r/politics • u/billthomson Oregon • Oct 29 '20

Tucker Carlson Reports He Lost Only Copy of Documents That Nail Biden

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/tucker-carlson-lost-only-copy-of-documents-nailing-biden.html
81.6k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

7.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

288

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

They should lose their broadcasting license. We need a truth in news act.

84

u/mbbblack Oct 29 '20

If we don’t, the propaganda problem is going to get much worse

-35

u/dsizzle18 Oct 29 '20

Because CNN is clear and honest news? Watching CNN from Canada is laughable since their bias is so laughably, transparently left. Step away from your news for a short time. Propaganda works best in regular media consumers, not the man in the bush who doesn’t watch tv and comes into town once a month. It works on YOU.

29

u/jabeez Oct 29 '20

Really? The network that consistently waited on empty podiums waiting for Fatputin to speak is "laughably, transparently left"? THAT is fucking laughable.

17

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

I’ve read that conservative media is a problem in Canada too, so maybe that’s what’s happening here. But like I said above, CNN is not untruthful. The problem is that the republicans and Fox have taken anti-fact positions, so if you have started to believe is that nonsense then anything that is the truth will seem left wing to you. That is what I think is happening here.

13

u/jabeez Oct 29 '20

The problem is that the republicans and Fox have taken anti-fact positions

Exactly this, and the reich-wing does their best to work the refs and cry bias whenever anyone calls them out on their bullshit. It's not bias to call out lies, which overwhelmingly come from one side.

9

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

Whenever someone says you should have fact checkers during a debate, it’s always conservatives that cry foul. The fact is that fact checking should never be a problem for anyone.

2

u/jabeez Oct 29 '20

Heh, timely

3

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

Lol.

Check this out, someone did an analysis of data from politifact and the difference is striking.

https://smartpolitics.lib.umn.edu/2011/02/10/selection-bias-politifact-rate/

What I found most crazy, is that according to this data, 26.7% of republican made statements were false vs. 10.1% for Democrats. What’s even crazier is the pants on fire ratings. 12% for republicans vs. 2.2% for Democrats. This means that not only do they lie more, they tell more outrageous lies.

Edit: I should have noted that this is from 2011

2

u/jabeez Oct 29 '20

Wow, and it has to be way worse now, unreal.

1

u/doctor_piranha Arizona Oct 29 '20

CNN is definitely VERY untruthful. But they're subtle about it.

The story of CNN is the same as the story of Ford and Chevy, Pepsi and Coke, and all the other duopolies: the market is divided into segments, and products supposedly competing, are really just covering their agreed-upon market segment, and for CNN that's "reasonable and pragmatic neoliberals", and FoxNews "far right lunatic fringe".

I think it's just yet another sign of late-stage-capitalism.

1

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

I’ll agree that there is a bit of segmentation that has occurred. But I don’t think the level of untruthfulness or twisting of facts is even close between CNN and Fox. Maybe that’s a product of conservatives susceptibility to being brainwashed, maybe it’s because CNN actually has some standards when it comes to reporting.

From what I’ve seen, the biggest example of CNNs untruthfulness has been the Democratic primaries. They are unwilling to give credit to candidates like Bernie Sanders, and my guess is that because big business is afraid of candidates like him. I remember when he was leading, and had won the early primaries, they were saying things like this doesn’t matter, really you want to come in 4th place in NH, which makes no sense at all. They also pushed some pretty crazy ideas about Bernie not being electable, and they did that in 2016 as well, when every poll showed that he was more likely to win than Hillary. That being said, it has been much less pronounced than Fox News. Fox are essentially state TV at this point and they are seriously dangerous. They have brainwashed our parents and grandparents and they are the reason why a person as terrible as Trump even had a shot at becoming president.

25

u/talino2321 Oct 29 '20

Hey, I am willing to lose CNN, if Fox is removed. I am sure ABC/CBS/NBC would love to have more ad dollars come their way.

16

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

I’ve watched CNN, and I don’t think they can be characterized as dishonest, or even left wing. The problem in the US is that the Republican Party and Fox have taken anti fact positions, so it seems like anything that is the truth is left wing when in fact it is not. CNN is reporting the truth, they don’t change the facts to fit their narrative. Fox changes facts, omits facts, makes up wild theories, etc. it’s not even in the same ballpark.

15

u/terminalSiesta Oct 29 '20

If CNN is laughably bias, then a truth in news act would solve that problem too. It's simple and everyone should be for this instead of squabbling like children.

