By Paul Farhi

The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — Fox News Channel's top Washington editor ordered network reporters to couple any mention of global climate change with skepticism about data underlying such a scientific conclusion, according to an e-mail released by a liberal media-watchdog group Wednesday.

Media Matters for America said the internal e-mail from Bill Sammon, Fox News' Washington bureau chief, called into question the network's impartiality in reporting on the subject.

In an e-mail sent last December to Fox News' journalists after a global conference on climate change, Sammon asked Fox journalists to "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."

Media Matters, a group that tracks perceived conservative favoritism in the news media, said it obtained the e-mail from a Fox News employee it did not identify.

Sammon and Fox News could not be reached for comment.

Ari Rabin-Havt, Media Matters' head of research, said the e-mail showed Fox News was attempting to create a false impression of the climate issue by giving a "fringe" minority of climate-change warming skeptics equal weight with those who have concluded the planet is growing warmer.

"The overwhelming, vast majority of scientists who have studied climate change" accept the trend as fact, he said.

As long as Fox doesn't play that gay ass music after a TD this weekend,I'll be fine.Good luck,
SZ

Or in the middle of a drive.

+ many

Media Matters, LMAO.

"Sammon asked Fox journalists to "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 seems reasonable. And BTW, a lot of the data is being questioned, which is a good thing.

Yup and there are those that see evidence of aliens in rock drawings just not the vast majority.

No one...and I mean NO ONE...with half a brain thinks that FauxNews is anything but the PR arm of the right wing whackos...after all, they're the only "news" network to ever go in front of the Supreme Court and argue...successfully, I might add...that the First Amendment gives them the right to lie on the air if they so choose, that they have no duty to exercise any modicum of truth or impartiality.

For those who doubt that their favorite "news" channel did this, try Google.

Fish on...

Todd

after all, they're the only "news" network to ever go in front of the Supreme Court and argue...successfully, I might add...that the First Amendment gives them the right to lie on the air if they so choose, that they have no duty to exercise any modicum of truth or impartiality


I would guess they just wanted the same rights as MSNBC

See, you can keep saying stuff like that if it makes you feel better, but it just ain't true...MSNBC is clearly biased to the left of center, but they certainly haven't gone in front of the Supreme Court and argued that they have a Constitutional right to lie...one that they exercise daily.

Just keep on watching, and filling your head with nonsense...but don't come here and expect to lay out the nonsense without getting bashed around for it...

Fish on...

Todd

Fox News isn't impartial? Gee, who'da' thunk it?

MSNBC? Better to call it MSDNC.

Name 1 major news organization that is 100% impartial. Hint: It aint NPR either.

"Name 1 major news organization that attempts to be 100% impartial"

Fixed it.

Under that criteria there's a long list which Fox isn't on.

I'm just saying that at times the truth is meaningless on both. Somebody had to have sued Fox for a case to end up before the supreme court. How did the court rule the cae anyway?

Sadly most folks only want reinforcement of their beliefs. If they are on the wacked out right, birthers, etc, they believe everything they hear on Fox, and God help us, usually parrot the "facts" back at us. (I saw the fact that Obama’s trip cost $200 million a day right here on this board.) Same with the loony left, . Damn few of us go out of their way to listen to what the other side says. I listen to MSNBC about 10 minutes a week and the same for Fox. Both are unabashedly biased. (If you doubt that take a gander at the last year’s worth of debunked lies listed on Snopes.)I would guess more than 2/3 are right wing propaganda) IMHO Fox is a bit more blatant about it. But MSNBC has an obvious bias too. If you can’t see that you just aren’t smart enough to form a valid opinion on your own.

I get most of my news from BBC, CBS and the Internet. Are any of these biased – of course. But they try to keep it under control. BBC is great for world news often covering news in other countries that no US news will touch.

I quoted Snopes once and a guy pipes up, "Aw, they're from California ! Can't believe a word they say !"

As usual, people who make the biggest deal out of what is on Fox only are going on what other sources told them about Fox. Watch it for a few weeks at different times of day and then make your own judgement about whether they are as biased as "your" normal "news" source.

