Donald Trump withdraws from Republican debate

By Dan Brooks in Republican Candidates 0 Comment
Donald Trump is not politically correct, so he can't believe how gay you are.

Donald Trump, who is not politically correct, suspects that you are gay.

Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, has confirmed that the wealthy meringue will boycott tomorrow night’s Republican debate in Des Moines. “He’s definitely not participating in the Fox News debate,” Lewandowski told the Washington Post. “His word is his bond.” Trump cited two reasons for his refusal. The first was that he felt he had been treated badly at the first Fox News debate by moderator and intelligent resonating crystal Megyn Kelly. The second was that someone else was making money on the deal. I quote WaPo:

“Why should the networks continue to get rich on the debates?” Trump told reporters at a news conference in Marshalltown. “Why do I have to make Fox rich?”

Just to clarify, debates among presidential candidates are not original reality programming from Fox News. Certain theories of democracy view them as a service to voters. But whoever he thinks his clients are, Trump has pulled Maneuver X.

Continue reading

Poll says Fox is most trusted news network

By Dan Brooks in Contemporary Media 0 Comment

Screenshot

Look upon this Quinnipiac poll, O ye mighty, and despair. Asked which national news network they trusted most, 29% of voters polled answered Fox News. That gave Fox a plurality of most-trusted responses, ahead of CNN (22%) and ABC and NBC (10% apiece.) Before we shut down democracy and enter the market for a benevolent dictator, though,  we should consider what this poll really tells us.

Continue reading

This misleading Fox News graph is fake

By Dan Brooks in Contemporary Media 12 Comments
A fake chart the internet made to mock Fox News for tricking people

A fake chart the internet made to mock Fox News for tricking people

Miracle Mike Sebba sent me this beautiful graph with the caveat that it might be fake, and sadly it did not really air on Fox News. By “sadly,” I guess I mean “fortunately,” since in theory we are against misleading people. That’s why we’re so angry at Fox. The image above, with its y-axis reversed and crammed into the bottom half of the graph, is a fake issuing from the bowels of the internet. Don’t read too much of that Reddit thread, lest you encounter people who argue that it’s still a downward-trending line “even if you flip the numbers,” plus people who, after they know it’s fake, continue to decry Fox News for airing it. The point is that Fox News tricks people, even if you have to trick people into understanding that.

Continue reading

Fox News runs saddest gotcha piece ever

By Dan Brooks in Contemporary Media 5 Comments
Vincent Hancock defends his gold medal in skeet shooting at the 2012 Olympics.

Vincent Hancock defends his gold medal in skeet shooting at the 2012 Olympics.

For some reason—probably to convey that he, like all other Americans, just loves to fire a gun—Obama told the New Republic that “we go skeet shooting all the time” at Camp David. Exactly who “we” is remains unclear; he specifically exempted his daughters but said that guests use the range at the presidential retreat often. Presumably, “we” means that he goes, too, and obviously, the president is lying. The president hates guns, as anyone who hates the president will tell you. To support this story, Fox News has found an anonymous source who says he has been to Camp David a half dozen times, yet only knows of Obama shooting skeet twice. Props to Ben al-Fowlkes for the link.

Continue reading

Is Bill O’Reilly fucking with us?

By Dan Brooks in lying 6 Comments

Those of you both of you who read Combat! blog regularly know that we grapple with a perennial question around here: do demagogues like Michele Bachmann or Bill O’Reilly actually believe what they say? It’s an unanswerable question, like the exact velocity and location of an electron. To know whether a Bill O’Reilly’s insane falsehoods are delusions or lies is, first, to know whether they are actually false, or if we are the ones who are deluded. Even if we mustered the certainty for that, we would have to further parse whether his audience believes him, or if they view the O’Reilly Factor as an ideologically thrilling romp along the lines of Taken—and if we think we’ve pinned that down, we incur the sub-question of whether O’Reilly is participating in the joke or trying to deceive them. Uncertainty of uncertainties—all is uncertainty. Then I saw this.

Continue reading