Fox News: Who Used Journalists as Human Shields in Libya?

[WhoWee]

That, or he just abhors lies in the skin of journalism.

Or maybe he feels used and angry that he was stood up by the "Libyan Strongman"?

 

[nismaratwork]

Or maybe he feels used and angry that he was stood up by the "Libyan Strongman"?

That is a distinct possiblity... I know I would be. That's an interview with a shelf-life right there... the next cruise missile could land on his Hershy's Kiss hat.

 

[Gokul43201]

1. What lies are you referring to? Robertson's highly emotional retort refers to "lies" in generic terms, but does not actually cite any that I can see. Could you please be specific about what in the Fox report you think is a lie?

Fox said the CNN and Reuters sent their people but Fox didn't. This is a lie.

2. By definition, the thesis/primary point of a report is the most important point of the report.
2a. When challenging a report in general terms, as CNN did, they imply - without evidence - that the primary point is wrong.

Where do you get this characterization that the report is being challenged in general terms? I heard a lot of specifics. Among those specifics, CNN pointed out the lie that Fox didn't send any of their people. CNN also went on to whine (my characterization) about how Fox was being hypocritical, and that it was extremely unlikely that they were being used as shield for <blah blah blah> reasons.

The upshot: CNN whines; Fox lies.

There's a secondary point that I'm not supporting yet: CNN goes where there is a possibility to investigate something potentially newsworthy; Fox, by their own implication, decides that aiding in the war effort is their primary responsibility, not providing news.

Of course, while CNN could have pointed that out, they chose to whine instead.

 

[nismaratwork]

Fox said the CNN and Reuters sent their people but Fox didn't. This is a lie.

Where do you get this characterization that the report is being challenged in general terms? I heard a lot of specifics. Among those specifics, CNN pointed out the lie that Fox didn't send any of their people. CNN also went on to whine (my characterization) about how Fox was being hypocritical, and that it was extremely unlikely that they were being used as shield for <blah blah blah> reasons.

The upshot: CNN whines; Fox lies.
There's a secondary point that I'm not supporting yet: CNN goes where there is a possibility to investigate something potentially newsworthy; Fox, by their own implication, decides that aiding in the war effort is their primary responsibility, not providing news.

Of course, while CNN could have pointed that out, they chose to whine instead.

re: bold: That actually seems to be their respective global MO's. I will never understand why CNN decided to become "CNN-Lifetime"

 

[Evo]

Locked pending moderation.