CARLSON: “SpongeBob is talking a lot about global warming, and he’s only looking at it from one point of view”

CARLSON: “The government agency showed kids this cartoon and handed out books that blame man for global warming, but they did not tell kids that that is actually a disputed fact. Oops.”

DOOCY: “Clearly Nickelodeon is pushing a global warming agenda, and while there’s no disputing the fact that the earth is getting a little warmer, the big question is, is it man made, or is it just one of those gigantic climactic phases that we’re going [through]? … For a while we’re cold and then we get warmer and then we get colder and warmer, which one is it? There’s science on both sides. There are a lot of scientists who say, ‘It’s this,’ others say, ‘It’s that.’”

Apparently it wasn’t the Department of Education, but rather corporate sponsors like Target, Nickelodeon and United Way who provided the books. and, according to Tim Tuten at the Department of Education, there were no SpongeBob videos played at the event.

“We’ve never shown any videos ever, so I have no idea where that is coming from,” he said. Tuten added that participants were permitted to choose one of dozens of diverse books to take home with them and the SpongeBob book was one of those options.

Source

Related posts:

1. Fox & Friends Producer Defends Fuzzy Math As reported, Fox & Friends manipulated a Rasmussen poll to...
2. Fox & Friends Falsely Claim Palin’s Book Tour Compared to Terrorists Organizing for America director Mitch Stewart has come under attack...
3. Fox & Friends Tries to ReWrite Economic History Brian Kilmeade of Fox & Friends made the following factually-challenged...

Joe Bastardi, providing "utter nonense"

Fox News, doing its best to spread misinformation about climate change, brought up the claim that “CO2 can’t cause warming,” citing the First Law of Thermodynamics and Le Chatelier’s Principle …Here’s what Joe Bastardi said on Fox News:

human-induced climate change “contradicts what we call the 1st law of thermodynamics. Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. So to look for input of energy into the atmosphere, you have to come from a foreign source.”

As for Le Chatelier’s Principle, Bastardi stated the following:

Le Chatelier’s Principle “says that any system in distress, physical or chemical in the atmosphere, tries to return toward normalcy. And that is why you’re seeing temperatures level off.”

Let’s see what some experts have to say about these claims, shall we?

Duke University scientist William Chameides, who called Fox’s claims “utter nonsense” – Read here:

It is true that global warming requires a source of heat. In this case it comes from the sun. What CO2 does is trap a larger amount of the heat from the sun, preventing it from escaping and thus driving up temperatures. To argue otherwise is to argue that the greenhouse effect does not exist. In fact the existence of the greenhouse effect was established by scientists more than a century ago. It would be impossible to explain the temperatures of Mars and Venus, as well as the Earth, without invoking this effect.

Kevin Trenberth, Senior Scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research has this to say:

the system “re-creates equilibrium” by heating up, since the surface and atmosphere radiate more at a higher temperature. As a result, “it reaches a new equilibrium but at a higher temperature,” he said, adding: “And of course we keep adding more CO2 so we have not reached that new state yet.”

David Archer of the University of Chicago’s Department of Geophysical Sciences responds as well:

“Without Le Chatelier’s principle, the climate crisis would be much worse than it is, but even with this buffering, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is rising and will continue to remain elevated for tens of thousands of years into the future. So to suggest that Le Chatelier’s principle is going to save us is wrong.” And the principle certainly doesn’t establish that “CO2 Can’t Cause Warming.”

Source

Related posts:

1. Eric Bolling’s Rewriting of History on Fox News Now that Glenn Beck’s show is no longer on Fox...
2. Propaganda Techniques Used by Fox News FoxNewsBoycott.com previously pointed out Bill O’Reilly’s use of propaganda techniques....
3. Veterans Demand Apology From GOP & Fox News Regarding the so-called “death book”  that supposedly encourages veterans to...

Fox News host Eric Bolling

Now that Glenn Beck’s show is no longer on Fox News, many people may think that the ratio of hot air to facts would improve, but the show that filled Beck’s time slot shall prove differently. Fox News host Eric Bolling who appeared on Beck’s replacement show, “The Five,” along with a panel including former Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino, made in incredible announcement, similar to Rudy Giuliani’s claim that, “we had no domestic attacks under Bush.”