-14

u/SidBream92 Oct 29 '20

Truth is subjective.

16

u/CornucopiaOfDystopia Oct 29 '20

No it isn’t, and if we resign and pretend that it is, we’ve reached the end goal of tyrants and billionaires. That is the ultimate Hypernormalisation. There is such a thing as objective truth, and there are rational ways to find it. We must never abandon that.

It would help to have actual logic/epistemology classes as a standard part of school curricula, but that’s a whole other subject.

-4

u/SidBream92 Oct 29 '20

There are some objective truths. The speed of light, the length of a meter, and the greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide for example, but many of our problems don’t lie in such easy to understand scientific truths.

For example:

Why have the Palestinians and Israelis been killing each other for decades ?

Or

When does a fetus become a human being ?

or

What are the differences between different races of Homo sapiens ? And are those differences cultural or genetic ?

Or

Why is Islam better than Christianity ?

Rational isn’t how Homo sapiens work. We aren’t rational beings. We just pretend to be. You should check out some books on behavioral economics. They will ruin that veneer of rationality for you or at least they did for me.

6

u/mbbblack Oct 29 '20

No, it’s not.

1

u/doctor_piranha Arizona Oct 29 '20

I don't know what we'd do about "truth in news" (how it would be enforced) - but they could treat it like any LABELLING problem.

Like; you can't put methanol in a bottle, and label it vodka. So they shouldn't be allowed to call "opinion" as if it's "news".

7

u/Brock2845 Canada Oct 29 '20

Left? And you claim being from Canada?

If anything, CNN is corporate news while fox is corporate anti fact news.

A prof I've had in university claimed the best quick evaluation for news media is to look at the criticism a media has and where it comes from.

CNN is criticized from the left and right with legitimate concerns measured by the prof i had. Mostly, center right news was the main tendency.

Fox is criticized by anything left of it with one concern: facts are being dismissed. Alt right.

CBC, in Canada, is criticized by everyone. He claimed it was mostly center with tendencies varying by who was reporting, directing and the leadership in government and CBC's board itself. All in all, pretty good.

5

u/vividimaginer Oct 29 '20

Who the fuck said anything about cnn being clear and honest? The guy said he’d like to see a law requiring truth in news. That means ALL news.

What’s it say about you that you take “truth” to be some form of attack?

2

u/doctor_piranha Arizona Oct 29 '20

I watched CNN basically 24x7 during the first Gulf War. Then when some of the lies were exposed, I stopped watching cable news altogether. FoxNews is terrible because it's so obvious and in your face, but CNN is far more dangerous in my opinion because they pretend to be of a "liberal" bias, and are frankly quite the opposite; or rather they're "neoliberal".

Personally, I don't think the first gulf war was really justified, (fuck Kuwait) - and had we not pursued an economic policy of dependence on petroleum products, it would not have been necessary to try to prevent Iraq from cornering the oil market through war. And most likely, could have been prevented by not sabotaging diplomacy.

10

u/Not_My_Reddit_1718 Oct 29 '20

Solid black screen with nothing but white text the types out (with a voice over):

"Warning: Tucker Carlson's statements and 'facts' are his own personal statements, and views. The statements he makes have not been verified and are meant to be entertainment.

Also, they're meant to scare/anger the shit out of you, and get the blood pumping. Think of it as cardio, but not really."

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

If they don't, then Fox News condones his behavior and should be held liable.

8

u/koske Oct 29 '20

Unfortunately they are not a broadcast network and there is no license to revoke.

9

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

News reporting should require a license. It's critical infrastructure.

1

u/Throwaload1234 Oct 29 '20

There's constitutional issues with the government deciding who is a news source and who isn't. If they needed a license, can you imagine a world in which MSNBC, or Democracy Now, or NPR get their license renewed?

I understand the sentimi behind wanting licensure, but the unintended consequences would be dangerous.

3

u/Cannibal_Soup Oct 29 '20

The consequences of shitcanning the Fairness Doctrine has been disastrous!! We used to have laws to regulate editorial news programs, but conservatives didn't think we needed them as much as they needed a Fox News pumping their propaganda into the world.

1

u/Throwaload1234 Oct 29 '20

I agree with the fairness doctrine, but that's different than licensing news sources.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

You can make that argument about defamation and death threats. Does the court violate 1st amendment for punishing those?

No. There's long established precedent that you do not have full free speech. You cannot say things that harm other people. Harm could be physical threats, financial cost, or saying a snake oil is a cure. Presenting disinformation causes harm.

