Should news organisations be able to lie?

Openminded

Argument Topic: Currently, “news” programmes in the USA are constitutionally allowed to lie to their viewers. Perversely it is specifically the wildest and most outrageous liars like Tucker Carlson that are protected because their lies are so over the top that there’s an expectation that the average viewer would be sensible enough to realise they are not being told the news.

@Ampersand
I believe this is one of the largest stains of America - news commentators who seemingly have no problem lying. And the fact we had a past president whose leadership failed greatly in the moral department. News organizations have a responsibility to uphold their right to free speech - to not abuse the bully pulpit they have the privilege to enjoy. There should be a code of ethics that needs to be followed amongst any person whose job it is to disseminate information. News organizations like FOX, Newsmax (yes other lie but these are the biggest offenders) make more money with outrageous and sensational content. Unfortunately, due to the ambiguity of The First Amendment (it was written at a time where technology, globalization, social media and discourse in politics was not ever imagined) and lying stills falls under protected speech. Citizens are now left to their own vices. They either adhere to their own information bubble, or ideally, do their own research. This reckless speech from news organizations has now left Americans in a morality crisis.

jack

Ampersand said:

Currently, “news” programmes in the USA are constitutionally allowed to lie to their viewers. Perversely it is specifically the wildest and most outrageous liars like Tucker Carlson that are protected because their lies are so over the top that there’s an expectation that the average viewer would be sensible enough to realise they are not being told the news.

Hello A:

"News" is distinct from "opinion".  Newspapers and TV publish both.  The consumer is left to distinguish between them.  Informed citizens can do that..  Dumb sh*ts can't. 

The road is clearly marked, however..  In general, TV hard news happens during the day.  Around 5 PM, the opinion shows come on..  In the newspapers, "opinions" are found on the editorial pages.  Can they lie on their hard news shows??  Sure, but they risk being sued for libel.  As you noted above, they can't be sued for their "opinions".

excon

Dee

@Openminded ;

I read that Trump before he was elected employed an advisor who was gifted in the art of influence especially regarding the media. Trump is excellent at distorting,  manipulating and lying and his favoured weapon is playing  into people's  emotions by using powerful body language and playing this patriotic game where its us as in the US against everyone else.

Every emotional outburst from Trump one can hear the crowd chanting USA , USA  Trump isn't the sharpest tool in the box but he knows how to whip a crowd nto a frenzy by appealing to Americam patriotism and the pioneer spirit, he has been well tutored.
 

Bogan

What was "truthful" about the "Russia collusion? hoax?      What was "truthful" about the 'Russian disinformation" claim over Hunter Biden's laptop?     What was "truthful" about the left wing presses feeding frenzy over the Jussie Smollet hoax?      What was "truthful" about slandering Nick Sandman, who won his case for slander?      What was "truthful" about slandering Kylie Rittenhouse, who will win his case for slander?  

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Possible Solutions

There are several potential solutions to the problem of fake news, including:

• Media literacy education: Teaching people how to critically evaluate the information they consume can help them to identify fake news.
• Fact-checking initiatives: Organizations like Snopes and PolitiFact can help to debunk fake news stories and provide people with accurate information.
• Regulation of social media platforms: Social media platforms play a major role in the spread of fake news. Holding them accountable for the content they host could help to reduce the spread of misinformation.
• Self-regulation by news outlets: News outlets can take steps to ensure that the information they broadcast is accurate and reliable. This includes adopting fact-checking procedures and holding journalists accountable for their work.

Ultimately, the issue of fake news is complex and requires a multi-faceted approach. There is no single solution, and the best way to address the problem will likely vary depending on the specific context. However, it is important to be aware of the potential harms of fake news and to take steps to combat its spread.

Dee

@Bogan

Oh stop it with the pathetic whataboutism , when you hear someone defend  a racist like Rottenhouse you just know you're dealing with scum.

Bogan

@Dee

Not worth responding to.

 Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument.     Writing sneery one liners or simply submitting curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading.    Neither is, pejorative abuse, or just continually asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions.     You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.

Dee

@Bogan


Bogend beaten again at the first punch ......,same ole , same ole......

Barnardot

@Ampersand @Dee ;I read that Trump before he was elected employed an advisor who was gifted in the art of influence especially regarding the media.

I think that you will find that the topic is about news organizations that lie not individuals. But as a converse to your argument there are some dishonest people who use news organizations that lie or rather sites that pose as news organizations. For example I saw one example on this site where some one actually quoted a bogus website that makes out that it publishes medical reports. But what they do in realty is charge you to go on to the site and then phish all your personal details. If I recall it had some thing to do with psychologists. And of course all the reports they had used made up names and made up reports.

Thats a pretty extreme case but surely some one who posts that sort of stuff as evidence to back up a false claim has got to be labelled as a lier.

Barnardot

@Bogan ;What was "truthful" about slandering Kylie Rittenhouse, who will win his case for slander?  

Well that is a good question like the question what is "truthful" about some one quoting half truths and extreme reports saying that black people are inferior to whites.

You have to think to your self how much honesty these people have or may be how much gray matter these people have or use.

Dee

@Barnardot


But what they do in realty is charge you to go on to the site and then phish all your personal details.

Yes you really should stop doing that.

If I recall it had some thing to do with psychologists

Yes I recall 78 psychologists (proven)  agreeing totally with my assertions and a chicken plucker called Barndoor getting extremely upset.....Barndoor  owns a Hermes phone case, it cost him 600 dollars but the man who sold him it from the trunk of his car said it would make him a hit with the ladies.


. And of course all the reports they had used made up names and made up reports.

Stop crying 78 psychologists totally agreed  as I proved with me and you're still crying like a new born bed wetter

Barnardot

@Dee So do you agree then that the sites that you posted as evidence are extremist scam websites that take money and phish your details and that the 78 Psychologists quoted in them made no such reports?
 Yes or No?

Dee

@Barnardot

The site I linked to is credible and used by the world's leading academics 78 of these acclaimed experts side with me ( naturally) so you st-pidily asking if I think the site is a "scam site"   demonstrates clearly you're an id-ot.

Dreamer

In science a scientist can suffer severe consequences for lying or simply messing up and spreading misinformation. On the other end of the spectrum politicians and media can lie all day long and not suffer any consequences. In fact they will probably profit due to the attention economy.

"“We found that falsehood diffuses significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth, in all categories of information, and in many cases by an order of magnitude,” says Sinan Aral"

https://news.mit.edu/2018/study-twitter-false-news-travels-faster-true-stories-0308

"Falsehood diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects were more pronounced for false political"

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559

We have to demonetize disinformation campaigns. Striking the balance between gotcha culture where someone makes an insignificant accidental easy to make error versus deliberate malice spreading of highly dangerous disinformation for profit or because its political expedient. See McCarthyism, witch trials, and reversal of polarity if you think absolute free speech is a good idea.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

Barnardot

@Dee ;The site I linked to is credible

So a website that charges money to read an article and phishes your details when you do and posts reports on Doctors that don't even exist or have there websites bloked is credible is it?

Can you post one phrase from one of those reports like you have been asked to before?

Have you actually gone on that site and checked the reports to see if they are not bogus?

Are you sure that your not continuing to lie your head off?

Dee

So a website that charges money to read an article and phishes your details when you do and posts reports on Doctors that don't even exist or have there websites bloked is credible is it?

No a website like that is not credible which is why I never link to sites like that.

Can you post one phrase from one of those reports like you have been asked to before?

Can you post even one  link to those doctors you say don't exist?

Have you actually gone on that site and checked the reports to see if they are not bogus?

If you claim they are bogus prove it.?

Are you sure that your not continuing to lie your head off?@Barnardot

The only one lying is you as you've spent 6 months constantly trolling and screeching " you lied" if I'm lying prove it?

You're that st-pid you pretend you believe someone invented a site with 78 bogus doctor's on it just to annoy you , seriously?

I've come across truly st-pid people before but no one comes close to you.

This is the part like always where you run like the yellow dog you are.

Barnardot

@Dee ;No a website like that is not credible which is why I never link to sites like that.

Yes you did for the 14 billionth time And you know it very well.

Can you post one phrase from one of those reports like you have been asked to before

Can you post even one  link to those doctors you say don't exist?
Have you actually gone on that site and checked the reports to see if they are not bogus?
If you claim they are bogus prove it.?

Come on. Answering questions with questions and blowing it back. Thats pretty dishonest and evasive in any ones language.
I will state these all ready proven facts.
The link you posted was a paying scam.
I paid and read it.
It contained phishing and dead links, made up names and doctors links that were closed.
You did not read it.
You are a total dishonest lier.
Live with it that you have been found out and not only once and not only by me.

Dee

@Barnardot

ARGUMENT TOPIC : Barndoors mental illness is spiralling out of control.

Stop wailing like a baby 78 academics totally agreed with my opinions , no one agreed with your neanderthal pseudoscientific nonsense.

You're that insane you now believe 78 scientists got together and created a fake site just to torment you and worse still you claim to have paid them .......ROFLMAO 

Openminded

Argument Topic: I read that Trump before he was elected employed an advisor who was gifted in the art of influence especially regarding the media. Trump is excellent at distorting,  manipulating and lying and his favoured weapon is playing  into people's  emotions by using powerful body language and playing this patriotic game where its us as in the US against everyone else. Every emotional outburst from Trump one can hear the crowd chanting USA , USA  Trump isn't the sharpest tool in the box but

@Dee
Trump is a master at marketing and promoting himself. It has been reported that he was a bully at 10 years old. I believe he´s honed this technique since childhood and used it as a protective, defense mechanism. I will go so far as to say that Trump has greatly influenced how news channels and many Americans now communicate. In the book ¨The Art of the Deal¨, he is quoted as saying ¨The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people's fantasies. People may not always think big themselves, but they can still get very excited by those who do. That's why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It's an innocent form of exaggeration — and a very effective form of promotion.¨ This may sound relatively harmless in itself if you are a performer and your job is simply to entertain. But his job as President was to lead the country, protect the Constitution, and protect Americans. Sure he got a few things done with help from his administration, but even a blind man hits his target occasionally. Somehow his narcissistic bravado has turned into the Greatest Show on Earth. This is evident when you hear his supporters at a rally exuberantly cheer as he curses, lies and incites his audience to laugh at the most indecent and cruel displays. Unfortunately the majority of his supporters have morphed into entertainment junkies that can no longer discern truth from reality. Our political system is now a mockery and the polarization may be irreparable. I believe since the Trump administration, truth, dignity and ethics have been replaced with lies, amorality and indecency. What a stain on America and the world. This in turn, has greatly influenced how Fox News, and other right wing news stations disseminate the news now. It has become normalized.

Bogan

@Openminded ;   quote      What a stain on America and the world. This in turn, has greatly influenced how Fox News, and other right wing news stations disseminate the news now. It has become normalized.

Now let's see?   

1.   The Us economy which was in good shape during the Trump years is now in the toilet.
2.   Inflation so bad that it is even hurting the very same foolish voters who barely put Biden in power.
3.    The USA the laughing stock of the world with a President who is senile and corrupt, who is being defended from prosecution by an obviously corrupt US administration.
4.    Russia and China emboldened to be aggressive because they know there is a corrupt, compromised,  and senile US President.
5.   9 million illegal immigrants swarming across the US border to the extent that even Democrat "sanctuary cities" are screaming for Biden to do what they criticised Trump for doing.
6.    Crime in Democrat controlled cities now completely out of control.
7.     The most productive and inventive US taxpayers fleeing Democrat controlled states to go and live in Republican ones.
8.    Homelesness turning Democrat controlled US cities into third world cities with human faeces all over the streets.
9.    An inability to hire or even retain police officers because the Democrats have demonised them to such an extent that nobody with any sense wants to be  a police officer anymore.
10.  Republican states doing nicely while Democrat states, despite high taxation, decay and demand federal money for bailouts.  
11.   The most prestigious US universities now hotbeds of neo-Marxism and anti semitism.  

And all Openminded obsesses about is Donald Trump's personality?

Dee

@Openminded

Trump is a cheap, nasty, hate filled power crazed bigot who holds sway over voters who worship his irrational hate filled rants , it makes them feel that their hatred for others is somehow just fine as Trump cannot be wrong.