BOLLING: America was certainly safe between 2000 and 2008. I don’t remember any attacks on American soil during that period of time.

Of course, there was that thing that happened in New York on September 11th, 2001, which was during Bush’s first term as President. It was only one of the largest attacks on American soil in U.S. history. It’s a simple thing to overlook.

Someone had to have corrected him on the show, right? Wrong.

Not even Dana Perino uttered a peep. But, really, who would expect her to? (See GOP Connections)

Source

Related posts:

1. Eric Bolling’s Textbook Fox News Use of ‘Some People’ Quote (His Own) In some instances a journalist can’t reveal their sources. In...
2. Dana Perino Rewrites 9/11 History on Hannity White House Press Secretary under George W. Bush and current...
3. Former Fox News Host Eric Burns Slams Network & Glenn Beck Early last year Eric Burns, who had been with Fox...

Fox News - Our viewers will believe anything

FoxNewsBoycott.com previously pointed out Bill O’Reilly’s use of propaganda techniques. Now, Dr. Cynthia Boaz at Truthout.org has doubled that list and have provided evidence of the techniques used by Fox News.

1. Panic Mongering. This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren’t activated, you aren’t alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don’t think rationally. And when they can’t think rationally, they’ll believe anything.
2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person’s credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. “liberals,” “hippies,” “progressives” etc. This form of argument – if it can be called that – leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass.
3. Projection/Flipping. This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you’re using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first. We see this frequently in the immigration discussion, where anti-racists are accused of racism, or in the climate change debate, where those who argue for human causes of the phenomenon are accused of not having science or facts on their side. It’s often called upon when the media host finds themselves on the ropes in the debate.
4. Rewriting History. This is another way of saying that propagandists make the facts fit their worldview. The Downing Street Memos on the Iraq war were a classic example of this on a massive scale, but it happens daily and over smaller issues as well. A recent case in point is Palin’s mangling of the Paul Revere ride, which Fox reporters have bent over backward to validate. Why lie about the historical facts, even when they can be demonstrated to be false? Well, because dogmatic minds actually find it easier to reject reality than to update their viewpoints. They will literally rewrite history if it serves their interests. And they’ll often speak with such authority that the casual viewer will be tempted to question what they knew as fact.
5. Scapegoating/Othering. This works best when people feel insecure or scared. It’s technically a form of both fear mongering and diversion, but it is so pervasive that it deserves its own category. The simple idea is that if you can find a group to blame for social or economic problems, you can then go on to a) justify violence/dehumanization of them, and b) subvert responsibility for any harm that may befall them as a result.
6. Conflating Violence With Power and Opposition to Violence With Weakness. This is more of what I’d call a “meta-frame” (a deeply held belief) than a media technique, but it is manifested in the ways news is reported constantly. For example, terms like “show of strength” are often used to describe acts of repression, such as those by the Iranian regime against the protesters in the summer of 2009. There are several concerning consequences of this form of conflation. First, it has the potential to make people feel falsely emboldened by shows of force – it can turn wars into sporting events. Secondly, especially in the context of American politics, displays of violence – whether manifested in war or debates about the Second Amendment – are seen as noble and (in an especially surreal irony) moral. Violence become synonymous with power, patriotism and piety.
7. Bullying. This is a favorite technique of several Fox commentators. That it continues to be employed demonstrates that it seems to have some efficacy. Bullying and yelling works best on people who come to the conversation with a lack of confidence, either in themselves or their grasp of the subject being discussed. The bully exploits this lack of confidence by berating the guest into submission or compliance. Often, less self-possessed people will feel shame and anxiety when being berated and the quickest way to end the immediate discomfort is to cede authority to the bully. The bully is then able to interpret that as a “win.”
8. Confusion. As with the preceding technique, this one works best on an audience that is less confident and self-possessed. The idea is to deliberately confuse the argument, but insist that the logic is airtight and imply that anyone who disagrees is either too dumb or too fanatical to follow along. Less independent minds will interpret the confusion technique as a form of sophisticated thinking, thereby giving the user’s claims veracity in the viewer’s mind.