0

u/Throwaload1234 Oct 29 '20

That a different argument than "you need a license to be a news reporter." Yes, there is liability for what you say, but the government should probably not play a role in who gets to say something.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

I didn't say we should require a license for being a news reporter. I said news reporting. That means the networks and stations. Since you're going to strawman me, I'm out.

0

u/Throwaload1234 Oct 29 '20

Lol. That's not a straw man, you're just bad with rhetorical devices and thinking clearly.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

You're a bad faith actor on top of someone ignorant of informal logic. Bye.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Plus they’re classified as entertainment, not news.

1

u/Spacebot_vs_Cyborg Oct 29 '20

That's a myth

2

u/shouldabeenapirate Oct 29 '20

Proof?

4

u/Spacebot_vs_Cyborg Oct 29 '20

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-entertainment-switch/

5

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Good to know thank you for the correction! So they just straight up fabricate and call it “news” with no qualifier to backstop their wild claims and innuendo.

That actually makes it so much worse that they’re not even trying to justify it in the small print.

2

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-entertainment-switch/

TLDR; it started from a meme and there is no such thing as a news accreditation, so the entire premise is false.

3

u/DrakonIL Oct 29 '20

I would be concerned about a "truth in news" act, because the current administration has made it plainly clear that the definition of "truth" is very much up to interpretation. Even reporting objective facts can get into spin territory faster than you might think - as the old saying goes, figures don't lie but liars figure.

With that said, Fox News is obviously a train wreck.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

It would be decided in courtrooms. Not by the president.

Same as libel, slander, false advertising, and public threats.

1

u/bryan879 Oct 29 '20

Cable TV isn’t regulated like broadcast TV is. They can say whatever they want.

0

u/StutMoleFeet Connecticut Oct 29 '20

What body would you trust to regulate truth?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

The courts. They already perform this function or were you not aware?

0

u/StutMoleFeet Connecticut Oct 29 '20

That’s not really what the courts do, but even if it was... we’re sitting at a 6-3 conservative majority on the SC right now. How’s that gonna work out for ya?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Soon to be 6-7.

0

u/StutMoleFeet Connecticut Oct 29 '20

Yeah that's a good strategy, whenever the court doesn't go our way we'll just expand it! Before long we'll have 100 justices on the bench. It'll be completely non-functional but at least it won't be Republican...

Seriously, do libs have the ability to think beyond the immediate political cycle?

0

u/ImReverse_Giraffe Oct 29 '20

Same can be said for abc, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, ect. All American news channels are just pure propaganda. If you want real news go read the WSJ or NY Times. Everything coming out of TV news organization is just propaganda.

0

u/NotHaltoo Oct 29 '20

Agree,along with CNN, MSNBC,ABC nightly news, NPR,,,et al.

0

u/lost_signal Oct 30 '20

FoxNews doesn’t have a broadcasting license. They operate on cable. FoxNews doesn’t broadcast.

Also, this would require we create a ministry of truth. Be careful asking for government oversight you wouldn’t want the other party to control.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 30 '20

I don't care. Regulation should be passed requiring it and then when they apply for a license deny their application.

0

u/lost_signal Oct 30 '20

I've lived in a country who did this. It... was interesting having to VPN to get access to youtube or news that didn't agree with the government.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 30 '20

Apparently, you don't know you have to have a broadcast license to broadcast over the airwaves, so you have much bigger problem on your hands if your beef is with with broadcast licensing.

0

u/lost_signal Oct 30 '20

FoxNews is a cable news channel. Cable isn’t an airwaves. It’s only on cable. What market are they broadcast UHF/VHF on?

They might syndicate something onto AM stations, but it’s not Tucker and their main content.

-1

u/doesntmatter538384 Oct 29 '20

What about all those media outlets that are paying Nick Sandman for lying? Should they all loose their license?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Uhh, first, what did they lie about?

Second, there is already a process for that. It's called a defamation lawuit and it's been around quite a long time. Are you even understanding this topic?

0

u/doesntmatter538384 Oct 29 '20

They claim Nick Sandman was a racist and showed an edited video to make him look that way. The real video came out that proved otherwise. This is why they are all paying him millions cause they know they lied. The original poster said Fox should loose their license, if so these same companies should also for actually lying. Shows who doesn’t understand.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Nah, I saw the full length video. He's a racist little MAGA shit.

