As reported yesterday, Sarah Palin will join Fox News Channel as a contributor. The news, today, is that the decision to use her to further polarize politics was intentional. Fox News Vice President of Programming, Bill Shine, has previously stated that Fox was the “voice of the opposition” to the Obama administration, and now admits that her “controversial”  statements are “probably going to help” them, and “[t]hat’s what people will want to watch.”

SHINE: With her hiring, Fox News gets a high-profile figure whose pronouncements on issues such as healthcare reform have helped drive contentious partisan debate — it was her Facebook post that first raised the term “death panels.”

She is one of the most talked about and politically polarizing figures in the country,” said Bill Shine, the network’s executive vice president of programming. “First off, we hope she brings that.

The VP of Programming has clearly dismissed responsibility and accuracy in reporting as long as their viewership is increased. By stating that he was “not concerned that Palin would make false assertions,” but rather welcoming the controversy, the “zero tolerance for on-screen errors” policy is, obviously, another Fox News lie.

According to PolitiFact.com, the following statements made by Palin have earned a “False” or “Pants on Fire” status – This is the kind of accuracy Fox News viewers should expect:

  • Seniors and the disabled “will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care.” (Pants on Fire)
  • Obama would “experiment with socialism.” (Pants on Fire)
  • “The truth was revealed there in that report that showed there was no unlawful or unethical activity on my part.” (Pants on Fire)
  • “Ronald Reagan faced an even worse recession” than the current one. (False)
  • The McCain campaign “did not elaborate” on Obama’s ties to ACORN. (False)
  • Says she couldn’t take stimulus money because it required “universal building codes.” (False)
  • A provision in the health care reform bill for end-of-life counseling for seniors is not “entirely voluntary.” (False)
  • Palin said stimulus money for weatherization required “universal energy building codes for Alaska, kind of a one-size-fits-all building code that isn’t going to work up there in Alaska.” (False)
  • “We’re building a nearly $40-billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America’s largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever.” (False)
  • “If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.” (False)

Original Story

Share this article

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Plus
  • Pinterest
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • FriendFeed
  • Tumblr
  • Instapaper
  • Blogger
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • Delicious
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
468 ad

15 Responses to “Fox News Wants to Futher Polarize with Palin”

  1. Crowdaddy13 says:

    So again…………why do they use the term “Fair and Balanced”?

    Our point exactly

  2. Palin has been hired as a FNC contributor. The same title liberal, polarizing figure Bob Beckel carries.

  3. FoxNewsBoycott says:

    Oh, gee, I guess that makes it all “fair and balanced” then, huh, Plunket?

    FNC has two former Republican governors, former Republican Speaker of the House, Former Chief of Staff and Senior Adviser for Bush, Former Republican US Representative and had two Bush speech writers on their payroll. Not to mention Roger Ailes, who was a media consultant for Nixon, Reagan, HW Bush & Giuliani leading the pack… You bring up one “liberal, polarizing” commentator… ‘cuz that makes it even… LOL, pathetic.

  4. Crowdaddy13 says:

    @plunket…….you’re a moron. You can name one guy on FNC that is considered liberal. So who’s the other 50 liberals they need to make it even?

    ex. One city has 100 people living in it. 99 are white, 1 is black……….so if we use FNC statistics, the town is even demographically? Well, the town does have ONE black person!!! Come on!!!! Its balanced now!!!!

  5. Your post was about “further polarizing” Fox News with the hiring of Sarah Palin. I just stated that her FNC colleague was just as polarizing (though not as famous). So it’s not uncommon for Fox to hire such individuals (liberal or conservative).

    Did I say it made FNC “fair and balanced”? No.

    Did I say “‘cuz that makes it even”? No.

    Did I say anything even remotely like that? No.

    I did enjoy the ranting and the raving, though.

  6. Crowdaddy13 says:

    My fair and balanced sarcasm comes from the quote above………..”With her hiring, Fox News gets a high-profile figure whose pronouncements on issues such as healthcare reform have helped drive contentious partisan debate —”

    So they hired someone based on their “partisan” views and debates………so Fox is in essence not fair and balanced………I wasnt talking to you or rebutting you with my first comment. But then YOU had to come in with a O’Reilly-esque whine as if the hiring of Palin was justified because they had also hired Beckel. So without further elaboration in your one sentence post, we the readers would have to assume that you were alluding to the fact that its even now?