9. Populism. This is especially popular in election years. The speakers identifies themselves as one of “the people” and the target of their ire as an enemy of the people. The opponent is always “elitist” or a “bureaucrat” or a “government insider” or some other category that is not the people. The idea is to make the opponent harder to relate to and harder to empathize with. It often goes hand in hand with scapegoating. A common logical fallacy with populism bias when used by the right is that accused “elitists” are almost always liberals – a category of political actors who, by definition, advocate for non-elite groups.
10. Invoking the Christian God. This is similar to othering and populism. With morality politics, the idea is to declare yourself and your allies as patriots, Christians and “real Americans” (those are inseparable categories in this line of thinking) and anyone who challenges them as not. Basically, God loves Fox and Republicans and America. And hates taxes and anyone who doesn’t love those other three things. Because the speaker has been benedicted by God to speak on behalf of all Americans, any challenge is perceived as immoral. It’s a cheap and easy technique used by all totalitarian entities from states to cults.
11. Saturation. There are three components to effective saturation: being repetitive, being ubiquitous and being consistent. The message must be repeated cover and over, it must be everywhere and it must be shared across commentators: e.g. “Saddam has WMD.” Veracity and hard data have no relationship to the efficacy of saturation. There is a psychological effect of being exposed to the same message over and over, regardless of whether it’s true or if it even makes sense, e.g., “Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States.” If something is said enough times, by enough people, many will come to accept it as truth. Another example is Fox’s own slogan of “Fair and Balanced.”
12. Disparaging Education. There is an emerging and disturbing lack of reverence for education and intellectualism in many mainstream media discourses. In fact, in some circles (e.g. Fox), higher education is often disparaged as elitist. Having a university credential is perceived by these folks as not a sign of credibility, but of a lack of it. In fact, among some commentators, evidence of intellectual prowess is treated snidely and as anti-American. The disdain for education and other evidence of being trained in critical thinking are direct threats to a hive-mind mentality, which is why they are so viscerally demeaned.
13. Guilt by Association. This is a favorite of Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart, both of whom have used it to decimate the careers and lives of many good people. Here’s how it works: if your cousin’s college roommate’s uncle’s ex-wife attended a dinner party back in 1984 with Gorbachev’s niece’s ex-boyfriend’s sister, then you, by extension are a communist set on destroying America. Period.
14. Diversion. This is where, when on the ropes, the media commentator suddenly takes the debate in a weird but predictable direction to avoid accountability. This is the point in the discussion where most Fox anchors start comparing the opponent to Saul Alinsky or invoking ACORN or Media Matters, in a desperate attempt to win through guilt by association. Or they’ll talk about wanting to focus on “moving forward,” as though by analyzing the current state of things or God forbid, how we got to this state of things, you have no regard for the future. Any attempt to bring the discussion back to the issue at hand will likely be called deflection, an ironic use of the technique of projection/flipping.

 

It’s an amazing, if not depressing, look at our society’s perception of news, politics and each other, manipulated by the marketing machine that is News Corp, parent company of Fox News. Many, if not all, of these techniques can be found employed by those working for any number of Rupert Murdoch’s properties around the world. Additionally, we’ve seen every one of these techniques used by Fox News fanboys defending Fox News, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc. Now that this list is being shared, be sure to keep an eye out for these propaganda techniques and be ready to call the fanboys out.

Source

Related posts:

1. Roger Ailes’ Secret Plan for GOP Propaganda TV Before launching Fox News Channel in 1996, FNC President Roger...
2. Fox News Uses Children In Anti-Obama Propaganda Here is a clip from Countdown on msnbc discussing Fox...
3. Study: Bill O’Reilly Uses All Seven Elements of Propaganda Based on a 2007 article from Indiana University School of...

Fox Nation, the right wing extremist site brought to us by Fox News, took the Reuters story and renamed it, “Reuters Bombshell: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduce Global Warming.”

Seriously?

Sulfur pollution is not a greenhouse gas.  Quite the reverse, as the Reuters article Fox News links to makes clear.  Indeed, its ability to cool the globe has been known for many, many decades.

As Media Matters reports, the study’s lead author, Robert Kaufmann, denounced the headline as “patently false” via email:

Now come the worst part of publishing an article on a topic of general interest … the distortions. Sulfur emissions ARE NOT GREENHOUSE GASES and the article carefully separates the two.  Sulfur emissions are known as radiatively active gases because they reflect incoming solar radiation back to space.  But they are not greenhouse gases, which affect Earth’s energy balance by absorbing out-going long wave radiation.  So the headline is PATENTLY FALSE….

Sulfur emissions are bad air pollutants–with severe health (e.g. respiratory disease that contribute to tens of thousands of deaths) and environmental effects (acid deposition, which makes entire lakes lifeless). I am no an expert in this area, but these effects are the reasons that all industrial nations have  strict limits on sulfur emissions and now developing nations are scrubbing their emissions too.

Source

Related posts:

1. Fox Nation’s Race Baiting Using Presidents Birthday This is low, even for Fox News… Fox Nation’s article...
2. Fox News, Fox Nation Punked By ACORN Staffer Fox News and their related web sites, including The Fox...
3. Fox Nation Fails At Obama Rating The Fox Nation web site incorrectly reported that a group...

A 300+ page cache of documents obtained by Gawker from the Nixon and Bush presidential libraries includes a memo titled, “A Plan For Putting the GOP on TV News.” The 15 page plan includes the opinion that “People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you.”

Today television news is watched more often than people read newspapers, than people listen to the radio, than people read or gather any other form of communication. The reason: People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you.

Knowing the differences between news and entertainment programming and the relative difference in rules, the plan was to circumvent the system and get GOP opinions into what they believed to be the “liberal media” and therefore delivered by who they saw as the enemy. Just as Fox News continues to claim to be the opposition to the mainstream media (of which they are part).

This is a plan that places news of importance to localities (Senators and representatives are newsmakers of importance to their localities) on local television news programs while it is still news. It avoids the censorship, the priorities, and the prejudices of network news selectors and disseminators.

The memo included handwritten notes from Roger Ailes, clearly stating his interest in making the plan a reality. Not only that, but using his media consulting experience to suggest changes and address possible repercussions.

Notes written by Roger Ailes in the margin of the memo.

Basically a very good idea. It should be expanded to include other members of the administration such as cabinet involved in activity with regional or local interest. Also could involve GOP governors when in DC. Who would purchase equipment and run operation—White House? RNC? Congressional caucus? Will get some flap about news management.

Ailes wanted in… here’s his note to Nixon Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman:

Bob—if you decide to go ahead we would as a production company like to bid on packaging the entire project. I know what has to be done and we could test the feasibility for 90 days without making a commitment beyond that point.

The first version of the plan was to be called “Capitol News Service.” After Roger Ailes was fired by the White House, he was involved with Television News Incorporated (TVN), seemingly the subsequent version. As reported by Rolling Stone, TVN was financed by the President of Coors Brewing Co., Joseph Coors, and “was designed to inject a far-right slant into local news broadcasts by providing news clips that stations could use without credit—and at a fraction of the true costs of production.”

The documents obtained by Gawker include other “dirty tricks” memos. A memo from Roger Ailes to Haldeman involves a scheme to infiltrate a political opponent’s organization – “I would like to see us get one of our people inside the Wallace organization immediately.” There was also evidence of a “news” piece to be directed by Ailes and financed by a pro-Nixon front group that would have used two pro-war Democrats, who he calls “dupes for the administration,” to respond to a CBS News special.

Ailes was working on as a response to an anti-war CBS News special.

As you can clearly see, these examples demonstrate a direct GOP connection between Roger Ailes (American President of Fox News Channel) and a plan to air GOP propaganda on TV, disguised as news, plus other dirty tricks involving media manipulation. “Fair and balanced?” Really?