Bogan

@Dee ;  quote  Trump is a cheap, nasty, hate filled power crazed bigot who holds sway over voters who worship his irrational hate filled rants , i

And the majority of people still think he is an improvement over Biden.

just_sayin

JulesKorngold said:

There are several potential solutions to the problem of fake news, including:

• Media literacy education: Teaching people how to critically evaluate the information they consume can help them to identify fake news.
• Fact-checking initiatives: Organizations like Snopes and PolitiFact can help to debunk fake news stories and provide people with accurate information.
• Regulation of social media platforms: Social media platforms play a major role in the spread of fake news. Holding them accountable for the content they host could help to reduce the spread of misinformation.
• Self-regulation by news outlets: News outlets can take steps to ensure that the information they broadcast is accurate and reliable. This includes adopting fact-checking procedures and holding journalists accountable for their work.

Ultimately, the issue of fake news is complex and requires a multi-faceted approach. There is no single solution, and the best way to address the problem will likely vary depending on the specific context. However, it is important to be aware of the potential harms of fake news and to take steps to combat its spread.

I agree fake news is a problem.  The NYT printed fake news about the Trump Russian Collusion story for years.  Instead of being penalized for the lies they spread, they were given a Pulitzer because of their obeisance to the leftist agenda.  As former NYT journalist, Nikole Hannah-Jones, said 'all journalism is advocacy'.  

The media covered up the Hunter Biden laptop story to help Biden win the election, when they knew it was real.  Biden's campaign asked social media sites to quash stories about it and they complied.  It seems like these social media companies are already in bed with leftist politicians.

Fact checkers like PolitiFact are run by left wing journalists - PolitiFact is run by Tampa Bay journalists. It has been called out numerous times for its bias.  Just do a Google search.  PolitiFact is notorious for marking Republican statements which are factually 100% correct and in context as mostly false, while marking the same statement from left wing politicians as True.    You will notice how many fewer factchecks there are of Democrats than Republicans on their site.  By selectively picking comments you can continue your advocacy agenda.  Even the left-wing US News and World Report commented on this:

The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.

The truth matters.  Well, obviously not to CNN, MSNBC, NYT, Washington Post, PolitiFact, NBC, CBS, or ABC News, unless it helps their agenda.  But the truth still matters to most of us.

I believe Musk has a better take on the situation than does Democrat Party mega donor Zuckerberg who spent tons of money to elect left wing politicians.  Who would get to decide what is true and what is not?  It is obvious from the Hunter Biden laptop story, which polls show would have made a difference in the election, that people are more than willing to say something is fake, when it is not.

Dee

@Bogan


And the majority of people still think he is an improvement over Biden.

 
Demonstrates clearly Americans are absolutely drained of talent in the political sector when the " best " choices are the orange one or the bumbler Biden. 

Barnardot

@Dee ;ARGUMENT TOPIC : Barndoors mental illness is spiralling out of control.

An other words you are a compulsive dishonest lier as shown in the evidence shown to you. You have constantly lied my making up scam topics with spam links and refuse to acknowledge any of it.

Barnardot

@Dee ;Trump is a cheap, nasty, hate filled power crazed bigot 

Why dont you stop your winging and complaining. Your much better at lieing by far.

Dee

@Barnardot

What's " winging" you fool?

Still sore me and 78 academics  demonstrated how ignorant and uneducated you are,.

Dee

@Barnardot

Yet you have not got 1 single shred of evidence to back up your nonsense, you have accused every member on here of being a l-ar all because you're the sites football as everyone kicks you around.

Openminded

Argument Topic: And all Openminded obsesses about is Donald Trump's personality?

@Bogan
While itś true that the personality of the previous president was/is repulsive. That is not the reason for my and the majority of American´s disdain for him. 

MayCaesar

As I see it, news organizations are only responsible for delivering the product they claim to be delivering. If a news organization has advertised itself as always speaking the truth, then it not speaking the truth constitutes a fraud - and if watching it involves paying the company for its services, then compensation of damages may be in order. Otherwise, it should be able to say whatever it wants, including outright lies - unless those lies constitute one of the other offenses, such as libel or incitement to violence (in most jurisdictions).