If you have a brain that works, you realize that choosing what to report guarantees bias. Anyone who thinks that there are any sources that are capable of being unbiased or are even trying very much to be unbiased are clueless about human behavior.

If you actually watch Fox, you know there are liberals on most of the shows that aren't silenced in any noticable way. At least not as silenced as NPR did to Juan Williams recently. I can't say whether they intentionally attempt to influence a certain opinion or not, but my guess is they do just like NPR, BBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, newspapers, blogs and of course, search engines.

What makes some people so mad about Fox is they don't want anyone to hear anything other than their side of the story...they know that if there is a discussion and facts are brought up, they lose. Instead, they pretend that the only bias that exists in the news outlet is Fox which is just bs.

Every once in a while I'll watch the BBC news for a different spin on the issues. Surprisingly enough, the news they deliver is fairly absent of spin.

I watched Fox News once. Had to stop for fear of getting ill. I also had the same reaction to Keith Olberman. Polarized views, one way or the other, suck out loud. BTW, Glenn Beck sucks slimey donkey dongs.

JG, I thought I made it clear above, but I guess not...

A couple of actual journalists at Faux News attempted to tell a straightforward story, one their bosses didn't like...so they fired them.

The journalists filed an unlawful termination lawsuit, claiming that attempting to tell the truth is not grounds for termination. Obviously, Faux News felt otherwise, and argued that not only is it grounds for termination, but that they have the Constitutional right to lie to tools like you who will eat it up and regurgitate it on the InterWebz.

The Conservative majority on the Supreme Court ruled that it is ample grounds for termination, and that lying, even by the media, is protected Free Speech (you know, that 1st Amendment stuff that the right wing loves to hate?)...and that if Fox wants to lie to dumbasses who want to believe them, they have to right to do so.

You watch Fox and believe it...you're the dumbass they were talking about.

Don't believe me? Try Google...it's free.

Fish on...

Todd

Try Google...you actually think their search engine isn't biased? If you think that, you deserve what you find.

I googled it, guess what Todd, your "facts" are pretty loose there buddy. Supreme court, really? Fact check has nothing listed and Snopes has a sketchy forum at best on it. While i understand the lawsuit happened, why It happened and why it ended the way it did, your going to need some sources or we will all know your full of shlt as usual. I suppose that's why you didn't cite a source. And by the way, an appellate court is not a supreme court on a state or federal level. Fox is just as right wing as MSNBC is left wing. All "news" should be taken with a grain of salt. I rarely watch it, but I know what to expect.

http://foxnewsboycott.com/resources/fox-can-lie-lawsuit/

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-the-media-can-legally-lie/

This is bullshlt too. Good thing your impartial. Feel free to prove me wrong there googlemeister.

Btw, I am in NO WAY defending fox news, they have the same right to lie as you do apparently.

bait thumper, the links that you yourself provided tell the story fairly well...

Fish on...

Todd

This!

So news agencies have the constitutional right to lie to their listeners, that makes their news propaganda.
Isn't that the cornerstone of a socialistic society?

It's all about the Benjamins. Getting folks to watch increases market share and advertising time costs more. The management and shareholders don't care what is said as long as their stock goes up. The truth is just a bothersome detail.

Hank, I like to know my enemy, so I do watch the propaganda channel.
So why do you think 20% of Americans think the President is a Muslim?
And I agree with Aunty, Beck is definitely gay.

I could believe that...there's no one for histrionics like a gay-hating gay conservative...but in the long run, I could care less about it.

I also don't think there's anything wrong with watching Faux News, or any other news agency, for that matter...they're all agenda and advertiser driven to a certain extent, and while I think Fox is the worst of the lot, and maybe even by far, none of them is giving you the unvarnished truth.

The problem is if you watch that garbage, and then believe it, and then vote accordingly...that's just plain stupid.

Fish on...

Todd

If Pelosi had acted half as wierd as Boehner does already, the right wing hate machine would have ripped her ten times more than they already do...Boehner gets a free pass for being a man, a real 'Mercan one, at that.

Fish on...