Source

Related posts:

1. Fox News President Roger Ailes Slammed by Rupert Murdoch’s Son-In-Law There is a rumor surfacing today that Fox News Channel...
2. Roger Ailes’ Reasoning for Cutting Away From Obama Q&A Arianna Huffington asked Fox News president Roger Ailes why Fox...
3. Roger Ailes: White House May Have Had ‘Legitimate Complaints’ About Fox News Without providing specifics, Fox News President Roger Ailes may have...

Here you go:

BECK CLAIM: In 2004, Soros Called The Election “Not A Normal Election,” And Said That “In Periods Of Regime Change, Normal Rules Do Not Apply.” Accusing Soros of setting up a “shadow party” to interfere in the 2004 elections, Beck cited David Horowitz and Richard Poe’s The Shadow Party.

REALITY: Beck Used Comments From 1995 To Show That Soros “Didn’t Mince Words” In 2004. Those comments are actually from the 1995 book Soros on Soros: Staying Ahead of the Curve.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros Advocated For “Globalization” By Saying, “The Main Obstacle Of A Stable And Just World Order Is The United States.” Citing Soros’ book, The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror.

REALITY: Soros Was Criticizing The Policies Of The Bush Administration And Said His Top Priority Was “[C]hanging The Attitude And Policies Of” The U.S.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros Has “Waged A War Against Capitalism” Because He Said “It Poses Some Serious Threats.”

REALITY: Soros Was Explaining That Regulations Are Needed To Shield Individuals From Financial Bubbles.

…

BECK CLAIM: McCain-Feingold Legislation Was The Result Of 1994 Soros Speech.

REALITY: Feingold Campaigned On Campaign Finance Reform During His 1992 Election And Repeatedly Supported It In The Senate Prior To Soros’ Speech.

…

BECK CLAIM: Mccain-Feingold Bolstered 501(c)(3) Groups, “Which Can Advertise At Will.”

REALITY: 501(c)(3) Groups Are Banned From Political Advertising On Behalf Of Or In Opposition To Candidates.

…

BECK CLAIM: Kerry “Adopt[ed]” Soros’ Criticism Of The War On Terror.

REALITY: Beck Showed Kerry “Adopting” Position From Soros’ 2004 Book. The comment Beck attributed to Soros — “War is a false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism. Crimes require police work, not military action” — comes from Soros’ book that was published in 2004. [The Bubble of American Supremacy: Correcting the Misuse of American Power, Page 18]

REALITY: Beck’s Proof Of  Kerry “Adopting” That Position Included Comments Kerry Made In September 2003 — Before The Bubble Of American Supremacy Was Published.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros “Set The Agenda” By Calling For “A Large Stimulus Package.”

REALITY: Obama, Congress, And Economists Had Already Called For Major Fiscal Stimulus. On November 5, 2008 — one day after Obama’s election and two-and-a-half weeks before Soros’ comments were published.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros Manipulated Lawmakers To Pursue Cap And Trade. Discussing the Soros interview that was published on November 24, 2008

REALITY: Cap And Trade Has Been Debated In Congress For More Than 10 Years. Contrary to Beck’s claim that Soros manipulated Obama to introduce cap and trade legislation “days after” he was elected, Congress has been debating similar proposals for more than a decade. [The Washington Post, 8/19/01]

REALITY: Obama Supported A Cap And Trade Bill During The 2008 Election. In fact, then-Sen. Barack Obama supported legislation that would have created a cap-and-trade system while campaigning in 2008. [The Washington Post, 6/1/08]

…

BECK CLAIM: “Soros Was Asked If He Felt Guilt At All About Taking The Property From The Jews As A Teenager. He Responded, No.”

REALITY: Soros Said He “Had No Role In Taking Away That Property.” In an interview with Kroft, Soros explained that he felt no guilt because he “had no role in taking away that property.”

REALITY: Biographer Reported Soros “Collaborated With No One.” In Soros: The Life and Times of a Messianic Billionaire — a book cited by Beck during the program — Michael T. Kaufman detailed Soros’ reaction during the interview, as well as Soros’ actions in Nazi-occupied Hungary.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros “Attended The Fabian Socialist London School Of Economics.” Beck said, “In 1947, the Soros family relocated from Hungary to England, where George attended the Fabian Socialist London School of Economics.” [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 11/9/10]

REALITY: LSE Is A Mainstream University That Many Prominent Conservatives Have Attended. While it is true that LSE was founded by four members of the Fabian Society in 1895, Beck’s suggestion that the school is a socialist indoctrination center is ridiculous.

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros Is Dangerous Because He Called For “A Managed Decline” Of The Dollar.

REALITY: Soros Said That “An Orderly Decline Of The Dollar Is Actually Desirable” To Boost Exports And Compensate For Decreased Consumer Spending. The comments Beck cited come from a 2009 interview Soros gave to the Financial Times, where Soros discussed concerns about the dollar’s relative strength to the value of other international currencies.

REALITY: Economist Paul Krugman Has Said, “The Truth Is That The Falling Dollar Is Good News.” In a New York Times column, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman

REALITY: Economist Nouriel Roubini Has Said: “[E]verybody Wants A Weaker Currency.” During an interview with Bloomberg Radio’s Surveillance, economist Nouriel Roubini was asked about the need for international currency coordination. Roubini said, “We’re not going to get the meeting because the reality is that everybody wants a weaker currency. The U.S. needs a weaker dollar to grow its exports. The Europeans needs a weaker euro to grow their exports. The Japanese need a weaker yen to grow their exports. Even the Swiss are intervening to prevent the Swiss franc from appreciating.”

REALITY: Economist Mark Zandi Has Said, “The Falling Dollar Has “Been Positive” And Was “A Real Boon To U.S. Businesses.” In a 2007 NPR interview, economist Mark Zandi was asked, “[H]ow is the fall of the dollar affecting the U.S. economy?” Zandi said that “on net, it’s been positive,” adding, “It’s been a real boon to U.S. business.”

…

BECK CLAIM: Soros “Collapses Regimes,” And America Is “His Target Now.”

REALITY: Soros Backed Groups That Were Nonviolently Opposed To Communist, Authoritarian, Or Corrupt Governments.

…

BECK CLAIM: Tides Foundation Gets “A Lot Of Their Funding” From Soros. Beck said: “And where does the Tides Foundation get a lot of their funding? George Soros.” [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 11/9/10]

REALITY: Tides Founder Says Soros’ Charity Funds “Far Less Than 5 Percent” Of Tides’ Budget. From a Politico op-ed by Tides founder Drummond Pike.

Source

Related posts:

1. Glenn Beck Spreads Lies and Fear About Cars.Gov Site Emails about the cash for clunkers web site, Cars.Gov, like...
2. Further Proof that Torture Doesn’t Work We’ve seen Fox News personalities claim that either Waterboarding is...
3. Sean Hannity: ‘George Bush…did not play golf while this country was at war.’ Sean Hannity, speaking with former Bush adviser Nicolle Wallace, made...

O’REILLY: This is a fact-based news analysis broadcast here, and the fact is that we’ve invited Mr. Koppel on the ‘Factor’ more than a few times… We want to discuss his ongoing beef.

O’REILLY: Ted Koppel..couldn’t give me examples of me lying on air and giving an opinion not based on fact… He couldn’t do it, and if he could he ought to come on in here and do it and he’d shut me up for good.

So, maybe Ted Koppel couldn’t do it, but Media Matters for America had the following ten examples… six years ago!

1. O’Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn’t oppose 9-11 Commission. O’Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards ’04 TV ad highlighting Bush’s opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)
2. O’Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O’Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: “They did have ricin up there in the north — so why are you discounting that so much?” In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)
3. O’Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O’Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O’Reilly’s claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq’s supposed involvement in terrorism — claims O’Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)
4. O’Reilly fabricated “Paris Business Review” as source for success of French boycott. O’Reilly falsely claimed “they’ve lost billions of dollars in France according to ‘The Paris Business Review’” due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named “The Paris Business Review.” (4/27/04)
5. O’Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O’Reilly tried to “blow off” the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)
6. O’Reilly confused on elementary economics. O’Reilly told a caller on his radio show, “We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we’re not wild about snails” — indicating that he doesn’t know the definition of “trade deficit” and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)
7. O’Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O’Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)
8. O’Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention … as Kennedy spoke behind him. O’Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O’Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: “When we come back, we’ll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up.” In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O’Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)
9. O’Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O’Reilly claimed that Democrats “lost votes from four years ago”; that “18- to 24[-year-old]s didn’t go” to the polls; and that “[c]ommitted Republicans didn’t carry the day for the president; independents did.” All three claims are false. (11/4/04)
10. O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: “Socialistic” French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are “government-controlled,” but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)

There are plenty of other examples of falsehoods and opinions flaunted as facts… take a look at the Bill O’Reilly category.

Source

Related posts:

1. Majority Give Obama Good Marks in O’Reilly’s Poll Bill O’Reilly has a poll on the Fox News web...
2. Selective Memories of Bill O’Reilly and Brit Hume White House communications director Anita Dunn called Fox News “a...
3. Bill O’Reilly Misinforms in Attack Against Al Franken It’s been confirmed that Senator Al Franken (D-MN) was, in...

President Obama and Vice President Biden released their tax returns on Thursday (Tax day). They reveal that Biden and his wife, Jill, earned $330,000 in 2009, but gave just four tenths of one percent ($4,820) in cash and “in kind” contributions to charity. The Obamas did slightly better. They gave almost 6 percent of their $5.5 million joint income to charity. Much of their income came from the president’s two bestselling books.

Check the math. The amounts provided by Fox News for Joe Biden do not represent “four tenths of one percent,” but rather almost 1.5%.  Additionally, there is no mention of President Obama’s Nobel Prize donation ($1.4 million) to ten different charities, but not claiming a tax deduction for the donation. The Nobel Prize contribution would have amounted to over 25% of the $5.5 million income reported by Fox News.

Related posts:

1. Karl Rove Calls Joe Biden a Liar on Fox News Like the pot calling the kettle black, the Rovian attack...
2. Biden Mentions Secret Bunker. Fox News Tells the World Where it is. Fox News calls it another verbal gaffe. Ask yourself, is...
3. FoxNews.com Middle East News Stuck in Bush Era Nearly one year into Barack Obama’s first term as President,...

Bill O’Reilly, citing the New England Journal of Medicine stated that  “46.3% May Leave Medical Profession” and “If half of the nation’s doctors are considering bailing on the profession if Obama-care passes, that is a frightening consequence.”

Here’s what the “poll” actually stated:

46.3%of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine.

Misleading, yes, but that’s not the most interesting part. The New England Journal of Medicine states that they never produced a health care survey!

For example, on Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said: “The New England Journal of Medicine has published a report and did a survey, and they said the impact of reform on primary care physicians, 46 percent, they say, feel reform will force them out or make them want to leave medicine.”

This is false.

Media Matters for America contacted the New England Journal of Medicine, which confirmed it neither conducted nor published the “survey.”

NEJM spokesperson Jennifer Zeis told Media Matters that the study had “nothing to do with the New England Journal of Medicine’s original research.” She also made clear that the study “was not published by the New England Journal of Medicine,” and said that “we are taking steps to clarify the source of the survey.”

The “report” that right-wing media are citing actually appeared in Recruiting Physicians Today, which is an employment newsletter produced by “the publishers of the New England Journal of Medicine.” According to Zeis, that report actually “was written by the Medicus Firm,” the medical recruitment firm that conducted the “survey.”

UPDATE: Following inquiries from Media Matters, the “NEJM CareerCenter” website has now posted the following statement, making clear that Recruiting Physicians Today is a “free advertiser newsletter” whose content is “produced by physician recruiting firms and other independent groups involved in physician employment” and that Medicus was responsible for conducting and publishing the “survey” in question…

Source

Related posts:

1. Truth-O-Meter on Glenn Beck Falsehoods 2009 Pulitzer Prize winning PolitiFact.com has taken a look at...
2. Congressman Weiner Calls FOX & Friends Liars Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) calls Fox & Friends hosts out...
3. Fox & Friends Uses Outdated Poll to Show Balance It’s a wonder that there are still so many people...