*** Official Politics Shitposting Thread ***

[Poopadoop]

You're killing me here dude. Think about the assumptions you have to make in order for your statement above to be valid.

What views did Fox 'confirm' in this case? You're assuming that conservatives, gathered in the form of the largest cable news audience, have some kind of opinion that this crime was perpetrated by a Moroccan Muslim. Why would they WANT to hear that instead of the actual truth?

Cognitive dissonance. People prefer to hear things that confirm their previously held beliefs than things that don't.

Also, you keep harping on how they have the biggest audience, like that's somehow automatic proof they're objective. That's not how it works mate. Maybe they have the largest audience because the liberal audience is split among a number of other networks and Fox is the only MSM that caters to the right-wingers - ever think of that?

Let's say hypothetically that the Moroccan guy was in on it. And in the context of week-long national headlines about Muslim immigrants committing crimes, I would expect fox to devote a little more airtime to the Muslim man than they do the French man. I would also expect CNN and MSNBC to play up the French connection. This would be an example of what you're talking about where viewers thrive on confirmation bias and being told what they want to hear. It happens on both sides, which is why anyone who gets their info from just one news source, no matter how good it may be, is pretty much hopelessly uninformed.

However, what actually happened is not the same. Fox reported a complete falsehood. Doing so on purpose, would be silly. So it seems infinitely more plausible that it was merely an honest mistake.

How about the idea that it was done on purpose even though it seems silly, because they knew their viewers would find it easy to explain away such a thing as an 'honest mistake'. You're a good example of that happening right here and now.

If you want bias, how about the fact that the letter to Fox ranted about Trump's immigration order. How are the two stories connected if the only criminal is a Canadian in Canada?

The fact that other people are biased doesn't change the fact that Fox is biased, or make it somehow ok. Not sure why you keep bringing those things up. I'm talking about Fox News here, which you say is really good and objective. I'm saying it's not good or objective if they fuck up on things like this.

I don't think that believing in the plausibility of an honest mistake makes anyone a Fox apologist. Frankly, if Fox were out to dupe people, I think they are smart enough to do it better than this.

They only have to be smart enough to understand that their viewers are going to give them the benefit of the doubt no matter what they do.

In the end, it may have been an honest mistake. At the very least, it was a dumb mistake, and it's not to their credit that Fox News was the only one to make it.

My point, however, has still been nicely illustrated by your reaction to the argument. If they were to commit the dishonest action on purpose a great majority of their viewers wouldn't see it as such, and defend them the way you're defending them here.