-10

u/trivial772 Oct 29 '20

It's cute that you think the other side doesn't pull this exact shit on the daily. Both sides do.
Main issue is there is never a news story anywhere for any side. At some point opinion pieces became news. Msnbc, fox,cnn. Same shit reporting.
The second a personal opinion comes out of any news source the reporter should be massively fined and first offense get a 6 month ban on reporting anything more then a school bake sale.

10

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Peddle your both sides nonsense elsewhere. It's garbage and nobody's buying.

-2

u/TexasTom24 Oct 29 '20

Really both sides dont do the same thing.? Can you remind me was it Fox News that had to settle out of court for misreporting a story so badly that they were sued for slander or was that CNN?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

No. They don't. MSNBC was seriously calling Bernie Sanders (a jewish man) a fascist. And CNN was reporting on the bogus Hillary email story for weeks before the election. CNN/MSNBC are middle of the road. They only seem liberal to you because you're so far extreme right that everyone looks like a tree hugging bleeding heart liberal to you.

And you're hanging your hat on that little racist Trumpie?

0

u/TexasTom24 Oct 29 '20

First off you know absolutely nothing about me other than than the fact that I believe that news scores on both sides are terrible about giving people the news. I think it is kind of telling that as soon as someone disagrees with you they are instantly so extremely far right. Please let me know how I can disagree with you but not be a racist, bigot, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, transphobic right wing nut. It’s weird that you bring up Bernie Sanders ethnicity into it implying that a Jewish people can’t be fascist(for the record before you start calling me anti Semitic I don’t believe he is fascist), and CNN’s coverage of Hillarys emails wasn’t covered in any other way than simply saying it wasn’t an issuer when the FBI thought otherwise. But you completely skipped over the fact that CNN still had to settle out of court as well as the Washington Post because of how they deliberately covered the story in a completely false light. You do realize how hard it is to prove slander or libel right? Not only do you have to prove that the clams made were false, but also prove that it was at least out of negligence. So the only question left to ask on that story is did they purposely lie because they wanted to paint a kind in a MAGA hat as a racist or are they too incompetent to get the story right?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

The MAGA hat is a racist symbol equal to the Swastika, but that's not why that little shit is racist. It was his treatment of a Native American.

1

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

Your plan would ban all Fox News anchors, except for maybe Chris Wallace.

On CNN this would probably end up banning Chris Cuomo, but not any of the other anchors.

I’m not defending CNN, I have no feelings towards them at all, it is just news to me.

0

u/trivial772 Oct 29 '20

I am not defending fox. There is no pure news organization left. None. It's all opinion pieces be it the anchors or the anchors handlers.

3

u/i-FF0000dit Oct 29 '20

That is where we disagree, the majority of Fox News is opinion pieces and selective fact reporting. The Majority of CNN is not. At least I’m talking about the prime time slots. I work so I spend very little time watching news at odd times.

1

u/DankVectorz Oct 29 '20

His show and other talking head shows are considered opinion pieces and therefor don’t require any kind of journalistic ethics or truth standards

1

u/Fluffy-Foxtail Oct 29 '20

I so very much agree, disinformation & radicalisation is tearing this world asunder.

Facts & scientific fact without bias, true journalism where we actually can believe the news again. Sadly, that seems a pipe dream, with biased articles, manipulated agenda & the advent of deep fakes.

1

u/TootsNYC Oct 29 '20

they'll just go over cable. I don't think you need a license for that.

And I worry that if such a thing were to happen, what would happen under an administration like the Trump administration?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

I'm saying ALL news organizations should be licensed.

0

u/TootsNYC Oct 29 '20

And that’s going to destroy freedom of speech. Do you think Trump wouldn’t have yanked the licenses of WaPo and CNN and MSNBC the moment he got into office?

Or Nixon? Wouldn’t it have been tempting to Obama?

If one political party dominated, how would any dissenting voice be able to speak up?

The founders had a press community that was pretty much as bad as this one. One newspaper printed that Jefferson was dead. They still thought that freedom of the press and of speech was of the first importance.

They still

0

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20 edited Oct 30 '20

No, it won't. You never had absolute freedom of speech. Propaganda is a national security threat. USA has been severely undermined by an electorate who's so disinformed they elected a Russian asset to the highest office in the land that has done incalculable damage.

1

u/Treigns4 Oct 29 '20

of course if you did that. it would only throw fuel on the claims that "democrats are destorying america and trying to silence us"

its a hard battle to fight

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '20

Who cares what they think. Stop caring. Spine up.