Todd

You must have heard that on Fox, because Boehner is a fuckin fruitcake, nutty throughout...I actually can't wait until he feels the need to stand in front of microphones every day starting next year...he'll make even the most partisan RWWJ's cringe, and that'll take some doin'.

Fish on...

Todd

As a child I recall numerous pleas for money to fund Radio Free Europe, it was democracies answer to the communist propaganda machine.
Back then it was considered unamerican to broadcast lies.
Perhaps we can pass the hat for Radio Free Wingnuts?

Hmmm....this should be titled the sore loser thread.

Captain

So what was considered anti American, is now a constitutional right?
Or is is just considered repressive when the communists are doing it.

Just for the record...the Dems still have the House, and the White House...over the past two years when they've had all three of them, FauxNews was still completely full of $hit...you don't actually believe the stuff you see on there, do you?

Uh, oh...I think you do. Sorry. Didn't mean to make you feel stupid.

Fish on...

Todd

To lie, spread hate speech, or speak Ill of your own country has ALWAYS been a constitutional right. All those worthless 60's era hippies should remember, that was the foundation of their movement.

Knowing lying to any public listening audience, to further any agenda, is nothing more than propaganda, which was considered anti American, and the entire free world condemned the communists for doing it.
I just find it ironic that now knowingly lying is a right guaranteed by the our Constitution.
And yes Fox Propaganda machine sets the bar very low in the credibility department.
Just feels sleazy and unamerican to me.

Here's one constant you can always count on...always.

The right wingers rip into everyone they hate...which is most anyone that's not them...they call them names, they call them un-American, they call them traitors, and they call for their heads.

Point out when they are total pieces of $hit...and they just say they're just like everyone else, and don't even bother denying it, because they can't.

You can count on it like rain in Seattle in the fall.

Fish on...

Todd

By that definition you and Goat fukker are right wingers.

I think someones goat is on the rag again

Thanks Hank....that made the Hawks loss a tad better. :>)

Wait for it......

Relax fawker....I changed it.

Fixed for you bait dunker"


"To lie, spread hate speech, or speak Ill of your own country has ALWAYS been a constitutional right. All those worthless 60's era dope smoking hippies should remember, that was the foundation of their bowel movement."


Always willing to help a brother out!

Captain

Just to be fair and balanced Todd I fixed this for you.

"Just for the record...the Dems still have the (SENATE) House?, and the White House...er ah AT LEAST TEMPORARILY, over the past two years when they've had all (INHALE DEEPLY) three of them, FauxNews was still completely full of $hit...you actually believe the stuff you see on there, ME TOO!"

Fire up the bong again brother, maybe the next two years will be even more enjoyable for you.

Captain

Hankster that was priceless.

KK I'd tell you to grow up but I heard that it is an impossibility for you.

Captain out!

"Sources familiar with the situation in Fox's Washington bureau have told Media Matters that Sammon uses his position as managing editor to "slant" Fox's supposedly neutral news coverage to the right. Sammon's "government option" email is the clearest evidence yet that Sammon is aggressively pushing Fox's reporting to the right -- in this case by issuing written orders to his staff. "

Interesting 'cut and paste' given several States have suited the US Government on this exact point ... and another nineteen have a joint suite going in Federal Court. I think his choice of words ("Government Option") actually are pretty mild. As the law stands, it's NOT an "Option," it's a mandate...... to the tune of (depending upon whose numbers you want to use) $1.4'ish TRILLION DOLLARS.

It is a interesting bit of case law for the average person to follow. Sifting through the BS from all sides two things sorta seemed to rise to the top for me. One it was a reach to use the interstate commerce clause of the constitution. Second when putting the thing through congress the Presidents supporters said the mandate was not a tax, but now the same people say it is a tax. ( to dodge the commerce thing in courts )

Still say a single pay was a better thing if one could choose the coverage they want. One thing about it is it ain't going away, the mandate to buy will likely get tossed, the system as it is is broke, so they got to fix it.

Spectator sport one more time.

I guess the word hypocrisy is lost on you as you carry out a tirade and fill it with exactly what you complain of.