Responsibility for being informed is on people, not on news organizations. If I want to learn some mathematics, I have to find a good book/paper and do a thorough study of it. Nobody is going to bring the perfect book to me on a silver platter. Similarly, if you want to be informed, you have to do some homework, learn about biases and behavioral patterns of various organizations, and choose how to (if at all) consume their content.

Not watching any television, it is hard to explain just how outlandish virtually any TV news show looks from the outside. I remember staying at a hotel in Arizona and having Fox News on. Tucker Carlson was ranting on about the crime committed by Mexican illegal immigrants at the border. He showed a short interview with one of the patrol officers, and among other things the officer said the following: "We found that most of the crime in county X is committed by members of drug cartels, rather than immigrants themselves". Then the camera switched back to Tucker, who said, "You heard it from a patrol officer himself: illegal immigrants do commit a lot of crimes!"
My first thought was, "How can people let him get away with such blatant lies? He literally lied about what was shown just 10 seconds ago". And my second thought was, "Oh, I forgot that I am not the target audience..."

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

As I see it, news organizations are only responsible for delivering the product they claim to be delivering. If a news organization has advertised itself as always speaking the truth, then it not speaking the truth constitutes a fraud - and if watching it involves paying the company for its services, then compensation of damages may be in order. Otherwise, it should be able to say whatever it wants, including outright lies - unless those lies constitute one of the other offenses, such as libel or incitement to violence (in most jurisdictions).

Responsibility for being informed is on people, not on news organizations. If I want to learn some mathematics, I have to find a good book/paper and do a thorough study of it. Nobody is going to bring the perfect book to me on a silver platter. Similarly, if you want to be informed, you have to do some homework, learn about biases and behavioral patterns of various organizations, and choose how to (if at all) consume their content.

Not watching any television, it is hard to explain just how outlandish virtually any TV news show looks from the outside. I remember staying at a hotel in Arizona and having Fox News on. Tucker Carlson was ranting on about the crime committed by Mexican illegal immigrants at the border. He showed a short interview with one of the patrol officers, and among other things the officer said the following: "We found that most of the crime in county X is committed by members of drug cartels, rather than immigrants themselves". Then the camera switched back to Tucker, who said, "You heard it from a patrol officer himself: illegal immigrants do commit a lot of crimes!"
My first thought was, "How can people let him get away with such blatant lies? He literally lied about what was shown just 10 seconds ago". And my second thought was, "Oh, I forgot that I am not the target audience..."

I don't think Tucker Carlson calls himself a journalist.  His show is a POV one.  He is quite open about his conservative leanings and has been so since his start on CNN when he wore a bow-tie when he represented the conservative side.  As far as the illegal immigrants vs drug cartel thing.  I need a point of clarification from you.  Where these Mexican drug cartels in a US county?  If so, then Carlson is correct - those crimes were committed by illegal immigrants - if you cross the border, even as part of a drug cartel, you fit the term 'illegal immigrant'.  So, can you clarify.

I appreciate it when persons on 'news' shows are open about their political leanings.  I respect Juan Williams being open about his leftist view, too bad for him he wasn't leftist enough for NPR.  I even agree with his views on school choice.  I can respect that about him.  Same goes for left leaning Harold Ford on Fox's the Five.  He is a former Democrat Senator from Tennessee.  What I can't respect is when someone wants to pretend that they are not bias.  Take George Stephanopoulos for example who is an ABC news personality and head of their news division.  He's the former Clinton communications director and primary advisor for the Democrat party.  He was responsible for the 'bimbo squad' whose job was to demonize women Clinton had slept with or sexually assaulted.  He is definitely a biased person.  I'd have much more respect for him, if he just admitted that he is every bit as biased as Tucker Carlson.

Openminded

Argument Topic: What a stain on America and the world. This in turn, has greatly influenced how Fox News, and other right wing news stations disseminate the news now. It has become normalized.

@Bogan
1) Your aggressive, scary looking emoticon says to me ¨I´m a mean-spirited person; don´t cross me or I´ll be in your face.
2) The discussion was about disinformation, the ease at which it is spread and the chaos it can cause.
3) If you want to stay on subject without getting defensive, then post a debate question using Trump´s accomplishments as a base.
4) Please read The Code of Ethics that Debate Island has posted as a reminder to stick to civility. 

Openminded

Argument Topic: Argument Topic: What a stain on America and the world. This in turn, has greatly influenced how Fox News, and other right wing news stations disseminate the news now. It has become normalized.

@just_sayin
1) Your aggressive, scary looking emoticon says to me ¨I´m a mean-spirited person; don´t cross me or I´ll be in your face.
2) The discussion was about disinformation, the ease at which it is spread and the chaos it can cause.
3) If you want to stay on subject without getting defensive, then post a debate question using Trump´s accomplishments as a base.
4) Please read The Code of Ethics that Debate Island has posted as a reminder to stick to civility. 

Barnardot

@Dee ;Yet you have not got 1 single shred of evidence to back up your nonsense, you have accused every member on here of being a l-ar 

Yes I have and you know that I have listed the qoutes and names of all the members that called you a lier twice. Is that right yes or no? Yes it’s right and you have asked the same lieing question twice also . Yes or no? Yes. So that’s the nature of a pathetilogical lier isn’t it? You have to keep on lieing more and more to cover up all your previous lies.

Dee

@Barnardot


ARGUMENT TOPIC: here is the site policeman Barndoor the cretin attempting to police the site .....

Yes I have and you know that I have listed the qoutes and names of all the members that called you a lier twice

Stop lying you cretin , the truth is the reverse you call everyone a who thrashes you in debate which is everyone.

. Is that right yes or no?

Read above you cretin.

Yes it’s right and you have asked the same lieing question twice also . Yes or no? Yes. So that’s the nature of a pathetilogical lier isn’t it? You have to keep on lieing more and more to cover up all your previous lies.

You truly are insane ,what's " pathetilogical" ? What's a " lier" ? What's " lieing" ?

maxx

What i consider worse is how they stretch the truth to get people top read their stories. Example: a person is mugged in the subway; a news story finds his political affiliation; then the story headline might read as: democrat attacked in sub way 3 miles from the white house. ) another thing i dislike about news is they will not let something drop. They interview the victim, his friends, family, neighbors, their dog, exhume his grand father, and then constantly go over the same story, sometimes for weeks on end. @Ampersand

Openminded

@JulesKorngold
I agree with all of what you write. Would love to see news channels adopt a Fact-Checking Department that fact-checks live news and is obliged to post their findings immediately. Artificial Intelligence may assist with this in the future?
I believe there´s been a rise in abuse of our First Amendment rights; liars can lie under and still use the protection of 1A. Sure are crazy times weŕe living in.

MayCaesar

Free speech laws are based on the philosophical presumption that the individual's ability to express themselves is essential for functioning of an intelligent being. In a way, speaking is thinking, and thinking without speaking is like reading without writing: it can only go so far before the individual hits a wall of their mental ivory tower and starts becoming deluded. Feedback to our thoughts is essential for our development, and the more deranged our thoughts are, the more important the feedback becomes.

The harm the individual's expression of opinion deals is directly proportional to the willingness of those who hear it to act on it: it cannot be attributed to the individual himself. If I say that Jews are pigs, and someone else decides to start killing them and using their meat in stead of pork, then I cannot be held responsible for that: I never killed anyone, and others only killed someone because they chose to act on what to me are just thoughts. The only framework in which this is not the case is one that posits that humans cannot think for themselves and only uncontrollably react to their environment - which is a pretty dismal framework indeed. I understand that this is how communists tend to think, and this is one of the reasons why I see communism as an evil ideology.

If someone says a lie, you are free to choose whether to accept it or not. If you are smart and understand that news organizations rarely actually deliver news, then their lies are not going to affect you. I know not to go to Breitbart News or New York Times to learn what goes on in the world, and those who do not have only themselves to blame. No one forces them to consume this content. And certainly no one forces them to act on this content.

So yes, in my view, just like with all other forms of free speech, news organizations are free to lie however much they want, and people are free to expose their lies however much they want. This should be not a legal, but an oratorial battle. And if you do not know how to wage it, then let others do that. Do not bring a hammer on a debate stage, and if you cannot stand on it without holding a hammer, then please remove yourself from it and let others do it.

just_sayin said:

I don't think Tucker Carlson calls himself a journalist.  His show is a POV one.  He is quite open about his conservative leanings and has been so since his start on CNN when he wore a bow-tie when he represented the conservative side.  As far as the illegal immigrants vs drug cartel thing.  I need a point of clarification from you.  Where these Mexican drug cartels in a US county?  If so, then Carlson is correct - those crimes were committed by illegal immigrants - if you cross the border, even as part of a drug cartel, you fit the term 'illegal immigrant'.  So, can you clarify.

I appreciate it when persons on 'news' shows are open about their political leanings.  I respect Juan Williams being open about his leftist view, too bad for him he wasn't leftist enough for NPR.  I even agree with his views on school choice.  I can respect that about him.  Same goes for left leaning Harold Ford on Fox's the Five.  He is a former Democrat Senator from Tennessee.  What I can't respect is when someone wants to pretend that they are not bias.  Take George Stephanopoulos for example who is an ABC news personality and head of their news division.  He's the former Clinton communications director and primary advisor for the Democrat party.  He was responsible for the 'bimbo squad' whose job was to demonize women Clinton had slept with or sexually assaulted.  He is definitely a biased person.  I'd have much more respect for him, if he just admitted that he is every bit as biased as Tucker Carlson.

I am aware of that. However he positions himself, however, blatant lie about something that he showed just a few seconds ago is not something people should let him get away with it. In that segment Tucker said a direct lie; I was paraphrasing what he said, but it was very clear that he conflated the actions of the drug cartel members with the actions of illegal immigrants who had nothing to do with the cartels.

I find it disturbing that someone's political leaning is increasingly used as an excuse for them making inaccurate statements. Remember the infamous blunder by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who said that "everyone was working two jobs", and people tried to justify this ridiculous claim by saying that Alexandria just really-really cares about the people who are struggling to make ends meet? Well, the statement being inaccurate should have been the end of it. Having a bleeding heart does not excuse saying things that are not true.

Tucker should be held up to a higher standard. I have no problem with him opposing illegal immigration with all the zeal he can muster. I do have a problem with him misrepresenting facts in order to promote his views, however, and it is quite disturbing that many of his followers do not. Not sure which is worse: when they see him misrepresenting facts and just do not care, or when they do not even see it...

To me, basically the moment someone's argument has involved an error, the rest of the argument becomes irrelevant. You do not get to take an erroneous logical step and follow up with your reasoning. If you do not patch up your argument before proceeding further, then the intellectual value of your argument is zero. I would like to see more people be so unforgiving and ruthless. We are not talking about football here, we are talking about policies and events involving lives of millions of people - if anywhere mistakes, let alone outright lies, must be called out, it is here.
At the same time, I believe that all of this should be dealt with by means of social pressure. The government should not get involved unless an outright fraud takes place, such as Tucker collecting donations to support the patrol officers' families, while actually putting the money into his personal bank account.

If Tucker pulled out a shenanigan like this while drinking tea with me and refused to correct his error, I would be out of there in a flash. No point talking to someone who does not think that he has an obligation to make accurate statement, for that person can say anything in response to anything. I do not feel like the conversation is going to be of any value in that case. It is like playing chess with someone who at any point in time is free to grab all the pieces on the board, throw them in my face and claim the victory... not playing games like this, and I would hope that others do not either.

Barnardot

@Dee ;What's a " lier" ? What's " lieing" ?

Its some thing thats common to @Dee and @just_sayin who are the 2 resident cheaters and deceivers and wouldnt know what the meaning is any way because that sort of behavior is so  common place to them that they cant tell the difference any way. Nor do they give a rats about it becuase if you pull them up about it they go absolutely troppo as a reaction which is the tendency for psychopathic liers any way.

Dee

@Barnardot

15

Barnardot

@Dee ;Stop lying you cretin , the truth is the reverse you call everyone a who thrashes you in debate which is everyone.

There you go lieing your ace off again. I called you a lier and you have never trashed me in a debate. And since I only call you and @just_sayin liers there you go lieing again and since no body has ever beeten me in a debate there goes another lie from the lier who has taken dishonesty and cheating to totally new levels scumness.