    If you want us to truly understand what your thinking or saying, then elaborate or shut the f**k up

  7. FoxNewsBoycott says:

    Just the mere fact that you think a liberal contributor to FNC could be anywhere near as polarizing as Palin speaks volumes. I’m sure I speak for most people that she is considered polarizing, largely, because of her lies. Why don’t you match lie for lie? I’ve provided a short list above. Go to it, Plunket. We’ll wait for you to prove that Beckel has told as many lies, with as much weight, with as far of a reach as Palin… What, exactly is the equivalent of Palin’s “death panel” comment that so many FNC viewers blindly believed?

    Yes, you think FNC is “fair and balanced” as evidenced by other comments. You just said that it “makes it even” because “her FNC colleague was just as polarizing.” So, you can enjoy the ranting and raving all you want, while I’ll enjoy seeing you struggle to defend FNC. What’s funny is that you stand by the “fair and balanced” slogan when it suits your needs and abandon it when you want to prove someone wrong. It’s also funny that you, again, suggest evenness when you state that “it’s not uncommon for fox to hire such individuals (liberal or conservative).” It is clearly more common for FNC to hire conservatives, if not in general then to higher profile positions. There is no fairness, nor balance, and to see you suggest that is laughable. If you actually believe it, it’s just sad.

  8. I have never, with a straight face, ever said Fox News was fair and balanced. It doesn’t matter how many times you repeat it, it’s not true. Fox obviously leans right. I have used the term “fair and balanced” as a joke. Of course they have more conservatives than progressives. I have never said otherwise. Ever.
    .
    What I have said is that the media has to take an adversarial role when covering both sides of the aisle. Only Fox has shown the inclination to question this President and this Congress. Without the left-leaning biases of the other news outlets there would be no Fox News. NBC, ABC, CBS, and CNN all helped create this monster.

    When do I defend Fox? When they ask the legitimate questions every reporter should be asking (at least in my estimation). A free press is messy and sometimes not fair and sometimes not balanced. That’s the only way it works.

    I only mentioned Bob Beckel because I happen to like him. He’s very partisan and made sense as Palin’s polar opposite. And you know, as well as I, that 99% of the people in this country couldn’t recite any of the “lies” you listed above. Palin is polarizing because she’s a Republican, Christian, pro-life, conservative woman who was totally unprepared for the national stage. That’s what unnerves her opposition.

  9. FoxNewsBoycott says:

    Glad to know that you saying that you wish I “were as fair and balanced as Fox News” was a joke.

  10. Crowdaddy13 says:

    next time your “joking” add a LOL or HAHA at the end so we can tell, ya know we arent in front of you so we cant see the body language or facial expressions………..sarcasm is a tone not a text

  11. Just wondering why Sarah Palin scares liberals so much! I mean liberals are really really scared of this woman. Scared enough to hatefully go after her children. Scared enough to lie about her on a daily basis. Please somebody tell me what conservatives have ever gone after a liberal’s children before? That’s right. They don’t. Just shows how mean spirited and hateful the left has become under the influence of the Clintons and the Obamas. This is simple Saul Alinsky Marxism coupled with good old fashioned Chicago style thuggery! So much for Obama being a new type of leader who is going to bring us all together! What a joke. Well the bad news for you idiots is the more you attack her the more popular she becomes! Remember the old saying, ALL publicity is GOOD publicity. Keep it up folks. her approval numbers are better tan Obama’s. Negative articles in Sheeple magazine and Snoozeweek aren’t going to do anything but cause her approval numbers to go up and up and up while Obamas go down, down, and farther down!

  12. Crowdaddy13, thanks for the helpful hints. HAHA

  13. Maybe Fox can be considered fair and balanced to offset the state run media that drools over Obama and his henchmen.

  14. FoxNewsBoycott says:

    Audrey, Thank you for exemplifying the problem.

  15. reasonably sane says:

    @mosh:

    “There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.”
      – Goethe
    “Fear always springs from ignorance”
      – Ralph Waldo Emerson
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    - Martin Luther King, Jr.
    “Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance.”
    – Confucius

    Palin is ignorant and intolerant and thinks she knows all the answers. And of course, she has been placed in a position of rare power by rich powerful men with a private agenda. An agenda that threatens the individual liberties you mistakenly think you are defending.

    This is not a conspiracy against Palin by any imaginary rabid pack of liberals. Philosophers through the ages would fear what she embodies and what she is being used for. Wake up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.