base - they should have done their due diligence before running the story in the first place.
Click to expand...
Or more likely, they were about to be exposed. :rolleyes:
 
BrooklynBaby said:
Fox News retracted the story and apologized when they found out they had been fooled. Of course, WaPo, NYT, and hundreds of others publish fake news every day and never apologize.
Click to expand...

Please list examples of these hundreds of fake news stories which the WAPO and the NYT refuse to retract when proven wrong.
Or, to use a classic Poker expression, put up or shut up.
 
Trebuchet said:
My sarcasm detector has run up against Poe's law. Can someone help me out here?
Click to expand...
We'd love to, but the claim to which you responded seems to suffer from a severe case of "lack of evidence", which means it will likely live forever...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Pretty minor thing to pick at considering all the actual controversies going on these days. I didn't see the story or the retraction.

ETA:
Ah it was on FB that would be why I missed it.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it around the point where if some security commentator is on fox news that means they are lying about their credentials? They get bit by this rather a lot.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I like the Wikipedia definition



Not correcting a non deliberate story is bad. But there is nothing there about the retraction process.
Click to expand...


They deliberately left it out there with "the intent to mislead". Ergo fake news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom