you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 26 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Only relatively.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

Sadly, it is not just Fox News that has made the claim that their shows are not news. In the same year, Rachel Maddow's lawyers successfully argued that her program is also not news.

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/may/23/san-diego-judge-dismisses-oans-10-million-defamati/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And they were both telling the unvarnished truth for once. Billionaire-owned media aren't reliable sources for news.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    This is a bit of the classic "both sides being the same" argument. The first article you linked even calls it out.

    In the Fox case, Carlson was presenting his own narrative, not even one extrapolating from known facts.

    Maddow was like "hey this journalist is working for Putin and writing for OAN. OAN is Russian propaganda." When in reality, the journalist in question wrote for Sputnik News, which is affiliated with the Russian government. Granted it is a bit of a stretch to say all of OAN is Russian propaganda.

    Carlson, on the other hand, just completely made up a story about Karen McDougal blackmailing Trump. A completely made up story.

    So yeah, I wouldn't go saying both sides are the same here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment