Originally Posted by Matter-eater Man
You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers
When a network uses this as a legal defense for his bullshit. Given how many people take him as factual though it seems like a false rationale.

And Attkisson was able to use Erik Wemple as an example because the media really isn’t what she alleges. However looking at her body of work in the last 4 years I see her as following a conservative narrative. Attkisson had built a reputation for being able to ask tough questions of whatever administration was in the WH. That isn’t the case anymore from what I’ve seen. She wrote a piece last fall about Trump was going to surely win the election. I don’t see any semi current work that deviates from a narrative that even comes close to upsetting a trump voter.


So you're compensating for the fact that you can't prove Sharyl Attkisson a liar or "right-wing", by changing the subject and trying to slander Tucker Carlson (who we weren't even talking about), with a hit piece from left-leaning NPR?

Yeah, that makes sense. rolleyes

You ignore that what you label as Attkisson's "conservative narrative" is he simply subjecting Obama (and now Biden) to the very same scrutiny that she gave to the George W. Bush administration. When she was embarassing the W. Bush administration, CBS loved her reporting. When she continued doing the exact same reporting about the Obama administration, suddeny they stated heavily editing and blunting and/or not airing her stories. I don't see that you've successfully shown any examples of Attkisson demonstrating a "conservative narrative". She has shown herself to be an impartial reporter who is critical of liberals OPENLY SAYING they are out to get Trump and Republicans and abandoning journalistic standards and sources, toward their OPENLY STATED goal of damaging the Republicans and hurting the Democrats.

It's similar to what Bernard Goldberg said in his 2001 book BIAS: Goldberg said that whether news bias is conservative or liberal, it hurts credibility. And he said this in a courageous editorial in the Wall Street Journal (reprinted in his book), that even as a liberal, he held liberals to the same standard. For which he was clearly unwelcome at CBS for the rest of his 30 years until he retired (he had previously been one of the anchors on 60 Minutes), so he was took a risk to push for what was right. Goldberg said that many reporters, including Dan Rather, were far-left and saw their own views as "middle of the road", which gave them an unconscious bias in their coverage. Anything to the slightest bit right of their far-left views they saw as "right wing". I suspect you suffer from the same affliction.

Goldberg said that while some biased coverage is conscious, a lot of it is unconscious. And Goldberg likewise cited many examples. Some of them hilarious. On an island in the Caribbean, they took news footage of the aftermath of a hurricane, where there was mass looting, and all the inhabitants were black. CBS executives were aghast when they saw the video.
"Oh we can't air your story, it's racist, all the people you showed looting are black."
The reporter, agitated, said: "But the entire population of the island is black! THE POLICE are black! I thought our job was to report the news! "
The story aired without video footage, just a graphic behind Dan Rather of the island's flag.